Showing posts with label Theresa May. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Theresa May. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 06, 2019

Cruelty & stupidity are hallmarks of US moves

Martin Love
The quixotic US president, Donald Trump, and his idiotic administration have continued to commit blunder after blunder, both at home and abroad, especially against the Islamic Republic of Iran despite their policy of economic terrorism in violation of the UN charter and international law.
Stay with us for an article by Martin Love, editor of the British daily Observer, titled: “Cruelty & Stupidity are Hallmarks of US moves”.
One huge lie zipping around the Internet of late is the depiction of a map showing the extent of the Persian Empire in 300 BC, as it is labeled. It shows that the Achaemenid dynasty controlling lands stretching from a part of Europe west of the Bosporus across Anatolia to Bactria in Central Asia and what today is Pakistan and western India.
Captions seen with the map are suggesting this same extent of rule or control is exactly what Iran’s leaders are eyeing today, as if Iran is on some grand offensive to re-create the Achaemenid territorial reach. This propaganda in support of Western and particularly American hostilities towards Iran is sheer madness because it is false. Iran merely wants to grow and develop as it is now territorially.
But the propaganda map is a joke, too, because in 300 BC the Achaemenid empire of antiquity had broken by the Macedonian marauder, Alexander, and moreover by 300 BC Alexander had been dead for over a decade and various former generals and compatriots of his were squabbling over who was going to get what of the lands of the Persian Empire that he had conquered. A stupidity piled atop a stupidity is the map itself.
Indeed, the most glaring earmarks of this century so far are two: stupidity, which is bad enough, but also cruelty, which is much worse, especially when it is based on stupidity. And this foisted upon the world by leaders, and they can easily be named with Trump and Netanyahu in the top positions, who by any assessment of their mentalities by professional psychologists, must be declared deeply damaged if not insane. (One might suggest impairment also for outgoing Theresa May, Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil, Macron in France and a host of less visible “leaders” of US puppet countries around the world),
The cruelty factor seems to play out almost daily, which does a tag team routine with the stupidity factor. Take what happened in the past week in Wadi Hummus on the outskirts of East Bayt al-Moqaddas on land the Palestinians allegedly control and where they were building or already had mostly built up a handful of high-rise apartment buildings for several hundred Palestinian residents. So, one morning hundreds of Israeli troops and police show up suddenly with teams planting explosives and deploying various other implements of destruction like bulldozers, order the residents out of these buildings so fast they barely have time to take ANY of their belongings, and over the next few hours reduce the entire neighborhood to rubble. This was such “in your face” ethnic cleansing that it literally shocked the world.
Why, allegedly? Because these apartment building were supposedly too close to the illegal separation wall or barrier that the Zionists earlier placed like a long viper across parts of the West Bank. And then, when the UN Security Council attempted to condemn the destruction in Wadi Hummus, the US (the stupidity factor) objection to the measure killed it.
Events of the same low-calibre sense but high-level cruelty are occurring almost daily under the aegis, distant or far, of the Trump Administration. Like for example with Brazil’s refusal (no doubt on command of the Trump gang) to fuel two Iranian ships laden with Brazilian agricultural produce. Like for example at the behest of the US the authorities in Gibraltar changing their laws immediately this month to accommodate the piracy against and capture of an Iranian oil tanker allegedly taking fuel to Syria.
But perhaps the greatest stupidity and cruelty so far of late is Trump’s declaration that he could end the war in Afghanistan in a few days, and murder 10 million people, if he wanted. This is megalomaniacal cruelty. This is not something anyone in their right mind would even consider, much less speak about. And do not doubt he was speaking less to Afghanistan than he was to Iran, where sanctions have hurt the working and middle classes. It was a threat, pure and simple. In addition, the US and the British have been talking about some kind of naval armada to “escort” ships through the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, as if transit has been endangered by Iran. This ploy really amounts to nothing more than a military blockade of Iran in the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman.
Any analysis of these moves suggests that Trump, who claims he does not want a war, in fact really does because he ought to realize that he is not fomenting an uprising in Iran, but shoring up the determination of Iranians to resist and support their government. In fact, one can imagine that Trump does not know what he wants exactly except submission -- as if he’s playing some sort of crude hardball to get a business (rather than a necessary diplomatic) deal he likes. But he will never get his kind of deal, even while he believes he can have it with John Bolton nearby. Bolton’s eagerness to kill Iranians, Trump thinks, is a bargaining chip. It’s another “good cop, bad cop” routine…which is so shallow and lacking in smarts and sophistication and sensibility as any kind of pseudo “diplomatic” strategy, it has already failed.
So again, what’s Iran to do? It seems straightforward. Respond in kind but no more than in kind to aggression on Iran’s interests, make sure the craven Trumpists and allies realize Iran isn’t kidding about shutting down resource shipments through the Persian Gulf if it is attacked militarily, and above all remain cool headed and patient.
Iran is not rebuilding the Persian Empire, but the US Empire is beginning to implode.

