Wednesday, November 30


Kosovo: KFOR: we'll shoot.

KFOR at Jagnjenica on Tuesday (Tanjug)
KFOR at Jagnjenica on Tuesday (Tanjug)
The locals ignored the warning and started hauling in earth and gravel, dumping it on the road, thus constructing a new barricade. KFOR reacted by throwing tear gas at the Serbs, who are also this Tuesday building a new road nearby. This latest maneuver by the locals left KFOR troops "partially blocked", Tanjug is reporting. The vehicles the soldiers used on Monday to break up the old barricade are now located between two new road blocks, set up on both sides of the Zubin Potok-Zvečan road this afternoon.

KFOR vehicles can at present only retreat to Čabra, an ethnic Albanian village where they had set up camp, according to this report. Earlier in the day, the talks between the NATO troops in Kosovo and local Serb leaders, held earlier in the day, did not produce any results.  "If your trucks unload gravel here, we will shoot," it was heard from the KFOR loud speakers. The citizens gathered on the roads reacted with dissatisfaction, but no incidents were reported from the scene.

During the meeting on Tuesday, KFOR again asked Serbs to leave the road, while Zubin Potok Mayor Slaviša Ristić said that the troops should return to the positions they held before they moved to remove the barricade at Jagnjenica, and added that KFOR enjoyed the freedom of movement. A KFOR commander, who reports said "did not wish to introduce himself", accused Ristić of being "directly responsible for yesterday's violence against KFOR" - an accusation which the mayor rejected as false.  Ristić also said he woud call on the citizens to remain calm. After the meeting, KFOR again used lound speakers to wanr the Serbs to disperse, and threaten that tear gas would be used against them.

Meantime, local Serbs have decided to build a new road near Jagnjenica.  On Tuesday afternoon, they brought machines to the location and started building an "alternative" road, in a bid to circumvent the barricade that is now held by KFOR.  The aim is to make sure that the town of Zubin Potok, now cut off from other towns in the north of the province, is once again connected to Zvečan and Kosovska Mitrovica.
The citizens are hauling in gravel and building the road, while KFOR troops are observing the developments.

Pakistan: "Russia and the Threat to the Afghan War".

Days after the Pakistanis closed their borders to the passage of fuel and supplies for the NATO-led war effort in Afghanistan, for very different reasons the Russians threatened to close the alternative Russia-controlled Northern Distribution Network (NDN). The dual threats are significant even if they don’t materialize. If both routes are cut, supplying Western forces operating in Afghanistan becomes impossible. Simply raising the possibility of cutting supply lines forces NATO and the United States to recalculate their position in Afghanistan. The possibility of insufficient lines of supply puts NATO’s current course in Afghanistan in even more jeopardy. It also could make Western troops more vulnerable by possibly requiring significant alterations to operations in a supply-constrained scenario. While the supply lines in Pakistan most likely will reopen eventually and the NDN likely will remain open, the gap between likely and certain is vast.

The Pakistani decision to close the border crossings at Torkham near the Khyber Pass and Chaman followed a U.S. attack on a Pakistani position inside Pakistan’s tribal areas near the Afghan border that killed some two-dozen Pakistani soldiers. The Pakistanis have been increasingly opposed to U.S. operations inside Pakistani territory. This most recent incident took an unprecedented toll, and triggered an extreme response. The precise circumstances of the attack are unclear, with details few, contradictory and disputed. The Pakistanis have insisted it was an unprovoked attack and a violation of their sovereign territory. In response, Islamabad closed the border to NATO; ordered the United States out of Shamsi air base in Balochistan, used by the CIA; and is reviewing military and intelligence cooperation with the United States and NATO.

The proximate reason for the reaction is obvious; the ultimate reason for the suspension also is relatively simple. The Pakistani government believes NATO, and the United States in particular, will fail to bring the war in Afghanistan to a successful conclusion. It follows that the United States and other NATO countries at some point will withdraw. Some in Afghanistan have claimed that the United States has been defeated, but that is not the case. The United States may have failed to win the war, but it has not been defeated in the sense of being compelled to leave by superior force. It could remain there indefinitely, particular as the American public is not overly hostile to the war and is not generating substantial pressure to end operations. Nevertheless, if the war cannot be brought to some sort of conclusion, at some point Washington’s calculations or public pressure, or both, will shift and the United States and its allies will leave Afghanistan.

Given that eventual outcome, Pakistan must prepare to deal with the consequences. It has no qualms about the Taliban running Afghanistan and it certainly does not intend to continue to prosecute the United States’ war against the Taliban once its forces depart. To do so would intensify Taliban attacks on the Pakistani state, and could trigger an even more intense civil war in Pakistan. The Pakistanis have no interest in such an outcome even were the United States to remain in Afghanistan forever. Instead, given that a U.S. victory is implausible and its withdrawal inevitable and that Pakistan’s western border is with Afghanistan, Islamabad will have to live with — and possibly manage — the consequences of the re-emergence of a Taliban-dominated government. Under these circumstances, it makes little sense for Pakistan to collaborate excessively with the United States, as this increases Pakistan’s domestic dangers and imperils its relationship with the Taliban. Pakistan was prepared to cooperate with the United States and NATO while the United States was in an aggressive and unpredictable phase. The Pakistanis could not risk more aggressive U.S. attacks on Pakistani territory at that point, and feared a U.S.-Indian entente. But the United States, while not leaving Afghanistan, has lost its appetite for a wider war and lacks the resources for one. It is therefore in Pakistan’s interest to reduce its collaboration with the United States in preparation for what it sees as the inevitable outcome. This will strengthen Pakistan’s relations with the Afghan Taliban and minimize the threat of internal Pakistani conflict.

