Messages In This Digest (12 Messages)

12.: Los tentáculos militares de EU From: Rick Rozoff

View All Topics | Create New Topic

Messages

1.: Unemployed Swedes Could Be Forced Into Wars Abroad

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff

Sat Sep 11, 2010 7:29 am (PDT)

http://www.thelocal.se/28860/20100908/

The Local
September 10, 2010

Swedish military turns to jobless to fill ranks

Job-seekers with a military background could be required to accept a vacancy as a soldier when the Public Employment Service (Arbetsförmedlingen - AF) begins recruiting professionals for the Swedish Armed Forces (Försvarsmakten) in the autumn.

Since the abolition of compulsory military service on June 1st 2010, the Armed Forces have been tasked with attracting recruits for a professional military.

The Armed Forces have contracted AF, which operates 320 job centres across the country, to aid them in their search for 4,000-6,000 suitable recruits to enter basic training.

Once admitted to the military soldiers will be obliged to bear arms and required to fulfil overseas operations on demand, according to the Armed Forces homepage which details the job requirements.

Under existing regulations jobseekers who refuse to accept an available job run the risk of losing unemployment benefits....

The Local reported in June that the Armed Forces had met criticism of its new recruitment campaign for allegedly painting a false picture of life in the military.

The three advertising films - for the army, navy and air force respectively - feature soldiers battling a forest fire, chasing Somali pirates in the Gulf of Aden, and pilots scrambling their jets to meet an incoming threat to Sweden's borders.

Fredrik Svahn at the Swedish Armed Forces told The Local in June that the films should not however be seen as a recruitment drive for a military career but should be seen more as a "discussion with the Swedish people".

"National service ends on June 30th and will be major major change with the first voluntary recruits admitted on August 15th. We want to open a discussion and invite opinions on the purpose of the Swedish Armed Forces," he said, while adding that the campaign website can also be used to apply for a job.

The centre-right Alliance government decided on June 19th 2009 to end 99 years of mandatory military service, which on average had lasted about 11 months, and move toward a professional military.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwrozoff@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Daily digest option available.
==============================

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

2.: NATO Obligations: Czech Global Military Deployment Costs Rising

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff

Sat Sep 11, 2010 7:29 am (PDT)

http://www.praguemonitor.com/2010/09/09/costs-military-missions-abroad-rising

Czech News Agency
September 11, 2010

Costs of military missions abroad rising

Prague: Czech military's foreign missions cost almost three billion crowns last year, half a billion more than in 2008, according to a government report, discussed by the Chamber of Deputies defence and security committee yesterday.

Last year's budget originally reckoned with about 2.33 billion crowns to be spent on foreign missions. However, the real expenditures eventually rose to roughly 2.95 billion, the report said.

The report explains the difference by the need to decide on the deployment of some contingents only after the drafting of the budget, while that in Afghanistan had to be additionally equipped.

The Afghan missions were to cost originally about 1.73 billion crowns, but the sum eventually rose to approximately 2.32 billion crowns, the report said.

The KFOR mission in Kosovo was the second costliest contingent.

The expected expenditures were to reach 526.4 million, but they eventually fell to about 512.3 million, the report said.

Roughly 1,000 Czech troops, the same number as in 2008, were continually deployed in foreign operations and observation missions last year.

Another 229 soldiers were prepared for deployment within the operations of NATO Rapid Response Force in the first six months of 2009.

In the second half of 2009, 1800 soldiers were ready within the Czech-Slovak battlegroup.

Up to 50 soldiers were on alert for deployment within United Nations operations last year, the report said.

($1 = 19.400 crowns)
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwrozoff@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Daily digest option available.
==============================

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

3.: 13-Nation NATO Exercise Largest Ever Held Off Finland's Coast

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff

Sat Sep 11, 2010 7:29 am (PDT)

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90853/7137138.html

Xinhua News Agency
September 11, 2010

Multinational naval exercise to start in Finland

Navy personnel from 13 countries will start a joint exercise on Monday in Finland's southern coastal city of Turku.

About 50 warships and 4,000 naval personnel from 13 countries including Finland, Germany, France, Great Britain, the United States, Sweden, Denmark and Norway are expected to participate in the two-week military exercise.

