Generational Dynamics World View - Printable Version +- Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory (http://generational-theory.com/forum) +-- Forum: Fourth Turning Forums (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: Theories Of History (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-7.html) +--- Thread: Generational Dynamics World View (/thread-51.html) Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
|
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 09-24-2017 (09-23-2017, 05:10 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: What will the highly nationalistic and xenophobic people of China I would expect them to swallow their government's propaganda that your postulated Chinese invasion of a North Korea in civil disorder constituted a great military victory. That could still whet their appetite for more victories, I suppose. Quote:This is the optimistic scenario, and the tensions will be worse than The difference is that the danger is more predictable, since there are fewer nuclear players involved. I suppose you could argue that we'd be better off with more, smaller players, in the hopes that the initial nuclear exchanges don't involve us, or at least don't involve an immediate war with the other Teller Ulam powers. I suppose by that argument we should be encouraging places like Georgia and Ukraine and Taiwan to get nuclear weapons, with the intent of taking them away again if we're still the global hegemon after the war. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 09-24-2017 (09-23-2017, 12:12 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: So what am I hoping for? I know what's going to happen to the world, Even crisis wars are survived by more people than they kill. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 09-24-2017 The problem with this reasoning is that it's Unraveling Era reasoning. In the 1990s we could have the Gulf War (Operation Desert Shield), we could prosecute the World Trade Center bombers, we could flee from Mogadishu, we could bomb the Bosnian Serbs (Operation Deliberate Force), we could bomb Saddam Hussein in Iraq (Operation Desert Fox), and we could do all of these things without triggering a wider war. That's what happens in an Unraveling Era. In a Crisis Era it's different. Any action today like the ones above could easily trigger a wider war. A good example is the Arab Spring, that began in 2011, which was triggered very simply by the death of a Tunisian food vendor. It led to several coups in Egypt, the war in Libya, the war in Yemen, the war in Syria, the new war in Iraq, the rise of ISIS, the Saudi-Iran split, the Saudi-Qatar split, the Russia-Iran-Hezbollah-Turkey-US proxy war in Syria, the flood of ten million refugees into countries neighboring Syria and Iraq, the flood of over a million refugees into Europe, increased tensions in the Caucasus, etc. Did I forget anything? So if the death of a Tunisian food vendor can trigger all of those wars, imagine what an American attack on North Korea could trigger. As I'm writing this, I'm listening to the BBC, with its usual anti-American anti-Trump "reporting," showing one "expert" after another blaming Trump's WORDS for bringing the world to the brink of WW III. Can you even imagine how all these people would be blaming Trump and America after a military attack? Or just look at some of the threads in this forum. How many of the left-wing posters on this forum would be thanking Trump for bombing North Korea? That's really laughable. (The BBC is now accusing Trump of causing some kind of racial war in the US for criticizing NFL players for dishonoring the American flag and country. The BBC is valuable because it has correspondents around the world, but their garbage editorial policies are entirely predictable. How do you think they'd react to "Trump's military attack" on North Korea?) One of the major reasons that generational theory works as it does is because so many people have lived through Awakening and Unraveling eras when the survivor generations prevent small wars from spreading into bigger ones, and think that the same thing will happen in a Crisis era, which, of course, it won't. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Cynic Hero '86 - 09-24-2017 (09-24-2017, 07:24 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: The problem with this reasoning is that it's Unraveling Era reasoning. These are just excuses by a boomer to Justify doing nothing. Arab Spring would not have turned into the mess it did if the US and Europe took a firm stand either for or against the movements at the beginning. Instead the boomer leaders of the west chose to sit there and dither. The boomers want to sit there and dither in regards to North Korea, But the North Koreans aren't allowing them to. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 09-24-2017 (09-24-2017, 07:24 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: The problem with this reasoning is that it's Unraveling Era reasoning. Can you clarify which reasoning you're talking about and what you see as the problem? I don't see potential triggering of the crisis was as necessarily a problem, since we're both agreed that the crisis war is inevitable. Do you just want to put it off as long as possible? Or are you worried about the left getting the upper hand politically? There's now news that Iran is testing missiles and we know that they've had observers at all North Korean nuclear tests; most likely they have arrangements to buy the warheads that their deal with the US doesn't permit them to test. If we do nothing about North Korea, we can expect rapid proliferation to people who hate the US. That makes it more likely that the first nuclear strikes will target American population centers. To me, that's a bad thing, because it gives use less warning and less time to prepare, such as by dispersing to less densely populated areas. What am I missing? RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 09-24-2017 (09-24-2017, 01:01 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Can you clarify which reasoning you're talking about and what you I'm not sure we disagree about anything. This started when I wrote "Famous last words," by which I meant that the outcome will be worse than either of us expects, and it seems we both agree about that, and that was really the only point I was making. 25-Sep-17 World View -- Rise of far-right AfD party in Germany raises international a - John J. Xenakis - 09-24-2017 *** 25-Sep-17 World View -- Rise of far-right AfD party in Germany raises international alarm bells This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Angela Merkel scores weak win in German national elections **** Campaign posters: CDU's Angela Merkel: 'Big things start with an ear for the small things.' SDP's Martin Schulz: 'It's time to solve the problems in Europe, instead of exposing them.' (Reuters) It appears that Angela Merkel has won a fourth term as Chancellor of Germany, although the relatively weak win will make it difficult for her to form a governing coalition. Turnout was high, at 75%, compared to 71% in the 2013 election. But perhaps the biggest news from Sunday's election is not Merkel's victory, but rather the rise of the far-right AfD party. (The phrase "far-right" has different meanings in Europe and America.) Angela Merkel's center-right party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU/SDU), has won a plurality of the votes in Germany's national election on Sunday, with 33% of the votes (according to exit polls), down 8.5 percentage points from 41.5% in the 2013 election. The CDU has been the governing party for most of the decades since the end of World War II, having positioned itself at the party of Christian democracy, while shedding the Nazism of the 1930s, but this is its weakest post-war showing. Merkel's CDU has only 33% of the votes, which is not a majority, which means that if she wants to govern as Chancellor, then she must form a governing coalition with other parties. In the past, the center-right CDU has joined in a coalition with the center-left Social Democratic Party (SDP). The SDP received 20.5% of the votes in this election, and so the CDU and SDP could, once again, form a majority coalition. But the SDP leaders said that they will refuse to form a coalition with the CDU, and the rise of the AfD is one of the reasons. The far-right party AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany), received 13% of the