Sunday, July 21, 2019

UK caught in crossfire of US-Iran brinkmanship, and whose fault is that?

UK caught in crossfire of US-Iran brinkmanship, and whose fault is that?

Next week, Britain will have a new prime minister after Theresa May makes room for either former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson or incumbent Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt. Whoever is elected next Tory leader and head of the government will get an international crisis in his lap. And it won’t be the Brexit mess that sealed the downfall of May’s premiership – there is a more acute problem with Iran.
In early July, the UK captured an oil tanker carrying Iranian crude through the Strait of Gibraltar, saying it was trying to violate EU sanctions by delivering its cargo to a Syrian port. This Friday, Tehran detained a British-flagged tanker off its coast in what is widely perceived as an act of retaliation. Iran accuses the UK of doing the US’ bidding as the administration of President Donald Trump ratchets up pressure on the Islamic Republic with deployment of military assets and threats of sanctions against buyers of its oil.

Both Johnson and Hunt said they would not support military action against Iran if Trump ordered one.
“The US is our closest ally, we talk to them the whole time, we consider any requests that they say carefully, but I cannot envisage any situation where they request or we agree to any moves to go to war,” Hunt assured MPs worried that the situation would escalate further.
Sure, the UK has a great record of resisting Washington’s requests to go to war in the Middle East. And it’s not like the architects of the 2003 Iraq invasion, like John Bolton, are back in power in Washington, leading the charge against Iran, right?
It may be tricky to declare your intentions for peace while pretending that all the culprits sit in Tehran, to the beat of war drums coming from Washington. What if newspapers learn that you have quietly asked your allies across the pond to please shut up… pardon, to “refrain from making inflammatory public statements”?
There is also the Labour opposition, ready to point out the UK’s embarrassing role in the stand-off with Iran.
“Our role is to speak up for conflict resolution, de-escalation,” said shadow Foreign Secretary Richard Burgon in an interview with Sky News. “What we don’t want to do is end up being just the messengers or sidekicks of Donald Trump and John Bolton.”
Washington’s hand in the seizure of the Iranian tanker was publicly confirmed by Spanish Foreign Minister Josep Borrell, who probably was not thrilled to see the Royal Marines in action in the territorial waters of Gibraltar, which Madrid refuses to see as British.
The US and Iran have been engaged in a brinkmanship confrontation since May, with the sabotage of oil tankers, takedowns of drones, and constant bickering over whose “malign actions” are a bigger threat to stability in the region. The Trump administration went on the war path against Iran last year after sending the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran down the drain, a key foreign policy achievement under Barack Obama. But it had a hard time convincing other signatories, including the UK, that it was a good idea.
Now London finds itself in the fray, despite all the Brexit chaos at home. The person on the British side who gave the order to raid the Iranian tanker may have given the hawks in Washington a nice present for Independence Day. Will it be good for Britain? It’s anyone’s guess.