Despite apologies by U.S. and NATO commanders, the Nov. 26 incident provided the Pakistanis the opportunity — and in their mind the necessity — of an exceptional response. The suspension of the supply line without any commitment to reopening it and the closure of the U.S. air base from which unmanned aerial vehicle operations were carried out (though Pakistani airspace reportedly remains open to operations) was useful to Pakistan. It allowed Islamabad to reposition itself as hostile to the United States because of American actions. It also allowed Islamabad to appear less pro-American, a powerful domestic political issue. Pakistan has closed supply lines as a punitive measure before. Torkham was closed for 10 straight days in October 2010 in response to a U.S. airstrike that killed several Pakistani soldiers, and trucks at the southern Chaman crossing were “administratively delayed,” according to the Pakistanis. This time, however, Pakistan is signaling that matters are more serious. Uncertainty over these supply lines is what drove the United States to expend considerable political capital to arrange the alternative NDN.

This alternative depends on Russia. It transits Russian territory and airspace and much of the former Soviet sphere, stretching as far as the Baltic Sea — at great additional expense compared to the Pakistani supply route. This alternative is viable, as it would allow sufficient supplies to flow to support NATO operations. Indeed, over recent months it has become the primary line of supply, and reliance upon it is set to expand. At present, 48 percent of NATO supplies still go through Pakistan; 52 percent of NATO supplies come through NDN (non-lethal); 60 percent of all fuel comes through the NDN; and by the end of the year, the objective is for 75 percent of all non-lethal supplies to transit the NDN. Separating the United States yields a different breakdown: Only 30 percent of U.S. supplies traverse Pakistan; 30 percent of U.S. supplies come in by air (some of it linked to the Karakoram-Torkham route, probably including the bulk of lethal weapons); and 40 percent of U.S. supplies come in from the NDN land route.

Therefore, Dmitri Rogozin’s threat that Russia might suspend these supply lines threatens the viability of all Western operations in Afghanistan. Rogozin, the Russian envoy to NATO, has been known to make extreme statements. But when he makes those statements, he makes them with the full knowledge and authorization of the Russian leadership. Though he is used to making statements that the leadership might want to back away from, it is not unusual for him to signal new directions in Russian policy. This means the U.S. and NATO militaries responsible for sustaining operations in Afghanistan cannot afford to dismiss the threat. No matter how small the probability, it places more than 100,000 U.S. and allied troops in a vulnerable position.

For the Russians, the issue is the development and deployment of U.S. ballistic missile defenses in Europe. The Russians oppose the deployment, arguing it represents a threat to the Russian nuclear deterrent and therefore threatens the nuclear balance. This was certainly the reason the Soviets opposed the initial Strategic Defense Initiative in the 1980s. Carrying it forward to the 2010s, however, and the reasoning appears faulty. First, there is no nuclear balance at the moment, as there is no political foundation for nuclear war. Second, the U.S.-European BMD scheme is not designed to stop a massive launch of nuclear missiles such as the Russians could execute, but only the threat posed by a very small number of missiles such as might be launched from Iran. Finally, it is not clear that the system would work very well, though it has certainly proven far more capable than the turn-of-the-century predecessor systems.Nevertheless, the Russians vehemently opposed the system, threatening to deploy Iskander short-range ballistic missiles and even tactical nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad and other locations in response. The Russian concern is obviously real, but it is difficult to believe it is the nuclear balance they are concerned about. Rather, it is the geopolitical implications of placing BMD infrastructure in Central Europe.

Elements of the weapons, particularly radars and interceptors, are being deployed around the periphery of Russia — in Poland, Romania, Turkey and Israel. From the Russian point of view, the deployment of radars and other systems is a precursor to the deployment of other military capabilities. They are extremely valuable installations that must be protected. Troops therefore will be deployed along with air defenses, and so on. In other words, the deployment of the BMD infrastructure itself may have no practical impact on the Russians, but the indirect consequences would be to set the stage for more expansive military deployments. The Russians must assume this could entail a return to containment, the principle employed by the United States during the Cold War to limit Soviet power.

The Russians see the inclusion of other military forces at the locations of the interceptor and radar deployment as creating a belt of nations designed to contain Russia. Given the uncertain future of Europe and the increasing relative power of Russia in the region, the United States has an interest in making certain any disruption in Europe doesn’t give the Russians opportunities to extend their political influence. While the extent to which American planners chose the sites with the containment of Russia in mind isn’t clear, from the Russian point of view the motive doesn’t matter. Planning is done based on capability, not intent. Whatever the U.S. intent, the move opens the door for containment if and when U.S. policy planners notice the opportunity.