votes, gaining 8.5 percentage points since 2013. This is extremely significant in German politics, because it means that AfD is surging past the 5% minimum required to be represented in Germany's Bundestag (parliament). The AfD is considered nationalistic and xenophobic because of its policies that are anti-European Union, anti-immigrant, and anti-Islam. The party was formed in 2013 when Germany led the EU in bailing out Greece. The bailout turned into an extremely vitriolic war of words between Germany and Greece, and the AfD was formed as an anti-EU party. They took their name from a phrase Merkel used in 2013, "There is no alternative," meaning that there was no alternative to bailing out Greece. Then, in 2015, when Angela Merkel approved the arrival of over a million Syrian refugees with the slogan "Wir schaffen es" ("We can do it"), the AfD became anti-Islam and anti-immigrant, though its leaders say that it's not opposed to immigration, only to a flood of immigrants. In the current election, its election posters showed young women on the beach with the slogan "Burkas? We’re into bikinis," and a young pregnant white woman with the phrase "New Germans? Let’s make them ourselves." Supporters of the AfD sometimes are quoted as saying, "The AfD is the new CDU." By this they mean that after WW II, the CDU became the party of a Christian democracy in Germany, while shedding the Nazi past. AfD supporters see the CDU as having abandoned the Christian heritage, and see the AfD as the new guarantor of a Christian Germany, while ironically ignoring the return to the 1930s style of nationalism and xenophobia. So if Merkel's first-place CDU forms a governing coalition with the second-place SDP, then third-place AfD will become the major opposition party, which would give them a special status in the Bundestag. For that reason, apparently, the SDP is rejecting a coalition with Merkel's CDU, so that the SDP can be the main opposition party, and prevent AfD from achieving that special status. So Merkel will have to form a coalition from some of the smaller parties. The Greens (Die Grüne, at 9%) are advocating strong environmental regulations. This contrasts strongly with the Free Democratic Party (FDP, at 10.7%), which is business-friendly. So Merkel would have to perform some difficult political juggling to form a three-way coalition with those two parties. That leaves Die Linke (the Left, 9.1%), which is the current incarnation of the 1930s Communist Party. Party leaders said on Sunday that they wanted to stay out of a coalition, so that they would be free to vote on their issues. So Sunday's election is over, but the chaos is just beginning. It's not an absolute certainty that Merkel will come out of all this as the Chancellor for a fourth term, but analysts consider it to be a very likely. Deutsche Welle and Guardian (London) **** **** Rise of far-right AfD party in Germany raises international alarm bells **** As I've been writing for years from the point of view of Generational Dynamics, we're deep into a generational Crisis era, and nationalism and xenophobia have been increasing in most nations around the world. Whenever I write about this, many people believe that I'm writing about xenophobia directed at Muslims. While that's true in the case of Germany's AfD, the target varies widely from country to country, and the target is usually a target of political convenience. A good example is the UK, which voted for Brexit largely because of immigration issues related to the EU rules about "freedom of movement." In the EU context, "freedom of movement" refers to EU citizens being able to move freely from EU country to EU country, and although immigration of Syrian refugees was a part of the Brexit motivation, the main issue was actually European Union citizens from eastern European countries like Poland, Romania and Bulgaria. So the UK's xenophobia was directed mostly at Christians from eastern Europe. In the United States as well, there is xenophobia directed at Mexicans, who are also Christian. In Japan, the xenophobia is directed at China. In China, the xenophobia is directed at Japan and the United States. In India, it's directed at Muslims in Pakistan. In Pakistan, it's directed at Hindus in India. So nationalism and xenophobia are not narrow attitudes directed at just one group, but are an organic part of every population during a generational Crisis era, and may be directed at any religious or ethnic group, depending on the country. In the case of Germany, many Jews are concerned that the rise of the AfD means a possible new Holocaust at some time in the future. There are some 200,000 Jews living in Germany, and post-war Germany has gained a reputation as a safe, tolerant place for Jews to live, although Jews point to official data reporting 681 anti-Semitic crimes reported to police so far this year. As the saying goes, "History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes." What this means is that in each generational Crisis era, there are behaviors that are similar in kind to the behaviors of the previous generational Crisis era, in this case the period leading up to and including World War II. Like most countries, Germany does seem to be on a trend line of increasing nationalism and xenophobia, and if this trend continues, Germany could witness widespread racist hate crimes, as in the 1930s. However, for what it's worth, we don't yet know whether this will be directed at Jews, as it was in the 1930s. However, even if it's directed just at Muslims it would be equally disastrous, and historians of the 2030s may look back and say that there were two Holocausts in the preceding century, one targeting the Jews and one targeting the Muslims. Der Spiegel and Deutsche Welle and Reuters and Jerusalem Post and Foreign Policy (11-Sept) Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Germany, Angela Merkel, Christian Democratic Union, CDU/SDU, Greece, AfD, Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany, Die Grüne, Greens, Free Democratic Party, FDP, Die Linke, United Kingdom, Brexit, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Mexico, Japan, China, India, Pakistan, Holocaust Permanent web link to this article Receive daily World View columns by e-mail Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal John J. Xenakis 100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A Cambridge, MA 02142 Phone: 617-864-0010 E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 09-25-2017 CDU and SPD are the only globalist parties in Germany, so I imagine they will still form a coalition, no matter what their campaign rhetoric was. 26-Sep-17 World View -- US adopts strategic response to North Korea's threats to shoo - John J. Xenakis - 09-25-2017 *** 26-Sep-17 World View -- US adopts strategic response to North Korea's threats to shoot down US warplanes This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** North Korea threatens to shoot down US warplanes **** An anti-US rally on Friday in Pyongyang, North Korea (KCNA/Reuters) Ri Yong-ho, North Korea's ambassador to the United Nations, said that Donald Trump had declared war on North Korea, and that therefore North Korea had the right to shoot down US warplanes, even over international airspace. According to Ri: <QUOTE>"The world, including all member states currently attending the United Nations General Assembly, must clearly remember that this time, America declared war on us first. The U.N. charter acknowledges all member states' independent rights to self-defense. Since the United States declared war on our country, we will have every right to make counter-measures, including the right to shoot down United States strategic bombers even when they are not inside the airspace border of our country."<END QUOTE> Ri was probably alluding to the American warplanes that flew over international airspace just east of North Korea over the weekend. Pentagon spokesman Dana White described these flights: "This is the farthest north of the Demilitarized Zone any U.S. fighter or bomber aircraft have flown off North Korea's coast in the 21st century." White House spokesman Sarah Huckabee Sanders responded to Ri's threats as follows: <QUOTE>"We have not declared war on North Korea and, frankly, the suggestion of that is absurd. ... It's never appropriate for a country to shoot down another country's aircraft when it's over international waters. Our goal is still the same. We continue to seek the peaceful denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. That’s our focus, doing that through both the most maximum economic and diplomatic pressures as possible at this point."