China aktualisiert seine „Kunst des (hybriden) Krieges“ – Von Pepe Escobar ( — CO-OP NEWS

China updates its ‘Art of (Hybrid) War’ 1999 sorgten Qiao Liang, damals ein hochrangiger Oberst der Luftwaffe in der Volksbefreiungsarmee, und Wang Xiangsui, ein weiterer hochrangiger Oberst, mit der Veröffentlichung von Unrestricted Warfare: Chinas Masterplan zur Zerstörung Amerikas für enormen Aufruhr . Uneingeschränkte Kriegsführung war im Wesentlichen das Handbuch der PLA für asymmetrische Kriegsführung: eine Aktualisierung von Sun Tzu’s […]

China aktualisiert seine „Kunst des (hybriden) Krieges“ – Von Pepe Escobar ( — CO-OP NEWS

Bolivien: Serie von Audioaufnahmen beweist, dass der Putsch aus den USA gesteuert wird.


Divulgan 16 AUDIOS de golpistas bolivianos ligados a EU

Die bolivianische Medienplattfrorm Erbol veröffentlichte eine Reihe von 16 Audios, in denen Oppositionsführer direkt über einen Putsch gegen die Regierung von Präsident Evo Morales sprechen, den sie jetzt inszenierten und der laut den Audioaufnahmen von der US-Botschaft im Land koordiniert worden wäre.

Laut den Audios wären die US-Senatoren Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio und Bob Menéndez in den Plan involviert , die den direkten Kontakt zur Opposition in Bolivien aufrechterhalten würden, um einen möglichen Regimewechsel im Hochland zu erreichen. Ebenso wurde Manfred Reyes Villa als einer der Architekten der Putschoperation beschrieben. Manfred Reyes Villa ist ein pensionierter Militäroffizier und der ehemalige Präfekt von Cochabamba und bekam in den USA asyl, nachdem er 2009 in Bolivien wegen Korruption angeklagt worden war.

Die Audios erwähnen auch Aufrufe von Oppositionsführern, Regierungsparteistrukturen niederzubrennen und landesweit einen Generalstreik zu organisieren. Bei alledem wäre ein möglicher Angriff auf…

Ursprünglichen Post anzeigen 781 weitere Wörter

Two pieces about the Regime Change in Venzuela

Dear all,

Today Pepe ESCOBAR posted a piece from Vijay PRASHAD about ways to regime change. PRASHAD shows the connection between imperial meddling in states of the Global South and economic structures belonging to Colonial boundaries like producing singular commodities (oil, sugar etc.).


Pepe Escobar – THE ULTIMATE 12-STEP METHOD FOR REGIME CHANGE by Vijay PRASHAD – Dokument 1 ·  Vijay Prashad – Wikipedia

Vijay Prashad is an Indian historian, journalist, commentator and a Marxist intellectual. He is the Executive Director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research


Moon of Alabama discusses the possibility of a military intervention by the USA in Venezuela  – Coup Attempt Part Of A Larger Project – Document 2


by my friend, the invaluable Vijay Prashad

Reprinted here IN FULL – please share it widely

Step One: Colonialism’s Traps. Most of the Global South remains trapped by the structures put in place by colonialism. Colonial boundaries encircled states that had the misfortune of being single commodity producers – either sugar for Cuba or oil for Venezuela. The inability to diversify their economies meant that these countries earned the bulk of their export revenues from their singular commodities (98% of Venezuela’s export revenues come from oil). As long as the prices of the commodities remained high, the export revenues were secure. When the prices fell, revenue suffered. This was a legacy of colonialism. Oil prices dropped from $160.72 per barrel (June 2008) to $51.99 per barrel (January 2019). Venezuela’s export revenues collapsed in this decade.

Step Two: The Defeat of the New International Economic Order. In 1974, the countries of the Global South attempted to redo the architecture of the world economy. They called for the creation of a New International Economic Order (NIEO) that would allow them to pivot away from the colonial reliance upon one commodity and diversify their economies. Cartels of raw materials – such as oil and bauxite – were to be built so that the one-commodity country could have some control over prices of the products that they relied upon. The Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), founded in 1960, was a pioneer of these commodity cartels. Others were not permitted to be formed. With the defeat of OPEC over the past three decades, its members – such as Venezuela (which has the world’s largest proven oil reserves) – have not been able to control oil prices. They are at the mercy of the powerful countries of the world.

Step Three: The Death of Southern Agriculture. In November 2001, there were about three billion small farmers and landless peasants in the world. That month, the World Trade Organisation met in Doha (Qatar) to unleash the productivity of Northern agri-business against the billions of small farmers and landless peasants of the Global South. Mechanisation and large, industrial-scale farms in North America and Europe had raised productivity to about 1 to 2 million kilogrammes of cereals per farmer. The small farmers and landless peasants in the rest of the world struggled to grow 1,000 kilogrammes of cereals per farmer. They were nowhere near as productive. The Doha decision, as Samir Amin wrote, presages the annihilation of the small farmer and landless peasant. What are these men and women to do? The production per hectare is higher in the West, but the corporate take-over of agriculture (as Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research Senior Fellow P. Sainath shows) leads to increased hunger as it pushes peasants off their land and leaves them to starve.

Step Four: Culture of Plunder. Emboldened by Western domination, monopoly firms act with disregard for the law. As Kambale Musavuli and I write of the Democratic Republic of Congo, its annual budget of $6 billion is routinely robbed of at least $500 by monopoly mining firms, mostly from Canada – the country now leading the charge against Venezuela. Mispricing and tax avoidance schemes allow these large firms (Canada’s Agrium, Barrick and Suncor) to routinely steal billions of dollars from impoverished states.

Step Five: Debt as a Way of Life. Unable to raise money from commodity sales, hemmed in by a broken world agricultural system and victim of a culture of plunder, countries of the Global South have been forced to go hat in hand to commercial lenders for finance. Over the past decade, debt held by the Global South states has increased, while debt payments have ballooned by 60%. When commodity prices rose between 2000 and 2010, debt in the Global South decreased. As commodity prices began to fall from 2010, debts have risen. The IMF points out that of the 67 impoverished countries that they follow, 30 are in debt distress, a number that has doubled since 2013. More than 55.4% of Angola’s export revenue is paid to service its debt. And Angola, like Venezuela, is an oil exporter. Other oil exporters such as Ghana, Chad, Gabon and Venezuela suffer high debt to GDP ratios. Two out of five low-income countries are in deep financial distress.