The Russians have threatened actions for years, and in the past few weeks they have become increasingly vocal on the subject of BMD and on threats. Rogozin obviously was ordered to seize on the vulnerability created by the Pakistani move and introduced the now-indispensible NDN as a point where the Russians could bring pressure, knowing it is the one move the United States cannot tolerate at the moment. Whether they intend to shut down the supply line is questionable. Doing so would cause a huge breach with the United States, and to this point the Russians have been relatively cautious in challenging fundamental U.S. interests. Moreover, the Russians are worried about any instability in Afghanistan that might threaten their sphere of influence in Central Asia. However, the Russians are serious about not permitting a new containment line to be created, and therefore may be shifting their own calculations.

It is a rule of war that secure strategic supply lines are the basis of warfare. If you cannot be certain of supplying your troops, it is necessary to redeploy to more favorable positions. The loss of supply lines at some point creates a vulnerability that in military history leads to the annihilation of forces. It is something that can be risked when major strategic interests require it, but it is a dangerous maneuver. The Russians are raising the possibility that U.S. forces could be isolated in Afghanistan. Supply lines into the landlocked country never have been under U.S. or NATO control. All supplies must come in through third countries (less than a third of American supplies come by air, and those mostly through Russian airspace), and their willingness to permit transit is the foundation of U.S. strategy.

The United States and NATO have been exposed as waging a war that depended on the willingness of first Pakistan and now increasingly Russia to permit the movement of supplies through their respective territories. Were they both to suspend that privilege, the United States would face the choice of going to war to seize supply lines — something well beyond U.S. conventional capacity at this time — or to concede the war. Anytime a force depends on the cooperation of parties not under its control to sustain its force, it is in danger.

The issue is not whether the threats are carried out. The issue is whether the strategic interest the United States has in Afghanistan justifies the risk that the Russians may not be bluffing and the Pakistanis will become even less reliable in allowing passage. In the event of strategic necessity, such risks can be taken. But the lower the strategic necessity, the less risk is tolerable. This does not change the strategic reality in Afghanistan. It simply makes that reality much clearer and the threats to that reality more serious. Washington, of course, hopes the Pakistanis will reconsider and that the Russians are simply blowing off steam. Hope, however, is not a strategy.

US ships 21tons "tears gas" to Tahrir: Egypt says no.

Port workers in Egypt have refused to receive a shipment of tear gas ordered by the country’s Interior Ministry from the United States. They fear it will be used against protesters in Tahrir Square.
Employees at the Adabiya Seaport in coastal city Suez published shipping documents for delivery of a total of 21 tonnes of the crowd-dispersal agent, local mediareport.
The revelation comes as the first 7.5-tonne shipment from the American port of Wilmington arrived to Egypt. Some of the port workers refused to accept the cargo and made the deal public, provoking an official investigation into their actions.
The tear gas was produced by the Combined Systems company. The initial shipment consists of 479 barrels.

Egyptian police have been regularly using tear gas and other riot control equipment against the protesters who gather each day on Cairo’s Tahrir Square. Apparently the stocks have run low and had to be replenished.
Image from Combined Systems websiteThe news angered many Egyptians, who asked why the interim government is buying tear gas instead of food to feed those without the money to feed themselves and jobs to earn their living. Meanwhile the country has passed the first round of its three-stage parliamentary election. The voting was marred by violence on Tuesday night, in which some 80 protesters were injured.
Image from Combined Systems.

IRAN: “the world is changing and the Iranians realize that Western Europe and the United States, their economies are declining.”

Tension between Iran and the West are on the rise after angry protesters stormed the UK embassy in Tehran. Experts believe it sends a strong message to the West and also expresses fears of a possible attack on Iran. Political analyst Chris Bambery told RT that the nationalist factor could unite the Iranians against the West. “For Iranians who may not be enthusiastic of President Ahmadinejad, many of them would rally against any notions of sanctions against Iran or indeed British-American NATO strike against Iran.” Bambery believes that the incident does however reflect fears that there might be an American or Israeli attack on Iran. He also pointed out the “hypocrisy of America and Britain in lecturing Iran about nuclear weapons it does not have or does not yet have.” “And those people who are committed to peace and don’t want to see another war should be concerned about this and should be putting pressure in Washington, London and Paris to stop any talk of further sanctions or any talk of a military strike against Tehran,” Bambery concluded. The attack on the UK embassy sends a strong message that Iranians are very angry about the sanctions and do not want to be treated this way, Professor Seyed Mohammed Marandi from the University of Tehran. He said the Iranians believe that the British government is trying to make ordinary people suffer. “The sanctions that have been imposed by the British government have been directed against the ordinary Iranians, the banking system and therefore import and export.” However, Marandi also noted that the Iranians are less and less interested in having relations with the West as Iran can do business elsewhere, especially with the BRICS countries

Il Pakistan annuncia il boicottaggio della conferenza internazionale di Bonn.