<END QUOTE> The events of the past three days follow months of increasingly vitriolic threats and exchanges. Recently, America's UN ambassador Nikki Haley said that North Korea was "begging for war." Russia's president Vladimir Putin said that North Korea would "rather eat grass" than end its nuclear program. The claim of "declaration of war" is a response to president Donald Trump's speech last week at the United Nations, where he ridiculed North Korea's leader Kim Jong-un by calling him "Rocket Man," and saying he was on a "suicide mission": <QUOTE>"No nation on Earth has an interest in seeing this band of criminals arm itself with nuclear weapons and missiles. The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea. Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime. The United States is ready, willing, and able, but hopefully this will not be necessary. That's what the United Nations is all about. That's what the United Nations is for. Let's see how they do."<END QUOTE> Kim responded with an equally personal insult directed at Trump: <QUOTE>"I am now thinking hard about what response he could have expected when he allowed such eccentric words to trip off his tongue. I will surely and definitely tame the mentally deranged U.S. dotard with fire."<END QUOTE> Trump tweeted in response to Ri's threat: "Just heard Foreign Minister of North Korea speak at UN. If he echoes thoughts of Little Rocket Man, they won’t be around much longer!" Could North Korea actually shoot down a US warplane? Most analysts believe not. North Korea is believed to have thousands of Soviet-era surface-to-air missiles, but those are old technologies that US warplanes could presumably avoid. However, North Korea has produce its own KN-06 surface-to-air missile, and perhaps Kim believes that it could be successful in shooting down an American warplane. NPR and Washington Post and Foreign Policy **** **** Is there a strategic explanation for Trump's statements and tweets? **** What's going on here between the US and North Korea? Is this just two countries stumbling into war, or is there some strategy in operation? There are thousands of attempted explanations on the internet. This is mine. America faces a very stark choice. Many people are suggesting that we do nothing, which would mean appeasement. If we do nothing, then North Korea will build an arsenal of nuclear missiles pointed at Japan, South Korea, and the United States. Even if those missiles are launched, they can be used for blackmail. Kim would threaten US forces in South Korea, Guam, and elsewhere. Kim would demand that all of those forces be withdrawn, and he would have the support of China and Russia. He would also be supported by the same people who are advising appeasement now. When the North Koreans make a nuclear threat, it's quite possible that they would carry it out. In 2010, the North conducted two acts of war targeting South Korea -- in May, North Korea torpedoed and sank the warship Cheonan, killing dozens of South Korean crew members, and in November, North Korea killed South Korean civilians by shelling Yeonpyeong Island. In both cases, the South Koreans chose not to respond, but it's pretty clear that they might have. So I believe that doing nothing, appeasing North Korea, would lead to war, and I believe that the Trump administration has the same view. Many of the analyses in the mainstream media start with the assumption that Kim Jong-un is correct in calling Trump a "dotard" and a "madman" with his finger on the nuclear button. These opinions are idiotic, but they are extremely common. Donald Trump and the US are facing a stark situation. Doing nothing, appeasement, leads to war. Therefore, something must be done. Therefore, we can assume that Trump is following a strategy. I do not for a second believe the idiotic statements by mainstream reports that Trump's name-calling is random and uncontrolled. I believe that Trump's actions, including his tweets, are all part of a strategy. This is my opinion as to what that strategy is. Part of the strategy is, of course, using strong sanctions, in the hope that North Korea will end its nuclear program. I don't think anyone serious believes that it will since, as Putin said, North Korea would rather eat grass. However, it's possible that the sanctions and threats of military action are really directed at the Chinese. It's apparent that Russia and China have absolutely no objection to North Korea having an arsenal of nuclear missiles targeting the United States, since they won't be targeting China or Russia. However, sanctions and military threats might convince the Chinese to force Kim to stop his nuclear missile program. So that's part of the strategy. But in the end, no one seriously believes that any of these diplomatic strategies will work. If the US wants to prevent North Korea from having an arsenal of nuclear weapons pointed at South Korea, Japan, and the US, then military action will have to be taken. After Monday's threat to shoot down an American bomber, the Pentagon said that it is preparing military options for Trump. Many analysts have said that no military action is possible without putting millions of people in Seoul, the capital city of South Korea, at risk. However, several days ago, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis was asked whether there were any military options the United States could take with North Korea that would not put Seoul at grave risk. Mattis said: “Yes there are. But I will not go into details.” So I don't know if Mattis was telling the truth, but whether he was or not, some military action must be taken. Several weeks ago, China said that if the US attacked North Korea first, then China would join North Korea in fighting the US. But if North Korea attacked first, and the US responded, then China would not defend North Korea. So my explanation for Trump's strategy is that he's trying to provoke a military attack by North Korea. In 2010, the North Koreans attacked South Korea by torpedoing the warship Cheonan and by shelling Yeonpyeong Island, as described above. My belief is that Trump is trying to provoke North Korea to do it again, by means of the name-calling and by flying American warplanes just outside of North Korea's airspace. If the North even tries to shoot down an American warplane, then a counter-attack would be justified, and China has promised not to defend North Korea. From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, we're seeing a typical pattern that historically has preceded any generational Crisis war, where each side "crosses the line," and the other side responds by "crossing the line" further, in a tit-for-tat ping pong of responses and counter-responses, eventually leading to war. As regular readers know, the world is headed for a Clash of Civilizations world war, pitting America, India, Russia, Iran and the West against China, Pakistan and the Sunni Muslim countries. Unfortunately, this is inevitable, no matter what strategy the US pursues in Korea. Fox News/AP and Reuters Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, North Korea, Kim Jong-un, Ri Yong-ho, Dana White, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Russia, Vladimir Putin, China, South Korea, Guam, Japan, Cheonan, Yeonpyeong Island Permanent web link to this article Receive daily World View columns by e-mail Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal John J. Xenakis 100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A Cambridge, MA 02142 Phone: 617-864-0010 E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe 27-Sep-17 World View -- Israel may be the only country recognizing the Iraq Kurdistan - John J. Xenakis - 09-26-2017 *** 27-Sep-17 World View -- Israel may be the only country recognizing the Iraq Kurdistan referendum This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Iraqi Kurds' independence referendum appears headed for big approval **** Iraqi Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani © sits during his meeting with clerics and elders in Erbil last month (Reuters) Thousands of ethnic Kurds in Erbil, the capital city of the Kurdistan Region in Iraq, were dancing in the streets and setting off fireworks on Tuesday, celebrating what is apparently an overwhelming YES vote on the non-binding referendum for Kurdistan independence. Voters were asked to