Step Six: Public Finances Go to Hell. With little incoming revenue and low tax collection rates, public finances in the Global South has gone into crisis. As the UN Conference on Trade and Development points out, ‘public finances have continued to be suffocated’. States simply cannot put together the funds needed to maintain basic state functions. Balanced budget rules make borrowing difficult, which is compounded by the fact that banks charge high rates for money, citing the risks of lending to indebted countries.

Step Seven: Deep Cuts in Social Spending. Impossible to raise funds, trapped by the fickleness of international finance, governments are forced to make deep cuts in social spending. Education and health, food sovereignty and economic diversification – all this goes by the wayside. International agencies such as the IMF force countries to conduct ‘reforms’, a word that means extermination of independence. Those countries that hold out face immense international pressure to submit under pain of extinction, as the Communist Manifesto (1848) put it.

Step Eight: Social Distress Leads to Migration. The total number of migrants in the world is now at least 68.5 million. That makes the country called Migration the 21st largest country in the world after Thailand and ahead of the United Kingdom. Migration has become a global reaction to the collapse of countries from one end of the planet to the other. The migration out of Venezuela is not unique to that country but is now merely the normal reaction to the global crisis. Migrants from Honduras who go northward to the United States or migrants from West Africa who go towards Europe through Libya are part of this global exodus.

Step Nine: Who Controls the Narrative? The monopoly corporate media takes its orders from the elite. There is no sympathy for the structural crisis faced by governments from Afghanistan to Venezuela. Those leaders who cave to Western pressure are given a free pass by the media. As long as they conduct ‘reforms’, they are safe. Those countries that argue against the ‘reforms’ are vulnerable to being attacked. Their leaders become ‘dictators’, their people hostages. A contested election in Bangladesh or in the Democratic Republic of Congo or in the United States is not cause for regime change. That special treatment is left for Venezuela.

Step Ten: Who’s the Real President? Regime change operations begin when the imperialists question the legitimacy of the government in power: by putting the weight of the United States behind an unelected person, calling him the new president and creating a situation where the elected leader’s authority is undermined. The coup takes place when a powerful country decides – without an election – to anoint its own proxy. That person – in Venezuela’s case Juan Guaidó – rapidly has to make it clear that he will bend to the authority of the United States. His kitchen cabinet – made up of former government officials with intimate ties to the US (such as Harvard University’s Ricardo Hausmann and Carnegie’s Moisés Naím) – will make it clear that they want to privatise everything and sell out the Venezuelan people in the name of the Venezuelan people.

Step Eleven: Make the Economy Scream. Venezuela has faced harsh US sanctions since 2014, when the US Congress started down this road. The next year, US President Barack Obama declared Venezuela a ‘threat to national security’. The economy started to scream. In recent days, the United States and the United Kingdom brazenly stole billions of dollars of Venezuelan money, placed the shackles of sanctions on its only revenue generating sector (oil) and watched the pain flood through the country. This is what the US did to Iran and this is what they did to Cuba. The UN says that the US sanctions on Cuba have cost the small island $130 billion. Venezuela lost $6 billion for the first year of Trump’s sanctions, since they began in August 2017. More is to be lost as the days unfold. No wonder that the United Nations Special Rapporteur Idriss Jazairy says that ‘sanctions which can lead to starvation and medical shortages are not the answer to the crisis in Venezuela’. He said that sanctions are ‘not a foundation for the peaceful settlement of disputes’. Further, Jazairy said, ‘I am especially concerned to hear reports that these sanctions are aimed at changing the government of Venezuela’. He called for ‘compassion’ for the people of Venezuela.

Step Twelve: Go to War. US National Security Advisor John Bolton held a yellow pad with the words 5,000 troops in Colombia written on it. These are US troops, already deployed in Venezuela’s neighbour. The US Southern Command is ready. They are egging on Colombia and Brazil to do their bit. As the coup climate is created, a nudge will be necessary. They will go to war.


2. MoA – Venezuela – Coup Attempt Part Of A Larger Project

88-112 Minuten


January 31, 2019

Venezuela – Coup Attempt Part Of A Larger Project – Military Intervention Likely To Fail

The Trump administration has launched a large political project to remake several states in Latin America. The Wall Street Journal headlines:

U.S. Push to Oust Venezuela’s Maduro Marks First Shot in Plan to Reshape Latin America
The Trump administration’s broader aim is to gain leverage over Cuba and curb recent inroads in the region by Russia, Iran and China

The plan includes regime change in Venezuela, Nicaragua and eventually Cuba. The removal of any Russian or Chinese interest is another point. It is a multiyear project that has bipartisan support. It will likely require military force.

The targets: Raúl Castro of Cuba, Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua, Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela.

The project seems to echo the „New Middle East“ plan then Secretary of State Condeleeza Rice launched in 2006. It largely failed due to U.S. incompetence but left behind severely damaged states.

That the U.S. is going for such a wide ranging plan in the western hemisphere might explain why Trump is pressing to end the other military projects in the Middle East and Afghanistan.

The starting shot for the new plan, the U.S. led coup attempt in Venezuela, is already in trouble. The U.S. selected puppet Juan Guaidó had called for demonstrations in support of his coup that were supposed to take place yesterday. But even the NYT, which propagandizes for each and every regime change operation the U.S. undertakes in Latin America, could find only little evidence of support:

Mr. Guaidó also took part in protests on Wednesday at the Central University of Venezuela in Caracas, where he was swarmed by international reporters. Wearing a white lab coat, he linked arms with medical students and marched with them up a roadway, before speeding off on the back of a motorbike.

The demonstration was one of a handful in the city on Wednesday, though on a smaller scale than some recent demonstrations. Some workers walked out of their jobs for hours in protest against Mr. Maduro and his government, gathering on corners through the capital.

Videos from Venezuela showed a crowd of some hundred people in the better off quarters of Caracas. Meanwhile pictures of several pro-Maduro demonstrations in various cities showed much larger crowds. New demonstrations will be held on Saturday and are likely to show similar results.