Wednesday, July 17, 2019

Britain Grovels: the Betrayal of the British Ambassador

 

Photograph Source: U.S. Department of State – Public Domain
Here in Ukania, where I’ve been for the past week, many things are going on: Wimbledon tennis, the cricket World Cup, the British Formula 1 Grand Prix, the Brexit fiasco, the shitty drama that is the Tory party leadership contest, revived interest in the “friendship” between the Queen’s son Prince Andrew (“Randy Andy”) and the sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein, and the resignation of the UK’s ambassador to the US at the instigation of Donald Trump.
The UK ambassador, Kim Darroch, was thrown under the bus by the soon-to-be prime minister BoJo Johnson, who, when asked repeatedly on TV, refused to give his support to the ambassador after the latter’s unflattering memos to the Foreign Office, on Trump and his administration, were leaked anonymously.
Darroch’s assessment of Trump was spot-on, simply because it was fully in line with numerous other such assessments, As such, it was a repetition of what is now conventional wisdom. Darroch said: “We don’t really believe this administration is going to become substantially more normal; less dysfunctional; less unpredictable; less faction-riven; less diplomatically clumsy and inept.”
Darroch also asked whether the White House “will ever look competent”.
Far more scathingly accurate accounts have been given of Trump and has administration. Nonetheless, Darroch’s commonplace memos sent Trump into a rage.
To quote The Guardian: “Even so, he [Darroch] could never have imagined that his distinguished 40-year diplomatic career at the Foreign Office would end with the US president publicly volleying insults his way, calling him “a very stupid guy”, “wacky” and a “pompous fool”.
Trump said he would have no more dealings with Darroch. It must however be remembered that Darroch had insisted on maintaining contact with Trump in the 2016 election campaign, which Hillary Clinton was expected to win by a mile. To quote The Huffington Post:
“One great irony in the affair, according to a former foreign office minister, is that Darroch was in fact one of the few people who kept open lines to Trump’s team during 2016 when everyone else was writing off his presidential bid. “Everyone though Hillary would win, but Kim was the utter professional and kept saying we needed to keep close to Trump,” the ex-minister said.
In fact, it was Darroch who helped arrange for Johnson to get a foot in the door with the Trump transition team in early 2017. Johnson had needed to rebuild his relations, having once attacked the former reality TV star for his remarks about London being a no-go area for crime”.
Trump’s insistence that Darroch would henceforth be persona non grata, coupled with BoJo’s refusal to back Darroch no less than 6 times on TV, meant the ambassador had little choice but to resign.
A couple of matters are of possible significance here. The first concerns the source of the leaks, and the second involves the course of events that may unfold from the ambassador’s resignation.
Regarding the source of the leaks, there are two hypotheses (and they are no more than that, pending a fuller investigation).
One is that Trump and BoJo want a British ambassador who will be much more supportive of Brexit, which was not the case with Darroch. Hence, the ridiculous suggestion has been made in Ukanian far-right circles that the white-supremacist Trump fan boy, Nigel Farage, would be a good choice to succeed Darroch.
The second, weaker and much more cynical, hypothesis is that the leak of the Darroch memos was instigated by someone close to the outgoing prime minister Theresa May, so that Darroch (whose term as ambassador was due to end in December) could be replaced by May with a career diplomat who would be in situ for several years while not accommodating the agendas of Trump and BoJo.
May has a week left in office, so she will have to move quickly if she wants to make this unprecedented appointment of an ambassador purely in order to preempt the choice of the individual who succeeds her as prime minister.
May, whose social background is several steps lower down the ladder than BoJo’s, is reported to dislike his patronizing ways, so who knows how much credence should be attached to this second hypothesis.
In any case, BoJo has undermined from the beginning all of May’s haphazard and unsuccessful attempts to strike a Brexit deal with the EU. So perhaps enough reason for May to poke BoJo in the eye in her final week as PM.
The British press, and even his fellow Tories, have denounced BoJo for sacrificing one of the UK’s top diplomats in order to know-tow to Trump, thereby making it clear that BoJo was now putting Trump’s boorish prejudices ahead of Ukania’s interests.
In effect, it seems that while BoJo is PM no UK ambassadors will be appointed who aren’t prepared to bend to Trump’s diktat.
According to The Guardian, Darroch grew up on a council estate but became a high-society party animal over the course of his diplomatic career.
Trump’s flunkeys–Sarah Sanders, Kellyanne Conway, treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin, commerce secretary Wilbur Ross, among others—were said to be regulars at Darroch’s popular embassy parties. Sanders also attended a private dinner a few months ago. Alas, their boss has called time on their British embassy partying by blackballing Darroch!
The two-faced Wilbur Ross then promptly cancelled a long-planned meeting with Liam Fox, the UK Secretary for International Trade, who had come to Washington to see Ross to facilitate a post-Brexit trade deal with the US, because Darroch had been expected to attend. Instead Fox, a staunch Brexiter and BoJo backer, had a meeting with Ivanka Trump.
The fawning Fox said he was apologizing to Ivanka for Darroch’s memos, saying:
“I will be apologising for the fact that either our civil service or elements of our political class have not lived up to the expectations that either we have or the United States has about their behaviour, which in this particular case has lapsed in a most extraordinary and unacceptable way”.
Ivanka, the handbag designer and phony, who owes her undefined position in the White House to sheer nepotism, should of course have been told by Liam Fox that Darroch, in his assessment of her father and his administration, was merely repeating what is spoken of without the slightest controversy within the Beltway.
Theresa May was usually on her knees when she dealt with Trump (who responded by calling her a fool later on), but Fox and BoJo are taking servility to another level– they resemble supplicants of yore who had to crawl the length of a palace chamber on their stomachs as they approached a mediaeval potentate.
The motto of the Brexiters is “Take back control (from the EU)”. While the EU has never succeeded as a democratic project, it nonetheless has not expected or required stomach-crawling from Ukanians.
No wonder Trump loves this kind of Brexiter Brit—“We won’t be slaves of the EU!” has clearly been replaced by “Mr President, we will grovel and suck-up to you, because that’s what a special relationship requires!”.