answer either YES or NO on the ballot asking them just one question in Kurdish, Turkish, Arabic and Assyrian: "Do you want the Kurdistan Region and Kurdistani areas outside the (Kurdistan) Region to become an independent country?" An estimated 78% of the more than five million eligible voters cast a ballot. The ballots are still being counted, though some reports indicate a YES vote around 90%. The reasons that they were celebrating is that they were hoping, probably delusionally, that the successful referendum may be the first step in the creation of an independent nation of Kurdistan, something that's been a frustrated hope for at least a century. Although the referendum took place in Iraq, there are large populations of Kurds in several countries in the Mideast and the South Caucasus. There are 20 million Kurds living Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Armenia, and other countries, making it an anomaly that they're one of the largest ethnic groups that didn't get their own state after two world wars in the last century. The reason that the this particular time was chosen for the referendum is because the Kurds believe that they have leverage for their role in fighting the so-called Islamic State (IS or ISIS or ISIL or Daesh), which began occupying Iraq with the the catastrophic fall of Mosul to ISIS in June, 2014. Since then it's been the Kurds that have been the main fighting force against ISIS. The Kurds protected Iraqi refugees, including Yazidi refugees, from ISIS, and played an important part in expelling ISIS from Mosul earlier this year. The Iraqi Kurdish leader, Massoud Barzani, was emboldened by the Kurds' success in fighting ISIS, and felt that it was necessary to move quickly before the international good will dissipated. Reuters and AP and Atlantic (24-Sep) **** **** Israel may be the only country recognizing the Iraq Kurdistan referendum **** Iraqi leader Massoud Barzani may have been hoping for some gratitude from the international community, especially the United States, for the Kurds doing such a great job fighting ISIS in Iraq, and even for the great job that the Kurds are doing fighting ISIS in Raqqa in Syria. Unfortunately, those hopes are not being fulfilled. Secretary-General António Guterres voiced concern over the referendum in a statement: <QUOTE>"The Secretary-General respects the sovereignty, territorial integrity and unity of Iraq and considers that all outstanding issues between the federal Government and the Kurdistan Regional Government should be resolved through structured dialogue and constructive compromise. The Secretary-General expects that United Nations-mandated activities across Iraq, including in the Kurdistan region, will be allowed to continue unhindered."<END QUOTE> There are many countries in the world today with ethnic sub-populations that would like to form an independent region. Many people in Scotland would like to leave the United Kingdom. The Catalonia region of Spain would like independence. China has multiple separatist problems, in Hong Kong, Xinjiang, Tibet and Taiwan. So none of these countries is going to support an independence referendum in Iraq, since doing so would energize the separatist forces in their own countries. Iraq's prime minister Haider al-Abadi will not even negotiate with the Kurds: <QUOTE>"We are not ready to discuss or have a dialogue about the results of the referendum because it is unconstitutional. Most of the problems of the [Kurdish] region are internal ones, not with Baghdad, and will be increased with the calls for separation. The economic and financial problems the region is suffering from are the result of corruption and mis-administration."<END QUOTE> The United States, the European Union, Turkey and Iran all fear that the referendum could destabilize the region. Turkey, Iraq and Iran are all sending troops for exercises near the Kurdistan border. Iraq is threatening to cut off air travel. Turkey is threatening to close the pipeline that goes through Turkey, and which the Kurds use to sell oil to international markets. Closing the pipeline would cut Kurdistan's major source of revenue. In fact, Turkey's president Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused Barzani of "treachery," while Iranian officials have called the referendum "evil." So with almost universal rejection of the referendum results, it may be considered surprising the Israel supports the independent state of Kurdistan. Several times in the last few years, Israel's prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has supported independence, saying that the Kurds are a "brave, pro-Western people who share our values." Many Israelis feel that they have a lot in common with the Kurds, in that Jews also had to fight to create the state of Israel. This has led Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei to issue a statement calling the independence referendum a "Zionist plot" meant to fuel violence in the Mideast. With almost every nation in the world opposing an independent Kurdistan, with only one major exception, Israel, it seems pretty certain that there will not be an independent Kurdistan. United Nations and Al Jazeera and BBC and Jerusalem Post (13-Sep) and Times of Israel Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Iraq, Kurds, Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Massoud Barzani, Turkey, Syria, Iran, Armenia, Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh, António Guterres, Haider al-Abadi, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Seyed Ali Khamenei, Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu Permanent web link to this article Receive daily World View columns by e-mail Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal John J. Xenakis 100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A Cambridge, MA 02142 Phone: 617-864-0010 E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 09-27-2017 Relying on gratitude isn't the most dependable strategy. The Kurds should have held the referendum two years ago, then bargained for recognition in return for participation against the Islamic State. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - David Horn - 09-27-2017 (09-27-2017, 01:59 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Relying on gratitude isn't the most dependable strategy. The Kurds should have held the referendum two years ago, then bargained for recognition in return for participation against the Islamic State. Why? At the moment, they hold the territory. I don't see the Iraqis making an effort to dislodge them, and no other player in the region would seem to be in a position to do it either. In fact, the entire region is realigning. The Kurds have created facts on the ground (much as the Israelis have done in the West Bank), and that may be enough in and of itself. Remember, the borders in the Middle East and Africa were artificial from the day a bunch of arrogant Europeans drew them on maps. They never made sense, so some adjustments have to be expected. This one makes sense. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 09-27-2017 (09-27-2017, 10:00 AM)David Horn Wrote:(09-27-2017, 01:59 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Relying on gratitude isn't the most dependable strategy. The Kurds should have held the referendum two years ago, then bargained for recognition in return for participation against the Islamic State. The relevant question always is: What have you done for me lately? RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 09-27-2017 (09-27-2017, 10:00 AM)David Horn Wrote:(09-27-2017, 01:59 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Relying on gratitude isn't the most dependable strategy. The Kurds should have held the referendum two years ago, then bargained for recognition in return for participation against the Islamic State. The facts on the ground in Iraqi Kurdistan, for which the vote was held, haven't changed substantially since the Kurdish no fly zone was set up 26 years ago. Now, if the vote had included Syrian Kurdistan, that would make sense. 