The Washington Post claims that anti-government protests took place in two of the more destitute areas of Caracas. But the report contradicts itself. It starts:

As the opposition campaign to oust President Nicolás Maduro dramatically escalated, the warren-like streets of the Puerta Caracas slum filled with pot-banging, anti-government demonstrators. A culture center run by Maduro loyalists was burned down. Hungry, beaten-down residents felt a rush of hope.

Then night fell, along with the boot steps of government forces.

Maduro called the arsonists “fascist criminals,” and residents in the western Caracas enclave paid the price. Mask-wearing special forces, locals said, swarmed the neighborhood last week, kicking in doors, rounding up young people and imposing an effective curfew.

Twenty propaganda filled paragraphs later we learn that the described arson of a culture center took place before the coup attempt happened and likely has nothing to do with it:

The uprisings began the night of Jan. 22, with residents of Puerta Caracas banging pots and lighting dumpsters on fire. Around midnight, neighbors say, a group of hooded boys threw molotov cocktails at the culture center.

Early Wednesday, family members said, Abel Pernia, 19, was heading to a doctor’s appointment when armed intelligence police officers grabbed him, shoved him against a wall and handcuffed him.

… [more] protests erupted in Petare last Wednesday and continued until dawn. A group set fire to barricades, threw stones and attacked an outpost of the National Guard. Security forces repelled them with tear gas as residents chanted “we don’t want food boxes! What we want is for Nicolas to leave!”

Neighbors said that criminal gangs were among the crowd and created havoc by violently confronting the police. The response was immediate.

The coup attempt was launched on January 23. The arson incident took place on January 22. The following day the police came and arrested people involved in it. More gang riots followed.

The whole story has nothing to with the coup attempt or with general protests against Maduro. It is about gang crime in some slum quarters. Gang fighting has long been a problem in Caracas. A special police force, the FAES, was set up in 2017 to get it under control.

That the Washington Post has to use an unrelated incident to proclaim that the poor people support the coup attempt shows how little real evidence it has to support that propaganda claim.

The public in Venezuela is evidently not supporting the foreign induced coup attempt. A recent poll shows that more than 80% of the people are against sanctions and other international interventions to remove President Maduro. 80% also support talks between the government and the opposition which Maduro repeatedly offered but which the coup plotters reject.

It is very unlikely that civil disobedience or demonstrations will be able to remove the government of Venezuela. The opposition simply does not have enough people on its side to create more than inconveniences.

It is also not the plan.

It is obvious that the U.S. wants a violent conflict. Either the Venezuelan military will have to launch a coup or the violence will have to be brought in from the outside.

The military has for now declared that it is not willing to do anything against the government. Other measures will have to be taken. That the Trump administration selected Elliott Abrams, Ronald Reagan’s „Assistant Secretary of Dirty Wars“, as special envoy to its puppets is telling:

The choice of Abrams sends a clear message to Venezuela and the world: The Trump administration intends to brutalize Venezuela, while producing a stream of unctuous rhetoric about America’s love for democracy and human rights. Combining these two factors — the brutality and the unctuousness — is Abrams’s core competency.

An oped by the U.S. selected dude, who was created by the U.S. regime change machine, was published in today’s New York Times:

Juan Guaidó: Venezuelans, Strength Is in Unity
To end the Maduro regime with the minimum of bloodshed, we need the support of pro-democratic governments, institutions and individuals the world over. 

Notice the „minimum of bloodshed“? One wonders how many thousands of dead will do.

Guaido explains the murky legal foundation for his claims to presidency:

I would like to be clear about the situation in Venezuela: Mr. Maduro’s re-election on May 20, 2018, was illegitimate, as has since been acknowledged by a large part of the international community. His original six-year term was set to end on Jan. 10. By continuing to stay in office, Nicolás Maduro is usurping the presidency.

My ascension as interim president is based on Article 233 of the Venezuelan Constitution, according to which, if at the outset of a new term there is no elected head of state, power is vested in the president of the National Assembly until free and transparent elections take place. This is why the oath I took on Jan. 23 cannot be considered a “self-proclamation.” It was not of my own accord that I assumed the function of president that day, but in adherence to the Constitution.

The early election in May 2018 was held on demand of the opposition parties some of which, urged by the U.S., did not take part in it. There is no evidence of fraud that lets one doubt the results. Maduro won among several candidates with more than 60% of the votes. One might argue that has more legitimacy than some other elected people.


Not liking the outcome is not a reason to declare an election illegitimate.

If Maduro’s first term ended on January 10 why did it take it Guaido, as head of the National Assembly, thirteen days to find that Maduro’s second term was ‚illegitimate‘? Moreover, if article 233 is used as justification to temporarily usurp the presidency then Guaido has the duty to hold new elections within 30 days. So far he has not even called for them. His reasoning is not convincing at all.

Guaido goes on to say that he needs support of the military. But this does not sound like he has it:

The transition will require support from key military contingents. We have had clandestine meetings with members of the armed forces and the security forces. We have offered amnesty to all those who are found not guilty of crimes against humanity. The military’s withdrawal of support from Mr. Maduro is crucial to enabling a change in government, and the majority of those in service agree that the country’s recent travails are untenable.

He further claims, like the Washington Post above, that the gang violence before the coup attempt shows that Maduro has lost all support:

Mr. Maduro no longer has the support of the people. Last week in Caracas, citizens from the poorest neighborhoods that had been Chavista strongholds in the past took to the streets in unprecedented protests. They went out again on Jan. 23 with the full knowledge that they might be brutally repressed, and they continue to attend town hall meetings.

Guaido ends by calling for external support for his endeavor.

What he needs are billions of dollars to build up some mercenary army that will help him to overthrow the government.

The U.S. seized Venezuelan assets but will have trouble handing them to Guaido. The main asset is CITGO, which owns refineries and gas stations in the United States. But CITGO is deep in debt. Its refineries depend on the heavy oil from Venezuela. If might well go into bankruptcy in which case the debt holders will take it over. At least 49.5 % will go to the Russian company Rosneft. The legal process will take years.

So how much U.S. money is Trump willing to invest in his plan?