Most of the warships arrived at Turku on Friday, getting ready to take part in the maneuver that will officially start Monday.

The exercise, code-named "Northern Coasts," is the largest military exercise ever staged in Finland's territorial waters.

The exercise, a multinational crisis management operation, involves simulated terror attacks, smuggling, and environmental catastrophes. The maneuvers will last until Sept. 24.

Reports said that it is the first time for Finland to host the "Northern Coasts" military exercise, which had been hosted three times by Germany.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwrozoff@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Daily digest option available.
==============================

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

4.: Indian Defence Minister, Navy Chief To Visit U.S.

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff

Sat Sep 11, 2010 7:49 am (PDT)

http://www.hindu.com/2010/09/11/stories/2010091157121300.htm

The Hindu
September 11, 2010

Navy Chief to visit U.S. next week
K.V. Prasad

NEW DELHI: Chief of the Naval Staff Admiral Nirmal Verma will visit the United States next week. Admiral Verma's first trip to the U.S. comes days ahead of Defence Minister A.K. Antony's scheduled visit.

The visit is yet another step in the growing strategic defence relations and engagement between the armed forces of the two countries.

Admiral Verma will tour several places, including Washington and Hawaii, headquarters of the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM), and witness the progress of the P-8I Long Range Maritime Reconnaissance aircraft the Indian Navy is procuring from the U.S.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwrozoff@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Daily digest option available.
==============================

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

5.: Britain Loses 335th Soldier To Afghan Fighting

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff

Sat Sep 11, 2010 7:50 am (PDT)

http://www.rnw.nl/english/bulletin/british-soldier-shot-afghanistan-dies-injuries

Radio Netherlands
September 11, 2010

British soldier shot in Afghanistan dies of injuries

A British soldier who was injured in southern Afghanistan last month has died in hospital in Birmingham, central England, the Ministry of Defence said Saturday.

The death of the soldier from the 2nd Battalion, The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment, brings the total number of British soldiers who have died in operations in Afghanistan to 335 since the US-led invasion in 2001.

The soldier was shot in the Nahr-e Saraj district of Helmand province on August 23, and finally succumbed to his injuries at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham on Friday.

About 10,000 British troops are fighting in Afghanistan as part of a 150,000-strong international force battling Taliban militants.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwrozoff@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Daily digest option available.
==============================

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

6.: NATO Chieftan: Iranian "Missile Threat" Necessitates Star Wars

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" r_rozoff@yahoo.com r_rozoff

Sat Sep 11, 2010 1:03 pm (PDT)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/7996581/Iranian-nuclear-threat-means-West-needs-new-missile-shield-Nato-chief-says.html

Daily Telegraph
September 11, 2010

Iranian nuclear threat means West needs new missile shield, Nato chief says
Nato's Secretary-General has urged the construction of a new missile defence system to protect Europe from the threat of Iranian nuclear attack
By Nick Meo in Brussels

-Speaking at his residence in a luxurious suburb of south Brussels, a day after returning from a meeting with President Barack Obama in Washington, Mr Rasmussen told The Sunday Telegraph that he believes that it would be relatively straightforward to set up a new defensive system. Under the plan, an anti-ballistic missile "shield" would be extended across Nato's territory, coordinated by a new command and control system that would "knit together" existing radar and other sensor systems, with new SM-3 missiles based on land.
-Not all missile experts are convinced Iran will pose a threat to Europe. Robert Hewson, editor of the industry publication Jane's Air-launched Weapons, said: "Missile defence is more about shovelling money to American contractors than protecting people in Basingstoke."

Anders Fogh Rasmussen told The Sunday Telegraph he has full American backing for a proposed â‚¬200 million (£165 million) defensive "shield", which he hopes will be agreed in November at a summit of members in Lisbon.
....
"Based on their public statements we know that Iran already has missiles with a range sufficient to hit targets in Europe, and they don't hide the fact that they want to further develop their capability," Mr Rasmussen said.

"If Iran eventually acquires a nuclear capability that will be very dangerous, and a direct threat to the allies. That is the reason why I am now proposing a new and effective Nato missile defence system."