28-Sep-17 World View -- Uganda lawmakers throw fists and chairs at each other over Mu - John J. Xenakis - 09-27-2017 *** 28-Sep-17 World View -- Uganda lawmakers throw fists and chairs at each other over Museveni's power grab This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Uganda lawmakers throw fists and chairs at each other over Museveni's power grab **** Uganda lawmakers throw fists and chairs at each other in argument over allowing Museveni to illegally remain in power after decades of being in power. (Africa News) For the last two days, lawmakers in Uganda's parliament in the capital city Kampala have exchanged kicks and punches, and assaults with chairs and microphone stands. At least two female lawmakers being carried out after collapsing. The disagreements were over changing the constitution remove the age limit for a presidential candidate. The change would permit Yoweri Museveni, who has been president for more than three decades, to run for another term, seen by many as a Museveni power grab. The constitution has an age limit of 75 years, which would make Museveni ineligible to run again in the next election, in 2021. Museveni's government attempted to prevent opposition lawmakers from even attending Wednesday's session, by sending security forces to surround their homes to prevent them from leaving. One MP, Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu, a musician turned politician, described his experience this way: <QUOTE>"The police surrounded my home in order to prevent me from going to parliament today [Tuesday]. I was too smart for them, I instead spent the night somewhere in the ghetto. [When the police found him and tried to arrest him,] I instead jumped onto a boda boda [motorcycle taxi]; they tried to grab me off the boda but the riders fought them off. Then police officers jumped onto a boda boda to chase me but the boda guys refused to carry the police officers."<END QUOTE> Several MPs had similar experiences and marched to parliament. Before the fighting started, opposition lawmakers filibustered and sang the national anthem repeatedly. One opposition lawmaker accused another MP of carrying a gun, and that led to the brawl. The speaker ordered that opposition MPs had to leave, and when they refused, plain-clothes security operatives stormed parliament and dragged them out. This was carried live on television and on the internet. The result was that the government's Uganda Communication Commission (UCC) banned all live broadcasts as of 8 pm on Wednesday. A statement by the UCC said: <QUOTE>"The Commission has noted with concern that both radio and television broadcasting operators are relaying live broadcasts which is inciting the public, discriminating, stirring up hatred, promoting a culture of violence amongst viewers and are likely to create public insecurity or violence. The Commission reminds broadcasters that such live broadcasts are in breach of the minimum broadcasting standards as laid down in section 31 of UCC Act 2013."<END QUOTE> Amnesty International issued a statement condemning the ban on live broadcasts, saying, "Ugandans have a right to know what their elected representatives are doing, a right the authorities must facilitate rather than hinder." The Observer (Kampala) and The Independent (Kampala) and New Vision (Kampala) and Amnesty International **** **** Uganda follows a familiar pattern of violence for many African countries **** Uganda is following a familiar generational pattern that I've described in many other countries, both in Africa and outside. When a country's generational crisis war is a civil war between two ethnic groups within the country, then in the decades following the end of the war, especially during the next generational Awakening era, the ethnic group that won the war and took power begins new violence, atrocities, rapes, and arbitrary jailings and executions against the ethnic group that lost the war. Outside of Africa, we see this for example in Syria, where the president Bashar al-Assad has for decades been using sociopathic forms of torture on his enemies, and has used everything from Sarin gas to barrel bombs containing metal and chlorine on marketplaces and residential neighborhoods to kill and torture his political enemies. Uganda's president is from the Hima tribe, which is closely allied with the Tutsi tribe. For decades, and perhaps centuries, ethnic Tutsis and ethnic Hutus have been conducting brutal wars with each other, the most well-known of which is the Rwanda genocide of 1994, where Hutus killed almost a million Tutsis in a period of three months. Uganda's president Yoweri Museveni, 73 years old, allied with the Tutsis, took part in many of these gruesome atrocities and slaughter. By any reasonable measure, he's just as much as a sociopathic monster as Bashar al-Assad. The same is true of Rwanda and Burundi, the other two countries that were heavily involved in the 1994 Hutu-Tutsi genocide. The current president of Rwanda is Paul Kagame, a Tutsi, while the president of Burundi is Pierre Nkurunziza, a Hutu. All three leaders are using repressive measures to stay in power long after their mandate has ended. But Nkurunziza in particular has been using torture, rape, beatings, arbitrary jailings and summary executions to suppress the Tutsis, resulting in over 500,000 refugees in neighboring countries, including Rwanda, Uganda and Tanzania. All three countries are in a generational Awakening era, meaning that there is no chance at this time of anything like the huge 1994 genocide. But there will be continuing government violence, torture and arbitrary jailings in all three countries, and these patterns will get worse as time goes on. Guardian (London, 12-Sep) Related Articles
**** **** Thailand's Yingluck Shinawatra sentenced in absentia to five years in jail **** On Wednesday, a court in Bangkok, Thailand, found Thailand's former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra guilty of graft in absentia, and sentenced her to five years in jail. As we reported last month, Yingluck fled to Dubai rather than face an all-but-certain guilty verdict and jailing for alleged graft in the rice stock sales program that she initiated. Yingluck supporters believe that the charges are purely political. This is worth mentioning in this article because Thailand is also in a generational Awakening/Unraveling era, following Thailand's last generational crisis war, Pol Pot's Cambodian Killing Fields war in the late 1970s. Yingluck and her brother Thaksin were both extremely popular as prime ministers, supported by majority dark-skinned indigenous Thai-Thai "red shirts," but opposed by the minority market-dominant light-skinned Thai-Chinese "yellow shirts." Just like the leaders of Uganda, Burundi, Rwanda and Syria described above, the élite in Thailand, led by the army, are using violence, army coups and dubious criminal charges to keep them out of power, and allow the minority Thai-Chinese élite to continue in power. Thailand's police chief announced on Wednesday that he is conducting a manhunt for Yingluck, and is asking Interpol to find her and bring her to justice in Thailand. Bangkok Post Related: Thailand's former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra flees to Dubai (26-Aug-2017) KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Uganda, Kampala, Yoweri Museveni, Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu, Uganda Communication Commission, UCC, Amnesty International, Syria, Bashar al-Assad, Hima, Tutsi, Hutu, Burundi, Rwanda, Paul Kagame, Pierre Nkurunziza, Thailand, Yingluck Shinawatra, Thai-Thai, red shirts, Thai-Chinese, yellow shirts, Thaksin Shinawatra, Pol Pot, Cambodia, Killing fields Permanent web link to this article Receive daily World View columns by e-mail Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal John J. Xenakis 100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A Cambridge, MA 02142 Phone: 617-864-0010 E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe 29-Sep-17 World View -- Burma's (Myanmar's) leaders may be inspired by Pol Pot's Camb - John J. Xenakis - 09-28-2017 *** 29-Sep-17 World View -- Burma's (Myanmar's) leaders may be inspired by Pol Pot's Cambodian 'Killing Fields' genocide This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Burma's ethnic cleansing of Rohingya Muslims passes a major milestone **** Rohingyas in Bangladesh receive humanitarian aid (Pakistan Today) According to the United Nations, the Rohingya crisis in Burma (Myanmar) passed a major milestone on Thursday, in that the number of Rohingya Muslims fleeing to Bangladesh since August 25, when the latest Burmese army military "clearance operations" began, has now topped 500,000, making it "the largest mass refugee movement in the region in decades." UN Secretary-General António Guterres called the crisis "the world's fastest developing refugee emergency and a humanitarian