Il raid della Nato, che ha provocato la morte di venticinque militari pakistani, sta provocando reazioni a catena: e le dinamiche nella regione, già complesse, sono adesso sotto una pressione crescente. Il primo ministro pakistano, Yousuf Raza Gilani, ha avvertito gli Stati Uniti che tra i due Paesi «i rapporti non saranno come prima». Il premier, riferiscono fonti di stampa, avrebbe giudicato «insufficienti» le dichiarazioni delle parti in causa, in seguito all'attacco, In un'intervista alla Cnn, Gilani ha ribadito la necessità di improntare le relazioni sul rispetto reciproco, in primo luogo l'indipendenza, la sovranità e 1 integrità territoriale del Pakistan. e proprio in queste ore le autorità di Islamabad hanno ribadito l'intenzione di boicottare la conferenza internazionale di Bonn sull'Afghanistan, fissata per il 5 dicembre. Dal canto loro gli Stati Uniti si dicono preoccupati riguardo alle possibili conseguenze che il raid in questione potrà produrre sul piano delle relazioni bilaterali. Il portavoce del dipartimento di Stato, Mark Toner, ha affermato: «Quello con il Pakistan è un apporto che ha affrontato battute di arresto. Malgrado ciò, dobbiamo andare avanti». In questo scenario è intervenuta la Russia, che ha detto di considerare «ingiustificabile» l'attacco delle forze Nato in Pakistan. Secondo Mosca, riferisce l'agenzia Ansa, la sovranità nazionale deve essere sempre rispettata anche quando si attaccano i terroristi. E stata poi la volta degli Emirati Arabi Uniti, che hanno chiesto al Governo pakistano di non chiudere la base militare statunitense in Balucistan, come rappresaglia per il raid. Ma Islamabad sembra che abbia già respinto la richiesta. Le autorità pakistane hanno infatti intimato a Washington di abbandonare, entro quindici giorni, la base di Shamsi, trecento chilometri da Quetta. Il presidente Zardari ha escluso una revoca della decisione.


Non c'è nulla che possa arginare l'iperattivismo dell'ambasciatrice americana all'ONU, Susan Rice, colei che in primavera confezionava l'operazione militare in Libia e in autunno tenta di raffreddare le voglie islamiste risvegliate dal vuoto del dopo Gheddafi. Rice, figura fondamentale del Consiglio di sicurezza negli anni di Clinton, ha ispirato personalmente le consultazioni del primo ministro libico Abdurrahim Khaled Abdulhafiz El Keib con le diverse forze politiche e parapolitiche per formare il governo e la classe dirigente della nuova Libia. 

L'ambasciatrice ha fatto saltare candidature che sembravano ovvie, ne ha suggerite altre meno prevedibili, ha posto veti e dato consigli così precisi che al suo interlocutore devono essere suonati come ordini. Tutto per impedire che la campagna di Libia, l"operazione militare cinetica" propiziata da Rice con solenni benedizioni onusiane, sfociasse infine in una forma di governo più ostile di quella che è stata smantellata a forza.

In nome della stabilità e per evitare gli eccessi di zelo, Rice ha voluto che nel nuovo esecutivo ci fossero uomini di Gheddafi: grazie al suo intervento, secondo il sito Africa Intelligence, Suleiman Sahli, un lealista che durante l'estate girava per le scuole a distribuire diplomi agli studenti più fedeli al colonnello, è stato nominato ministro dell'Istruzione; anche per il controverso Ben Yezza, ex manager dell'Eni e nuovo ministro del Petrolio, il tocco della feluca di Washington è stato fondamentale. 

Al gruppo minoritario dei lealisti, Rice ha aggiunto gli uomini d'affari che hanno legami con l'occidente, specialmente con gli Stati Uniti. Il ministro del Lavoro, Mustapha Rujbani, è un ex manager di IBM e ha gestito gli affari del colosso dei computer in Giordania. Il ministro dell'Energia elettrica, Nuri Berruin, si è laureato in Canada alla University of British Columbia, mentre quello dell'Università, Naim El Ghariani, in passato ha lavorato per il dipartimento dell'Energia di Washington.

Il frenetico attivismo di Washington sulla Libia (effetti collaterali). Prima che la delegazione americana si sedesse attorno a un tavolo con il nuovo primo ministro e dettasse le sue condizioni, il ministro degli Esteri designato era Ibrahim Dabbashi, il numero due della rappresentanza libica presso l'Onu; gli uomini di Rice hanno lavorato perché fosse invece nominato Ashour Ben Khayal, diplomatico semisconosciuto che si è distinto per un incarico all'ambasciata di Libia a Roma negli anni Sessanta e per un lungo esilio americano. 

La chiave di Ben Khayal, però, è la sua città d'origine, Derna, la roccaforte dei Fratelli musulmani. Occorre conoscere le minacce e prevenirle. La complicata trama intessuta dall'ambasciatrice nella logica del contenimento islamista in questa delicata fase di transizione è il contraltare del lavorio interventista che aveva condotto fra la Casa Bianca e il Palazzo di Vetro in primavera assieme a Samatha Power, attivista e consigliere di Obama.

Gli sforzi di Rice avevano piegato il deciso scetticismo del Pentagono - contrario all'apertura di un nuovo fronte militare - e avevano convinto il presidente ad abbandonare di fatto il "leading from behind" americano, la dottrina basata sull'appoggio esterno dell'America alle pulsioni bellicose di Nicolas Sarkozy e David Cameron. Il tutto sotto il cappello della risoluzione Onu propiziata dalla stessa Rice per eliminare preventivamente le obiezioni sull'unilateralismo di Washington. 

Sempre lei aveva gestito il passaggio più che altro nominale dell'operazione libica alla NATO e aveva dato l'annuncio di un salto di qualità dell'azione nei giorni caldi dei negoziati: "Dobbiamo prepararci a considerare mosse che comprendono, e forse superano, la "no fly zone", dato che la situazione sul campo è cambiata". Ora che la situazione è cambiata di nuovo, Rice lavora per gestire i nuovi, preoccupanti effetti collaterali.