He claimed that the new system could be set up in cooperation with Russia, which has angrily opposed previous American attempts to set up missile shields in Europe.

Iran's longest-range ballistic missiles, such as the Shahab-3 and the Qiam-1, have ranges of around 2,500 miles and could hit targets in Turkey ["Europe"] and Greece.
....
Europe's anti-missile defences at present largely consist of American-made SM-3 missiles, based on US warships, which would attempt to shoot down attacking ballistic missiles.

Speaking at his residence in a luxurious suburb of south Brussels, a day after returning from a meeting with President Barack Obama in Washington, Mr Rasmussen told The Sunday Telegraph that he believes that it would be relatively straightforward to set up a new defensive system. Under the plan, an anti-ballistic missile "shield" would be extended across Nato's territory, coordinated by a new command and control system that would "knit together" existing radar and other sensor systems, with new SM-3 missiles based on land.

"In a nutshell we could build an effective missile defence system to protect all our population by connecting existing systems," he said. "Even in a time of economic constraints it would cost very little â€" â‚¬200 million over 10 years, shared between 28 allies. For a modest cost we can protect 900 million citizens.
....
Not all missile experts are convinced Iran will pose a threat to Europe. Robert Hewson, editor of the industry publication Jane's Air-launched Weapons, said: "Missile defence is more about shovelling money to American contractors than protecting people in Basingstoke."

Afghanistan will be the main focus of the Lisbon Summit, and Mr Rasmussen said that he hopes to make a major announcement on progress in handing responsibility for security of provinces from Nato to Afghansâ€" so-called transition.
....
In the week that Taliban leader Mullah Omar predicted Taliban victory, the Secretary-General said Nato would â€œstay the courseâ€ in Afghanistan.
....
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages

http://lists.topica.com/lists/ANTINATO/read
==============================

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

7.: Capitulation, Not Compromise | UN Adopts "Serbian" Resolution

Posted by: "ANTIC.org-SNN" mantic@rogers.com minimaks

Sat Sep 11, 2010 1:04 pm (PDT)

http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/09/10/capitulation-not-compromise/

Capitulation, Not Compromise

UN Adopts "Serbian" Resolution

by Nebojsa Malic <http://original.antiwar.com/author/malic/> , September 11, 2010

A sordid spectacle unfolded at the United Nations on Thursday, as the government of Serbia unconditionally surrendered to the Empire, ingloriously ending the two-year charade of "peaceful and diplomatic struggle" over its occupied province of Kosovo.

Two years ago, following the declaration <http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2008/02/22/day-of-infamy/> by the UN-established provisional government that the NATO-occupied province was an independent state, the government in Belgrade decided to "fight back" by taking its case to the UN. In October 2008, it won <http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2008/10/16/cheap-thrills/> the overwhelming support of the General Assembly to ask for an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice. In late July this year, the ICJ opined that the declaration wasnâ€™t really illegal, employing sophistry <http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/07/22/cry-havoc/> and verbal acrobatics to support the conclusion. The regime in Belgrade reacted by drafting a resolution for the General Assembly that condemned unilateral secession and called for new negotiations.

For a brief moment, it appeared as if the government â€" installed <http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2008/06/26/return-of-the-reds/> in 2008 by the U.S. and EU ambassadors â€" might have slipped its leash and stood up for its country. Then the foreign ministers of Germany <http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/08/27/westerwelles-big-adventure/> and the UK <http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jgdPlZ821CBEbDAzHet_6ZeprT2gD9HUJA7G1> came calling, and the façade of false patriotism crumbled overnight. President Tadic and Foreign Minister Jeremic eagerly accepted a "compromise" offered by the EU: have Brussels rewrite the resolution to EUâ€™s liking in exchange forâ€¦ nothing at all.

The new resolution welcomed the ICJ decision, thanked the court for "careful consideration" of the question presented, gave a blanket endorsement to the EU and implicitly recognized an independent Kosovo. The UN General Assembly approved it by acclamation. Voting would have simply been in bad taste.

