Muddied waters: Russia finds 'piracy' cargo ship but what really happened?

Caroline Davies and Tom Parfitt for The Guardian report:

The Arctic Sea was discovered 300 miles off the Cape Verde islands three weeks after it went missing, triggering speculation of a pirate attack.

Three weeks after it vanished at sea, the cargo ship Arctic Sea was found off the Cape Verde islands today with its Russian crew alive, well and "answering questions".

All 15 sailors were aboard a Russian anti-submarine warship , bringing to a conclusion one of the most intriguing maritime mysteries of modern times.

But, even as the Russian authorities announced the development, the few details to emerge left more questions than answers at the end of a saga which has inspired frenzied rumours of piracy, ransom demands, secret cargoes and arms smuggling – all worthy of a cold war thriller.

Russia's defence minister, Anatoly Serdyukov, informed the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, that the crew, when found, were not under armed control, and were now helping to "clarify" the circumstances of this most unusual incident.

Tass news agency quoted Serdyukov saying: "The Arctic Sea was discovered at 1am Moscow time today 300 miles off the Cape Verde islands.

"The crew have been moved to our anti-submarine warfare ship. They are answering questions … to clarify all circumstances of the incident. All crew members are alive and they are feeling well. They were not under armed control."

Viktor Matveyev, the director of the Finnish-owned vessel's operating company, Solchart, told the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper: "We are extremely pleased, we've been told everyone is alive and nobody was hurt … I can't say any more. I'm rushing to a meeting to organise getting the crew home, checking their health and providing any help. We still don't know what condition the ship is in".

The disappearance of the Arctic Sea, carrying a £1.1m cargo of timber, baffled experts as it eluded radars and satellites and vanished after passing through the English Channel on July 28. Just how a 4,000 tonne ship could drop off the charts in these days of space-age technology prompted allusions to the Bermuda triangle and the "ghost ship" Marie Celeste.

Further intrigue came with reports that the Malta Maritime Authority had received information that the Maltese-registered vessel had been boarded by up to a dozen armed men in masks as it sailed through the Baltic Sea, sparking concerns of piracy – almost unheard of in European waters.

The "raiders" reportedly bound, blindfolded and beat the crew before departing in an inflatable boat 12 hours later, it was said, leaving the ship's communications equipment damaged. The Arctic Sea had left Finland, bound for the Algerian port of Bejaia, on 23 July. It was known to have made contact with Dover coastguards on 28 July, but, at that point there had been no alert over the "attack" so there was no hunt for the ship.

Two days later it was spotted in the Bay of Biscay. Its automatic tracking system recorded its position at 1.30am. From then on, however, there was no further contact. The tracking system appeared either to have been switched off or to have stopped working from that day. It was due to make port in Algeria on 4 August. It now appears it changed direction, heading out into the western Atlantic.

The Kremlin had ordered warships and submarines to scour the Atlantic amid fears that the ship might have been the target of a second attack. Meanwhile, Nato was monitoring the situation, due to the unusual nature and location of the attacks, but was not directly involved .

Puzzling over speculation that the ship had fallen victim to pirates, a spokesman for the European commission, Martin Selmayr, said on Friday: "From information currently available it would seem that these acts, such as they have been reported, have nothing in common with 'traditional' acts of piracy or armed robbery at sea."

Then, French officials reported the same day that a ship "resembling" the Arctic Sea had been spotted off the Cape Verde islands, west of Senegal, though there was no immediate confirmation of this.

The plot took a further twist at the weekend with unsubstantiated reports that the ship's Finnish owners, who have denied its cargo is anything other than timber, had received a ransom note for a "large sum", reported to be almost £1m.

But there was never confirmation whether this was genuine.

Since it went missing, unsubstantiated suggestions have been made that the ship might have been hijacked because it was carrying a "secret" shipment, such as drugs or arms, unknown to its crew or owners.

Russia's Nato ambassador, Dmitry Rogozin, gave no indication of how, or by whom, the ship had been seized, and how the Russian military had managed to get the crew aboard the Russian-guided missile frigate Ladny.

He told Interfax: "We can say now that the operation has been carried through successfully. It was done with brilliance."

So what happened?

Piracy: Was the ship attacked in the Baltic Sea?

Swedish police said the crew allegedly told their shipping company that up to 12 masked men, claiming to be Swedish anti-drugs police had boarded the vessel on July 24, one day after leaving Finland, tying up the crew before leaving in an inflatable boat after 12 hours.

Cargo: Was it carrying anything other than timber?

Not according to its owners. However, Mikhail Voitenko, editor of Russia's Sovfracht maritime bulletin, fuelled intense speculation by suggesting on the Russia Today news channel that its cargo might not be drugs or arms, "but something much more expensive and dangerous". He did not elaborate. "It seems some third party didn't want this transit to be fulfilled so they made this situation highly sophisticated and very complicated," he said. The operating company pointed out that the ship was checked by customs agents on leaving Kaliningrad, and in Finland. The Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority dismissed as "stupid" claims of a nuclear cargo. Officials did conduct radiation tests on the ship at a port in Finland, but the head of the authority said there was "no basis' for reports that a fireman had thought there might be some radioactivity involved.

Dispute: Were the Russian mafia involved?

The possibility that the Arctic Sea was involved in a commercial dispute, perhaps involving the Russian mafia, was widely rumoured. David Osler, who writes on Maritime Safety for Lloyd's List, told the BBC's Today programme: "It doesn't look like it's the sort of theft of a high-value ship or cargo. It looks like some sort of dispute between Russian interests".

Speech delivered by Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on the Divine Victory Anniversary

I take refuge in Allah from the stoned devil. In the Name of Allah, The Compassionate, The Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, The Lord of the world. Peace be on our Master and Prophet – The Seal of Prophets – Abi Al Qassem Mohamad Bin Abdullah and on his chaste and kind Household, chosen companions and all the prophets and messengers. Dear audience peace be upon you and Allah's blessing and mercy

First, I would like to welcome you all on the day of your victory, on the day of your glory, honor and triumph, on the day of Lebanon's new resurrection and on the day of victory offered by the resistance, people, army, all Lebanon, all Arabs, all Muslims and all free men all over the world. I welcome you in this square where we have always met to celebrate victories and the glorious stands of martyrs. It is my duty too to pay tribute to the audience massing in Baalbeck to attend the Zajal (Lebanese traditional poetry) ceremony. It is my duty to address – on your behalf – the chaste and pure souls of martyrs – the martyrs among the resistance fighters from all factions, the martyrs among the Lebanese army officers and security forces and the civil martyrs among our dear and precious people whether Lebanese, Palestinians or Syrians who were martyred during July War. It's my duty to address all the wounded – some of whom are still suffering from injuries. It's my duty to pay tribute to all those whose homes and welfare were demolished. I pay tribute to all those who remained steadfast in their land or were displaced from their lands but remained steadfast. I pay tribute to all those who embraced the displaced from among their people in mosques, churches, schools and homes. I pay tribute to all those who stood with the resistance and supported and backed it with arms, money, blood, position, speech, tears, true emotions and supplication. I pay tribute – without mentioning names because the list would be very long – to all Arab, Islamic and world peoples, all leaders, forces, movements and governments which backed our people, resistance and nation during the Zionist aggressive war in July. Praise is first and above all to Allah, the Lord of the world who blessed us with victory, backed us and defended us, and held our hearts steadfast and our souls peaceful and defeated our enemy and blessed us with glorious victory.

Brothers and sisters! After the aggressive war came to an end like on this day and the legendary stand of our people who left the places of displacement and returned to the lands of steadfastness despite demolition, destruction and millions of cluster bombs much was said about this war, its causes, reasons, motives, schemes, background, events, developments, courses, incidents, aims, results, morals, lessons and repercussions on the Lebanese level , the usurping entity, Palestine, the region and the development of the American project. It was normal that words come to no end. There still remains much to be said because we were before a historic legend made by Lebanon and the Lebanese people. It was a true miracle made by Lebanon and the Lebanese people. It must be tackled from all its perspectives and dimensions whether cultural, social, spiritual, emotional, political, military, strategic, tactics… Among what must be tackled is the following question: What if the resistance was defeated in Lebanon? What would be the image of Lebanon, Palestine and the entire Islamic and Arab region?

Today we are before this legend made by Lebanon, its people, resistance, state and vital villages. For thirty three days, it was the first and only news headline worldwide. I do not want to go into evaluations or answer such question – though they are of much importance – because I will give the priority in the available time to the statue quo and the current and upcoming threats. I do not want to talk about the media uproar and the current threats, read the upcoming stage and the current and upcoming dangers to offer for you and occupy you with political analysis. Rather I will offer you a reading that will lead to stances that concern all of us. One of the special characteristics of the contemporary experience of the resistance in Lebanon is that it tackles issues with such transparency and transfers this responsibility to a public responsibility which we all shoulder whether in thinking about it, analyzing it, getting preoccupied with it, working and getting ready to reach results. But before ushering into our main topic, I would like to read for you just a short text which has to do with the results of July War. The text is for the current enemy Premier Netanyahu but he said this text some time after July War and before he became a Premier. In this text he draws a comparison between the six-day-war in 1967 and the 33-day-war in 2006. Netanyahu said: The six-day-war enabled Israel to survive and make peace agreements. The 1967 war signaled the transformation of a state with many question marks surrounding it into an unbeatable state. That was made possible through expanding the area of the state from 12kms before 1967 to 70km and through controlling Mount Yahuda and Mount Sumeria i.e. the West Bank which height is 1000m (what blocks the way before throwing the Jews in the sea). Following the outcome of the six-day-war and the Day of Indulgence War in 1973, it became deep-rooted in the consciousness of some of the Arab world the saying that Israel is an undefeatable state. The Israeli victory and deterrence force formed a decisive element in the Arab states reaching the conviction of having to acknowledge the state of Israel and signing peace agreements with it. All of that followed the repercussions of the war then. Thus we signed peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan and we had indications that we can go for reconciliation with the Palestinians. However, since the unilateral pullout from Lebanon in 2000 and the unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, and after Lebanon War II (July War), our track changed the other way round.

So Mr. Netanyahu what's the new track now? It is evident that Israel today is no longer an unbeatable state.

Question marks on the survival of the state of Israel were paused again from friends and foes alike. Even the friends of Israel started wondering whether Israel is a state that potentially may survive. That's enough to say about the repercussions of July War. This speech was said before Gaza War. Indeed after the legendary steadfastness and the miraculous victory in Gaza, these words became asserted more than any other time in the past.

In the past few weeks, there had been media and political uproar in Israel supported by some US and Western stances, particularly British stances. Topics tackled by these statements, uproar and threats varied. Many questions were raised and imposed themselves on the regional and Lebanese statue quo. Many contacts on this issue took place. Here I am telling you: We do not believe that these threats and all this uproar which we heard from Israeli officials indicate an imminent Israeli war on Lebanon. We do not believe in that. These threats have other and various goals, including psychological war. The psychological war is not the sole goal. The threats are not only to cause a psychological war. There is no true war now. One of the goals of the threats is the psychological war.

In brief we can build an indicator which is not 100% certain. Israelis are now as we were decades ago. He who talks much and threats much does not frighten. When the Israelis talking much, that means they are unable to do anything. When they keep silent as a serpent we must open our ears attentively and be cautious.

These threats and this uproar have many aims. We will tackle these goals to face them. I will rely on Israeli texts and not on my analysis.

First: This media uproar aims at targeting the formation of the Lebanese government through warning those who are forming it that if you allowed Hezbollah to partake in the government, Lebanon must bear the repercussions. We will demolish the infrastructure and the Lebanese cabinet must assume the responsibility of such and such... So the uproar aims above all at pressing or obstructing the formation of the government. Second they aim at pressuring Hezbollah not to partake in the Lebanese government so that it would be formed now. Thirdly the Zionist enemy is worried, annoyed and vexed should a national unity government – a government of partnership and sharing - be formed.

The response is to make haste and participate together to form a national unity government, a national agreement government, a coalition government…. Call it whatever you want. So there is a security, political, social, economic and living need to have a national unity government as soon as possible.

Second: Hezbollah must participate forcefully in the government. Well you have heard me wondering during Ridwan Operation Anniversary: Shall we participate or not? What shall we do? What shall our allies do? But now – to vex Netanyahu – we must participate. So this is the first response. We frustrate such threats when we present as soon as possible to the Lebanese, Zionists and the world a national unity government and a national agreement government. Thus we say that this uproar is valueless.

Another goal for this uproar is the attempt to bring back discord, crisis and tension to Lebanon. This is what the Israelis are saying. They frankly said that in the past weeks the situation settled. Tension eased and there is a quiet and soft debate between political forces. This makes the resistance at ease. We must not allow the resistance to be at ease in Lebanon. So let's arouse anew the topic of threats, arms, resistance and Hezbollah. Let's threat the Lebanese: We will demolish you, strike your government and your infrastructure so that discord is restored. This aim also was not achieved. Praise be to Allah the general atmosphere in the country is good and positive. It's true some odd voices were heard commenting but no soon the atmosphere cooled down and consequently the Lebanese and the political forces will not succumb to this Israeli goal.

A third goal of this uproar is the endeavor to amend the mandate of the UNIFIL. The UN Secretary General report over the implementation of UN resolution 1701 and extending the mandate of the UNIFIL in the South was about to be released. Before the incident that took place in the town of Khirbet Selem, the Americans and the Israeli raised the issue of amending the UNIFIL’s mandate, the issue of arms, armament, and the access of arms to the south of Litani. The aim was amending the mission of the UNIFIL. Just to remind the UNIFIL has one mission in southern Lebanon which is to back the Lebanese army and other legitimate forces only. Consequently, the UNIFIL cannot erect checkpoints, raid houses, search spots… These are the missions of institutions. If it was summoned for help, they come to help. They wanted to amend its mandate to transform this force into a multi-national force as suggested back in July War so as to act independently from the Lebanese army and government. So it might have the right to erect checkpoints, arrest, raid and search. This uproar aims at serving this target. The explosion incident in Khirbet Selem was exploited to push things in this direction. This goal also failed due to the official stance in Lebanon and the political forces in Lebanon which unanimously agreed on rejecting amending the international resolution or on making any amendment in the mission of the UNIFIL. This goal also failed and came to an end.

Fourth: Another goal for these threats is to reopen the file of the resistance arms. Indeed with the anniversary of the war, even within the Zionist entity there were lengthy debates: What has this war led to? What goals did it achieve? For example, if Olmert – who is gone now - was still in power he would have repeated the achievements. Imagine what would have he said! Now the state which has the strongest army in the region and the most powerful air force in the region had launched a war for thirty-three days. What are the targets and the great achievement made? It's that they prevented me from delivering a speech among the people or from walking on the street. What a goal and a great achievement! (As for me this is more comfortable! I used to deliver the speech while standing; now I do that while sitting!) In the framework of such debates, Israeli officials evoke the issue of the resistance arms and power. Well, they start with inciting the international community and pressuring Lebanon, the Lebanese government, Syria and Iran. They caused an uproar saying that if you did not take decisive measures to prevent the resistance from arming, the region would be on the verge of war. This is one of the goals of this uproar. Indeed I am not concerned now with opening the file of armament. Are we making armaments or not? Where? How? In this context we are usually not concerned with making comments. Still if there is something which is appropriate to be said – as we say everything in its due time and here I am only commenting on this goal - I would like to tell all the Lebanese people (and I will go back to this point later): Our dear and precious people: This precious and dear land lies next to an enemy whom we know his historic greed. He still relies on allegations which are more than three thousand years old. In face of this enemy's greed and threats and in a world ruled by the law of the jungle and not the international law; in a world where the strong rules and the weak is slaughtered, where right is deemed wrong and what's wrong is deemed right and where facts are being falsified, rights are being usurped, sanctities are being violated and millions are being killed for the sake of American and western oil and weapons companies; in a world ruled by the law of the jungle, only a strong people, country and nation might survive. Whoever imagines that he may protect his people and nation through alliances and relations must be cautious and benefit from all past experiences so as not to be sold in the international market of politics when the right price is paid. No people are protected by alliances and relations. In the first place, they are protected by their self- power, unity, will and determination to live with dignity.

Among the goals of this uproar and these threats is the psychological war. Continuous and ongoing psychological war is one of the goals. It aims at targeting the convictions of our people and the peoples of the region. It aims at targeting our hearts, conscious, determination, will, seriousness, confidence and hope in the future. It aims at keeping the Lebanese people and the peoples of the region in a state of worry, tension and disorder. This psychological war has failed. I want to remind the enemy of Sharm Sheik in 1996. Then not only Netanyahu, Liebermann and his deputy in the Foreign Ministry (who talks much) but also the whole world (America, the West and even China, Russia, Latin America and a great number of Arab states) convened after the martyrdom operations in Al Qods and Tel Aviv which were executed by our brethren fighters in Hamas and Jihad. They came out with an international consensus that classifies three groups as being terrorists and which must be eliminated: Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. They were mentioned in name. We must exterminate these groups and dry up their financial sources. We must fight them all over the world because they are terrorists groups. In Sharm Sheikh 1996, a universal war was announced against the resistance movements in Lebanon and Palestine. But I still remember that day when we convened in one of the squares in Dahyieh (Beirut Southern Suburbs) and spoke out our response. Before such a psychological war, we must cite the holy Qoranic verse which we memorize by heart: (Men said to them: A great army is gathering against you – so fear them: but it only increased their faith: they said: for us Allah suffice, and He is the best disposer of affairs). The whole world took a resolution to exterminate, crush and wipe you from existence. Your will grew stronger. Your will became more deep-rooted. Your certitude became greater. Why did your faith increase? On whom do you depend and trust? On Allah (they said: for us Allah sufficeth, and He is the best disposer of affairs). Following this stand during those days, no soon the Grapes of Wrath took place in April 1996. It took place weeks later. Still the resistance remained steadfast and gained victory. So such psychological war did not in the past and will not now or in the future be useful. I tell all those who are troubling themselves with psychological war: Such psychological war works with a society such as the Israeli community and other societies. But with people who have faith and trust in Allah, have hope in the future and have determination, will and the soul of sacrifice and who do not fear death and believe that Allah will back them and support them no psychological war is useful. In the contrary, that increases their faith and consecrates their conviction. There is a very nice Tradition which says that Allah Almighty have revealed to His Prophet David (pbuh). It says: "Whoever among my servants seeks protection in me (i.e. in Allah) instead of in any of my creatures (i.e. trusted, depended and resorted to Me) and I knew that in his intentions (i.e. he is honest in his resort to Allah and trust in Him) should heavens and the world conspire against him (not only Netanyahu, Liebermann, America and Britain) and all who are in them, I will make a way out for him from all of that".

Allah Almighty makes for whoever trusts in Him and depends on Him a way out even if all who are in heavens and the world conspired against him. This is the essence of the victory in July War. Another Tradition tackles the believer's trust, determination and steadiness: "Whoever seeks protection in Allah, Allah protects him. Whoever dedicates himself to Allah, Allah accepts him. Then this servant does not care should heavens fall on Earth." So should heavens fall on Earth, the will, determination, faith and steadfastness of such a human being would never be shaken. Brothers and sisters! In the framework of this psychological war, I would like to address all those who assess and study July War. Well I know that friends and foes alike study July War. It was examined in then Pentagon. Committees from senior generals in America and Russia and other places around the world were formed to study it. We in Lebanon are concerned in studying this experience also in the framework of our examination of the defense strategy. Following July War experience in Lebanon and following Gaza War, I tell all analysts here and in any place in the world: Before examining arms and their quality, (Do we have anti-tanks and anti-aircraft or not? What rockets do we have? What's there quantity?) and before examining the combating squads, strategy, tactics, plots and schemes, examine man. So it's not arms that count. It's not possessing all the arms in the world that counts. One day Imam Moussa Sadre (May Allah return him sound and safe) said while addressing and calling on the people of the South to resist the Israeli aggressions (so as to express their steady will): "We will fight you with stones and with our nails and teeth." So before talking about anti-tanks and anti-aircraft, search for the man who is ready to protect himself with stones, teeth and nails. There isn't any man who does not own nails and teeth and stones. So whoever have the will fights, remains steadfast, guards his honor and gains victory at last. Some make arguments with us and with me personally on July War and the promise of victory saying that was an adventure. How did you tell the people: As I used to promise you victory, I promise you victory again? Through our knowledge and experience, we have the conviction. Today if we talk about any future that is awaiting us, I am one of the persons who assume this responsibility and confront this challenge. I am ready everyday to retaliate to you and to the whole world through our statue quo and the upcoming threats and with greater conviction and trust: As I used to promise you victory, I promise you victory again, God willing.

Some tell us where do you get this confidence from? Allow me to use the courtesies of July War. We have this conviction first from our faith in Allah and our trust in Him. Second whoever has the people who are the most honorable people and fighters who are the men of Allah would never experience the sense of defeat. Whoever has a people like this people who are ready to offer sacrifices and steadily remain steadfast and present a legendary, civil and historic example as during July War and whoever has fighters with such a level of steadfastness, courage, wisdom, strength and will to offer sacrifices, why should he look with worry to the future?

But now all these threats were useless. They rather had a negative impact there. That means the psychological war which Israel created had a negative impact there. Barak and others have shown up and said that Hezbollah in Lebanon has become thrice as strong as it was in July. He is telling the world come and help us against Hezbollah. But still what is he saying to the people of the Israeli entity and to those dwelling in the north and other regions? Still more, when Barak says that as a result of the international community tolerance with Hezbollah, the party's rocket arsenal grew and Hezbollah now has the power not only to bomb Tel Aviv only but also any other spot in the Israeli entity. He is saying so. I have preceded him to that. True Barak is inciting the international community against us but what is he doing with his people? Beware there is a new war. Not only the residents of Haifa, Naharaya and Kiryat Shmouna will run away but all of you will run away.

In past few weeks, what pushed Netanyahu to withdraw the whole issue and say that was a media storm? You occupied the whole world for four weeks threatening. No one in Israel refrained from talking. Finally he said it was a media storm. Why? That's because settlers expressed resentment and tourists started to flee. As far as I know tourists did not flee from Lebanon but rather from northern Palestine. So the psychological war had negative impact on them and thus they could not carry on with it.
Anyway, if we remained as we are and confronted any psychological war, threat and intimidation with cooperation and solidarity as what took place during the past weeks, I believe none of these storms, uproar and political and media campaigns will be useful.

I move now to another topic related to the issue of war as war. It has nothing to do with threats which are saying that these threats are to prepare for an Israeli war on September 15th. Others are saying it will take place on the end of September. Well the timing differs in 15 days. Some people say the war will take place in November 2009. In our opinion, this is ruled out.

Well such talk remains general. There is a general atmosphere in the country and in the region which talks about an imminent Israeli war whether in 2010, 2011, 2012 or 2013. God knows. So some people suppose in principle that there is an imminent war and only Allah knows when it will take place. They give as a proof on the validity of this conviction various and diversified political evidences. I do not want to go into such analyses because I have no information to rely on. They are all analyses. I like to say that we as Lebanese are not to occupy ourselves with analyses. We have to wait and see the future. In principle the assumption of war on Lebanon is valid as a possibility regardless of time and timing. It might take place after 10, 20 or 30 years. Can anyone swear that a war against Lebanon will never take place? As Lebanese we are before two options regarding our responsibility as we will not limit ourselves to tackling analyses only.

The first option is to surrender and tell the Israelis what do you want? We are ready. We are at your service. Do whatever you want but do not wage a war on our country. This option has great negative impacts and dangers. The Israelis might say we want first the disarmament of the resistance. We do not want armed resistance in Lebanon. We will say. That's easy. Let's collect arms O Lebanese. If we collected arms we will be a week country which has nothing to defend itself with. But the Israelis are owners of a project in the region which they announced. Israel is a Jewish state. That means Palestinians living in territories occupied in 1948 will not be able to stay there and spoil the identity and color of the Jewish state. Second, we have settling the Palestinians in the countries where they are present. Third in the future we will reach a war crisis as their population is increasing. So they will demand water from us. Fourth we have the security commitments. There will be a fifth condition among an endless number of conditions.

So the first option is surrendering to the conditions, will and project of the enemy. And this is out of question.

The second option is not to make war. Not at all. The second option is to get ready and consolidate the factors of strength to prevent war from taking place. You might ask me: Are we able to prevent a war from taking place? I will give you the answer: Yes. There is a great possibility. If we cooperated as Lebanese we will be able to prevent Israel from waging a war on Lebanon. So the second option is that we work together to prevent the enemy from waging another war on Lebanon. But should the enemy wage a new war, will we win in it? This is another option. How may we make this other option? Can we prevent the enemy from waging a war on Lebanon yes? Can we prevent the enemy of thinking of waging a war against Lebanon? Yes. But we have to work. That is possible not in hopes but with working.

I will be content with mentioning three topics only.

First (And here we are talking about Lebanon and not about Hezbollah) Lebanon must have a deterrent military strength. When Lebanon becomes a strong country (Here comes the defense strategy) as an army, resistance and people and when we own a deterrent military power and capacity, then we will be telling the Israelis be careful. You want to wage an attack against Lebanon to achieve goals. You won't be able to achieve goals because we are not a weak country anymore. If we presented the Israelis with such logic, they will think fully million a million times. Hereof I am not with those who frighten people saying war is imminent. I tell you: It's not easy for any Israeli cabinet to take the decision of waging a war against Lebanon. That's not easy. They will think fully before taking such a decision. This is the truth. If the Israelis wanted to launch a war against Lebanon, what will their goal be? Indeed their goal will not be less than that of July 2003 War which they called Liquidation War or less than that of the Grapes of Wrath in 1996 or that of July 2006 aggressive war. The minimum goal which the Israelis would be seeking to restore their deterrence and prestige and impose their conditions and settlement with all the governments of the region is to eradicate the resistance in Lebanon. This is a goal which the Israelis might wage a war for achieving. The question now is for military and political experts and all the analysts and for you too so that the world won't carry on frightening us: Do the current Israeli army and cabinet have the power and capacity to wage a war to eradicate the resistance in Lebanon? Here I am telling you. Indeed they cannot. They have been working day and night for three years. It's weird that some still believe that Israel was not defeated. What a victorious undefeated army which has been exercising for three years day and night, changing leaderships and generals, arming, forming investigation committees, drawing lessons and moral! If they are doing all of that and they are victorious, what if they were defeated, what would have they done?

Israel has been working day and night to become strong and they can't but do that. It's just as Barak said in a statement some days ago when he went with Netanyahu to visit an air force base. It was clear that he said the government, political forces, the settlement, the conditions, negotiations and the political future of the state of Israel is all based on the force of that army. How did that army emerge from July War? How would it get engaged in a new war? Yes, if they exercised, get armed, staged maneuvers, put plans and drew conclusions and morals while on the other hand we wasted our time and were occupied with each other, then they can in a number of years possess the power to wage a new war against Lebanon, occupy Lebanon, impose their condition on Lebanon and conclude an agreement which is more humiliating that May 17t Accord. But if we seriously assumed responsibility, they won't be able to do that. If we worked day and night, made evaluations, drew lessons, benefited from July War lessons, discovered the points of strength we own as Lebanese and consolidated them and discovered the points of weakness and addressed them, if we put our combat school into effort, (Yes I can today with pride and glory talk about a military school that the Lebanese resistance presented to the world. We are more fit of implementing this school which we made with the blood of our martyrs and the minds of our fighters on top of whom is martyr leader Hajj Imad Moghneyih -May Allah bless his soul); if we worked industriously to be strong; if we were ready to confront the enemy in a way better than that of July War even on the human level too; if we in July War confronted the enemy with thousands, we are ready today to face them with tens of thousands. We can make this enemy comprehend that any new war on Lebanon will have new rules and equations. With my respect to the debate I heard from some Lebanese, when the Israelis talk for over a year about the Dahyieh doctrine or strategy and put a new strategy for the upcoming war based on new ideas and no one answers them after one day or two and one month or two, we have the right and we are concerned with making a response. Should anyone have answered them, we would not have answered them. If the Israelis are talking about a new equation in any upcoming war (And we do not want any upcoming war but we are not afraid of that. Perhaps they want a war but they are afraid of it. That's the difference) yes it's our right to let them know that in July War we told them if you bombed Beirut, we will bomb Tel Aviv. Today we are telling you: If you bombed Beirut or Dahyieh we will bomb Tel Aviv. When we make the enemy know very well that if you waged a war on southern Lebanon and imagined that you can bomb any other city or village in Lebanon here I am telling you: today we are ready to bomb any city or village all through the area of your usurping entity. Go then and stage internal maneuvers until you are fed up.

When the enemy also comes to comprehend as we did let them comprehend but we are reiterating that – as they are talking about a new war strategy that is not limited to aerial bombarding but also broad land operations and invasions: Develop your tank armors and train your brigades to invade our territories. Again I will tell you: They will be crushed in our towns, villages, valleys and hills. If we could make this power (and it is present but we have to consolidate it and let the enemy understand that) won't that deter Israel from launching a war against Lebanon? That indeed deters Israel and protects the country. I assert for you and I am not mentioning numbers and as I used to say in July War: In any new Israeli war there will be surprises God willing. When we say that to the Israelis we will be deterring and preventing them from waging a war. They will consider all possibilities fully before even thinking of waging a war against Lebanon. So let them go and search for other choices to confront us but not war.

The second thing which we could do together to prevent a war is having national solidarity and emerging from internal crises and tension. A national speech was delivered lately. That would be highly appreciated especially if heard from all the political leaders in Lebanon. This speech says that in case of any Israeli war against the resistance we will all be with the resistance and we will back it. If that would be the national logic in Lebanon, Israelis will wonder: Where are we going? They believe we are weak and they are thinking of isolating people and regions from one another. But if they find national solidarity they won't have the choice of war anymore.

A third factor which is a very helpful factor that can't be underestimated is the issue of spying nets. Why do the Israelis insist on air violations? They say we are making violations and that is untrue. But since July War until now 4000 Israeli violation have been recorded. Still the international security Council did not make a move. Neither did the UN. Still until now there is an Israeli violation in Shabaa Farms and nothing was done in that perspective. Lebanese Al Ghajar village is a Lebanese area and still nothing has been done in that perspective.

Why do Israelis still insist on keeping their airplanes in our skies? Indeed the case is not that he is obsessed by violating our sovereignty. No they dispatch their planes to gather information. Still all military men and experts know that the technical gathering of information through such planes is not enough. The enemy can't dispense with field spies in villages, towns and neighborhoods to gather information for him. The most important element that makes the Israelis rush into a war is having enough information. When his information is not enough he becomes hesitant. When his information becomes messed up he becomes lost and when he loses information he becomes blind. Who are his eyes? They are the spies.

Thus today and on behalf of the martyrs, I demand that security forces complete what they started. Don't stop with the elections. Come on and carry on revealing the agents and arresting them. What has been accomplished so far is very great and important but still it is not enough. There is no spy-free town, village and city in Lebanon. I am responsible of what I am saying because Israelis are gathering information from every village. If once the members belonging to every definite organization were counted to see which is the greatest organized party in Lebanon it will turn out to be the agents. I am responsible for what I am saying. So this mission must be completed.

Second the judiciary file must be carried on seriously also. We have heard days ago warning words about tolerance and leniency regarding collaborators. Here I am saying: Whoever is tolerant with agents is tolerant with the people's blood and fate and the fate of the nation. It is unacceptable that anyone be tolerant in this perspective. The state has been concerned in addressing this issue since 2000 and we have depended on it to do that. Do us a favor and carry on addressing this issue.

So if we strengthened ourselves and achieved national solidarity and a national unity government and carried on revealing the Israeli agents, we as Lebanese will deter the enemy from waging a new war against Lebanon. No matter how strong he grows, his war will flop in achieving any of its goals; and the repercussions of the upcoming war on the fate, existence and future of Israel in the region will be catastrophic. But should a war take place, there is Allah, the men of Allah and the most honorable people.

July 2006 war strongly foiled the most dangerous US-Israeli plot in our Arab and Islamic region. This project apparently possessed all the elements of strength to control and practice hegemony and to cancel all impeding element. In the past recent years, that project had the most forceful push to the front especially under the administration of George Bush. That project spread over Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan to cover the whole region. Today that project failed drastically. I won't be exaggerating if I said it is over now. Some parts of this project fell and came to an end. Since August 14, 2006, we haven’t heard anything about the new Middle East of Condolezza Rice. Yes, the US-Israeli project flopped drastically in Palestine thanks to the resistance and ultimately to its legendary steadfastness in Gaza; in Lebanon thanks to its resistance, its people and all who backed it and ultimately in its legendary steadfastness in July War; in Iraq also thanks to the Iraqi resistance that prevented the dreams of George Bush and the US administration of peacefully controlling Iraq but rather forced the Americans to leave towns even if through a political agreement. Such an agreement would not have taken place without the sacrifices of the resistance fighters. I would like to tell you that if all the bombs in Iraq and the suicide bombers and the military actions targeted the occupation troops and evaded the Iraqi people of various sects, they would have inflicted the US army with a rapid, historic and great defeat. I will tell you the US project will fail in Afghanistan thanks to the resistance, and in the opposition states on top of which is Iran and Syria this project also failed.

Today and at this very moment I tell you that our domestic, regional and international situation is better than our situation back in July 2006. If you asked how it is better I will put it in other words. The current domestic, regional and international situation is not worse than the situation back in 2006. We remained steadfast and gained victory. The resistance in Palestine remained steadfast and the enemy's project flopped. Today they are nurturing desperate hopes. There were hopes that Syria falls but Syria emerged strong. As for Iran, they thought that the continuous threats to hit Iran will make it retreat and succumb. In the past few weeks, some bet and even dreamt that the Islamic revolution will come to an end and the regime would fall in the Islamic republic of Iran. Their dreams were but a mirage. I assert to you that many around the world exaggerated the events that took place in Iran, but it emerged as a regime, state and people and with the bless of the existence of such a wise, courageous, kind and historic leader as His Eminence Imam Sayyed Khamenai (May Allah prolong his life span) and with the bless of the public presence over thirty years. Iran emerged from its crisis stronger and more powerful. Iran will remain as it is. So the resistance movements today possess a stronger faith, conviction and confidence in the future.

As I recall the souls of martyrs, the suffering of their families, the sufferings of the wounded, the displaced, those whose houses were demolished and those who offered sacrifices, I tell you with much love: O people of Lebanon1 O people of Palestine! O people of Iraq! O people of our region! O brothers and sisters! Our strength is in our unity, solidarity, resistance and firm will. The future is ours. We will make it with our hands, the blood of martyrs and our faith and conviction. This is the moral drawn from the historic divine victory of July War. With you and with our proud courageous and great people we will carry on our way to guard Lebanon - Lebanon of the cedars, Lebanon of the proud mountains, Lebanon of the proud foreheads, Lebanon of the steady might- against any threat and challenge and to make Lebanon a landmark for pride, honor and glory. Peace be upon you and Allah's mercy and blessing.

source: In Their Eyes

Ahmadinejad annouces his new Minister of Intelligence

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has announced a number of his appointees for his Cabinet, including three women. Among the names was Hojatoleslam Heidar Moshlehi who used to be the Iranian Supreme Leader's representative to the Basij. He is a representative of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution in the ground forces of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), as well as the Iranian Charity Organization. He is also an advisor to the head of the Islamic Development Organization. He reportedly has close ties with the intelligence unit of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC).

Does anybody want to share any information or thoughts about this nomination?

Thanks,

VS

US 'involved in Honduras military coup'

Press TV reports:

The United States was involved in a military coup in Honduras that ousted President Manuel Zelaya on June 28, a top aide to Zelaya says.

Before heading to Costa Rica, the Honduran military plane that flew Zelaya into exile stopped to refuel at the Soto Cato air base (Palmerola) where at least 500 US troops are based, said Patricia Valle, the deputy foreign minister of Zelaya.

Palmerola is a Honduran air base that houses US troops who according to Washington conduct counter-narcotics operations and other missions in Central America.

"The United States was involved in the coup against Zelaya," Valle told The Associated Press on Saturday.

The aide however added that she did not believe the highest levels of the Obama administration were involved. (yeah, right. so what, only the local troops knew? VS)

US Embassy spokeswoman Shantel Dalton said she had no information about Valle's claim and could not comment.

International and regional efforts to reinstate Zelaya have so far failed, with some regional leaders alleging that the US - despite condemning the incident - was actually behind the June 28 military coup against Zelaya in a bid to threaten the new leftist alliance in Latin America.

"This threat doesn't scare us; on the contrary, with more force, we will be stronger," said the Bolivian President Evo Morales referring to the June 28 military coup.

Earlier, the ousted president himself criticized Washington for failing to play a bigger role in helping him to reclaim his presidency and failing to impose tougher penalties on the government of interim President Roberto Micheletti.

Meanwhile, the country's interim President Roberto Micheletti is to send a delegation to the US to try to gain inter-national recognition. The mission will meet with foreign ministers of nations belonging to the Organization of American States.

Top 10 percent of earners in America now receive nearly 50 percent of all the income earned in the United States

by Daniel Tencer for the Raw Story

The wealthiest 10 percent of Americans now have a larger share of total income than they ever have in records going back nearly a century — an even larger amount than during the Roaring Twenties, the last time the US saw such similar disparities in wealth.

In recent years, the fact that differences between rich and poor are the greatest they’ve been since the Great Depression has become a popular talking point among liberal-leaning economists.

But an updated study (PDF) from University of California-Berkeley economist Emanuel Saez shows that, in 2007, the wealth disparity grew to its highest number on record, based on US tax data going back to 1917.

According to Saez’s study, which Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman drew attention to at his New York Times blog, the top 10 percent of earners in America now receive nearly 50 percent of all the income earned in the United States, a higher percentage than they did during the 1920s.

“After decades of stability in the post-war period, the top decile share has increased dramatically over the last twenty-five years and has now regained its pre-war level,” Saez writes. “Indeed, the top decile share in 2007 is equal to 49.7 percent, a level higher than any other year since [records began in] 1917 and even surpasses 1928, the peak of stock market bubble in the ‘roaring’ 1920s.”

By comparison, during most of the 1970s the top 10 percent earned around 33 percent of all the income earned in the United States.

The contrast is even starker for the super-rich. The top 0.01 percent of earners in the US are now taking home six percent of all the income, higher than the 1920s peak of five percent, and a whopping six-fold increase since the start of the Reagan administration, when the top 0.01 percent earned one percent of all the income.

There is no consensus among economists on whether large disparities in income lead to economic disruption, but it is hard to ignore the correlation between rising income inequality and the onset of economic crisis. The last time the US saw similar differences in income was in 1928 and 1929, just before the start of the Great Depression.

Saez also broke the numbers down by administration, and found that while the wealthiest few saw their incomes rise as quickly during the Bush years as they did during the Clinton years, the same was not true for the rest of the population.

Saez suggests that the economic growth seen on paper during the Bush years was little more than an illusion for the vast majority of Americans, who saw their income grow much more slowly in the 2002-2007 period than they did during the Clinton years.

During both expansions, the incomes of the top 1 percent grew extremely quickly at an annual rate over 10.3 and 10.1 percent respectively. However, while the bottom 99 percent of incomes grew at a solid pace of 2.7 percent per year from 1993–2000, these incomes grew only 1.3 percent per year from 2002–2007. As a result, in the economic expansion of 2002-2007, the top 1 percent captured two thirds of income growth.

Those results may help explain the disconnect between the economic experiences of the public and the solid macroeconomic growth posted by the US economy since 2002. Those results may also help explain why the dramatic growth in top incomes during the Clinton administration did not generate much public outcry while there has been an extraordinary level of attention to top incomes in the press and in the public debate over the last two years.

Saez, who this spring won the prestigious John Bates Clark Medal for economists under 40, links this disparity to the Bush tax cuts, noting that “top income tax rates went up in 1993 during the Clinton administration (and hence a larger share of the gains made by top incomes was redistributed) while top income tax rates went down in 2001 during the Bush administration.”

TWO MORE RECESSIONS?

The economic crisis that has taken hold over the past year isn’t over, and the world could in fact see two more recessions before the crisis is finally over, says the chief economist of Germany’s influential Deutsche Bank.

Norbert Walter told CNBC that investors are worried about the health of the US dollar, and many countries are facing difficult financial problems because of overspending by governments on bailouts and stimulus. Those things combined could push the world economy downwards not once but two more times in the near future, he said.

“I believe that the rescue packages brought on have been so costly for so many governments that the exit from this fiscal policy will be very painful, very painful indeed,” he said. “Some of us are already talking about a W-shaped recovery. I’d probably talk about a triple-U-shaped recovery because there are so many stumbling blocks here to get out of this.”

“The world is in trouble,” Walter told CNBC.

Zionist Pioneer Renounces Zionism

By Helena Cobban From World View News Service

I've never met Dov Yermiya, a Jewish Israeli peace activist who is now 94 years old. But I read of course the book he published in 1983 in which he wrote with anguish about the torture and other gross mistreatment of civilians he witnessed directly during Israel's invasion of Lebanon the year before.

I have it in my hand now.

I just learned, in this open letter published today by Uri Avnery, that Yermiya, recently renounced the ideology and practice of Zionism with these stirring words:

I, a 95 year old Sabra (native born Israeli Jew), who has plowed its fields, planted trees, built a house and fathered sons, grandsons and great-grandsons, and also shed his blood in the battle for the founding of the State of Israel,

Declare herewith that I renounce my belief in the Zionism which has failed, that I shall not be loyal to the Jewish fascist state and its mad visions, that I shall not sing anymore its nationalist anthem, that I shall stand at attention only on the days of mourning for those fallen on both sides in the wars, and that I look with a broken heart at an Israel that is committing suicide and at the three generations of offspring that I have bred and raised in it.

... for 42 years, Israel turned what should have been Palestine into a giant detention camp, and is holding a whole people captive under an oppressive and cruel regime, with the sole aim of taking away their country, come what may!!!

The IDF eagerly suppresses their efforts at rebellion, with the active assistance of the settlement thugs, by the brutal means of a sophisticated Apartheid and a choking blockade, inhuman harassment of the sick and of women in labor, the destruction of their economy and the theft of their best land and water.

Over all this there is waving the black flag of the frightening contempt for the life and blood of the Palestinians. Israel will never be forgiven for the terrible toll of blood spilt, and especially the blood of children, in hair-raising quantities...

Avnery's response is fascinating. He, too, is a veteran peace activist, and of about the same generation as Yermiya. But in the letter he is, I think, pleading with Yermiya not to renounce Zionism completely, but rather to reconnect with the "idealistic" Zionism that they both experienced during their youth.

He writes -

When I think of our youth, yours and mine, one scene is never far from my mind: the 1947 Dalia festival.

Tens of thousands of young men and women were sitting on the slope of a hill in the natural amphitheater near Kibbutz Dalia on Mount Carmel. Ostensibly it was a festival of folk dancing, but in reality it was much more - a great celebration of the new Hebrew culture which we were then creating in the country, in which folk dancing played an important role. The dancing groups came mainly from the kibbutzim and the youth movements, and the dances were original Hebrew creations, interwoven with Russian, Polish, Yemenite and Hassidic ones. A group of Arabs danced the Debka in ecstasy, dancing and dancing and dancing on.

In the middle of the event, the loudspeakers announced that members of the UN Commission of Inquiry, which had been sent by the international organization to decide upon the future of the country, were joining us. When we saw them entering the amphitheater, the tens of thousands spontaneously rose to their feet and started to sing the "Hatikva", the national anthem, with a holy fervor that reverberated from the surrounding mountains.

We did not know then that within half a year the great Hebrew-Arab war would break out - our War of Independence and their Naqba. I believe that most of the 6000 young people who fell in the war on our side, as well as the thousands that were wounded - like you and me - were present at that moment in Dalia, seeing each other and singing together.

What state did we think of then? What state did we set out to create?

What has happened to the Hebrew society, the Hebrew culture, the Hebrew morality that we were so proud of then?

Then, he pleads this:

You, Dov, have invested in this state much too much to turn your back on it in a gesture of anger and despair. The most hackneyed and worn-out slogan in Israel is also true: "We don't have another state!"

Other states in the world have sunk to the depths of depravity and committed unspeakable crimes, far beyond our worst sins, and still brought themselves back to the family of nations and redeemed their souls.

We and all the members of our generation, who were among those who created this state, bear a heavy responsibility for it. A responsibility to our offspring, to those oppressed by this state, to the entire world. From this responsibility we cannot escape.

Even at your respectable age, and precisely because of it and because of what you represent, you must be a compass for the young and tell them: This state belongs to you, you can change it, don't allow the nationalist wreckers to steal it from you!

True, 61 years ago we had another state in mind. Now, after our state has tumbled to where it is today, we must remember that other state, and remind everybody, every day, what the state should have been like, what it can be like, and not allow our vision to disappear like a dream. Let's lend our shoulders to every effort to repair and heal!

These are very weighty issues that these two longtime Zionists are debating.

I remember the evening I had back in early March with longtime Jewish-Israeli nonviolence activist Amos Gvirtz. Gvirtz is "only" in his late 60s or early 70s. But like Avnery and Yermiya he grew up in Israel.

He told me in March,

I became an anti-Zionist after Oslo, when the government expelled the Arabs of Jahhaleenn to make room for the big new settlement area if Maale Adummim... Like the Zionists, I believe we Jews need a state of our own. But unlike the Zionists I don't think this should be built on the ruins of someone else's home. So our state need not necessarily be right here.

Gvirtz, too, like Avnery, identified a strong link between the events of 1947-48 and the situation today-- though the nature of the link Gvirtz identified was very different from Avnery's: "The Nakba wasn't really a single event that happened in 1948, so much as a long-drawn-out process, that continues to this day." In other words, he was quite unwilling to neatly divide Israeli history, as Avnery still does, between the idealized, pre-lapsarian days of the 1947 Dalia festival and the post-lapsarian era that was inaugurated-- in Avnery's view-- only by Israel's conquest of the West Bank.

Obviously, this is a very weighty issue for Zionists and their supporters to grapple with. Did 1967 mark a notable break between a laudable past and a troublesome present? Or were there indeed, as Gvirtz and many other current non- and anti-Zionists have argued, many elements of continuity from the 1947 period right through to the present?

Anyway, I'd love to see the whole text of the latest Yermiya letter from which Avnery is quoting, if anyone can provide a link to it, preferably in English. The only recent English text that I could find by him online was this letter, published in the Communist weekly Zo Haderekh in June 2008.

In it, Yermiya was returning to Defense Minister Barak the invitation he had been sent to attend a ceremony to honor all veterans of Israel's 1948 "War of Independence".

He wrote,

As a veteran of the 1948 war, who was already wounded in face to face combat two weeks before the Declaration of the State, I feel obliged herewith to return the invitation to you, as Minister of Defence. I do so regretfully but see this as my duty.

I consider you, Ehud Barak, as one of the top military commanders and prominent political leaders who were responsible for converting the army from "the Israeli Defence Force" to an army of occupation and oppression of the Palestinian people and defender of the criminal settlements in their country.

40 years of occupation have utterly corrupted the Israeli army and all strata of Israeli society.They are both characterized by the nationalist 'east wind' [the east wind brings the chamsin and locusts - C.A.] which blows and kindles conflagrations of endless wars, which threaten our people and land with the third and final destruction. Your share in the responsibility for all this is enormous, and therefore I return your invitation to you, without thanks...

Reflections by Fidel Castro: The Yankee Bases and the Latin American Sovereignty

by Fidel Castro Ruz for Cubanow.net

The concept of nation emerged from the combination of common elements such as history, language, culture, costumes, laws, institutions and others related to the material and spiritual life of human communities.

Bolivar, who worked the great heroic deeds that made him be known as ‘The Liberator’ during his struggle for the freedom of the peoples of the Americas, urged them to create what he called “the greatest nation in the world: less for its extension and riches than for its liberty and glory.”

In Ayacucho, Antonio José de Sucre waged the last battle against the empire that for more than 300 years had transformed much of this continent into a royal property of the Spanish Crown.

That was the same America that tens of years later, after being divided in part by the rising Yankee imperialism, was called by Martí ‘Our America.’

We should remember once again that on May 19, 1895, a few hours before dying in combat for the independence of Cuba -the last bastion of Spanish colonialism in the Americas-, Jose Marti prophetically wrote that everything he had done and would do was to “…timely prevent, with the independence of Cuba, that the United States could expand over the Antilles and fall with that additional force over our American lands."

In the United States, the recently liberated thirteen colonies did not take long to engage in a disorderly expansion to the West in their quest for land and gold -while exterminating indigenous populations- until they reached the Pacific coast. The agricultural and slave States of the South competed with the industrial States of the North that exploited wage labor in an attempt to create other States to protect their economic interests.

In 1848 Mexico was robbed of more than 50 per cent of its territory during a war of conquest launched against that country that was then militarily weak. The conquerors occupied the capital and imposed humiliating peace conditions. Mexico’s big reserves of oil and gas, which remained in the territory that was robbed, would later on be supplied to the United States for more than a century and in part they continue to be so now.

The Yankee filibuster William Walker, encouraged by “the manifest destiny” declared by his country, landed in Nicaragua in 1855 and proclaimed himself as President, until he was expelled by the Nicaraguans and other Central American patriots in 1856.

Our National Hero realized how the destiny of Latin American countries was being shattered by the rising United States Empire.

After Marti’s death in combat there was a military intervention in Cuba at a time when the Spanish army had already been defeated.

The Platt Amendment, which granted that powerful country the right to intervene in the Island, was imposed on Cuba.

The occupation of Puerto Rico - which has lasted for 111 years now- a country nowadays called “Free Associated State” that is neither free nor a State, was another consequence of that intervention.

The worst was still to come for Latin America, as was confirmed by the brilliant premonitions of Marti. The rising empire had already decided that the canal that would connect the two oceans would go through Panama and not through Nicaragua. The Panama isthmus, the Corinth dreamed of by Bolivar as the capital of the biggest Republic of the world he had envisaged, would become a Yankees’ property.

Despite that, there were worst consequences that occurred in the course of the 20th century. With the support of the national political oligarchies, the United States became the owner of the resources and the economies of Latin American countries. Military interventions multiplied; the armies and police forces fell under the US aegis. The Yankee transnationals took control over the fundamental productions and services, banks, insurance companies, foreign trade, railways, ships, warehouses, electricity and telephone services. Others, to a greater or lesser degree, were also finally controlled by them.

It is true that the sharp social inequities led to the emergence of the Mexican Revolution in the second decade of the 20th century -which became a source of inspiration for other countries. The Revolution made it possible for Mexico to make progress in different areas. But the same empire that in the past devoured much of the Mexican territory, is also devouring today important natural resources that still remain in that country, imports cheap labor and is even forcing the Mexican people to shed its own blood.

NAFTA is the most brutal economic agreement ever imposed on a developing country. For the sake of brevity, it will suffice it to point out that the US Government has recently stated that in this moment, when Mexico has been hit by a double blow, not only because of its economic slowdown, but also because of the effects of the AH1N1 virus, the US would probably want to see a more stable economy there before engaging in a long discussion about new commercial negotiations. And of course, not a single word is said about the fact that, as a consequence of the war unleashed by drug trafficking - for which Mexico has deployed 36 000 troops-, almost 4 000 Mexicans have died in 2009. The same phenomenon repeats itself to a greater or lesser degree in the rest of Latin America. Drugs not only cause serious health problems; they also give rise to violence which is causing lot of pain in Mexico and Latin America as a consequence of the insatiable appetite of US markets, which are an undepletable source of the hard currency that is used to foment the production of cocaine and heroine. The US is the country that supplies the weapons that are used in that ferocious and unadvertised war.

Those who die in the territory between Rio Grande and the farthest corners of South America are all Latin Americans. Thus, general violence is breaking new records of deaths and the victims, resulting mostly from drugs and poverty, surpass the figure of 100 000 a year in Latin America.

The empire does not wage the war on drugs within its borders; it does so in the Latin American countries.

In our country we do not grow coca or poppy. We efficiently combat those who attempt to introduce drugs in our country or use Cuba as a transit point. The number of persons who die as a result of violence is decreasing every year. And for that we do not need Yankee soldiers. The war on drugs is a pretext to establish military bases in the whole hemisphere.

Since when the vessels of the Fourth Fleet and modern combat planes are used to combat drugs?

The true objective the US pursues is to control the economic resources, the markets, and to struggle against social changes. Was there any need to reactivate that fleet, which was demobilized after the Second World War, now, more than 60 years later, after the cold war is over and the USSR no longer exists? The arguments used for the installation of seven air and naval bases in Colombia are an insult to intelligence.

History will not forgive those who have been so disloyal to their own peoples, or those who resort to the exercise of sovereignty as a pretext to legitimize the presence of Yankee troops. What type of sovereignty they refer to? Is it the one conquered by Bolivar, Sucre, San Martin, O’Higgins, Morelos, Juárez, Tiradentes and Martí? None of them would have accepted such a repugnant argument to justify the granting of military bases to the Armed Forces of the United States, an empire far more dominant, powerful and universal than the Crowns of the Iberian Peninsula.

If as a consequence of such agreements promoted illegally and unconstitutionally by the United States, any government in that country uses those bases, as was done by Reagan during the dirty war, and Bush at the time of the Iraq war, to provoke an armed conflict between two sister nations, this would be a big tragedy. Venezuela and Colombia were born together in the history of the Americas, after the battles of Boyacá and Carabobo, under the leadership of Simon Bolivar. The Yankee forces could promote a dirty war as they did in Nicaragua, and even recruit soldiers of foreign nationalities who are trained by them and attack any country. But the combative, brave and patriotic people of Colombia would hardly let itself be dragged into a war against a people from a sister nation like Venezuela.

The imperialists would be making a mistake if they equally underestimate the other Latin American peoples. None of them would agree with the presence of Yankee military bases; none of them will fail to express its solidarity with any other Latin American people that is attacked by imperialism.

Martí felt great admiration for Bolivar, and he was not wrong when he said: “And that is how Bolivar is in the sky of America: vigilant and frowning…still wearing his campaign boots; because what he did not do, still remains undone today: because Bolivar still has things to do in the Americas.”

Fidel Castro Ruz

August 9, 2009

Nader Was Right: Liberals Are Going Nowhere With Obama

By Chris Hedges for Truthdig

The American empire has not altered under Barack Obama. It kills as brutally and indiscriminately in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan as it did under George W. Bush. It steals from the U.S. treasury to enrich the corporate elite as rapaciously. It will not give us universal health care, abolish the Bush secrecy laws, end torture or “extraordinary rendition,” restore habeas corpus or halt the warrantless wiretapping and monitoring of citizens. It will not push through significant environmental reform, regulate Wall Street or end our relationship with private contractors that provide mercenary armies to fight our imperial wars and produce useless and costly weapons systems.

The sad reality is that all the well-meaning groups and individuals who challenge our permanent war economy and the doctrine of pre-emptive war, who care about sustainable energy, fight for civil liberties and want corporate malfeasance to end, were once again suckered by the Democratic Party. They were had. It is not a new story. The Democrats have been doing this to us since Bill Clinton. It is the same old merry-go-round, only with Obama branding. And if we have not learned by now that the system is broken, that as citizens we do not matter to our political elite, that we live in a corporate state where our welfare and our interests are irrelevant, we are in serious trouble. Our last hope is to step outside of the two-party system and build movements that defy the Democrats and the Republicans. If we fail to do this, we will continue to undergo a corporate coup d’etat in slow motion that will end in feudalism.

We owe Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney and the Green Party an apology. They were right. If a few million of us had had the temerity to stand behind our ideals rather than our illusions and the empty slogans peddled by the Obama campaign, we would have a platform. We forgot that social reform never comes from accommodating the power structure but from frightening it. The Liberty Party, which fought slavery, the suffragists who battled for women’s rights, the labor movement, and the civil rights movement knew that the question was not how do we get good people to rule—those attracted to power tend to be venal mediocrities—but how do we limit the damage the powerful do to us. These mass movements were the engines for social reform, the correctives to our democracy and the true protectors of the rights of citizens. We have surrendered this power. It is vital to reclaim it. Where is the foreclosure movement? Where is the robust universal health care or anti-war movement? Where is the militant movement for sustainable energy?

“Something is broken,” Nader said when I reached him at his family home in Connecticut. “We are not at the Bangladesh level in terms of passivity, but we are getting there. No one sees anything changing. There is no new political party to give people a choice. The progressive forces have no hammer. When they abandoned our campaign, they told the Democrats we have nowhere to go and will take whatever you give us. The Democrats are under no heat in the electoral arena from the left.

“There comes a point when the public imbibes the ultimatum of the plutocracy,” Nader said when asked about public apathy. “They have bought into the belief that if it protests, it will be brutalized by the police. If they have Muslim names, they will be subjected to Patriot Act treatment. This has scared the hell out of the underclass. They will be called terrorists.

“This is the third television generation,” Nader said. “They have grown up watching screens. They have not gone to rallies. Those are history now. They hear their parents and grandparents talk about marches and rallies. They have little toys and gizmos that they hold in their hands. They have no idea of any public protest or activity. It is a tapestry of passivity.

“They have been broken,” Nader said of the working class. “How many times have their employers threatened them with going abroad? How many times have they threatened the workers with outsourcing? The polls on job insecurity are record-high by those who have employment. And the liberal intelligentsia have failed them. They [the intellectuals] have bought into carping and making lecture fees as the senior fellow at the institute of so-and-so. Look at the top 50 intelligentsia—not one of them supported our campaign, not one of them has urged for street action and marches.”

Our task is to build movements that can act as a counterweight to the corporate rape of America. We must opt out of the mainstream. We must articulate and stand behind a viable and uncompromising socialism, one that is firmly and unequivocally on the side of working men and women. We must give up the self-delusion that we can influence the power elite from the inside. We must become as militant as those who are seeking our enslavement. If we remain passive as we undergo the largest transference of wealth upward in American history, our open society will die. The working class is being plunged into desperation that will soon rival the misery endured by the working class in China and India. And the Democratic Party, including Obama, is a willing accomplice.

“Obama is squandering his positive response around the world,” Nader said. “In terms of foreign and military policy, it is a distinct continuity with Bush. Iraq, Afghanistan, the militarization of foreign policy, the continued expansion of the Pentagon budget and pursuing more globalized trade agreements are the same.”

This is an assessment that neoconservatives now gleefully share. Eliot A. Cohen, writing in The Wall Street Journal, made the same pronouncement.

“Mostly, though, the underlying structure of the policy remains the same,” Cohen wrote in an Aug. 2 opinion piece titled “What’s Different About the Obama Foreign Policy.” “Nor should this surprise us: The United States has interests dictated by its physical location, its economy, its alliances, and above all, its values. Naive realists, a large tribe, fail to understand that ideals will inevitably guide American foreign policy, even if they do not always determine it. Moreover, because the Obama foreign and defense policy senior team consists of centrist experts from the Democratic Party, it is unlikely to make radically different judgments about the world, and about American interests in it, than its predecessors.”

Nader said that Obama should gradually steer the country away from imperial and corporate tyranny.

“You don’t just put out policy statements of congeniality, but statements of gradual redirection,” Nader said. “You incorporate in that statement not just demilitarization, not just ascension of smart diplomacy, but the enlargement of the U.S. as a humanitarian superpower, and cut out these Soviet-era weapons systems and start rapid response for disaster like earthquakes and tsunamis. You expand infectious disease programs, which the U.N. Developmental Commission says can be done for $50 billion a year in Third World countries on nutrition, minimal health care and minimal shelter.”

Obama has expanded the assistance to our class of Wall Street extortionists through subsidies, loan guarantees and backup declarations to banks such as Citigroup. His stimulus package does not address the crisis in our public works infrastructure; instead it doles out funds to Medicaid and unemployment compensation. There will be no huge public works program to remodel the country. The president refuses to acknowledge the obvious—we can no longer afford our empire.

“Obama could raise a call to come home, America, from the military budget abroad,” Nader suggested. “He could create a new constituency that does not exist because everything is so fragmented, scattered, haphazard and slapdash with the stimulus. He could get the local labor unions, the local Chambers of Commerce and the mayors to say the more we cut the military budget, the more you get in terms of public works.”

“They [administration leaders] don’t see the distinction between public power and corporate power,” Nader said. “This is their time in history to reassert public values represented by workers, consumers, taxpayers and communities. They are creating a jobless recovery, the worst of the worst, with the clear specter of inflation on the horizon. We are heading for deep water.”

The massive borrowing acts as an anesthetic. It prevents us from facing the new limitations we must learn to cope with domestically and abroad. It allows us to live in the illusion that we are not in a state of irrevocable crisis, that our decline is not real and that catastrophe has been averted. But running up the national debt can work only so long.

“No one can predict the future,” Nader added hopefully. “No one knows the variables. No one predicted the move on tobacco. No one predicted gay rights. No one predicted the Berkeley student rebellion. The students were supine. You never know what will light the fire. You have to keep the pressure on. I know only one thing for sure: The whole liberal-progressive constituency is going nowhere.”

Mousavi accused of helping 'foreign spies'

Press TV reports:

A prominent lawmaker accuses the campaign headquarters of defeated presidential candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi of aiding and abetting foreign intelligence operatives in Iran.

Ali-Asghar Zarei, a senior parliamentarian and an advisor to newly re-elected Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, claimed on Sunday that the Mousavi camp had candidly supported foreign espionage activities to advance its political agenda before and after the June 12 election.

“Our intelligence sources say that the Mousavi camp not only laid the foundation for a coup, but also offered their full support to foreign intelligence agents in Iran,” he said.

Zarei claimed that Mousavi and his associates were well aware that foreign spies had infiltrated their election headquarters. “They had full knowledge and yet they did nothing to prevent them from acting against Iranian interests.”

At some point, Zarei also accused the former prime minister of cooperating with Western media outlets in casting doubt on the legitimacy of the presidential poll.

“Without the help of foreign media outlets such as the BBC and VOA, Mousavi could have never spread such baseless rumors about the election conduct,” said Zarei.

He went on to charge that Mousavi had coordinated his efforts with foreign embassies in Tehran, particularly Britain. “If it wasn't for the help extended by Mousavi, British diplomats could not have interfered in the post-election events.”

However, Qorban Behzadian-Nejad, the head of the Mousavi campaign headquarters, dismissed the accusations as “absurd.”

“We have said it before and we will say it again, there were absolutely no meetings between the headquarters [of Mousavi] and foreign embassies,” he said.

Hundreds of thousands of people in Iran took to the streets after the victory of President Ahmadinejad with nearly two-thirds of the vote, which his rivals term as “fraudulent.”

Iran blames the post-election protests on foreign 'interference' and accuses certain Western countries, particularly Britain, for inciting violence during the unrest.
-------
Commentary: while there is no doubt in my mind that Imperial intelligence agencies were deeply involved in the "Gucci Revolution", I don't believe for one second that these acted through the local Western embassies or directly through the Mousavi campaign headquarters. This is just not how such kind of things are done. Frankly, I am even dubious whether there is any formal collaboration or conspiracy between Rafsanjani's Guccis and Imperial intelligences agencies. It is far more likely that the very real collaboration between Rafsanjani and the West is the result of a tacitly acknowleged community of interests and the opposition to a common enemy (Ali Khamenei). Unlike a conspiracy, this type of collusion is impossible to prove or break-up.

What is clear from this report, as well as from the one about a purge of the intelligence services, is that the Iranian intelligence community is being drawn in into the infighting taking place between the various Iranian elites and that is very bad news indeed.

The Saker

Iran's president purges Intelligence Ministry

The LA Times reports:

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad replaces longtime officials with loyalists. The son of a former intelligence chief accuses the president of retaliation against those who have not supported his reelection.

By Borzou Daragahi

Reporting from Beirut — Iran's president has conducted a purge of the nation's Intelligence Ministry, sweeping aside ranking officials with decades of experience in favor of loyalists, said a lawmaker, several news websites and a former intelligence chief's son.

The move, chronicled by news outlets Sunday, underscores the deep rifts and disarray within the highest echelons of the country's security apparatus since President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's disputed June 12 reelection.

Analysts say the purge does away with decades of intelligence experience. Even after the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic, chose to co-opt the shah's clandestine services into his new government rather than start from scratch.

"Ahmadinejad has practically taken command of the most significant security organ in the country and is embarking on a retaliation project," Hassan Younesi, the son of former Intelligence Minister Ali Younesi, wrote in letter posted on his blog late Saturday. "Never has the Intelligence Ministry witnessed such a politically motivated purge since its establishment. This gesture will certainly inflict heavy damage on the management of the ministry."

Officials in the Revolutionary Guard allied with the president have moved to rid the powerful Ministry of Intelligence and Security of senior officers deemed disloyal to Ahmadinejad and his allies, the analysts say.

Ahmad Avai, the lawmaker, accused Ahmadinejad of "settling scores" with ministry officials who had showed unspecified disloyalty to him, according to an interview published by the news website Fararu.com.

"We have to be worried about the ongoing cleanup at the Intelligence Ministry, and the persistence of this trend will irreparably harm the ministry," he said, describing the dismissed officials as "pious, experienced and law-abiding."

Among those sacked were the ministry's No. 2 official and the chief of counterintelligence, Younesi said. News website Alef.ir, close to conservative lawmaker Ahmad Tavakoli, said those leaving include the head of the ministry's technology department, a 25-year veteran; its parliamentary liaison; and the chief of ministry security, who is said to be a confidant of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Some analysts say Ahmadinejad was enraged at the ministry after its leader, Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei, opposed the airing of taped confessions extracted from detained election protesters and politicians. The president fired Mohseni-Ejei last month.

Analysts have also said that many in the ministry supported presidential challenger Mir-Hossein Mousavi over Ahmadinejad, and that Mohseni-Ejei allowed a group of intelligence personnel to deliver a report to Khamenei chronicling massive fraud in the election.

Ahmadinejad last month made himself temporarily de facto chief of the agency, which has operatives and offices across Iran. Hossein Taeb and Ahmad Salek, two hard-line clerics loyal to the president and close to the Revolutionary Guard, now control the vast human intelligence and electronic monitoring infrastructure, Younesi wrote.

Ahmadinejad said he would seek parliament's approval for a new Cabinet, including an intelligence minister, by mid-August. By law, the post must be filled by a cleric. Traditionally, Khamenei must also give his blessing to the person filling the crucial position.

Iranian Guccis scream "death to Russia"

Check out this al-Jazeera report:




Does anybody in Iran seriously think that Russia's stance towards the Iranian Gucci Revolution can influence the outcome of the struggle for power in Iran?

Of course not.

Sure, Russia sells technology and weapons to Iran, but such contracts are dwarfed by the oil contracts many other countries signed with Iran. So what is the big deal here?

The big deal is, of course, that the top Guccis are all actively courting the rabidly russophobic regimes in the USA and Israel, while the "street-level" demonstrators have clearly fully absorbed the anti-Russian propaganda of the West. "Death to Russia" is not so much an expression of grievances (real or imagined) towards Russia's policies, as it is a kind of oblique "pledge of allegiance" to the USraelien empire and its political agenda.

Building the US Gulag one case at a time

For a partial list of political prisoners held in US jails, please check:

The Jericho Movement's list
The Prison Activist Ressource Center's list

Also, for some background info check out this 2002 article:

The Reality of Political Prisoners in the USA (PDF format)