Thursday, March 14, 2019

Why Bahrain's torture prince can still visit Britain despite calls for his arrest

by Joey Ayoub
The regime in London, despite its pretensions to democracy and human rights, continues to support the state terrorism of the repressive Aal-e Khalifa regime against the people of Bahrain.
Now we have a feature in this regard published by Global Voices and written by Joey Ayoub, titled: “Why Bahrain's torture prince can still visit Britain despite calls for his arrest”.
In recent months, Britain’s relationship with its Persian Gulf allies leapt into the spotlight with a unique espionage tale amidst a British media landscape otherwise dominated by Brexit.
In November 2018, 31-year-old British academic Matthew Hedges returned to London after spending seven months in a jail in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), mostly in solitary confinement, on espionage charges.
Hedges’ story, which initially received relatively little attention, made it to the front pages after the UAE, a British ally, announced it was accusing Hedges of being a spy for MI6. Hedges and the British government deny the accusation.
Hedges’ story calls attention to Britain’s long and complicated history of impunity when it comes to reports of torture committed by its allies in the Persian Gulf states, and reminds us of some of the reasons Bahrain's “torture prince,” Nasser bin Hamad Aal-e Khalifa, still has the privilege and pleasure of meandering through Britain despite clear evidence of abuse ever since Bahrain's 2011 uprising.
Hedges suffered abuses during his imprisonment in the UAE that seemed to have surprised British regime, but London’s tepid response to his torture — in addition to solitary confinement for 23 hours every day, Hedges was drugged by his jailers — despite the fact that the UAE is one of Britain’s main allies in the West Asia-North Africa region.
Hedges’ wife Daniela Tejada, who had spent the entirety of the seven months campaigning for her husband's release, held the British regime responsible for ignoring her constant requests for aid.
The British regime’s response to the Hedges story revealed yet another example of the leniency afforded by London to the Arab regimes of the Persian Gulf. And activists can't help but remember how and why Bahrain's notorious “torture prince” can still walk free.
Long before Britain ignored the torture of one of its citizens at the hands of an ally, it faced a legal challenge at home for its role in protecting a notorious member of the repressive Aal-e Khalifa minority regime of Bahrain: the ruler’s Sheikh Nasser bin Hamad.
Notorious as the “torture prince” for taking part in the torture of activists who participate in the ongoing revolution that started in 2011, he once shamelessly tweeted: “If it was up to me, I’d give them all life [in prison].”
Indeed, Nasser bin Hamad, aged 32, is among those calling for the brutal repression of peaceful protesters.
As the head of Bahrain's Olympic Committee, he has created a special commission to “identify and punish more than 150 members of the sporting community” who took part in the 2011 protests alone, according to Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain (ADHRB). He publicly called for “a wall to fall on [protesters’] heads … even if they are an athlete … Bahrain is an island and there is nowhere to escape.”
Rather than face prosecution in Bahrain, his father promoted him to the commander of Bahrain's Royal Guard on June 19, 2011.
Nasser’s relationship with the British regime goes back to 2006 when he graduated from Britain’s elite Sandhurst Military Academy at the age of 19.
Given such a prestigious background, the “torture prince” may have never thought that visiting Britain could lead him to trouble. But soon after he tortured Bahraini protesters, another protester, known only as ‘FF’, made it London and successfully applied for asylum.
This meant that Britain recognized FF's legitimate claims, including FF's fears of retaliation should he or she be forced to return to Bahrain. FF, notes ADHRB, also “testified that Sheikh Nasser was involved in torture.”
A year later, however, the British regime opted to grant the “torture prince” immunity when FF called for his arrest during his July visit to the 2012 London Olympics as the head of Bahrain’s Olympic Committee. Instead, Nasser bin Hamad was spotted in the VIP section in one of London's stadiums that day, which made prominent female Bahraini activist, Maryam al-Khwaja, herself a former prisoner, tweet: “Is it true the torturer Nasser bin Hamad is being allowed to attend the Olympics in London.