The Fatal Section "F"

There was no doubt in the English-speaking press as to what the resolution meant. For example: "Serbia drops UN challenge to Kosovo independence," proclaimed the Guardian on Wednesday, when the text of the "compromise" resolution became public. "Serbia backs down on UN challenge to independent Kosovo," echoed a headline over an AP story <http://www.smh.com.au/world/serbia-backs-down-on-un-challenge-to-independent-kosovo-20100909-153bg.html> in the Sydney Morning Herald on Friday.

Meanwhile, Serbian President Tadic openly lied to his people that the new resolution specifically "excludes recognition of Kosovoâ€™s independence."

Does it? Rather, the entire resolution an implicit recognition of the breakaway province. This is made crystal clear in the last section of the text <http://www.srbija.gov.rs/vesti/vest.php?id=68730> :

"f) Welcomes the readiness of the EU to facilitate the process of dialogue between the parties. The process of dialogue by itself would be a factor of peace, security and stability in the region. This dialogue would be aimed to promote cooperation, make progress on the path towards the EU and improve peopleâ€™s lives."

As anyone can see, the provinceâ€™s status wonâ€™t be subject to discussion. The only things on the table are "cooperation" and joining the EU. The self-proclaimed government in Pristina is considered an equal party to Belgrade. And since the "dialogue" is defined as a factor of peace, security and stability by itself, it doesnâ€™t even have to result in anything. This is not a compromise â€" it is a total capitulation to EU demands, an unconditional surrender.

Some of the remaining Serbs of Kosovo seem to have reached the same conclusion; they are seeking Russian citizenship <http://serbianna.com/news/?p=6206> .

Insult to Injury

Even though the Empire thus got Serbia to publicly humiliate itself, renounce any claims to justice, and even endorse its ongoing occupation and dismemberment, that wasnâ€™t quite enough. Representatives of the "Republic of Kosovo" were brought to the chamber to bear witness. The Serbian delegation objected. After a two-hour delay, they were told to sit down and shut up; the "Kosovars" were "guests" of the five European powers and the U.S., and they would be allowed to stay. The incident was reported as yet another instance of Serbia causing trouble and "forcing" Britain and France to "negotiate a settlement" (AFP <http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gX8faiPjLD5bsQgwf4m2d4VsYf1Q> ).

In 2006, the UN launched "status talks" about Kosovo, wherein NATO envoy Martti Ahtisaari pretended to talk to Belgrade and the separatist Albanians. His proposed <http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2007/02/08/ahtisaaris-final-solution/> "compromise" solution was an independent Kosovo; for that absurdity he later got the Nobel Peace Prize <http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5g5l2fRFVwVBwe7Ra-93Sz-pK9xSQ> . Even before Ahtissaariâ€™s proposal was made public, French newspaper Le Figaro quoted one UN official, who described the whole farce thus <http://grayfalcon.blogspot.com/2006/06/voluntary-rape.html> :

"Serbia will be â€˜voluntarily rapedâ€™- namely, Belgrade will be required to declare the rape consensual after the fact, and then be given hush money by the rich playboy responsible for the act, in this case the EU."

The prediction was only half right. Belgrade was indeed required to declare the rape consensual. However, with the Tadic regime declaring that the rape was actually good, the "hush money" â€" in whatever form â€" became unnecessary.

The Grand Betrayal

Boris Tadic was suspected of being Empireâ€™s willing servant <http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m071901.html> even before he became President of Serbia in 2004. He offered proof when his inauguration was set up to mimic that of the American presidents, and when he flew to Washington to swear fealty just days later. He proved it further later that year, with a sycophantic letter to Emperor Bush <http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2004/09/30/most-humbly-yours> . But his clownish behavior <http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2005/09/29/laughable-sycophancy/> was merely a mask for outright treason <http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2007/04/19/war-of-words/> . It is no coincidence that the Albanian provisional government declared an independent Kosovo right after Tadicâ€™s re-election <http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2008/02/07/dead-end/> in February 2008; Tadic and his party sabotaged the governmentâ€™s response to the declaration. By July 2008, they had formed a majority government that nobody in Serbia voted for, but the Empire openly supported.