Venezuela will have trouble defending itself against a foreign military attack. The Maduro government is not the most competent, the military is quite corrupt, and money is scarce. China and Russia may support it with some additional loans, but are otherwise unlikely to come to its help. Cuba and Nicaragua may be willing to send troops but have little else to offer.

But the Bolivarian movement in Venezuela has millions of supporters. Most are poor people who would lose out under a new rightwing government. While the Venezuelan military may be corrupt and not very willing to fight, many people will surely take up arms to defend the gains they made under Maduro and Chavez.

It might be relatively easy to invade Venezuela and to defeat its regular military. But the following occupation would be a very difficult endeavor. The Pentagon has seen how this worked out in Iraq. It will likely warn against the use of any U.S. troops in Venezuela. Other countries will likewise be careful not to get into such a mess.

The CIA and the coup plotters can hire thousands of throat cutting thugs to do some extreme damage to Venezuela. But they have little chance to win more than a completely destroyed country.

Might that be the real aim? Is the project for the New Middle East Latin America one of complete destruction?

Posted by b on January 31, 2019 at 01:59 PM | Permalink


Highlights by StB


Greets Stephan Best


LINKEDIN-Stellenanzeige für Ukrainian Linguists, welche US-Sp ezialkräfte in den Kampfzonen der Ukraine unterstützen sollen

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS

Martin Zeis,

Stuttgart, 02.12.2018

Liebe Leute,

Jochen Mitschka beleuchtet heute auf telepolis unter dem Titel „Politik der Reflexe statt Reflexionen“ die Reaktionen des Westens auf die Aktionen der ukrainischen Marine in der Kerch-Straße/russsischen Territorialgewässern und die darauf folgenden Antworten der russischen Seite. Link: ) – vgl. unser Posting vom 29.11.2018: Scharmützel im Asowschen Meer – Neuauflage der Maidan-/Krim-Krise?

In diesem Zusammenhang sind die von zerohedge * gestern (Ortszeit) veröffentlichten Dokumente der geopolitischen Analyse-Website SouthFront (1) von erheblicher Bedeutung.

SouthFront hat bei Linkedin eine Stellenanzeige (2) vom 16.11.2018 von „Mission Essential“ (3), einer Vertragsfirma des Pentagon, ausgegraben, in der versehentlich enthüllt wird, dass die USA in den Kampfzonen im Süden der Ukraine US-Militär stationiert haben, was die jahrelangen Behauptungen der US-Regierung, sie sei militärisch nicht direkt in den Ukraine-Konflikt involviert, dementiert.

In der Anzeige werden Leute gesucht, die sehr gut Ukrainisch und Englisch sprechen, um durch Deutung/Auslegung/Übersetzung entsprechender Texte/abgehörter Kommunikation geheime Spezial-Operationen des US-Militärs in der Ukraine zu unterstützen.

Diese „vorausschauende“Stellenanzeige erschien zufällig nach einem Treffen des US-Außenministers Mike Pompeo mit seinem ukrainischen Kollegen Pavlo Klimkin (4) und wenige Tage vor der Kertsch-Krise.

Der offizielle Arbeitsplatz der gesuchten Sprachspezialisten ist die ukrainische Hafenstadt Mykolayiv, wo seit über einem Jahr eine „Logistik“-Basis der US-Marine aufgebaut wird. (5)





(3) „Mission Essential“ ist eine in Washington basierte Vertrags-Firma der US-Regierung, die hauptsächlich mit ihren „Diensten“ (translation + intedrpretation) US-Geheimdienste und militärische Stellen bedient. Sie wird hier als führender Anbieter gesehen.

(4) vgl. einen Report des „Atlantic Councils“ vom November 2018 – URL:

(5) vgl. U.S. Navy to construct maritime operations centre in Ukraine. The facility will be set up in the country’s south, in Mykolaiv region, 16 August 2017 – URL:


Strike on Syria – articles published on AntiMedia, April 15, 2018

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS
Martin Zeis, 15.04.2018 16:55

Below some recently published articles on AntiMedia (about: )
Trump Ordered Syria Strike Based on a Secret Legal Justification Congress Cant’t See
World Leaders Condemn Attack on Syria as US Threatens Additional Airstrikes
Secret Saudi Cable Leaked: Overthrow the Syrian Gov’t, but Play Nice With Russia
Pentagon Papers Whistleblower Urges Mattis to protect World From Trump
Thousands of US Troops and Marines arrive in Jordan Near Syrian Border

Neue Nuclear Posture Review – Die Überprüfung der US-Atomwaffendoktrin

Fee (Eva) Strieffler postet die ins Deutsche übersetzte Fassung der zu überprüfenden US Atomdoktrin.

S. Anhang in dt. u. engl. Sprache

*Wichtig für jeden Bürger Deutschlands , da auch US-Atom-Waffen in der BRD sowie B, NL, I, stationiert sind :

„“Wir haben das persönliche Vorwort übersetzt, mit dem US-Verteidigungsminister Jim Mattis die Überprüfung der US-Atomwaffendoktrin im Jahr 2018 eingeleitet hat.
„Nuclear Posture Review —
Die Überprüfung der US-Atomwaffendoktrin“
Februar 2018
Vorwort des US-Verteidigungsministers Jim Mattis (Seite I – III)““…/…/LP02618_280218.pdf…/2018-NUCLEAR-POSTURE-REVIEW-FIN…

Der US- Verteidigingsminister Jim Mattis eröffnet seine Ausführung mit klarer Ansage : Zitat “ Am 27. Januar 2017 hat der Präsident (Trump) das Verteidigungsministerium angewiesen,eine neue Nuclear Posture Review / NPR (Überprüfung der US-Atomwaffendoktrin) vorzunehmen, um eine sichere und wirksame Abschreckung zu gewährleisten, die unser eigenes Land und unsere Verbündeten schützt und Angriffe unserer Gegner verhindert. Diese Überprüfung erfolgt in einem für die Geschichte unserer Nation sehr kritischen Moment, indem sich die USA mit einer internationalen Sicherheitssituation konfrontiert sehen, die komplexer und herausfordernder als jede andere seit dem Ende des Kalten Krieges ist. In dieser kritischen Lage dürfen wir die Modernisierung unserer atomar bewaffneten Streitkräfte nicht länger hinauszögern, wenn wir eine glaubwürdige atomare Abschreckung sicherstellen wollen, die unseren Diplomaten die Möglichkeit erhält, aus einer Position der Stärke heraus über Krieg und Frieden verhandeln zu können. ….. “
Unbedingt den besorgniserregenden Artikel fertiglesen ….. und den Zusatzlinks bitte auch Beachtung schenken. Es geht um IHR Leben, mit dem hier gespielt wird.

Ciao Stephan


Zur „Neuordnung“ des Mittleren Ostens – Artikelauswahl

Globacrisis/globalchange NEWS


Teil I von Stephan Best

Guten Tag an die Listen.

Die gegenwärtige Lage in und um Syrien gerät besonders seit dem Übergreifen türkischer Kampfverbände auf syrisches Territorium immer unübersichtlicher. Immer wieder bieten an Stelle von Agentur gestützten Nachrichten die Analysen und Einordnungen von Reportagen von Menschen, die sich vor Ort ein differenzierteres Bild der Lage verschaffen, Einblicke in deren Hintergrundwissen.

Unsere Redaktion wählt für diesen Rundbrief für die deutschen Listen statt umfänglicher Dokumentenanhänge eine Übersicht von weiter führenden Artikeln.

17.02.2018Schwerpunkt Junge Welt

»Stabilisierung« à la USA

Washington braucht Krieg in Syrien, um den Mittleren Osten »neu zu ordnen«. Türkei, Iran und Russland sind Gegenspieler


Die Türkei verfolgt mit ihrem neoosmanischen Kurs das Ziel, in der Region an Einfluss mit Iran und Saudi-Arabien zumindest gleichzuziehen. Die NATO wiederum will verhindern, dass ihr Mitglied Türkei zur regionalen Großmacht aufsteigt. Sie nutzt kurdische Ambitionen nicht nur als Bollwerk gegen ein Bündnis zwischen Beirut, Damaskus, Bagdad und Teheran, sondern auch, um Ankara in Schach zu halten. Deswegen hat sich die Türkei Russland zugewendet und den Astana-Vereinbarungen für Syrien zugestimmt. Ein Krieg gegen die Kurden ist darin nicht vorgesehen.

Die türkische Wirtschaft und ehemalige Militärs fordern, dass Ankara auf Damaskus zugehen und zulassen soll, dass Syrien wieder die Kontrolle der Grenzen übernimmt. Russland und der Iran würden das unterstützen, die USA, Israel und die EU nicht. (…)


Leukefeld hat einen dem jW-Artikel teilweise identischen, teilweise anders akzentuierten Artikel bei Rubikon veröffentlicht:

Samstag, 17. Februar 2018

Kampf um die Levante

Eskaliert der Krieg in Syrien?

von Karin Leukefeld

Das NATO-Mitglied Türkei bedroht das NATO-Mitglied USA im Norden Syriens. Die syrische Luftabwehr schießt über syrischem Territorium einen israelischen Kampfjet ab und der UN-Sondervermittler für Syrien, Staffan De Mistura spricht von der „klaren Gefahr“, dass der Krieg in Syrien sich über die Landesgrenzen hin zu einem regionalen Stellvertreterkrieg entwickeln könnte. „In einigen Teilen des Landes“ sei eine militärische Eskalation zu beobachten. In den vier Jahren, die er als UN-Sondervermittler für Syrien tätig sei, habe er „nie einen gefährlicheren Moment erlebt“, so der UN-Diplomat. (…)


Syrien: Weitere Eskalation durch Angriffe der USA und Israel (Joachim GUILLARD)

Die Hinweise darauf, wie gefährlich die Politik der führenden syrisch-kurdischen Kräfte PYD/YPG ist, zusammen mit den USA den Osten Syriens zu besetzen, haben sich sehr schnell bestätigt.

Die USA haben jetzt aus diesem Gebiet heraus direkt regierungsloyale Kräfte angegriffen und eigenen Angaben zufolge über 100 Gegner getötet. Es sind die ersten US-Angriffe zur Durchsetzung der von YPG und US-Armee Grenze entlang des Euphrats.

Zynischer Weise bezeichnete Washington die Angriffe als einen Akt seines „nicht verhandelbaren Rechts zur Selbstverteidigung“ und als „defensive“ Luftangriffe zur Vergeltung für einen „unprovozierten“ Angriff auf die „Demokratischen Kräfte Syriens“ (SDF) und „ausländische Militärberater“, d.h. Spezialeinheiten der USA (und evtl. Frankreichs u. Großbritanniens). Dabei besteht kein Zweifel, dass die US- und NATO-Truppen absolut illegal im Land sind.

Teil II von Martin Zeis

Am 17.02.2017 veröffentlichte die Plattform einen Beitrag unter dem Titel „Escalation In Syria – How Far Can The Russians Be Pushed?“ (1), in dem eine gehackte E-Mail des US-Sonderbeauftragten für Syrien, Michael Ratney (2) an Khaled Al-Mahamid (3), Mitglied der Verhandlungsdelegation der syrischen Opposition bei den Genfer Friedensgesprächen zu Syrien, verlinkt ist (4).





Im Folgenden der Wortlaut der E-Mail (dt. übers. m.z.)


Re: Vienna talks

Michael Ratney


Dear Mr. Al-Mahamid,

ich möchte Ihnen die Position der U.S. Regierung bzgl. eines in Sotschi (Russland) stattfindenden Kongresses des syrischen nationalen Dialogs übermitteln.

Das US-Außenministerium beabsichtigt über die UN zu agieren um ein Gegengewicht zu den russischen Initiativen zu bilden. Wir können nicht zulassen, dass ein alternativer Beschluss zum Syrienkonflikt (rechtlich) legitimiert wird. Beachten Sie bitte, dass der Genfer Prozess für uns vordringlich bleibt.

Wir möchten Folgendes unterstreichen:

  1. Sie sollten weiter darauf bestehen, dass Assad und die ihn unterstützenden Kräfte die Bühne zu verlassen haben.
  2. Wir glauben, dass sie weiter Bedingungen stellen sollten, die für die Delegation der syrischen Regierung unannehmbar sind.
  3. Unsere gemeinsame Aufgabe ist es, die diplomatischen Anstrengungen Russlands in/bzgl. Syrien/s und die Gespräche in Sotschi zu blockieren.

Wir fordern Sie auf an alle anderen oppositionellen syrischen Delegationen in Wien einen nachdrücklichen Appell zu richten, ihre Reise nach Russland abzusagen.

Best regards,

Michael Ratney

Special Envoy for Syria


Im o.a. Beitrag auf zerohedge kommt der Autor zum Schluss, dass das US-Imperium sich dafür entschieden hat, eine partielle „Rückeroberung“ Syriens zu versuchen, zumindest aber die russische Seite einen möglichst hohen Preis für ihre Rolle im Syrienkonflikt zahlen zu lassen. D.h. unter anderem:

„ (…)

  • Eine de-facto Teilung Syriens vornehmen, indem das östlich des Euphrat gelegene syrische Territorium okkupiert wird;
  • Diebstahl/Erbeutung der Erdgasvorkommen in Nordwest-Syrien;
  • Die Konfiguration eines Bereitstellungsraums, vom dem aus Operationen kurdischer Kräfte, „guter“ und „böser“ Terroristen geplant und ausgeführt werden können;
  • Die Sabotage sämtlicher, von Russland unterstützter Friedensgespräche/-Verhandlungen;
  • Die Unterstützung israelischer Operationen gegen iranische Kräfte und die Hisbollah im Libanon und in Syrien;
  • Regelmäßige Angriffe gegen die syrischen Streitkräfte, die versuchen, ihr Land von ausländischen Invasoren zu befreien;
  • Die Invasion und (Teil-)-Okkupation Syriens als einen der „Erfolge“ zu präsentieren, die von Trump gegenüber dem Militärisch-Industriellen-Komplex und der israelischen Lobby (in den U.S.) versprochen wurde.“

vgl. Conclusions in:

Anm. m.z.:  Eine übergreifende Betrachtung der neu justierten US-Außen-/Geopolitik findet sich u.a. in einem Beitrag von Finian Cunningham: The US is Executing a Global War Plan; URL:


Teil III von Elke Schenk

Guten Tag,

eine Behauptung, die in unseren Medien immer wieder wiederholt wird, ist, die syrische Regierung setze Giftgas gegen das eigene Volk ein. Als Gewährsleute dafür werden u. a. die Weißhelme, syrische Beobachtungsstelle für Menschenrechte in London oder Bellingcat angeführt, – alles von westlichen Geldern gegründete oder finanzierte Gruppen, die den militärischen Rebellengruppen im Krieg gegen den syrischen Staat nahe stehen, teilweise mit Verbindung zu Islamisten.

Den Vorwurf wiederholte auf der jetzigen „Münchner Sicherheitskkonferenz“ Trumps Sicherheitsberater McMaster: „Fotos zeigen ganz klar, dass Assad weiter Chemiewaffen einsetzt“.

Newsweek berichtet von einer Pressekonferenz mit US-Verteidigungsminister James Mattis, in der dieser zum Giftgaseinsatz befragt wurde. Seine Antwort:

Jim Mattis: Nein, ich habe keinen Beweis, nicht speziell. Ich habe keine Beweise dafür. Was ich sage ist, dass andere Gruppen im Feld, NGOs, Kämpfer auf dem Boden gesagt haben, dass Sarin verwendet wurde. Wir sind daher auf der Suche nach Beweisen. Ich habe keine Beweise, glaubwürdige oder unglaubwürdige.


Der Artikel von Thierry Meyssan (s.u.) zum Thema sowie der Originalartikel aus Newsweek, auf den sich Meyssan bezieht.

Raed Al Saleh, Chef der Weißhelme, Sitz in Gaziantep, ist im übrigen Teilnehmer der diesjährigen „Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz“. Die 26-seitige Liste ist abrufbar unter

In der Einführung heißt es:

Von Freitag bis Sonntag kommen mehr als 30 Staats- und Regierungschefs und über 100 Minister aus aller Welt zur Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz (MSC) zusammen, um über aktuelle Herausforderungen in der internationalen Sicherheitspolitik zu diskutieren.

Verschwiegen wird dabei die hohe Zahl an Vertretern von Konzernen und transatlantischen, neokonservativen Think tanks.

Viele Grüße

Elke Schenk


Jim Mattis widerlegt die „Fake News“ von Israel und der NATO

von Thierry Meyssan Voltaire Netzwerk | Damaskus (Syrien) | 14. Februar 2018


Seit Jahren versichert die atlantische Presse: der Präsident Bachar Al-Assad würde chemische Waffen gegen sein eigenes Volk verwenden. Jetzt aber handelt es sich, laut dem US-Verteidigungsminister, General Jim Mattis, um eine fake news. Wie Saddam Husseins chemische Waffen ist diese Geschichte, die die Zeitungsspalten seit fünf Jahren füllt, reine Kriegspropaganda. (…)




Ciao Stephan Best

North Korea – Watch A Sitting Congresswoman Shred The MSM Narrative In Under A Minute; zerohedge 15.01.2018

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS / 16.01.2018

US-Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard speaks unequivocally about why „North Korea has these nuclear weapons.“

Greets, Martin Zeis

abcNews-This Week Video 6:25 min / transcribed quotations see 4:24 – 6:25 min


Watch A Sitting Congresswoman Shred The MSM Narrative In Under A Minute

Hawaii Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard appeared on multiple Sunday news shows a day after her state’s false ICBM emergency alert sent the islands into a tense 40 minutes of panic before it was revealed to be a message sent in error, where she slammed the mainstream media’s reporting on the North Korean nuclear threat, saying,

„We’ve got to understand that North Korea is holding onto these nuclear weapons because they think it is their only protection from the United States coming in and doing to them what the United States has done to so many countries throughout history.“

She further called for Trump to hold direct talks with Kim Jong Un in order to prevent the real thing from ever happening.

On Saturday Gabbard had immediately criticized President Trump for mishandling North Korea, taking to MSNBC to proclaim that „our leaders have failed us. Donald Trump is taking too long… he’s not taking this [nuclear] threat seriously…“ During Sunday interviews she elaborated on a plan of action, advising Trump to enter talks with Pyongyang which should “happen without preconditions” and that Trump should “sit across the table from Kim Jong Un” in order stamp out the climate of fear which contributed to the “unacceptable” alert issued on Saturday.

“We’ve got to get to the underlying issue here of why are the people of Hawaii and this country facing a nuclear threat coming from North Korea today, and what is this President doing urgently to eliminate that threat?”

Gabbard said on CNN’s State of the Union. She added that Pyongyang sees its nuclear weapons program as „the only deterrent against the U.S. coming in and overthrowing their regime there“ after decades of the US exhibiting a pattern of regime change when dealing with rogue states, which she said makes setting up preconditions for talks a self-defeating step.

And concerning the potential for an „unintentional“ nuclear war, Gabbard said,

„It’s not just the President making a decision to launch a nuclear weapon. It’s these kinds of mistakes that we have seen happen in the past that bring us to this brink of nuclear war that could be unintentional.”

Tulsi Gabbard


When the people of Hawaiʻi got this message yesterday, they were literally going through this feeling of „I’ve got minutes to find my loved ones, to say my last goodbyes, to figure out where could I possibly find shelter that would protect me from a nuclear attack.“

8:49 PM – Jan 14, 2018

The Hawaii lawmaker, who has garnered a lot of attention over her non-interventionist stance on Syria while angering establishment pundits for doing things like visiting Damascus last yearon a fact-finding mission, left ABC’s George Stephanopoulos visibly flustered during an interview on Sunday’s „This Week“. She said:

„We know that North Korea has these nuclear weapons because they see how the United States in Libya for example guaranteed Gadaffi – ‚we’re not going to go after you, you should get rid of your nuclear weapons.‘ He did, then we went and led an attack that toppled Gaddafi, launching Libya into chaos that we are still seeing the results of today. North Korea sees what we did in Iraq with Saddam Hussein, with those false reports of weapons of mass destruction. And now seeing in Iran how President Trump is decertifying a nuclear deal that prevented Iran from developing their nuclear weapons, threatening the very existence and the agreement that was made.“

At this point an incredulous Stephanopoulos stopped the Congresswoman and asked, „Was it a mistake for the United States to take out Gaddafi and Hussein?“ Gabbard responded firmly with, „It was, absolutely.“ Apparently this was enough to end the interview as a presumably shocked Stephanopoulos had no response at that point.

For those unfamiliar, Gabbard is an Army reserve officer who previously served two tours in the Middle East, including in Iraq, and has been an outspoken critic of regime change and Washington’s interventionist foreign policy.

Fehlerhaftes Axiom

Fehlerhaftes Axiom

Es folgt eine zusammenfassende Übersetzung des Beitrags “Fehlerhaftes Axiom“.

“Es gibt keinen Preis, den Russland nicht für die Ukraine bezahlen würde” – das ist das wichtigste Axiom, mit dessen Anwendung die westliche Koalition, gemeinsam mit Israel und einer Gruppe arabischer Staaten, einen Fehlstart in der Ukrainekrise hingelegt haben, mit dem eigentlichen Ziel, Russlands Einmischung in Syrien zu verhindern. Der Putsch in der Ukraine wurde seit langem vorbereitet, war aber zu den Neuwahlen [regulär Anfang 2015] geplant. Putin hat das so bestätigt, dass der Putsch zu den Neuwahlen geplant war, aber vorgezogen wurde. Der Grund für die Eile war die Angst, dass Russland es wagen könnte, sich im Nahen Osten einzumischen und dort das Fest des Westens stören könnte. Bei der Umverteilung im Hauptspiel wurde die Ukraine von Beginn an als Joker zurückgehalten, für den Fall, dass Putin sich in den geplanten Mega-Raub und die Neuziehung von Grenzen einmischen würde. Die Gewissheit über “es gibt keinen Preis…” gründete sich auf die Meinung zahlreicher Experten, Analysen, Berichte, sowie den zahlreichen Bestätigungen dieses Axioms durch russischsprachige Juden, die im Westen als Russlandexperten gelten. Das ist wirklich so, die stehen dort verschiedenen Instituten vor und sind Mitglieder in Think Tanks und machen ein gutes Geschäft, indem sie ihre kostbare Meinung verteilen, sowohl über Russland als auch über alle ehemaligen Territorien des Russischen Imperiums. (…)


Diana JOHNSTONE: U.S. Sanctions Aimed at Russia Strike Western European Allies

Elke Schenk

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS


Collateral Damage: U.S. Sanctions Aimed at Russia Strike Western European Allies


by Diana Johnstone

Do they know what they are doing? When the U.S. Congress adopts draconian sanctions aimed mainly at disempowering President Trump and ruling out any move to improve relations with Russia, do they realize that the measures amount to a declaration of economic war against their dear European “friends”?

Whether they know or not, they obviously don’t care. U.S. politicians view the rest of the world as America’s hinterland, to be exploited, abused and ignored with impunity.

The Bill H.R. 3364 “Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act” was adopted on July 25 by all but three members of the House of Representatives. An earlier version was adopted by all but two Senators. Final passage at veto-overturning proportions is a certainty.

This congressional temper tantrum flails in all directions. The main casualties are likely to be America’s dear beloved European allies, notably Germany and France. Who also sometimes happen to be competitors, but such crass considerations don’t matter in the sacred halls of the U.S. Congress, totally devoted to upholding universal morality.

Economic “Soft Power” Hits Hard

Under U.S. sanctions, any EU nation doing business with Russia may find itself in deep trouble. In particular, the latest bill targets companies involved in financing Nord Stream 2, a pipeline designed to provide Germany with much needed natural gas from Russia.

By the way, just to help out, American companies will gladly sell their own fracked natural gas to their German friends, at much higher prices.

That is only one way in which the bill would subject European banks and enterprises to crippling restrictions, lawsuits and gigantic fines.

While the U.S. preaches “free competition”, it constantly takes measures to prevent free competition at the international level.

Following the July 2015 deal ensuring that Iran could not develop nuclear weapons, international sanctions were lifted, but the United States retained its own previous ones. Since then, any foreign bank or enterprise contemplating trade with Iran is apt to receive a letter from a New York group calling itself “United Against Nuclear Iran” which warns that “there remain serious legal, political, financial and reputational risks associated with doing business in Iran, particularly in sectors of the Iranian economy such as oil and gas”. The risks cited include billions of dollars of (U.S.) fines, surveillance by “a myriad of regulatory agencies”, personal danger, deficiency of insurance coverage, cyber insecurity, loss of more lucrative business, harm to corporate reputation and a drop in shareholder value.

The United States gets away with this gangster behavior because over the years it has developed a vast, obscure legalistic maze, able to impose its will on the “free world” economy thanks to the omnipresence of the dollar, unrivaled intelligence gathering and just plain intimidation.

European leaders reacted indignantly to the latest sanctions. The German foreign ministry said it was “unacceptable for the United States to use possible sanctions as an instrument to serve the interest of U.S. industry”. The French foreign ministry denounced the “extraterritoriality” of the U.S. legislation as unlawful, and announced that “To protect ourselves against the extraterritorial effects of US legislation, we will have to work on adjusting our French and European laws”.

In fact, bitter resentment of arrogant U.S. imposition of its own laws on others has been growing in France, and was the object of a serious parliamentary report delivered to the French National Assembly foreign affairs and finance committees last October 5, on the subject of “the extraterritoriality of American legislation”.


The chairman of the commission of enquiry, long-time Paris representative Pierre Lellouche, summed up the situation as follows:

“The facts are very simple. We are confronted with an extremely dense wall of American legislation whose precise intention is to use the law to serve the purposes of the economic and political imperium with the idea of gaining economic and strategic advantages. As always in the United States, that imperium, that normative bulldozer operates in the name of the best intentions in the world since the United States considers itself a ‘benevolent power’, that is a country that can only do good.”

Always in the name of “the fight against corruption” or “the fight against terrorism”, the United States righteously pursues anything legally called a “U.S. person”, which under strange American law can refer to any entity doing business in the land of the free, whether by having an American subsidiary, or being listed on the New York stock exchange, or using a U.S.-based server, or even by simply trading in dollars, which is something that no large international enterprise can avoid.

In 2014, France’s leading bank, BNP-Paribas, agreed to pay a whopping fine of nearly nine billion dollars, basically for having used dollar transfers in deals with countries under U.S. sanctions. The transactions were perfectly legal under French law. But because they dealt in dollars, payments transited by way of the United States, where diligent computer experts could find the needle in the haystack. European banks are faced with the choice between prosecution, which entails all sorts of restrictions and punishments before a verdict is reached, or else, counseled by expensive U.S. corporate lawyers, and entering into the obscure “plea bargain” culture of the U.S. judicial system, unfamiliar to Europeans. Just like the poor wretch accused of robbing a convenience store, the lawyers urge the huge European enterprises to plea guilty in order to escape much worse consequences.

Alstom, a major multinational corporation whose railroad section produces France’s high speed trains, is a jewel of French industry. In 2014, under pressure from U.S. accusations of corruption (probably bribes to officials in a few developing countries), Alstom sold off its electricity branch to General Electric.

The underlying accusation is that such alleged “corruption” by foreign firms causes U.S. firms to lose markets. That is possible, but there is no practical reciprocity here. A whole range of U.S. intelligence agencies, able to spy on everyone’s private communications, are engaged in commercial espionage around the world. As an example, the Office of Foreign Assets Control, devoted to this task, operates with 200 employees on an annual budget of over $30 million. The comparable office in Paris employs five people.

This was the situation as of last October. The latest round of sanctions can only expose European banks and enterprises to even more severe consequences, especially concerning investments in the vital Nord Stream natural gas pipeline.

This bill is just the latest in a series of U.S. legislative measures tending to break down national legal sovereignty and create a globalized jurisdiction in which anyone can sue anyone else for anything, with ultimate investigative capacity and enforcement power held by the United States.

Wrecking the European Economy

Over a dozen European Banks (British, German, French, Dutch, Swiss) have run afoul of U.S. judicial moralizing, compared to only one U.S. bank: JP Morgan Chase.

The U.S. targets the European core countries, while its overwhelming influence in the northern rim – Poland, the Baltic States and Sweden – prevents the European Union from taking any measures (necessarily unanimous) contrary to U.S. interests.

By far the biggest catch in Uncle Sam’s financial fishing expedition is Deutsche Bank. As Pierre Lellouche warned during the final hearing of the extraterritorial hearings last October, U.S. pursuits against Deutsche Bank risk bringing down the whole European banking system. Although it had already paid hundreds of millions of dollars to the State of New York, Deutsche Bank was faced with a “fine of 14 billion dollars whereas it is worth only five and a half. … In other words, if this is carried out, we risk a domino effect, a major financial crisis in Europe.”

In short, U.S. sanctions amount to a sword of Damocles threatening the economies of the country’s main trading partners. This could be a Pyrrhic victory, or more simply, the blow that kills the goose that lays the golden eggs. But hurrah, America would be the winner in a field of ruins.

Former justice minister Elisabeth Guigou called the situation shocking, and noted that France had told the U.S. Embassy that the situation is “insupportable” and insisted that “we must be firm”.

Jacques Myard said that “American law is being used to gain markets and eliminate competitors. We should not be naïve and wake up to what is happening.”

This enquiry marked a step ahead in French awareness and resistance to a new form of “taxation without representation” exercised by the United States against its European satellites. They committee members all agreed that something must be done.

That was last October. In June, France held parliamentary elections. The commission chairman, Pierre Lellouche (Republican), the rapporteur Karine Berger (Socialist), Elisabeth Guigou (a leading Socialist) and Jacques Myard (Republican) all lost their seats to inexperienced newcomers recruited into President Emmanuel Macron’s République en marche party. The newcomers are having a hard time finding their way in parliamentary life and have no political memory, for instance of the Rapport on Extraterritoriality.

As for Macron, as minister of economics, in 2014 he went against earlier government rulings by approving the GE purchase of Alstom. He does not appear eager to do anything to anger the United States.

However, there are some things that are so blatantly unfair that they cannot go on forever.

* Diana Johnstone is co-author of From MAD to Madness, by Paul H. Johnstone (Clarity Press).
She can be reached at diana.johnstone