Fantasmi, illusioni ed eleganze dei debiti pubblici. Il lato B della bancocrazia

L`auspicabile savoir-faire dei ministri-banchieri nel caos debitorio Sul Wall Street Journal si leggeva ieri che i governi d`Italia e Portogallo starebbero stimolando le loro banche a comperare i titoli emessi dal proprio Tesoro.
Ciò può spiegare anche come mai gli acquirenti dell`ultima asta di titoli triennali venduti al tasso del 7,89 e di quelli decennali al tasso del 7,56 siano stati, prevalentemente, investitori istituzionali italiani.

Sembra ci sia una contraddizione fra ciò e la regola del "mark-to-market", cioè la valutazione dei titoli al prezzo di mercato che fa sì che le banche siano disincentivate dal comperare i titoli del debito dei paesi oggi considerati più rischiosi (per quanto solvibili, come l`Italia). Posto che, come ha scritto il Sole 24 Ore, gli acquirenti alle aste dei titoli non sono affatto in gara fra di loro, perché conoscono l`oggetto dell`asta, in questo caso la vendita di 9 miliardi di debito nazionale, e quindi si conoscono e possono mettersi d`accordo sulle quote degli acquisti, fissando anche il prezzo a cui comperano, se ne desume che questi alti tassi siano stati fissati dagli intermediari finanziari nazionali, come condizione per smaltire tutta l`offerta lasciando simbolicamente sul campo una domanda insoddisfatta di 1,5 miliardi.

Ma - ecco il paradosso - proprio l`alto tasso genera una riduzione nel valore dei possessi delle banche di vecchi titoli del nostro Tesoro, ove stimati al mark-to-market. E questo, secondo le nuove regole dell`Eba (l`Autorità bancaria europea) può portare anche alla richiesta di una eventuale ricapitalizzazione. Poi c`è un paradosso nel paradosso, dovuto al fatto che nel governo attuale ci so- no almeno tre-tra ministri e viceministri - che provengono da Intesa Sanpaolo (Passera, Fornero e Ciaccia), un ministro (Giarda) che ha presieduto una banca popolare, due o tre ministri che hanno avuto legami con Unicredit e un presidente del Consiglio che appartiene a una famiglia del gotha bancario. Come si risolve il puzzle? E` bene o male che ciò accada? A mio parere non essendo l`economia, in specie quella monetaria-bancaria materia da santuario (pecunia non olet), tutto ciò fila bene, in regime di trasparenza.

Merkel e Sarkozy stiano a guardare, il nostro debito ce lo ricompriamo noi. E noi lo possiam garantire anche senza il Fondo salva stati (Efsf). 11 40 per cento del nostro debito è di banche, assicurazioni, fondi d`investimento italiani, il 15 per cento di privati italiani. In totale 970 miliardi. Se le banche avessero problemi, il governo potrà sottoscriverne quote di capitale con la Cassa depositi e prestiti, con le Poste e con qualche veicolo finanziario pubblicoprivato cui esso conferisce un po` d`immobili e diritti cartolari a canoni demaniali. Inoltre può rivalutare a prezzi mark-tomarket le loro quote in Banca d`Italia, valutandone anche l`oro a valori di mercato.

E mi piacerebbe anche ricordare agli analisti finanziari il saggio di Luigi Einaudi "Fantasmi, illusioni ed eleganze dei debiti pubblici", nel quale si spiega che il debito d`ogni stato s`estingue per acquisto privato dei relativi titoli da parte dei debitori dell`imposta. Ma ciò avviene perché questi contribuenti risparmiano. Alla fine tutto ciò funziona se si tutela il nostro risparmio. E` un avviso per i ministri banchieri e per quelli amici della CIGL.

Free Syria Army

Nei villaggi turchi di frontiera si vedono passare le pattuglie siriane mentre profughi e oppositori del regime nelle tende della Mezzaluna rossa, a ridosso dei reticolati, sono ancora sotto il tiro degli uomini di Assad. Di notte le ombre del Mukhabarat, i servizi siriani, scivolano oltreconfine, tra alture dolci e foreste di pini, e ogni tanto si portano via qualcuno come successe quando scomparve al bazar di Altinozu il colonnello Hussein Harmoush, un disertore riapparso tempo dopo alla tv siriana per "confessare" i suoi crimini contro la patria. «Se lasciamo in Siria la famiglia o i parenti, glishabbiya, i miliziani, li arrestano e li torturano: è l'arma più subdola ed efficace del regime», dice Mahamoud Moussa, insegnante, 39 anni, uno dei capi della rivolta di Badma, rifugiato con moglie e figli nel campo di Reyhanli a cinquanta metri dal confine. «Il Mukhabarat ha migliaia di dossier e un enorme potere di ricatto: questo spiega perché Assad non se ne andrà di sua volontà», afferma il giovane Osman, 25 anni. Osman è uno specialista di guerra elettronica.