To get elected, Tadic promised the Serbs "both Kosovo and the EU." Though 22 out of the 27 EU members have recognized the occupied province as an Albanian state, and have explicitly conditioned Serbiaâ€™s hypothetical accession with the recognition of an independent "Republic of Kosova," Tadicâ€™s control over the media and all levers of government has ensured that Serbia remained in a state of cognitive dissonance <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance> . In such complete and utter confusion, Tadic can claim to be a patriot â€" because "treason" doesnâ€™t mean anything any more.

Yet what he did with the resolution was treason, pure and simple. Worse yet, Tadicâ€™s betrayal went beyond Serbia. It was a slap in the face to all the countries â€" more than two thirds of the world â€" that had so far refused to recognize Empireâ€™s conquest of Kosovo. And it was a betrayal of hope that Serbiaâ€™s ongoing resistance to Imperial diktat could have held out for other people around the world faced with similarly bleak prospects. Every government, every power, ultimately rests on the consent of the governed. Despite the blockade, the bombs and the media demonization, the Empire could never fully impose its will without Serbiaâ€™s agreement. And anyone refusing to consent to Imperial will was a threat. Serbia had to be broken, as an example to others <http://www.antiwar.com/deliso/?articleid=6338> .

As former PM Vojislav Kostunica put it, it was "especially humiliating that many countries trying to defend Serbia in the General Assembly had no one to defend. Serbia gave up defending itself."

No Victory

Is this a triumph for the Empire, then? Or could it be that this is merely the latest push against the fabric of actual reality, yet another brick in the edifice of lies <http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m110603.html> , which will make the eventual collapse so much more disastrous once reality pushes back?

Tadic is finished; not because he has just about run out of Serbia to sacrifice, but because the Empire doesnâ€™t need him anymore. Already several "opposition" politicians in Serbia are lining up to be Empireâ€™s new favorite sycophants. They must have missed the memo that the Empire wonâ€™t be around <http://original.antiwar.com/eland/2010/09/07/no-tears-needed/> much longer.

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

8.: Armenia: NATO Practices "Disaster Relief"

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" r_rozoff@yahoo.com r_rozoff

Sat Sep 11, 2010 1:08 pm (PDT)

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/world/breakingnews/armenia-and-nato-launch-joint-exercise-simulating-response-to-earthquake-102689214.html

Associated Press
September 11, 2010

Armenia and NATO launch joint exercise simulating response to earthquake

YEREVAN, Armenia: Armenia and NATO have launched a joint exercise to simulate a response to a catastrophic earthquake.

The Armenia-2010 exercise that began Saturday involves 600 people and last for a week.

Armenia suffered a devastating 1988 earthquake that left 25,000 people dead when it was still part of the Soviet Union.

The exercise is intended to help simulate search and rescue efforts after an earthquake.

Armenia is part of NATO's Partnership for Peace program.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages

http://lists.topica.com/lists/ANTINATO/read
==============================

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

9.: State Department: U.S. Base In Okinawa Despite Local Opposition

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" r_rozoff@yahoo.com r_rozoff

Sat Sep 11, 2010 1:08 pm (PDT)

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jF8xJcyxpJgQjZwX8JRFOhACj-mQD9I5JLGO0

Associated Press
September 11, 2010

Senior US diplomat confident Japan base will stay

GENEVA: U.S. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg says Washington would prefer to keep its military base on the southern Japanese island of Okinawa despite local opposition.

Steinberg says he is confident the day-to-day political debate on moving the base won't trump an overriding commitment in Japan to host the U.S. military.

He told an international security conference in Geneva on Saturday that serious security issues remain in East Asia and the U.S. would "rather stay where we are."

Under a 2006 agreement, Washington will move 8,000 Marines from Okinawa to the U.S. territory of Guam and relocate an air base from the middle of a city to a less crowded part of the island by 2014.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages

http://lists.topica.com/lists/ANTINATO/read
==============================

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

10.: 1950-2010: Second U.S.-China Conflict Over Korea?

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" r_rozoff@yahoo.com r_rozoff

Sat Sep 11, 2010 1:23 pm (PDT)

http://taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2010/09/09/2003482434

Taipei Times
September 9, 2010

The US-China contest for power
By Sushil Seth

-The spirit of the Korean War was thus invoked when China halted the US military advance toward the Yalu River....This time, it will be China, and not the former Soviet Union, that will hold the opposing flag.
The US is aware of the new danger China is posing to its naval dominance in the Asia-Pacific region. To counter Chinaâ€™s challenge, it is cultivating and expanding political and military ties with countries in the region, like Indonesia and Vietnam.
-The US is obviously activating regional resistance to thwart Chinaâ€™s moves to declare the Asia-Pacific region as its own bailiwick, as it has done with the South China Sea, the Yellow Sea and the Korean Peninsula.
- â€œIf China continues its impressive economic growth over the next few decades, the US and China are likely to engage in an intense security competition with considerable potential for war.â€
We are already witnessing a trial run of this in the Asia-Pacific region.
-â€œIf China continues its impressive economic growth over the next few decades, the US and China are likely to engage in an intense security competition with considerable potential for war.â€
We are already witnessing a trial run of this in the Asia-Pacific region.

The recent China visit of North Korean leader Kim Jong-il is an important development. This is his second recent trip, the first one coming around the time of the sinking of the South Korean warship Cheonan, believed to be Pyongyangâ€™s doing.

During that visit, Kim obviously gave his own version of the incident, apparently absolving his country of any wrongdoing. China maintained neutrality on the issue, counseling both sides to maintain calm, which disappointed South Korea and the US, as they believed, on the basis of an investigation into the issue, that North Korea was responsible.

When the US and South Korea subsequently conducted joint military exercises to emphasize their preparedness and resolve, Beijing was not impressed. It sought to bar the US from conducting joint naval exercises in the Yellow Sea, because it constituted a threat to Chinaâ€™s security. (The South China Sea is already being billed as Chinaâ€™s territorial lake.)

Apart from warning the US, China was also implicitly cautioning Seoul against inviting foreign vessels into the Yellow Sea.

Another message is that the Korean Peninsula is Chinaâ€™s security zone and the US involvement could trigger a Chinese response, as in the Korean War of the early 1950s.

Indeed, the Xinhua news agency report of Kimâ€™s visit not so subtly pointed out the link, with the North Korean leader having said: â€œThrough this visit, the [North Korean] side had yet another in-depth experience of the preciousness...of the friendship created by older generations of revolutionaries of both countries.â€

The spirit of the Korean War was thus invoked when China halted the US military advance toward the Yalu River.

Against this backdrop of such fraternal ties going back many years, the Chinese press ran a flurry of editorials defending a stable relationship with North Korea.

What it means is that China is veering toward more assured support for North Korea and the Kim dynasty.

The reinforcing of the 1950s fraternal ties, forged during the Korean War, is not a good portent.

The Korean War intensified the Cold War.

This time, it will be China, and not the former Soviet Union, that will hold the opposing flag.

The US is aware of the new danger China is posing to its naval dominance in the Asia-Pacific region. To counter Chinaâ€™s challenge, it is cultivating and expanding political and military ties with countries in the region, like Indonesia and Vietnam.

China is not pleased with an impending agreement between Washington and Hanoi to share nuclear fuel and technology for Vietnamâ€™s plans to build 14 nuclear power stations over the next 20 years.

The two countries reportedly signed a memorandum of understanding in April about cooperation on nuclear power, including access to â€œreliable sources of nuclear fuel.â€

China has accused the US of â€œdouble standardsâ€ for simultaneously pushing its non-proliferation campaign and disturbing â€œthe preset international order.â€

The US is obviously activating regional resistance to thwart Chinaâ€™s moves to declare the Asia-Pacific region as its own bailiwick, as it has done with the South China Sea, the Yellow Sea and the Korean Peninsula.

Although the countries in the region are careful not to antagonize China, they are unlikely to be enthused about a sudden chorus from China of its regional primacy.

And why is China ignoring its neighborsâ€™ sensitivities and concerns? Wang Hanling, a maritime expert at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, has an explanation.

According to him, Beijing used to be concerned that the Southeast Asian states might gang up against China to promote their own competing claims.

But not any more, because: â€œWe found our neighbors had territorial-water disputes to wrangle over and national interests to defend, which makes it very difficult for them to build a unified front against China,â€ he said.

Moreover, he added: â€œEven if they succeed in joining together, they are still not strong enough to defeat China.â€

In other words, they are easy to ignore.

It is in this overall context of Chinaâ€™s virtual declaration of its own Monroe Doctrine that the renewal of the Chinese-North Korean friendship (harking back to the 1950s) appears to be part of a pattern to assert Chinaâ€™s security parameters.

China seems determined to drive out the US navy from regional waters.
....
At the same time, Chinaâ€™s own military buildup is designed to deter the US from weighing in significantly.
....
China is also developing anti-ship missiles to target US aircraft carriers and other surface vessels.

Some China scholars have felt over the years that Chinaâ€™s transition to great power status need not lead to conflict, as happened during the two world wars.

The main argument has been that China is a beneficiary of the existing global system, which has facilitated its rapid economic growth.

G. John Ikenberry, a proponent of this argument, put it this way in an article in Foreign Affairs: â€œTechnology and the global economic revolution have created a logic of economic relations that is different from the past â€" making the political and institutional logic of the current order all the more powerful.â€

However, things are changing too fast, even in the two years since Ikenberry wrote his article. Chinaâ€™s military buildup continues apace, and it has started to assert sovereign claims over important waterways.

While Western economies, including that of the US, are struggling to recover, China seems to grow increasingly confident about its new place in the world.

In this state of affairs, John Mearsheimer is closer to the truth than Sinologists like Ikenberry.

According to Mearsheimer, â€œIf China continues its impressive economic growth over the next few decades, the US and China are likely to engage in an intense security competition with considerable potential for war.â€

We are already witnessing a trial run of this in the Asia-Pacific region.

Sushil Seth is a writer based in Australia.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages

http://lists.topica.com/lists/ANTINATO/read
==============================

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

11.: Fw: Obama Going to India in November to Sell Weapons

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff

Sat Sep 11, 2010 1:23 pm (PDT)

From: Global Network <globalnet@mindspring.com>
Subject: Obama Going to India in November to Sell Weapons
To: "GN List Serve" <globenet@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Saturday, September 11, 2010, 10:39 AM

India, US to ink huge military deal
Global Times
http://world.globaltimes.cn/asia-pacific/2010-07/550830.html
US President Barack Obama's visit to New Delhi in November may secure $5 billion worth of arms sales to India, Russia's Vzglyad newspaper reported Monday.
The deal, if signed during Obama's visit, would make the US replace Russia as India's biggest arms supplier, the paper said, adding that the deal would also help India curb China's rise.
India's shortlist includes Patriot defense systems, Boeing mid-air refueling tankers and certain types of howitzers, and the total cost of the deal may exceed $10 billion, the paper added.
The report came a day after The Economic Times in New Delhi reported that talks are underway between Indian and US officials over a deal to sell 10 Boeing C-17 military transport aircraft to the Indian Air Force (IAF).
The talks focus on the price and onboard equipment of the T-tailed C-17 Globemaster-III, which has passed validation trials and meets the requirements of the IAF, the newspaper said.
According to an official Boeing statement, the C-17 can carry a maximum payload of 74,797 kilo-grams for 2,400 nautical miles (4,444.8 kilometers) without refueling, and 45,495 kilograms for 4,000 nautical miles (7,408 kilometers) without refueling, the paper added.
Wang Mingzhi, a military strategist at the PLA Air Force Command College, told the Global Times that those reported military deals reflect Washington and New Delhi's needs in the region.
"To assist the Afghan war and the fight against the Pakistani Taliban, the US has been trying to improve its presence in South Asia and the Indian Ocean," Wang said. "Those arms sales will improve ties between Washington and New Delhi, and, intentionally or not, will have the effect of containing China's influence in the region."
"For example, once India gets the C-17 transport aircraft, the mobility of its forces stationed along the border with China will be improved. Mobility includes transportation, lifting, landing and deployment," he added.

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)

12.: Los tentáculos militares de EU

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff

Sat Sep 11, 2010 1:42 pm (PDT)

http://www.excelsior.com.mx/index.php?m=nota&id_nota=658970

Excelsior
September 8, 2010

Los tentáculos militares de EU
Washington ha instrumentado un despliegue global de bases castrenses que le permite afrontar distintas contingencias.
Luis Gutiérrez Esparza

Fuentes de inteligencia estadunidenses y sudamericanas habían confirmado, antes de la llegada al poder del presidente Fernando Lugo, la presencia de efectivos militares de Estados Unidos en Paraguay, como primer contingente para el establecimiento de una base militar.

Ese movimiento de tropas tenía el propósito aparente de llevar a cabo ejercicios conjuntos e intercambios entre las fuerzas armadas. La base quedaría ubicada en Mariscal Estigarribia, lugar en el cual históricamente el ejército paraguayo ha mantenido un comando de división y considerables efectivos, como asentamiento de soberanía en el Chaco.

Por su situación geográfica, se vinculaba ese despliegue a una probable intención estadunidense de controlar los recursos naturales de la región, como el petróleo y el gas bolivianos, los acuíferos paraguayos y el tráfico en la Triple Frontera.

Teniendo en cuenta la endémica inestabilidad política y social de Bolivia, el escaso control fronterizo de los países en esa zona, el contrabando asociado al narcotráfico, con la complicidad o pasividad de las autoridades de los gobiernos respectivos (Argentina, Brasil y Paraguay) y con un marco de pobreza y marginalidad; lo más probable es que tales actividades se habrían de incrementar en el mediano plazo y por lo tanto influirían en la estabilidad regional.

Si se incluía en el escenario la presencia permanente, temporal o en tránsito de comandos terroristas, era lógico que Washington decidiera adoptar medidas para asegurar un futuro controlable. En 2003, el supremo comandante militar aliado en Europa (OTAN), general James Jones, actual asesor de seguridad nacional del presidente Barack Obama, dijo que "existen grandes zonas no gobernadas, que son potenciales santuarios para los terroristas del mundo y para los futuros mercaderes de todo tipo de elementos, a los que tratamos de combatir".

Esta reflexión no se circunscribía únicamente al escenario europeo ni al terrorismo islámico ni a los narcotraficantes, sino que resultaba mucho más amplia. Jones agregó: "Tenemos la oportunidad de establecer una presencia estratégica, de ser necesario una presencia operacional, mucho más rápido que lo hayamos hecho antes. Por lo tanto, razonablemente se espera que analicemos los emplazamientos de bases para asegurarnos que haremos las cosas bien en el futuro".

Éste ha sido y sigue siendo el perfil de una visión geoestratégica militar diseñada en Washington y con proyección hasta 2020, por lo menos. Estados Unidos posee comandos conjuntos (unificados, conforme a su terminología militar), los cuales dependen directamente del Presidente, con responsabilidad jurisdiccional en todo el planeta e incluso en el espacio exterior.

Se trata del Comando Central, para conducir las operaciones ofensivas de contingencia en cualquier parte del mundo (actualmente sus fuerzas operan en Irak y Afganistán); el Comando Europeo, cuya extensión se describe por sí sola y se vincula con la OTAN; el Comando del Pacífico, que incluye a todo ese océano, sus islas y el Lejano Oriente; el Comando Sur, con responsabilidad desde el río Bravo hasta la Antártica, incluido el Caribe; el recientemente creado Comando de África.

También, el Comando de las Fuerzas Especiales; el Comando de Administración del Tráfico Militar, responsable de todos los medios de transporte aéreos, navales y terrestres; el Comando del Espacio, con jurisdicción en el espacio exterior, incluidos los medios de defensa estratégica; y el Comando Norte, con una misión estratégica defensiva del territorio de Estados Unidos y la inclusión de Canadá y México bajo un mando militar unificado.

Washington ha instrumentado un despliegue global de bases militares, aéreas y navales que le permite afrontar distintas contingencias, conforme a los tiempos reales y los espacios estratégicos.

Las últimas dos décadas se han caracterizado por la adopción de un modelo de intervención global inmediata. Continuaré con el tema.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwrozoff@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Daily digest option available.
==============================

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)