and human rights nightmare." Counting the refugees who had fled earlier, there are now believed to be "well over 700,000" Rohingyas in Bangladesh. And since the systemic violence by Burma's army is continuing there could be 250,000 more fleeing into Bangladesh in the next couple of months. Burma's army has been conducting a scorched earth attack on Rohingya Muslims, burning down thousands of homes and buildings, and hundreds of entire villages. The army committed massacres, torture, rapes and other atrocities that have displaced hundreds of thousands of people, with hundreds of thousands fleeing for their lives, crossing the border into Bangladesh. Burma's government, led by the ethnic cleanser-in-chief and Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, has been denying that any ethnic cleansing is taking place, and is making the laughable claim that Rohingyas are burning down their own villages and killing each other. For years, as these military operations were taking place, Burma refused to allow any foreign investigators into Rakhine state. Journalists, NGOs, UN investigators have all be blocked by Burma from entering the region. Burma has been internationally pressured to allow investigators in, or risk losing aid or having sanctions applied. Finally, Burma agreed to a visit by United Nations officials and other diplomats to take play yesterday (Thursday). At the last minute Burma canceled the visit, refusing to give any explanation, but several hours later said that it was "because of bad weather." Burma claims that the visit will be rescheduled. The visit was to have been tightly controlled, allowing the UN officials to see only the things that Burma's army wanted them to see. However, that strategy failed disastrously earlier this month, as we reported at the time. There was a tightly controlled visit by BBC reporter Jonathan Head, but then they happened to see some smoke going up through the trees. Head's minders lost control as Head and his cameraman ran towards the fires, where they able to question a Buddhist Burman who admitted to burning down the buildings. So after that experience, it's not surprising that the Burmese government canceled Thursday's UN visit. This is an extremely serious situation. The Burma Rohingya crisis is creating a huge refugee crisis and is energizing jihadist groups in Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Asia, and the Mideast. After several years of these atrocities by Burma's army, Rohingya activists have formed the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), which conducted terrorist attacks on August 25 and triggered the current round of "clearance operations" by Burma's army. This crisis is extremely destabilizing to the entire region, and is just as likely as the North Korea nuclear missile crisis to trigger a war that could escalate into a world war. AP and WHO - Bangladesh situation report and Independent (London) Related Articles
**** **** Burma has possible parallels to Pol Pot's Cambodian Killing Fields **** Every time I write one of these articles about Buddhist Burma's ethnic cleansing and genocide of Rohingya Muslims, some commenters always get confused and think that I'm writing about Rohingya Muslims raping, torturing and murdering Buddhist Burmese. But no, let me be clear, this is about Buddhists murdering, raping, and torturing Muslims, not the other way around. The phrase "religion of peace" gets thrown around a lot these days. Every time there's a terrorist attack by a Muslim jihadist group, some Muslim leader insists that Islam is a "religion of peace," a claim that infuriates many people in the West. From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, Islam is NOT a religion of peace. In fact, there's no such thing as a religion of peace. In fact, no religion would exist for long as a "religion of peace," since its population would soon be exterminated by people of other religions who do NOT follow "religion of peace" policies. On the other hand, many people who comment on my articles seem to believe that Buddhism is a "religion of peace," and claim that Buddhists are somehow congenitally unable to murder, rape and torture Muslim Rohingyas or anyone else. A typical comment is that "Buddhists would never harm anyone, so the Rohingyas must have done something particularly harmful to deserve what's happening to them." And so, many commenters seem to believe that Buddhism is a "religion of peace." And yet, the Buddhist society of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia in 1975-79, led by Pol Pot, perpetrated one of the three or four top mass genocides of the 20th century, comparable to the huge Christian genocides in Russia and Germany in the two world wars, or the huge Muslim genocides in the Mideast coming out of the collapse of the Ottoman empire, or the huge African genocides in the 60s and 70s, or the huge Chinese genocides in the 40s and 50s. Genocide and sex are driven by DNA, not by religion, and all religions have the same DNA. The Buddhist Cambodian killing fields genocide, 1975-79, killed something like 1.7 to well over 2 million people, out of a population of 8 million. So around 20% of Cambodia's population were killed, making it possibly the worst genocide, on a percentage basis, of the 20th century. By contrast, the Nazi Holocaust killed around 5 million, which was less than 3% of Germany's population. Pol Pot was trying to imitate Mao Zedong's Great Leap Forward in China, which was a genocide that killed millions of people out of some two billion, Mao Zedong and Pol Pot may be comparable in their genocides. In all cases, these millions of people were the subject of almost unimaginable atrocities, including torture and rape. From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, Buddhism is a "religion of war," just like Islam and every other religion. No "religion of peace" would survive more than a few decades, if it weren't willing to become a "religion of war." So now looking more closely at the Buddhist Cambodian Killing Fields genocide, it may well be that the Buddhists in Burma may be borrowing some techniques from their Buddhist cousins in the 1970s Khmer rouge. This would be a historic example of one group of genocidal Buddhists learning genocide from another group of genocidal Buddhists. This comparison became even more dramatic on this week, when Burma's government announced that the government will take over the land that contained the villages that Burma's army burned down, making the ethnic cleansing permanent. Right now, this is speculation, and there is no public evidence of this connection between the Buddhist cousins. Perhaps someday, when ethnic cleanser-in-chief and Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi writes her memoirs, we'll learn more about whether there is a connection. UC Santa Barbara and Reuters and Al Arabiya KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Burma, Myanmar, Rohingyas, Rakhine State, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Pol Pot, Killing Fields, Khmer Rouge, António Guterres, BBC, Jonathan Head, Aung San Suu Kyi, Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army, ARSA, Buddhism, Islam, China, Mao Zedong, Great Leap Forward Permanent web link to this article Receive daily World View columns by e-mail Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal John J. Xenakis 100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A Cambridge, MA 02142 Phone: 617-864-0010 E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 09-28-2017 To be fair, the Khmer Rouge's genocidal religion was Communism, not Buddhism. I'm still not seeing how the Burma situation triggers a crisis war. Bangladesh invading Burma, triggering an Indian invasion of Bangladesh, in turn involving Pakistan? Maybe, but it would require serious stupidity on the part of Bangladesh. Or do you think jihadists could become powerful enough to be party to a crisis war? Maybe, but they'd probably have to get nuclear weapons - which, granted, isn't that far fetched. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 09-29-2017 (09-28-2017, 10:22 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > To be fair, the Khmer Rouge's genocidal religion was Communism, Well, the importance of Buddhism as the Khmer Rouge religion is not that there's something special about Buddhism that leads to the Cambodian Killing Fields. In fact the Khmer Rouge were apparently learning from Communist Mao's Great Leap Forward genocide, in the same way that children might learn carpentry from their parents. What makes Cambodia's Buddhism important today is that there's a religious identity group connection between the people of Burma and the people of Cambodia, and there may even be familial connections. Today's Burmese Buddhist leaders may be learning from the Khmer Rouge's Killing Fields genocide from their Cambodian cousins, which would make Mao's communists the grandparents, the Khmer Rouge the first generation children, and the Burmese the grandchildren, creating a kind of family tree of horror. The way that a war could arise is if some nation takes some military action to right the situation. There will soon be close to a million Burmese Rohingyas in Bangladesh, and I could easily imagine Bangladesh doing something to force these refugees to return to Burma, or at least to stop the flow. Another possible way is another Muslim nation taking some action. Here's an article that describes how Muslims in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkey, Malaysia and Chechnya are holding large anti-Burma protests, sometimes demanding that the government cut diplomatic relations. Imagine, for example, if a jihadist militia from one of these countries goes to Burma, and they're captured by the Burmese, and their government demands that they be returned, and Burma refuses. http://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg-asia-rohingya-20170904-story.html So it's not that the Burma situation could lead overnight to a crisis war. It's that there may be a typical "regeneracy" scenario, where one country crosses a red line, and another country (Burma) crosses a red line in response, creating a ping-pong escalation process that leads to a war. 30-Sep-17 World View -- Steve Bannon and Henry Kissinger form project to sound alarm - John J. Xenakis - 09-29-2017 *** 30-Sep-17 World View -- Steve Bannon and Henry Kissinger form project to sound alarm on China This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Steve Bannon and Henry Kissinger form project to sound alarm on China **** Henry Kissinger shares a meal with Chinese premier Zhou Enlai, Beijing, 1972 According to an interview in Bloomberg Businessweek, Steve Bannon and Henry Kissinger have had several meetings, and are preparing a project to sound the alarm about what Bannon views as the primary economic threat to America: <QUOTE>"If we don’t get our situation sorted with China, we’ll be destroyed economically. The forced technology transfer of American innovation to China is the single biggest economic and business issue of our time. Until we sort that out, they will continue to appropriate our innovation to their own system and leave us as a colony—our Jamestown to their Great Britain, a tributary state."<END QUOTE> This is a bit of hyperbole, referring to England's Jamestown Colony of Virginia, formed in 1607, but it illustrates the fear that Bannon is presenting of a reversal of roles between China and America, with China becoming the dominant world economic power. Henry Kissinger, 94, was the Secretary of State in the administration of Richard Nixon whose "secret meeting" with China in 1971 permitted Nixon to "open China to the West" and invigorate US-China relations. As an international consultant, Kissinger has visited China more than 80 times since then. He's considered by many to be the most brilliant geopolitical strategist of our time. Most recently, Bannon met with Kissinger twice in September at Kissinger's country home in Connecticut. Both Bannon and Kissinger are experts on world and military history, and Bannon is also an expert on Generational Dynamics, so he understands that a new war between China and the US is approaching. As regular readers know, I've worked with Steve Bannon off and on for almost ten years. Bannon frames the conflict with China in economic terms. He says that China is harming the U.S. by engaging in unfair trade practices, such as the forced transfer of U.S. technology to Chinese companies. According to Bannon, China’s historical disposition toward trading partners is exploitative and potentially ruinous: <QUOTE>"There have been 4,000 years of Chinese diplomatic history, all centered on ‘barbarian management,’ minus the last 150 years. ... It’s always about making the barbarians a tributary state. Our tribute to China is our technology -- that’s what it takes to enter their market, and [they’ve taken] $3.5 trillion worth over the last 10 years. We have to give them the basic essence of American capitalism: our innovation."<END QUOTE> What does Henry Kissinger think of all this? As it happens, Kissinger spoke at a Columbia University conference earlier this week. Possibly with his meetings with Bannon in mind, his speech emphasized that America and China must have been economic relations to avoid World War III and global destruction: <QUOTE>"China’s Belt and Road Initiative, in seeking to connect China to Central Asia and eventually to Europe will have the practical significance of shifting the world’s center of gravity from the Atlantic to the Pacific and will involve the cultures of Eurasia, each of whom will have to decide what relationship to this region they will see, and so will the United States. It is said by many scholars that never before has a power grown in one region as China is doing and that its interaction will lead to tensions and maybe even war. We do not have this choice. That would be a road to the disaster and would do to the world what World War II did to Europe."<END QUOTE> Bannon and Kissinger share the view that China and America are headed for a world war, and both are them are (in my view) desperately looking for a way to avoid it, by means of an economic alliance. From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, avoiding this world war is impossible. In every century for millennia, every continent of the world has had massive wars that have killed half the population. In the last century, there were two world wars, plus additional massive wars in Africa, China, South America and South Asia. That this will happen in this century is 100% certain. Bloomberg Businessweek and South China Morning Post (Hong Kong) Related Articles
**** **** Taiwan's prime minister says that Taiwan is an 'independent sovereign state' **** With the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP's) 19th Party Congress set to begin in Beijing on October 18, China's president Xi Jinping is facing a new embarrassment, as Taiwan's prime minister William Lai Ching-te said on Tuesday to Taiwan's Legislative Yuan (Parliament) that Taiwan is an "independent sovereign state." Lai, 57, took office on September 8. His long-held views on Taiwan's independence from China were certainly well known to Taiwan's president Tsai Ing-wen when she appointed him, and it's even possible that the timing was chosen now, just before the Party Congress, to annoy Xi Jinping. Lai delivered his first policy report to the legislature on Tuesday, and said: <QUOTE>"“I am a political worker who advocates Taiwan independence, but I am also a pragmatic pro-Taiwan independence theorist. We are already an independent sovereign nation called the Republic of China. We don't need a separate declaration of independence."<END QUOTE> There was immediately a great deal of media speculation, in Taiwan and in China, as to what this means, and whether it indicates a change in Taiwan policy. President Tsai Ing-wen issued a statement saying that her administration has never changed its position that "the Republic of China is a sovereign independent country," nor has it changed its dedication to peace in the region and maintaining stability in the Taiwan Strait. However, both Lai and Tsai have refused to endorse the "One-China policy," also called the "1992 Consensus," which states that there is only one China, and leaves some ambiguity as to what that means. Furthermore, Tsai has said in the past that "We won't allow our sovereignty to be challenged or be exchanged for anything." It was Tsai's implicit support for independence that allowed her pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to win decisively in January 2016. China's government responded on Wednesday: <QUOTE>"The mainland and Taiwan belong to China, and their relations are never state-to-state relationships, nor one China, one Taiwan. As an inseparable part of the Chinese territory, Taiwan is never a country, and can never become one. Taiwan is an inseparable part of Chinese territory, has never been a country and can never become a country. The mainland side resolutely opposes any form of ‘Taiwan independence’ words or action, and will never allow the historical tragedy of national separation to repeat itself. The consequences will be reaped for engaging in Taiwan independence separatism."