«Il mio compito era tagliare i telefoni, bloccare internet, la tv, isolando città e villaggi. Mi hanno portato con la Settima divisione a Deir ez Zour per oscurarla, poi hanno voluto che sparassimo sulla gente coni mitra puntati alla schiena: non ce l'ho fatta e ho disertato». L'esercito siriano, tenuto ai margini dai corpi speciali di As-sad, appare demotivato ma l'intelligence è dotata dei migliori ritrovati occidentali. «C'erano anche tecnici italiani per addestrarci», sostiene Osman, confermando il coinvolgimento di alcune società americane e dell'italiana Area, che poi ha rinunciato alla commessa. La diaspora dell'opposizione ha un braccio politico, il Consiglio nazionale siriano, e uno armato, il Free Syria Army. «Siamo aomila e aumentiamo ogni giorno», dice il portavoce, il maggiore Maher Rahmoun Al Naiemy. Gli ufficiali sono concentrati nel campo di Apaidyn, 15 chilometri da Antiochia, due dal confine. «Il Free Army sarà l'embrione del nuovo esercito quando cadrà il regime», dice convinto Maher. «Nessuno ci sostiene, né la Turchia né altre potenze regionali. Per l'armamento contiamo su tre risorse: le armi dei disertori, quelle che ci procuriamo negli scontri con gli uomini di Bashar e gli acquisti al mercato nero siriano». Ci sono i presupposti per una guerra civile? «Non la vogliamo, il nostro scopo è proteggere la popolazione.

Ma Assad proietta all'esterno l'immagine di un Paese che senza di lui precipita in un confetto settario. La verità è che quando attaccano i dimostranti ci sono medici di ogni credenza religiosa ed etnia, alauiti, cristiani, ismailiti, drusi, che curano gratis i feriti». Il Free Syrian Army conta ovviamente sui turchi che dopo la rottura con Assad puntano a creare qui la futura leadership di Damasco. Ankara non vuole in Siria un altro Iraq, lungo una frontiera di 90o chilometri popolata anche da curdi e sostenitori del Pkk, tanto più che da Baghdad gli americani si ritireranno 1131 dicembre. È un obiettivo che i turchi condividono con una task force basata a Iskenderun (Alessandretta) costituita da "osservatori" americani, francesi, canadesi, sauditi, del Qatar e degli Emirati: il loro compito è studiare un eventuale intervento per costituire corridoi umanitari o una "zona cuscinetto". Ma per ora anche una no-fly zone in stile libico appare una prospettiva assai incerta con i veti all'Onu di Russia e Cina. Il mondo, visto da Damasco, è diverso, secondo l'esperto turco Ziya Meral.

«L'alauita Assad può resistere alle sanzioni, conta sul fatto che né Usa né Israele vogliono che la Siria cada in mano agli islamici. E i generali turchi, secondo lui, non faranno una guerra voluta dall'Akp di Erdogan. Certo la Turchia, che sta piazzando i radar anti-missile della Nato contro Teheran, è in competizione per l'influenza regionale con l'Iran, alleato storico della Siria, e se la crisi si internazionalizza i calcoli di Bashar *** potrebbero rivelarsi sbagliati: questa è una partita a poker». Qui si respira un'atmosfera da drSle de guerre, su un confine popolato di spie e contrabbandieri che ricorda il fronte iracheno negli anni dell'embargo a Saddam. La nafta siriana acquistata a una lira turca viene rivenduta a quattro in Turchia da trafficanti esperti e doganieri compiacenti che si muovono su una delle controverse frontiere della Turchia moderna. E la storia della provincia di Hatay ci insegna qualcosa. Al crollo dell'impero ottomano qui fu creato il Sangiaccato di Alessandretta, popolato da arabi e turcomanni, musulmani sunniti e alauiti - una setta islamica non ortodossa affiliata gli sciiti - cristiani assiri e armeni sopravvissuti all'assedio di Mussa Dagh. Dall'altra parte, in Siria, la Francia coloniale aveva fondato uno stato alauita dove un ruolo importante lo ebbe il nonno di Bashar e padre di Hafez, Suleyman Assad.

Il Sangiaccato dipendeva da Damasco ma nel 1939 i turchi se ne impadronirono con il consenso dei francesi che nello stesso anno sciolsero pure il territorio alauita, incorporato nella nuova Siria. Gli alauiti erano stati venduti dai francesi sia ai turchi che al nuovo Governo siriano. «Respingiamo l'annessione perché la religione ufficiale è quella dei sunniti che non riconoscono gli alauiti», fu la protesta a Parigi in una lettera firmata anche da Suleyman Assad. Forse non è un caso ma turchi e francesi si sono di nuovo incontrati a Istanbul nei giorni scorsi per discutere il futuro della Siria: e questo per l'ultimo erede della famiglia Assad non è un buon segno.

Did the Agency sabotage the investigation? In 2007, the BND destroyed personal files of the SS and the Gestapo.

Preparations have already been made for Ernst Uhrlau's retirement party next Wednesday when he steps down from his post as the head of the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), Germany's foreign intelligence agency, on his 65th birthday. The office of the chancellor has selected a posh location in Berlin for his farewell party and Angela Merkel herself is expected to attend. Uhrlau, a member of the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), will be turning over his post to Gerhard Schindler, a member of the business-friendly Free Democratic Party. At events like this, the successes of the person retiring are usually celebrated. In Uhrlau's case, topping the list are his efforts to review the problematic history of the BND's creation after World War II. It has long been known that around 10 percent of the employees at the BND and its predecessor organization once served under SS chief Heinrich Himmler in Nazi Germany.

In 2011, Uhrlau appointed an independent commission of historians to research the agency's Nazi roots. Now, only one week before Uhrlau's retirement, the commission has uncovered what is a true historical scandal. The researchers have found that the BND destroyed the personnel files of around 250 BND officials in 2007. The agency has confirmed that this happened. The commission claims that the destroyed documents include papers on people who were "in significant intelligence positions in the SS, the SD (the Intelligence Agency of the SS and the Nazi Party) or the Gestapo." They added that some of the individuals had even been investigated after 1945 for possible war crimes. Historian Klaus-Dietmar Henke, spokesman for the commission, told that he was "somewhat stunned" by the occurrence.

The incident inevitably raises suspicions that agency employees have deliberately tried to obstruct Uhrlau's efforts to investigate the organization's history. The historical commission had not yet been appointed at the time of the documents' destruction, but Uhrlau had already announced that he planned to look into his agency's Nazi past. It is no secret that some people within the BND are unhappy about Uhrlau's project. Some employees are fundamentally opposed to the agency shedding light on its own past. Others are worried about the reputations of their own families -- for many years, the BND deliberately recruited new staff from among the relatives of existing BND employees. Within the BND, a working group headed by Bodo Hechelhammer is responsible for cooperation with the historical commission. The group is currently trying to shed light on the circumstances surrounding the destruction of the documents. Hechelhammer told that he regretted the loss of the documents.

There have already been several curious incidents involving the BND archives in the past. Spiegel recently requested access to BND documents relating to the former SS Captain Alois Brunner, who was once a close associate of Adolf Eichmann, the chief logistics organizer of the Holocaust. The agency informed SPIEGEL that the 581-page files on Brunner had been disposed of in the 1990s. That incident also appears to have been carried out behind the backs of the BND leadership. The historical commission is now demanding that the BND consult it before any more "potentially valuable historical records" are destroyed. The historians are also insisting that the 2007 incident be thoroughly investigated. Commission spokesman Henke says the agency's reaction will be "a test of how seriously the BND is really taking the investigation into its past."

Teheran non si è fatta attendere.

Nel pomeriggio di ieri una delle abituali manifestazioni degli studenti oltranzisti filoregime di fronte all'ambasciata britannica a Teheran, nel centralissimo viale Ferdowsi, è sfociata nel caos in seguito all'irruzione da parte di un gruppo di partecipanti all'interno della sede diplomatica. I contestatori hanno successivamente dichiarato di aver agito in proprio. Per diverse ore le forze di sicurezza iraniane hanno dato la caccia agli assalitori tra gli imponenti edifici dell'antica ambasciata, alcuni dei quali sono bruciati in seguito al lancio di bombe Molotov. In serata le agenzie di stampa iraniane hanno riportato la notizia della liberazione, da parte della polizia diplomatica, di un gruppo di sei feluche brevemente prese in ostaggio all'interno del parco di Gholhak, un complesso residenziale sotto le dipendenze dell'ambasciata ma sito una decina di chilometri a nord della sede principale. Mentre erano in procinto di uscire da Gholhak, gli studenti che vi avevano fatto irruzione hanno commemorato il primo anniversario della morte di Majid Shahriari, lo scienziato nucleare che fu assassinato nel centro di Teheran da una bomba piazzata sulla sua automobile.

Secondo l'agenzia di stampa Fars, gli studenti hanno fatto irruzione all'interno dell'ambasciata alla ricerca di documenti che provassero il coinvolgimento della Gran Bretagna nell'uccisione di Shahriari. In seguito alle nette condanne dei governi europei — che hanno parlato di violazione della convenzione di Vienna che sancisce ?inviolabilità delle sedi diplomatiche — e di alleati come la Russia, il ministero degli esteri di Teheran ha emesso una propria condanna sommessa dell'accaduto, rammentando che un «numero ristretto» di manifestanti ha dato vita ad «azioni inaccettabili» e ha garantito la protezione di tutte le ambasciate. La Fars, vicina ai pasdaran, ha invece trionfalmente parlato di «conquista» della sede britannica e ha rivelato che tra i numerosi documenti estratti dagli edifici dell'ambasciata vi sarebbero pure ritratti della regina Elisabetta assieme all'ultimo odiato scià d'Iran. La stessa fonte ha causticamente reso noto che la polizia ha arrestato diversi studenti, che saranno ora soggetti a procedimenti giudiziari. Il pomeriggio di fuoco di Teheran è stato l'ultimo tassello di un periodo assai movimentato nei rapporti tra la Repubblica islamica e il Regno Unito. La settimana scorsa il Foreign Office di Londra ha infatti annunciato la promulgazione di nuove sanzioni unilaterali ai danni della Banca centrale iraniana, che hanno di fatto interrotto qualsiasi rapporto finanziario tra istituti bancari dei due paesi.