The story doesn't end here. In October 2014, however, the High Court in London ruled that bin Hamad was not immune from prosecution over torture claims, reviving hopes that he could be arrested.
As the daily ‘Guardian’ reported, the dossier was then passed on to the war crimes team of the Metropolitan Police counter-terrorism command. To the shock of peace activists, the latter subsequently announced that “on the basis of the dossier submitted to it, the police are not investigating.”
Part of the reason why the Metropolitan police decided not to investigate was simply that key witnesses are still in Bahraini prisons and therefore can't be interviewed. Incidentally, Nasser bin Hamad's representatives made a similar argument, claiming that FF's statements “have not been tested in a British court and that there have never been any proceedings against him.”
In other words, Nasser bin Hamad's representatives tried to claim that FF's allegations could not be tested in British courts without acknowledging that the reason is that key witnesses could not be present in any court or answer any questions by British police.
And so, just a few months later, in March of 2015, Nasser bin Hamad uploaded a video of himself jogging across London's Hyde Park, renewing calls for his arrest. In fact, he has regularly visited Britain despite the charges against him, including to enjoy the yearly Royal Windsor Horse Show in the company of Queen Elizabeth II with his father, Sheikh Hamad, King of Bahrain, because the regime in London has chosen to turn a blind eye.
This blatant case of impunity has renewed questions as to whether Britain is living up to its international obligations, notably the UN Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and Punishment, which says that states must criminalize torture and pursue public officials of other nations when they are present in the state's territory.”
Britain signed it on March 15, 1985, and ratified it on December 8, 1988, but continues to blatantly violate its clauses.

Tuesday, March 12, 2019

What is not said about BREXIT!

By Hanif Ghaffari

TEHRAN - The apparent confrontation between the government and the British Parliament over how to leave the EU continues. The BBC has dedicated one of its most recent reports to the latest developments in the subject. The BBC writes in this regard:
The EU has said it is now up to MPs to decide the next steps for Brexit and it remains "committed" to agreeing a deal in time for the UK to leave this month.
Officials said they had offered fresh assurances on the issue of the Irish backstop ahead of Tuesday's second vote by MPs on Theresa May's deal.It was "now for the Commons to take an important set of decisions", they said. Labour and Tory MPs have told the PM she must honour her commitment to put her deal to the vote again on Tuesday. 
Amid speculation the vote could be postponed or downgraded, No 10 confirmed it remained the plan to go ahead with another "meaningful vote". Downing Street said the PM's focus was "getting on with the work required to allow MPs to support the deal and to bring this stage of the process to an end".
The BBC's political editor Laura Kuenssberg said the prime minister was "likely" to head to Strasbourg later - where European Parliament is based.
What the BBC does not say!
Like many English media, the BBC does not reveal many of the behind-the-scenes truths about the choices and policies of the two traditional parties in terms of exit from Europe. 
Britain should leave the EU in March, but parliamentarians opposed the prime minister's plan in January. They wanted to make changes to the plan. However, there are other realities beyond the controversy that has emerged between the supporters and opponents of PM's plan!
It should not be forgotten that according to the statements of the officials of both mainstream British parties, the Labor Party and the Conservative Party, the probability of holding a referendum is not to be ruled out again.
 The precondition for a referendum on this is to "create blind nodes" on the BREXIT, and to make demands among public opinion to hold a referendum again. The British government has allegedly committed itself to pursuing its departure from Europe (following the 2016 referendum), but is actually redirecting public opinion to a referendum.
It is stressed that holding a re-referendum is the backdrop of the headlines of both the traditional British parties. In such a situation, "the complexity of the mystery of the departure of Europe" by media like the BBC is a policy that we have been seeing over the past two years.