<END QUOTE> This threat of "consequences" is based on China's "anti-secession law." This law, passed by the Chinese Communist Party in 2005, requires China to invade Taiwan if Taiwan makes any move toward independence, whether by word or by deed. Arguably, the preconditions for such an invasion have been met repeatedly since Tsai took office. As the 19th Party Congress approaches, Xi Jinping has suffered several recent humiliations and setbacks, including the decision for China's army to stand down from invading Bhutan's Doklam Plateau, rather than risk a war with India at this time. Perhaps even more significant, the belligerent actions by North Korea have forced Xi to take actions that support the United States over North Korea. This new humiliation over Taiwan certain cannot be pleasant, and he may feel forced, after the Party Congress, to take some action over the political need to score a win. Reuters and Xinhua and South China Morning Post (Hong Kong) and China Post (Taiwan) and New Bloom (Taiwan) Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Steve Bannon, Henry Kissinger, China, Richard Nixon, Chinese Communist Party, CCP, Xi Jinping, 19th Party Congress, Taiwan, William Lai Ching-te, Tsai Ing-wen, One China Policy, India, Bhutan, Doklam Plateau, North Korea Permanent web link to this article Receive daily World View columns by e-mail Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal John J. Xenakis 100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A Cambridge, MA 02142 Phone: 617-864-0010 E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe 1-Oct-17 World View -- Catalonia referendum poised to go ahead despite Spain's harsh - John J. Xenakis - 09-30-2017 *** 1-Oct-17 World View -- Catalonia referendum poised to go ahead despite Spain's harsh repressive measures This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Catalonia referendum poised to go ahead despite Spain's harsh repressive measures **** On Friday, hundreds of farmers drove tractors into Barcelona to support the referendum and to protect polling places (Reuters) Spain's government in Madrid is going to extraordinary measures -- some would say heroic measures, others would say abusive, paranoiac measures, depending on point of view -- to prevent Catalonia's independence referendum from taking place on Sunday. Madrid has sent tens of thousands of national police into Catalonia. The police have gone from house to house confiscating vote record forms, ballot boxes, and almost ten million ballot papers, as well as and campaign leaflets. They've demanded that Google make the Catalonia voting app unavailable, and Google has complied, although many are now turning to encrypted communications with WhatsApp. The police stored Catalonia's parliament and government building, and arrested high-level Catalonian politicians for the crime of preparing for the referendum. All of these measures have infuriated the Catalans, and the anger is so intense that even if the referendum is stopped, Madrid may lose control of Catalonia's political situation, and the government of Mariano Rajoy, who is already weak, may collapse. If the referendum wins, then there are widespread fears that it will destabilize Spain and cause chaos in the rest of the European Union trying to deal with the backlash. A YES vote would probably mean that Catalonian leaders would declare independence, even if they currently claim that they won't. Catalan leaders would take steps to enforce the claim, like not forwarding taxes to Madrid, or not honoring Spanish courts, or dissolving the local parliament and calling for new elections. Madrid would be forced into military action. Violence is a distinct possibility, since Catalonia itself is sharply split, as many Catalans oppose independence. Ironically, the Catalans who oppose independence have said that they will boycott the referendum, making a YES vote all the more likely. In Madrid on Saturday, thousands of people rallied in a central plaza to protest the independence referendum, shouting "Long live Spain!" and "Puigdemont to jail!", referring to Catalan regional President Carles Puigdemont. A lot of this has to do with money. Catalonia contributes more in taxes to Madrid than it takes out in benefits, so of course Madrid doesn't want to permit independence. If Catalonia were getting more in benefits than it pays in taxes, then they wouldn't want independence, and Madrid would be happy to be rid of them. As an aside, money is also the issue in the Kurds' separatist referendum in Iraq, since the Kurds pay more to Baghdad than they receive. In the end, all the supposedly high-minded rhetoric is only about money. That's the way the world works. The usual gang of international thieves is promoting independence, not because they care at all whether the Catalan people are alive or dead, but because they want to create chaos in the European Union. These include alleged rapist Julian Assange, hiding out in London's Ecuador embassy to avoid facing his rape victim accusers, and Edward Snowden, the American criminal traitor currently hiding out in Russia under the protection of the Kremlin. The Kremlin is the third member of the gang, meddling in the referendum election with trolls and massive amounts of with fake news to discredit Spain's government. Even if the referendum fails, there may be chaos anyway. On Tuesday, the radical left separatist party CUP will be joined by some of the trade unions in a general strike , to protest against the state's repression and for civil liberties. Euro News and Business Insider and Atlantic and VOA and La Vanguardia (Barcelona) (Trans) **** **** Hundreds of Catalan families occupy school buildings in defiance of police **** There are 5.5 million Catalans eligible to vote in Sunday's referendum. When an independence vote was held in 2014, only 40% of the eligible voters bothered to vote, effectively making the referendum irrelevant. This time, Madrid's harsh police tactics, particularly arresting Catalan politicians, have so energized Catalan voters, that many more may be inclined to vote. If over 50% voted and the referendum passed, the separatists would declare a victory. The Madrid government is aware of this as well, which is why they've been confiscating ballot papers, shutting down Google apps, and arresting Catalan leaders. There is one final battleground before the referendum: Catalonia's school buildings. There are 2,315 polling places in Catalonia where people can go to vote, and most of them are school buildings. Madrid police are sealing these buildings off, with the objective of keeping people from voting at all. Catalan families, including parents and children, have responded by holding parties in the schools all day Saturday, playing football, yoga sessions, picnics, board games, and ping pong in schools, and in to prevent the police from closing the schools. The partying will continue through the night, with the intention of continuing until the polls open at 9 am on Sunday. Police have been told to forcibly evict anyone who refuses to leave, if the refusal has to do with the referendum vote. So according to reports, the game is played as follows: The police, who really have no desire to evict mothers and children, enter the school and ask if the board games and ping pong are related to the referendum vote. They are told that the parties are completely unrelated to the referendum, so the police have done their duty, and they leave. The charade is supposed to end at 6 am Sunday morning. Police have delivered an ultimatum to families occupying the schools to leave by that time. Police have been told to use "minimum force" when evicting families from the schools. Washington Post and AFP and AP Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Spain, Catalonia, Carles Puigdemont, Mariano Rajoy, Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Russia Permanent web link to this article Receive daily World View columns by e-mail Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal John J. Xenakis 100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A Cambridge, MA 02142 Phone: 617-864-0010 E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe |