The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has a massive hurdle to pass over. As French President Emmanuel Macron and the French government is reacting to a secretive alliance agreement between United States of America, United Kingdom and Australia (AUSUK).
This agreement or alliance is not only shaping the military alignment in Indo-Pacific sphere, but in Europe as well. The Biden Administration has with this thrown more shade and fire on a fickle organization. Which was already bickering and had lot of internal strife’s.
It is not like NATO has been running smoothly in the Trump era. No, it has been raised havoc and Trump has caused diplomatic furore over his actions. However, Biden is causing even more damage by selling sub-marines and making strategic agreements without considering close allies. This is not a wise move. The United Kingdom has been a running mate of Washington D.C. since the time of Tony Blair. So, it isn’t new on that front and post-Brexit this is just showing their own way.
Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has a huge burden on his hands. Not only clean up the mess left behind from Afghanistan and other missions associated with NATO. Now he also has a diplomatic task of epic proportions. He has to sit-down and discuss with all the allies. Stoltenberg has to appease the French, meet with Biden and zoom-call Prime Minister Scott Morrison. Because, this has to be settled.
NATO will pay a price for this. The levels of distrust the French feels might goes to others as well. Just like the Turkish are closing the waters of the Greeks in the Mediterranean. The Turks have blocked a Maltese vessel from doing it’s scientific mission in Greek waters. Therefore, Stoltenberg doesn’t only have Macron and the French to appease.
An alliance like NATO builds it’s structure on trust and protocol. This was not only business of military industries of the French, but of their pride as a sovereign within an alliance. They were promised and this wasn’t kept. While the NATO members haven’t talked or been upfront about things. That hurts the pride of Paris and surely they will feel betrayed by their allies. USA and UK might not care, but do they really want more friends anyway?
Stoltenberg has to be clever. He got to be wise and hopefully he got good council at NATO. Since these troubling times will not be easy on him. He has to stand stall until the end of his office in September 2022. Stoltenberg has had the office in 2014 and he thought the idiotic times Trump would be bad enough. However, this will be his biggest personal challenge.
As the Secretary General he has to be strong, confident and humble meeting these Head of State. Stoltenberg needs to confine and find time to build trust. He needs reassurance and security on behalf of the alliance. While trying to forge relations between Macron, Biden, Johnson and Morrison. These has to appeased and feel the vibe. That will not be easy. Yes, Stoltenberg is a seasoned politician and has touched upon trouble before.
Nevertheless, this will be a huge operation. It cannot be saved by speeches or poetic statements. No, this is mending wounds and healing relations between allies. That will not be easy. Especially, when the French says it could even ditch the whole alliance. This is why Stoltenberg have to show character and do it quick.
If NATO is still going to matter. Stoltenberg have to prove it and he got to show courage. He needs to go to Paris, Washington D.C., London and Canberra. Stoltenberg needs to show his whole skill-set of diplomacy and political game of compromise.
This will not be easy. Stoltenberg has to pass over this mountain with a proper compass or a map. He needs to follow streams, use his gut-feeling and follow the lights on the horizon. There will be no second chances and he got deliver. NATO depends on it….
Stoltenberg has to prove it’s validity and it’s value. While building trust…. that’s huge task and it’s his to bear. He got to carry it and resolve the matter. That is an unforgiving mission, but that’s what he signed up for when he accepted the office. Peace.
There isn’t anything about this man that is about trust, except of his own ego and his own scary love for his daughter. The rest is just a relic of man, whose role in the world is supposed to be trusted and secure, but instead is a beacon of distrust and disloyalty, there isn’t any cause or any effort he will thwart because of his world-view. It isn’t anyone else he will make sure suffers, because it doesn’t fit his narrow little cable-TV mind of his. President Donald J. Trump, has yet again betrayed the world, this time with Iran and Middle East as a the pawns.
That President Trump is untrustworthy is with the change of guards, the twitching ways of bombing in Yemen, the drone attacks in Somalia, the possible pull-out in South Sudan and so on. The sudden suicidal mission in Niger, the blatant support of Saudi Arabia and other friends in the Middle East. While not having a coherent strategy in Iraq and in Syria. Therefore, that today, the United States is pulling out of the Nuclear Agreement with Iran.
Everyone should know that Trump cannot be trusted, the allies in NATO should be worried, as he has attacked them and said they haven’t done enough. Who knows if he pulls out of there too. Just like he has done with the TPP and the Paris Agreement. Nothing seems impossible, if he would ask the United Nations to change their headquarters too, would seem reasonable at this point. Because this man is of the chains. Nothing is stable, nothing is done with consensus or quorum, all in the midst of misty fog, which the farts he has made by eating to many cheese-burgers and drinking to much diet-coke.
Clearly, the world cannot anticipate a trustworthy partner in the United States, the NAFTA negotiations team, the Chinese Trade Deals and the North Koreans should know that Trump is unreasonable and a megalomaniac, who only praise his own ego, but not caring about the costs for the world around him. Like it is seemingly done on impulse without other reasons than, Obama did this, so I have to do the opposite. If Obama acted like a grown ass man, I have act like baby, if Obama talked with tact with his allies, Trump has to insult the Montenegro Prime Minister Duško Marković, because Trump has to be the big-shot and King Kong at the NATO Meeting.
So, the world doesn’t need enemies when it has Trump, he has already lied about missiles ships in Asia to spread fear around North Korea, promised that something might happen in Syria or other places. This man is pulling out of the world, but expect his guns and ammunition to hit conflicts with a steady phase. If he thinks this is wise and controlling, it will just be by rare luck if nothing going to pop-off, not like Ivanka Trump or Jared Kushner can even trade their bad estates of 666 fifth avenue in New York, and copy-cat fashion designs to make a deal like the Iran Nuclear Agreement. 3 years into the deal, he pulls out.
If I was North Korea, I would wonder if the United States can be trusted and if they should just directly talk with Seoul and not Washington. Since the mad-man in DC is off the hinges and could suddenly send drones to Pakistan, because his newly appointed such-and-such with a mustache said so. Since, nothing is impossible in this mess and the lack of reflection is a bad sign. That the microwaved and lack of possible outcome of a self-inflicted wounds are the result of pulling out of it.
I am sure Fox & Friends, Tomi Lahren and all the bad-boys of the Republican going to praise this, but the world is looking in awe and thinking, does this man has any hinges? Where does the buck stops? When will this man be better? He is only getting worse.
Who needs enemies? When you have Trump? You don’t need any, no one is so self-conflicted, split-personality and self-indicted, than the commander-in-chief. Also his neglect in lack of understanding and basic knowledge of the concerns is evident too. That is why these sort of acts appears, because he thinks he won the rose on The Bachelorette and gets another shot at the woman. Instead, its big giant policies that affects not only the region, but all powers. This is creating frantic problems, and worries about the outcome. While he is just acting like it was nothing.
Who knows the consequences now, but Iran will with time start up their Nuclear production, the arms race of the Middle East will happen with time. The United States will export more weapons and who knows how it will go. Who will shoot and who will spread fear, but in the equation, the United States cannot be trusted. The United States cannot be trusted at all, as long as Trump is at the helm.
He might end NATO tomorrow. Who knows? He got the capacity and he doesn’t care. Peace.
“It’s really sad that we’re in an environment where tax returns are leaked by whoever it may be” (…) “Just think about it. Think about how dangerous that is, how third world that is on a practice that happened. When personal information is put out by people for political agendas. As a civilian, it’s actually scary” – Eric Trump on Fox News (Tani, 2017).
It is just one of these days where the sons of President Donald Trump speaks their mind and hits the nail. The nail is in the coffin, with the knowledge of the plans to make the republic less attractive, less business-friendly, more lassiez-faire and more focused on army than on progressive financial instruments and regulation to create growth. Trump Administration is busy with deporting millions, building a wall and starting trade-wars. The U.S. Government does not need to be transparent or accountable while doing so. Especially, not in the minds of one of his sons. That claims something unique and special. I have claimed in the near past that under President Trump, the U.S. Government could turn the Republic into a Banana Republic, a sort of style government that could be described by others as a third world one. Therefore, let the dictionary explain that!
Eric Trump needs a definition of the Third World:
“1: a group of nations especially in Africa and Asia not aligned with either the Communist or the non-Communist blocs” (…) “2: an aggregate of minority groups within a larger predominant culture” (…) “3: the aggregate of the underdeveloped nations of the world” (Merriam-Webster).
So the United States can itself soon be fitted, not that it is an Asian or African nation, neither Communist, but still it is getting underdeveloped by the way the financial framework and industry is set-up under the Trump Administration. Where the Industry and Financial industry has the Administration by the balls and no eager of taking care of nature or the resources, except for eating the profits without giving anything back to the Republic. Just like the Oil Industry in Nigeria or in Ghana. The same as the mining and mineral industry in the Democratic Republic of Congo. So the United States under President Trump, will be similar. Eric Trump is not so far off, just not the way he thought he would be.
Another man’s vision:
“This brings about complete dysfunction. It makes everything — economy, politics, roads, bridges, police, school — broken and shitty. Those who can leave do. Making it worse. This leads to more extremism, and more corruption, and more cynicism. And sometimes extreme violence. Because the other side becomes evil” (…) “The US has been shifting towards all four of these over the last 30 years, with inequality leading the way. We are more divided, economically and socially, then we have ever been (we are less divided racially. But only marginally so.)” (Arnade, 2016).
So when you have a system on the brink of collapse, a wealthy elite eating of the government plate and settling score to not pay their bills to the public, while the citizens and middle-class cannot build a steady life or afforded needed services, you know there are something wrong with the system and the state. That makes the Eric Trump words so right, that United States is becoming more like a third world country, with a sophisticated army, but cannot afford health care, schools or infrastructure. Just like the countries President Trump doesn’t want to affiliate with or been seen with. Since him and his advisor Bannon are supposed to be superior, and like a dictator in a Third World country, he believes he is always right and isn’t wrong.
So one smudge of evidence of his fathers Tax Returns from 2005 leaked to MSNBC Rachel Maddow, proves the realization of the state, that the Trump Administration would dislike. As they are not capping the debt, neither taking into account their ideas of taxation and tax-releases, as much as their will to deregularte industry and financial institutions. Therefore, leading the space of more expenses and negative environmental policies, that damage earth and only gains profit for a slim elite. Just like a Third World Country.
This is degrading for the United States, but the harsh truth, the ideas and policies in the making, the killing of health insurance, the idea of building the giant nuclear silos, while not paying for food for the starving. Proves that the U.S. Government are no closer to countries it does not want to be affiliated with, but still can be consider to be assimilated with. President Trump and his administration is clearly not wishing to be differing from chauvinistically taking charge and not caring what effect it has. Clearly, it is only his image that matter, just like any big-man and authoritarian leader.
So, soon we can say that the United States is underdeveloped and need aid, as their waters are daft, the industry is lacking technology, the roads are more potholes than tarmac, the bridges are weak, their railways not working and often not trusted. The United States has soon more expensive foreign imported goods, than what they produce and is losing money on their export of cash crops as soya and other grain. Therefore, President Trump leading his Republic to become underdeveloped or become a Third World Country.
Arnade, Chris – ‘USA: A Third World Country in the making’ (05.10.2016) link: https://medium.com/@Chris_arnade/usa-a-third-world-county-in-the-making-14064ea5c534#.ah2gi0loi
Tani, Maxwell – ‘Eric Trump blasts Trump’s tax return leak on Maddow: ‘Think about how dangerous…how third world that is’ (19.03.2017) link: http://nordic.businessinsider.com/eric-trump-tax-return-leak-maddow-third-world-2017-3?
Merriam-Webster – ‘third world’ link: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/third%20world
Well, ladies and gentleman the super-power called the United States of America, is a dying dinosaur that Michael Moore or even Jay-Z doesn’t have the power to change. Today was a shock for many, even for me as the American Electorate decided to elect a Demagogue of ill-rhetoric towards certain ethnic groups like the Latin-American, Women and so-on. Donald Trump in his power and commander-in-chief will remarkably create havoc.
All of this is well known, but what the United States’ citizens didn’t think about when they voted against the establishment on protest against the D.C. power-structure they voted for a man with certain traits that can put certain pieces of the Government into shambles. So before I start; for those of you who don’t know, here is the definition of a banana republic!
“It was coined in a 1904 book of fiction by O. Henry, an American writer. Henry (whose real name was William Sydney Porter) was on the run from Texan authorities, who had charged him with embezzlement” (…) “His phrase neatly conjures up the image of a tropical, agrarian country. But its real meaning is sharper: it refers to the fruit companies from the United States that came to exert extraordinary influence over the politics of Honduras and its neighbours. By the end of the 19th century, Americans had grown sick of trying to grow fruit in their own chilly country. It was sweeter and cheaper by far to import it instead from the warmer climes of Central America, where bananas and other fruit grow quickly. Giants such as the United Fruit Company—an ancestor of Chiquita—moved in and built roads, ports and railways in return for land. In 1911 the Cuyamel Fruit Company, another American firm (which was later bought by United), supplied the weapons for a coup against the government of Honduras, and prospered under the newly installed president. In 1954 America’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) backed a coup against the government of Guatemala, which had threatened the interests of United. (Historians still debate whether the CIA’s motive was to protect United or, as many now believe, to nip Communism in the bud.) Hence the real meaning of a “banana republic”: a country in which foreign enterprises push the government around” (The Economist, 2013).
Why do I believe this, it’s because of all his sort-of promises over the months. There is all kind of activities that proves the clear indications of a Banana Republic on the rise. The Americans might think otherwise, that is because there are blind on how the state really is.
“The United States recorded a Government Debt to GDP of 104.17 percent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product in 2015. Government Debt to GDP in the United States averaged 61.94 percent from 1940 until 2015, reaching an all time high of 121.70 percent in 1946 and a record low of 31.70 percent in 1974. Government Debt to GDP in the United States is reported by the U.S. Bureau of Public Debt” (Trading Economics).
So the average debt level or ratio is staggering already. This is not tackled because the creditors accept the debt levels are raising, just as seen with the numbers from Trading Economics are showing during 30 years the percentage has gone up over 70 %, which should be frightening to any economy. When you have that level of debt, you should be able to have a heavy tax-base to collect and pay the debt.
Taxing under Trump:
“US taxes are low relative to those in other developed countries. In 2012, US taxes at all levels of government represented 24 percent of GDP, compared with an average of 34 percent of GDP for the 34 member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)” (…) “The United States collects relatively less revenue dedicated to retirement, disability, and other social security programs—22 percent of total tax revenue—than the 26 percent OECD average” (…) “Property taxes provided more than twice as large a share of US tax revenue—12 percent in 2012—than the OECD average of 5 percent. Almost all revenue from taxes on property in the United States is collected by state and local governments” (…) “The United States relies less on taxes on goods and services (including both general consumption taxes and taxes on specific goods and services) than any other OECD country, collecting 18 percent of tax revenue this way compared with 33 percent for the OECD. The value-added tax (VAT)—a type of general consumption tax collected in stages—is the main source of consumption tax revenue, employed worldwide in 160 countries including all 34 OECD member countries except the United States. Most consumption tax revenue in the United States is collected by state and local governments” (Hoo & Toder, 2006).
So when the Federal and Republic itself has such a giant debt ratio, the taxes should be high and should be to the levels of actually having the ability to pay it back. As they do not even have VAT on goods that is very normal world-wide, but apparently isn’t a thing in the United States. This proves the mismanagement of potential tax-base that the Government need to succeed to pay their debt. This is before the Election yesterday.
This is the taxes planned under Trump: “According to the Tax Foundation’s Taxes and Growth Model, the plan would reduce federal revenue by between $4.4 trillion and $5.9 trillion on a static basis. The amount depends on the nature of a key business policy provision” (…) “After accounting for the larger economy and the broader tax base, the plan would reduce revenues by between $2.6 trillion and $3.9 trillion after accounting for the larger economy, depending on the nature of a key policy provision” (…) “On a static basis, the Trump tax plan would increase the after-tax incomes of taxpayers in every income group. The bottom 80 percent of taxpayers (those in the bottom four quintiles) would see an increase in after-tax income between 0.8 percent and 1.9 percent, under both policy assumptions. Taxpayers in the top quintile would see a 4.4 percent increase in after-tax income under the higher-rate assumption, or 8.7 percent under the lower-rate assumption. Those in the top decile would see a 5.4 percent increase in after-tax income under the higher-rate assumption, or 9.3 percent under the lower-rate assumption. Finally, taxpayers in the top 1 percent would see the largest increase in after-tax income on a static basis, driven by both the lower top marginal tax rate and the lower corporate income tax. Under the higher-rate assumption this increase would be 10.2 percent, and under the lower-rate assumption this increase would be 16.0 percent” (Cole, 2016).
So when the government are axing it income, while the economy running on a deficit your making no-sense. Your continue to spend on deficit while cutting taxes; the taxed ones are the ones who voted for Trump, the bottom 80% will get higher taxes, while corporations and 1% riches will get less. So the richer will get richer. A real proof of a Banana Republic where the solidarity towards the ones who needs so. They who voted for him is the ones that will pay on his tax-plan, which is ironic.
This is on the direct economic sense, now on health care. Here he proves again he will hurt the ones who voted for him, the poor and what is left of the working-class:
“The policies would cause almost 21 million people to lose their insurance coverage, as the replacement health care policies would only cover 5 percent of the 22 million individuals who would lose coverage upon the repeal of Obamacare. This would almost double the number of Americans without health insurance” (…) “The largest component of this estimate comes from the “repeal.” The campaign website proposes to “completely repeal Obamacare,” which we assume to mean repealing the Affordable Care Act’s regulations, subsidies, Medicaid expansion, Medicare savings, and tax increases. Although repealing the coverage provisions would save about $1.1 trillion, based on Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates (adjusted for recent legislation and changes in the budget window), repealing the legislation’s tax increases and Medicare cuts would cost a combined $1.6 trillion. In total, this means repeal would cost $480 billion – or $260 billion including the economic benefits of repeal” (Committee for a responsible Federal Budget, 2016).
So the Trump Administration are planning to hurt their own, the ones that has gotten through the Obamacare gotten some sorts of subsidized medical insurance, something he wants to repeal and will even make sure to cost the state more. So the educated minds will know that people has to carry insurance on their own while the state pays more to abolish the Obamacare. The 21 million individuals will regret questioning the medical treatment through Obamacare, as the Federal State will add more money. So the people are getting higher tax for the same 80% who losing their health insurance. Do the American citizens prefer punishing themselves?
As with the true implications of NAFTA:
“Customs duties reductions led to increases in trade with the other two countries of 11% in Canada, 41% in the United States, and 118% in Mexico, for the period between 1993 and 2011.5 In terms of value, American trade with Canada and Mexico increased from US$481 billion in 1993 to US$1.1 trillion in 2015. While Donald Trump claims that Americans “don’t make anything anymore,” implying that NAFTA is to blame, the American manufacturing sector has increased production by 58% since the deal came into effect” (Bedard, 2016).
So the results of NAFTA are apparently different in reality than what comes across when coming to Trump, so the reality hasn’t mattered. He wants to dissolve or change the rules and regulations, this will make it harder to export and import products between Canada and Mexico into the United States. The United States need free-movement of products and industrial products to be able to have the Corporate Capitalism that drives the USA.
So with lower taxes in general, a higher cost of health-care without concern for the 21 million without health insurance. They now are getting more problems with exporting and importing the needed products and raw-material has been possible and even at longest part of the NAFTA agreement has been positive to the US. So the regulation and cooperation with neighbours will be harder because of barriers that will be created with abolishing the NAFTA.
This is still all economic implications… then you have the gun-control, the war-lord aspects and the other social policies mixed with the economic aspect that turns the ones giant and great nation into tatters, if the President Donald Trump gets to do as he pleases without questions.
We should consider it with the implication on the policies and the foreign affairs. The US Government would lose with their plans on playing hardball with NATO and others. With the Muslims ban and deportation, also the Latin-American population that has been singled out; these groups can hurt the economy and also the basic workforce who does the needed services needed in society. That these will be sent out because of their ethnicity and faith will also prove that the United States isn’t the leaders of free-world, but another tyranny under President Trump. The fear and loathing of the Republican President Trump! That will do like the Americans did during Second World-War when Japanese for being so we’re detained into camps, or if he pleases send them packing.
This racial laws and deportations will hurt the economy and make sure the state becomes a Banana Republic; What is special is that the United States will have a free-flow of guns, ammunition, but will make it harder to import goods and also export goods with worse deals, have lesser taxes, still high debt yield and add expenses on health-care while the citizens has to cover themselves. This while the US President hasn’t a plan to help lower-classes as the minimum-pay or salaries increase for the 80% who still get added tax, also pay more for health care. The US Electorate got all reasons for feeling foolish if they even read this.
Bananas and Banana Company we’re President William Howard Taft did what he could to save the companies. Now the new President might try to replicate this, but he forgets the needed international community and production as the needed bolts, tools and manufacturing are inter-connected. That is something that the modern day President Trump needs.
Side Note – International Partnerships:
So if he builds walls, gets into whiny bitch mode and becomes a fully-blown attack paranoid mode, than the international partners will not accept being constantly bullied. I am sure that Philippines C-I-C President Rodigro Duterte will be tossed around for another power or human being. Neither will Russian President Vladimir Putin and even German Chancellor Angela Merkel will not accept it. So the price of him being brash and irresponsible thin-skinned versus the ones that questions his actions or words, isn’t really suitable with the trading partners and allies that the U.S. still needs. The US doesn’t live in a vacuum and not the only one with a giant defence and has much money to spend like on AGOA and others.
So congratulation on becoming a Banana-Republic, ready to become muffled with after playing king-pin… for decades; as your economic prospects under the Trump Administration and regime doesn’t look healthy. Peace.
Bedard, Mathieu – ‘NAFTA: DONALD TRUMP’S CRITICISMS ARE UNFOUNDED’ (07.2016) link: http://www.iedm.org/files/lepoint1016_en.pdf
Committee for a responsible Federal Budget – ‘Analysis of Donald Trump’s Health Care Plan’ (09.05.2016) link: http://crfb.org/blogs/analysis-donald-trumps-health-care-plan
Cole, Alan – ‘Details and Analysis of the Donald Trump Tax Reform Plan, September 2016’ (19.09.2016) link: http://taxfoundation.org/article/details-and-analysis-donald-trump-tax-reform-plan-september-2016
Hoo, Sonya & Toder, Eric – ‘The U.S. Tax Burden Is Low Relative to Other OECD Countries’ (08.05. 2006) link: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/us-tax-burden-low-relative-other-oecd-countries
The Economist – ‘Where did banana republics get their name?’ (21.11.2013) link: http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/11/economist-explains-16
Trading Economics – ‘United States Government Debt to GDP 1940-2016 | Data | Chart | Calendar’ link: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt-to-gdp
“Det er riktig at Norge ikke deltok i selve invasjonen. Bondevik skal ha takk for at han klarte, med god hjelp fra fredsbevegelsen og den norske kirken, å stå i mot presset fra Høyre om å slutte seg til USAs og Storbritannias angrep. Men den ubehagelige sannheten er likevel at norske våpen, norske soldater, norske politikere og norsk næringsliv både direkte og indirekte støttet Irak-krigen” (Borgen, 2016).
Igjen skriver jeg om hva freds-nasjonen Norge bedriver. Vi snakker fred og selger ammunisjon. Vi selger våpen og høyt teknisk utstyr, selv med strenge lover og reguleringer blir likevel militært forsvarmateriell til land som bryter med menneskerettigheter og de verdier som Norge står for. Dette skjer selv om forsvarlige salget skjer til våres allierte i NATO og OECD. Disse kjøper største-delen av materiellet og våpnene. Resterende ender til land som kan stilles spørsmål til. Denne informasjon kom ut og gitt til Stortinget fra Utenriksdepartementet den 10 Juni 2016. Så dette er ikke gammelt nytt, men bør sperre øynene ettersom dette er noe vi gjør for å gjøre verden mindre fredelig.
“Den samlede verdien av eksporten i 2015 var i underkant av 4,2 milliarder kroner, hvorav drøyt 3 milliarder utgjorde salg av militære varer. Av dette utgjorde eksporten av A-materiell om lag 2,8 milliarder og B-materiell ca. 300 millioner kroner. Eksporten av A-materiell økte med 21 % og eksporten av B-materiell falt med 53 % i 2015” (…) “Den samlede verdien av eksporten i 2014 var ca. 3,6 milliarder, og i 2013 beløp den seg til i underkant av 4,3 milliarder kroner. I forhold til i 2014, økte verdien av den totale eksporten med 15 % i 2015. Eksporten av A- og B-materiell økte med til sammen 4 %” (Meld.St. 36, S: 8, 2016).
Norge solgte våpen og forsvarmateriell til Forente Arabisk Emirater både ‘elektronisk utstyr’ totalt: 2287 tonn, ‘billed/videoutstyr’ totalt: 508 tonn. også ‘Ammunisjon tilhørende deler og komponenter samt tilhørende deler og komponenter’ totale 23475 tonn .
I det samme året solgte vi fra Norge til Malaysia både våpen og forsvarmateriell. ‘Glattboret våpen med kaliber 20 mm eller mindre, våpen med kaliber 12,7 mm og lavere samt tilhørende komponenter’ 5280 tonn og ‘Ildledningsutstyr og tilhørende systemer og komponenter’ 58 tonn.
Et annet land som ble solgt til var Oman og dette var ‘Bomber, torpedoer, raketter, missiler og eksplosiver samt tilhørende komponenter’ 10015 tonn.
Det var militære-oppdrag gjort i Norge for oppdrags-land ved å reparere våpen og forsvarmateriell. Det ble reparert materiell fra land som Forente Arabiske Emirater, Jordan, Malaysia og Sør Korea. Det ble levert levert kommunikasjonmateriell for militært bruk til Algerie, Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia og Thailand.
Disse landene fikk etterforsyning av forsvarmateriell i år fra Norge: Afganistan, Belize, Israel, Irak, Kuwait, Mali og Sør Sudan.
Noe som er spesielt i rapporten og stusser over at Libya står i tabell 9.2. i Stortingsmeldingen, men har intet direkte eksport til, så hvorfor lagt inn ett mottakerland av forsvarmateriell, men ingen offisielle tall. Dette virker suspekt, resterende land har fått materiell i løpet av tidsperioden 2012 til 2015.
Disse tallene og nasjonene som blir solgt til viser til hvordan ståa er med ‘freds-nasjonen’ Norge. Allerede 1. Mars 2013 skrev jeg en blogg om våpen-regulering og salg. Der man skulle forandre lovene for å gjøre det vanskeligere å videreselge til visse former for problematiske nasjoner og land der en bryter med internasjonale lover og regler; slik som menneskerettigheter og konvensjoner for ‘rettferdig krig’. Dette gjør at lovteksten og skjønnet blir plausibelt. Noen nyanser jeg kritiserte i 2013 og likeså kan idag. Ettersom å selge våpen til Libya, Sør Sudan, Mali, Irak, Belize og Afganistan burde sees på som tvilsomme salg ettersom konflikt og brudd burde eksistere. Dette er noe en freds-nasjon ikke skulle støtte. Selv om Norsk tropper har tidligere vært til stede eller gjort oppdrag som en del Nato i flere nasjoner, der man stille spørsmål om deres oppdrag var rett eller feil. Kan en likevel still spørsmål til fortsettelsen av å selge våpen og forsvarmateriell til konfliktområder ettersom da profitten i Norge er viktigere enn menneskeliv. Peace.
Borgen, Erling – ‘Det norske hykleriet om Irak-krigen’ (08.06.2016) link: http://www.dagbladet.no/kultur/det-norske-hykleriet-om-irak-krigen/60312259
Stortinget – Meld. St.36 (2015-2016) ‘Eksport av forsvarsmateriell fra Norge i 2015, eksportkontroll og internasjonalt ikke-spredningssamarbeid’ (10.06.2016)
As there been a leak of documents that are addressing the Bilderberg conferences that have been silenced and been a not well-known public affair between the European Government and also the World Affairs, as they have been set invited to discuss the affairs and deal with the present takes of issues.
Like on the Bliderberg Conference of 1954 that we’re on the 29th – 31st May. When the Chairman for the Conference we’re Prince of the Netherlands Prince Bernhard and his Vice-Chairmen we’re John S. Coleman and Paul Van Zeeland. While the same Conference had rapporteurs on the subjects that we’re discussed, these men we’re from USA, Belgium, Netherlands, France and Italy, but half we’re from the United States. Of attenders there we’re from all across Europe, like from Norway came Leif Høegh; UK had a dozen attendees, but the one standout we’re Sir Harry Pilkington; From Germany Rudolf Mueller, Penagiottis Pipenelis from Greece for instance. This proves the importance of the conference as the nations didn’t send some random citizens.
They held the conference in hope for the American that the European Countries could through the NATO partnership have the military arm inside the European Defense Community, while German and French didn’t have faith in or could be part of the EDC. While the unity within unions like Steel and Coal we’re possible, as the sacrifices we’re not feasible, even if the American wished for something more than a European answer, but a Atlantic Pact, that we’re combining the European and American, not only trade, but also Defense. There we’re a general agreement between Europeans at the conference to work against the Soviet propaganda and advantages from the Communists.
One key pieces from the 1954: “The difference between America and Europe with respect to the problem of overseas territories emerged from the discussion as minor by comparison with the areas of agreement. The obvious objective to be sought is an agreed policy of the West to work towards colonial self~government as rapidly and safely as is possible. Such a solution serves the interests of the West and of the dependent peoples. It thwarts the imperialistic interests of Communism”. Second piece: “It was recognised that this conflict sprang largely from the differences in the emotional reactions to the Korean war in America and Europe – differences which it was thought had recently diminished. It was hoped that the negotiations at present taking place on the list of controlled exports would do much to eliminate them”. Third piece: “European unity in some form has long been a Utopian dream, but the conference was agreed that it is now a necessity of our times. Only thus can the free nations of Europe achieve a moral and material strength capable of meeting any threat to their freedom”.
The next conference we’re on the 18th– 20th February 1955 at Barbizon Conference. The Chairman of the Conference we’re H.R.H the Prince of Netherlands. Honorary Secretary we’re J.H. Reitinger and American Secretary Joseph E. Johnson. Interesting people’s attending we’re Sir. Colin Gubbins of United Kingdom, H.J. Heinz of United States and Alberto Pirelli of Italy.
This was the second conference and here is the key issues and quotes from the report: “We had created the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation to oppose Stalinism all Its aspects, but today that Organisation had a very difficult task. Set on foot to meet the possibility of an attaque brusquee it now found itself facing the long struggle of the cold war, perhaps to be prolonged through many decades to come” (…) “Anti-Colonialism: “A European speaker discussed the important psychological aspect of the uncommitted peoples of Asia and Africa, and a number of Latin Americans. He had been very much struck during the last General Assembly of the United Nations by the fact that so much jealousy and resentment was pent up beneath the mostly polished exteriors of representatives of these countries. This was particularly so with the Asians and to a lesser degree there was something of the kind at work in the minds of quite a few South Americans” (…) “There were Asians who, being ardent nationalists and in many cases instrumental in forging the independence of their countries, nevertheless understood the West and all it had to offer to Asia and Africa well enough to interpret it. Names of men like General Romulo sprang to mind, or Sir John Kotelawala” (…) “There was a dangerous tendency on the part of United Nations commissions, after short visits to territories under European tutelage, to recommend periods after which independence should be given. There had been continuous attacks on the Belgian position in Ruanda-Urundi, in East Africa. In this case the Commission had recommended a course which might transform the territory directly from feudalism to “peoples’ democracy”. It must be remembered that the more the Western powers were weakened in Africa the more would their political, economic and even moral powers of resistance to communism be weakened” (…) “The United Nations had entered into the discussion by way of the problem of colonialism. But in terms of the broad relationships between the West and the East the United Nations was an instrument of the greatest importance. It had been said that international law was a generalisation of British foreign policy of the nineteenth century. Whether that was true or not, there was written into the preamble and articles 1 and 2 of the Charter a set of propositions about international order which were entirely congenial to the foreign policies of all who sat there in the room and these had been agreed by sixty governments, including the uncommitted peoples whom we were discussing” (…) “One of Europe’s greatest responsibilities today was to find new formulae for getting over nationalism and in that the speaker agreed with the views of a participant who had suggested that some sort of federation might be the solution. We must find some form, whether it was of federation or of any other juridical term which one might give it, which would be a European-invented by-pass for European-created nationalism”.
The next conference we’re in Garmish-Partenkichen conference at the date 23rd – 25th September 1955. When the same leaders as earlier in the year at the Barbizon Conference as this was a continues effort on the common work. The key things to take from this one we’re this: “The discussion on this subject revealed general support for the idea of European Integration and unification among the participation from the six countries of the European Coal and Steel Community, and a recognition of the urgency of the problem” (…) “The six countries of the Coal and Steel Community had definitely decided to establish a common market and that the experts were now working this out was felt to be a most encouraging step forward and it was hoped that other countries would subsequently join in”.
In 2 Years the next conference happened on St. Simon Island on the 15th – 17th February 1957. Where most of the usual suspects showed up again, when even a Turkish representative Muharrem Nuri Birgi; Jean De La Garde, French and David Rockefeller, United States. The discussion of this conference led to this: “Several speakers urged that patience was essential in the present Suez crisis. Situations like that which developed in Iran in 1951 and was now being repeated in Egypt could not be dealt with in a hurry. A dictator who is impervious to external influences must be allowed to run through his cycle. For a period his personal pride and the demands of his position will render him insusceptible to advice or pressure. The point at which this cycle begins to turn is very delicate and needs careful watching, since a dictator like Nasser might well take desperate measures” (…) “According to the best available estimates, the expansion of oil sales in the years ahead would bring greatly increasing revenues, in fact within the next ten years the oil-producing countries of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrein should receive 5 billion dollars in oil royalties; yet it was calculated that. over this period they would not be able to spend more than a third of this amount inside their own frontiers. This would leave a surplus of about billion dollars to dispose of” (…) “It might be possible and desirable to change NATO’s present strategic!’ posture and to develop a military organization and doctrine which would free Europe from total . dependence on the threat of massive atomic retaliation. But until or unless this was done the contradictions of our present policy were damaging and dangerous. Because the peoples of NATO did not believe in the possibility of an effective shield against attack, they were reluctant to make the sacrifices required to provide for the forward advance strategy was official doctrine at present”.
The Second conference that year was in Fiuggi, we’re still the usual suspects we’re in control of it and the men behind it. Special names registered at this one we’re Henry A. Kissinger we’re a U.S. Representative and Major-General James Jr. McCormack a U.S. Representative. Key issues and quotes from the Fiuggi we’re this: “Participants from the countries directly involved, however, felt that these fears would prove to be unfounded. The Common Market would be implemented by easy stages and, if the experience of Benelux was any guide, trade With the outside world would increase together with internal trade. They were confident that the Common Market would be a step towards greater freedom in world trade as a whole. This was the purpose of the plan, although in some cases adjustments had had to be made so that particular interests would not be too drastically affected. Now that the internal pattern had been settled in the Common Market Treaty attention would concentrate increasingly on relations with third countries; the Free Trade Area would be the next step in the process of European economic integration” (…) “the main obstacle to British and Scandinavian participation in the Common Market was its function a step towards political union among the countries concerned” (…) “there was also the problem of including agriculture, which for countries like Denmark was of fundamental importance”.
At the 1958 Buxton Conference on the 13th September to 15th September 1958; which was run by the usual suspects yet again. Other representatives worth noticing from this ones we’re E.N. Van Kleefens from the European Coal and Steel Community, Jaques Rueff, European Economic Community (EEC), C.V.R. Schuyler, S.H.A.P.E., Sakari Tuomioja, UN Economic Commission for Europe and Sir. Gordon Archibald of the United Kingdom; other key quotes from this conference are these: “Nationalism could well yield positive results, as was the case in Turkey under Ataturk. It was objectionable, however, when it reached beyond its own borders hurting the interests of others. In such cases we had the right to protect ourselves, and should be firm about it” (…) “The Common Market was due to come into operation on a January 1959, and it was feared that, if no solution were in sight by then, the first appearance of discrimination would produce a schism between the Six and the rest of Europe” (…) “Further the speaker suggested that the Free Trade Area proposals were not the only alternative to the European Economic Community. The notion of association had a technical meaning, and various degrees of rights and obligations were conceivable and could be worked out between the European Economic Community and individual countries on a bilateral basis” (…) “Another major problem facing the European Economic Community was the co-ordination of monetary policies. As one of the participants pointed out, the economic integration of the Six required the co-ordination of all fields of economic policy”.
So there you have it and this is just outtakes, the Soviet problem is a key picture on every single conference, but that isn’t that important now. As the proof of the cold-war and the escalated influence U.S. policy had in Europe. That with their will of a more unified Europe; this being more valid for me, as the proof of the works behind the scenes from the Bliderberg group and their supporters from both United States and Canada; as they even wanted a federal solution to issues between the nation and their integration of monetary and trade-agreements on the continent.
Also the worrying views of Europeans wish to hold-on to their colonies and the liberation of the nations under British and French rule. While the Americans actually wanted a quicker liberation, while they had the worry of Soviet and Communist influence in the new “territories”; the leaked documents really reflect the dominance and arrogance of the Europeans at the time as their paternalistic threshold came under question. Another key we’re the usefulness of NATO and the place of military operations as a countering for peace in Europe, as the fear of Soviet was a reason for the alliance after the Second World War.
Next time I drop on the subject, I will go through the 1960s documents of Bilderberg conferences. To see what else that came up in the next decade. Peace.