Tuesday, February 26, 2019

The behavioral paradox of Europe continues

By: Hanif Ghaffari

The behavioral paradox of Europe continues

TEHRAN, Feb. 25 (MNA) – The European Union has still not been able to define a clear relationship between itself and the United States.
Some European politicians like the German Chancellor, the French President and, above all, the British prime minister are trying to continue to turn Europe into a passive act in the international system. In this equation, the independence of the European Union in the world has been completely questioned.
The paradoxical approaches taken by the European authorities is definitely one of its kind! Over the past months, Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, has repeatedly emphasized that the EU can no longer rely on the United States to secure its interests. However, the German Chancellor held secret and hidden negotiations with the U.S. government and Trump to resolve Europe's economic and security problems and crises.
 In other words, there is a significant difference between the speeches and actions of the European authorities regarding the EU's independence from Washington. 
What is really happening in Europe? Senior European officials seem to have no time finding out about the consequences of their direct play on the land of the Trump government! It seems that people like Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron do not pay attention to the trump's hostility to the existence and nature of the European Union! There is no doubt that the continuation of the current process in the European Union will result in no more than a fall: a subject many European analysts have warned about.
European officials have practically closed their eyes to the realities of international relations! U.S. President Donald Trump is one of the main opponents of the existing structure in Europe! He has come to this conclusion that the collapse of United Europe will provide the United States with great economic growth among its allies.
 The White House, therefore, monitors the simultaneous destruction of the Eurozone and the European Union as essential goals. This is the main reason for Trump's support for nationalist and anti-EU movements in Europe. Donald Trump has officially urged French President Emmanuel Macron to pull his country out of the EU to benefit from more U.S.-France ties!
 Also, the U.S. president has asked Theresa May, the British prime minister, to sue the European Union for making barriers in Brexit talks. Trump has gone even further, and warned Theresa May that she should choose between integrating in the European Economic structure and having economic relations with the United States! Together, these statements and stances show that Trump is working hard to achieve his main goal in Europe, which is the collapse of the European Union.
Ultimately, the only way forward for people like Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron is to change their behavior and political and economic strategy against the United States. If this strategy does not change, in the near future, the Europe Union will easily be broken by the United States.
 It is reaffirmed that one of the public objectives of the Trump government is the destruction of the European Union and the empowerment of nationalists in the political and executive equations of European countries. Do the European authorities understand this absolute truth?

Wednesday, February 20, 2019

Europe has not taken action to keep JCPOA

By Hnaif Ghaffari 

TEHRAN - European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini recently announced that if there were no European efforts, the nuclear deal with Iran would be eliminated! It is claimed that, basically, the European Union has not yet taken a step towards maintaining a nuclear deal with Iran.
The fact is that the European Union is blamed for a nuclear deal with Iran. Donald Trump stepped at the White House in 2017. Theresa May, the British Prime Minister, was the first European official to travel to Washington to meet with the new president of the United States. During this visit, Trump informed Theresa May mind of his decision on "changing the nuclear deal".
 He emphasized that if the nuclear deal is not reviewed and redefined, the United States will no more remain as a part of it. It was during this visit and among American senators that Theresa May called the JCPOA a "controversial deal" for the first time since 2015. In this way, and indirectly, May announced her company with the United States for changing the JCPOA.
 Afterward, it was time for the French President, Emmanuel Macron to take part in the joint game of London and Washington. In July 2017, Macron assured Trump that he would do its best to include Iran's missile capability in the context of the nuclear deal, and thus limit the regional power of Iran.
 But Macron never imagined that he had practically turned to Trump's piece in his confrontation with Iran. In September 2017, and during the United Nations General Assembly meeting in New York, British and French officials were urged by the United States to attract Germany's positive stance to participate in the "West's joint effort to change the JCPOA." Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, surrendered to her Western counterparts much earlier than expected.
 As a result, by mid-2017, talks between American and European diplomats on changing the nuclear deal entered a new phase. A deal in which diplomats from the United States, Germany, France, and Britain, worked on a common goal called "complementary" or "secondary" agreement aimed at achieving Trump's four demands.
The EU and, in particular, Germany, Britain, and France, have not taken the necessary steps to maintain a nuclear deal with Iran after eight months. Undoubtedly, people like Federica Mogherini, EU foreign policy chief, also believe in this. Now the "deceived Europe" is trying to maintain the nuclear deal with Iran. It seems that the European authorities don't intend to confess that they had been tricked by Trump right now. In this way, they're trying to keep their prestige, but they can't do it forever, and sooner or later, they will be forced to do so.
 Finally, Iran's patience on the European Union is coming to an end. The European Union continues to play its ground in the United States. This issue is never acceptable to Iran. If the European authorities take no serious action to secure Iran's rights in a nuclear deal, the possibility of our country's departure from this deal is very high.

Sunday, February 03, 2019

The battle before the United Europe

By Hanif Ghaffari


TEHRAN - The power of anti-European, anti-migration movements in the European Union is increasing day by day as a result of the financial, economic and migration crisis. Evidences suggest that the European voters’ tendency for participating in the 2019 elections for the European Parliament on 23-26 May is decreased to a great extent.
 The next European Parliament will be formed after the UK leaves the EU in March, and the numbers of MEPs will be reduced to 705 from currently 751. The remaining 27 seats is thus to be redistributed between members.
We should note that the European political perspective has undergone significant changes over the last five years.  Such shifts will be normally reflected in the next European Parliament as well, and is going to affect European policymaking.
Accordingly, dbresearch published an article written by Kevin Koerner. We read in this article; “Our calculations, based on current national polls, suggest a loss of EP seats for most centrist pro-European groups and a visible gain for anti-EU and EU (ro) sceptic alliances. Polls suggest that the Christian Democrats (EPP) would remain the largest group in the EP with 25.2% (-3.9 pp).
 Socialists and Democrats (S&D) would bear the heaviest losses (-5.9 pp) and only reach 19.1% of seats. According to our poll-based calculations, the liberal ALDE could potentially gain 10.5% to 13.5%, depending on whether French President Macron's En Marche will join the alliance. The far-right ENF could gain the most (+3.4 pp) and increase its share of seats to 8.1%. Together with the EU-sceptic EFDD (6.5%), ECR (7.1%) and other anti-EU parties, they could reach more than ¼ of seats in the next EP.”
It continues; “Strengthened EU (ro) sceptic parties would have a substantial impact on policymaking in the EU over the next five years.” Koener then argues that “Anti-EU parties might not find the broad agreement required to build a united movement in the EP; but their potential strengthening and closer collaboration would still increase the complexity in the EP, hamper voting and decision making and contribute to further tensions and disputes in an increasingly disunited Union.”
Europe’s Nationalist parties know well that in the event of the inability of the traditional European parties, including socialists, social democrats, and conservatives to revive public participation in the 2019 European Parliamentary elections, the opposition front including the opponents of the United Europe and the Eurozone will find it easier to win this political battle.
 Over the past few years, far-right movements have become active players in countries like Austria, Germany, Sweden, and France. Currently, one of the main concerns of European authorities is the impact of the European Parliamentary elections on the reorganization of the right-wing extremists in the EU member states.
 If nationalists can win European parliamentary elections, they will be able to play a major role in shaping the political future of the European countries. In this case, there is no guarantee that the traditional and pro-EU parties in countries such as Germany and France will survive.
Undoubtedly, European politicians such as the German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and the French President Emmanuel Macron, and senior European officials such as Jean-Claude Juncker, will seek to maximize public participation in the European Parliamentary election. In this way, they attempt to prevent the nationalists from standing high above others in the European Parliament. Under such circumstances, the conflict between traditional parties and anti-Euro movements in Europe is worth seeing!

Wednesday, January 16, 2019

Fall of Empires: London, Washington & Paris on brink of collapse

by George Galloway

George Galloway
George Galloway was a member of the British Parliament for nearly 30 years. He presents TV and radio shows (including on RT). He is a film-maker, writer and a renowned orator.
Fall of Empires: London, Washington & Paris on brink of collapse (by George Galloway)
Washington, London, and Paris – the three capitals of the Empire – are today effectively ungoverned, shutdown, tottering on the brink of collapse or under siege by their own 
people.
Their self-chosen Nemeses – Moscow and Beijing – meanwhile toast the New Year in a state of considerable optimism and self-confidence. These are the facts, this is the news.
We should start at the top of the Empire. The United States government has closed down amid stasis and a barrage of inter-governmental howitzers.
The defense secretary, 'Mad Dog' Mattis, has resigned as have other uniformed subalterns angry at the president's re-found determination to withdraw from costly and losing foreign wars. The actual "mad dog" – John Bolton – openly defies President Trump over Syria, Mueller closes in, and the new Democratic majority in the House gears up to "impeach the mother***er."

Nobody knows if President Trump will be around for much longer, and the merest glance at the views of his putative successor – Vice President Mike Pence – recalls the famous picture of President Nixon with his vice president, Spiro Agnew, standing behind him. The satirical speech bubble had Nixon pointing over his shoulder and saying "nobody is going to shoot me with this guy next in line."
In London, British Prime Minister Theresa May is a dead woman walking; Britain's exit from the European Union is still a matter of total uncertainty, yet a mere 80 days away. Violence outside the Parliament has begun to erupt, no faction can command a majority, an election cannot be held because its most likely result would be the election of veteran anti-imperialist Jeremy Corbyn whom the 'deep state' would sooner see under arrest (alongside this writer, according to the coup-apparatus Integrity Initiative).
A no-deal Brexit will see the south of England grind to a halt given the lack of preparation for it, as trucks headed to and from the continent turn Kent, the 'Garden of England', into a car-park.
A Brexit in name only – otherwise known as Theresa May's deal – cannot pass in the House of Commons next week given Labour's opposition together with at least 50 of the government's own MPs and the 10 members of the coalition partners, the DUP.
A third option, a new referendum, runs the risk of the same scenario being played out (but almost entirely unreported here) on the streets of Paris and other French cities. Defying the result of the first referendum, cheating 17.4 million people of that which they voted for, risks social peace in England. Millions of Brexit voters are among those in Britain with nothing left to lose.
In France, the Elysee has become Macron's Bastille and it is not at all inconceivable that it will be stormed.
Last weekend his own spokesman had to be smuggled out of a back-door after a truck hijacked by protestors smashed through the door of his government building. The very conditions Macron strove so very hard to bring about in Damascus and that France DID help bring about in Kiev are now rocking the very foundations of the French Republic.
No amount of turning the 'Nelson's Eye' (when famously England's Admiral Lord Nelson at the Battle of Trafalgar was told that the French Navy were advancing on him, he put his telescope to the black patch covering his missing eye and said "I see no ships" – will alter the fact that for eight weeks and counting, hundreds of thousands of French people of all political stripes have been – increasingly violently – on the streets of cities throughout the country demanding that their president resign. And that Macron showering Euros down the Champs Elysees in concessions – in absolute defiance of the EU's fiscal rules – has merely encouraged 'les autres' to keep on demonstrating.
This week, the EU (and NATO) government of Italy joined the side of the 'Gilets-Jaunes', with Italy's Salvini personally denouncing the French president as being "against his own people."
This Saturday, a mammoth demonstration will take place in London,leveling the same raft of anti-austerity demands on the British government as the Yellow Vests are making of Macron. The center cannot hold.
The old order is dying; the new one cannot be born. If we are not careful we will soon be alive in the time of monsters.