La reazione della dirigenza di Teheran non si era fatta attendere. Domenica il consiglio dei Guardiani ha fornito la propria approvazione definitiva alla legge, passata dal parlamento, che ha declassato i rapporti diplomatici tra l'Iran e la Gran Bretagna dall'attuale rango di ambasciatore a quello immediatamente inferiore di incaricato d'affari. La norma, consegnata proprio nella giornata di ieri al governo dal presidente del parlamento Ali Larijani, che vi si era apertamente opposto durante la discussione parlamentare, impone quindi l'espulsione di Dominick John Chilcot. Il neo-ambasciatore del Regno Unito aveva ricevuto il gradimento del governo iraniano in ottobre, dopo sette mesi di "sede vacante" che erano seguiti al trasferimento in Afghanistan di Simon Gass, l'ambasciatore uscente che aveva causato le ira delle autorità iraniane per i suoi interventi a favore dell'opposizione riformista e della società civile — a suo parere fortemente represse — su Twitter e sul sito ufficiale dell'ambasciata. La prima reazione furibonda del Foreign Office, che ha parlato di «oltraggio del tutto inaccettabile», potrebbe venir seguita con misure più pratiche. A differenza della sede omologa a Teheran, che è soggetta a una serie di misure assai restrittive, l'ambasciata iraniana a Londra vanta numerosi centri e iniziative religioso-culturali. Rimane da vedere se la solitamente pacata diplomazia britannica deciderà di alzare il tiro contro questi e altri interessi locali della Repubblica islamica nel sempre crescente confronto, che va ad aggiungersi alle tensioni e alle crisi che alimentano da oltre mezzo secolo gli antichi rapporti tra i due Paesi.

Le mani sulla rivoluzione araba. Il governo finanziato da "fuori".

Gli investitori stranieri sono in fuga dal paese, ma gli investimenti di denaro nella politica dell'Egitto sono forti in questo periodo post rivoluzione. A luglio ci sono state proteste furiose davanti all'ambasciata dell'Arabia Saudita dopo che era circolata la notizia di grandi finanziamenti da parte del regno ai partiti salanti, in vista delle elezioni parlamentari che sono partite lunedì. II rumor diceva quattro milioni di dollari, che non sembra una cifra importante, ma che i salanti avrebbero investito con profitto nella loro rete assistenziale low costa in Egitto, grazie al cambio, con un dollaro puoi comprare un pasto, con i soldi sauditi si può puntare a spostare l'equilibrio elettorale in più di un governatorato. L'ambasciatore saudita, Ahmad al Qattan, ha negato il finanziamento e lo hanno fatto anche i gruppi salanti, ma la loro smentita è stata peggiore della notizia "Non abbiamo ricevuto fondi dall'Arabia Saudita, ma da Qatar, Emirati arabi uniti e Kuwait". A tutti appare abbastanza ovvio che un canale di finanziamento che parte dai sauditi e arriva ai salanti egiziani sia una delle ragioni della loro prova di forza al loro debutto politico durante queste elezioni: sono ben organizzati, Hizb al Nour - il Partito della luce - ha manodopera in divisa gialla che va a prendere e porta ai seggi gli elettori. La dozzina di emittenti televisive salante che trasmettono dall'Egitto sono finanziate con soldi sauditi.

E venerdì 29 luglio, quando gli islamisti egiziani hanno riempito piazza Tahrir, sventolavano - tra lo sbigottimento dei passanti - anche bandiere saudite. Che i regni sunniti del Golfo partecipino alla gara elettorale nell'unico modo che co- noscono, passando denaro ai salanti, non è una sorpresa. Il Qatar soprattutto, che tanto si spende per guidare le rivoluzioni arabe nella direzione più conveniente ai propri interessi, è già legato agli islamisti libici e verosimilmente concede udienza e favori anche a quelli egiziani. Anche se non esistono dati disponibili, è possibile che anche la Fratellanza musulmana goda di nnanziamenti dall'Arabia Saudita, e sicuramente ne gode grazie ai privati. Gli Stati Uniti non finanziano i partiti politici, ma i gruppi che difendono i diritti civili. L'ambasciatore Anne Patterson, a differenza di quello saudita, a giugno ha dichiarato in pubblico che Washington quest'anno ha speso 40 milioni di dollari per appoggiare la società civile e che 600 organizzazioni hanno fatto richiesta per ricevere fondi. La dichiarazione ha scatenato dibattiti furiosi sull'influenza degli stranieri sull'Egitto, ovvero su un paese dove dalla caduta di Hosni Mubarak in poi la diffidenza contro gli stranieri ha preso i contorni psichiatrici di una mania di persecuzione collettiva: chiunque parli un'altra lingua è guardato con sospetto.

In televisione Essam al Nizami, che pure appartiene ai giovani della rivoluzione, più aperti e laici, ha elencato con sdegno le singole voci del sostegno americano ai gruppi civili, "provano l'infiltrazione americana, perché non esistono pasti gratis". E' toccato rispondere ad Ayman Okeil, presidente di una fondazione per la pace, lo sviluppo e i diritti umani: "In Egitto non esistono fonti alternative di finanziamento. Quando abbiamo monitorato le elezioni scoprendo i brogli, lo stavamo facendo grazie ai soldi americani". Emad Mubarak, direttore dell'Associazione per la libertà di pensiero ed espressione, dice che i gruppi per i diritti umani hanno un bisogno naturale di manodopera e di risorse e non c'è altra strada che quella di accettare i fondi che arrivano da fuori. L'Amministrazione americana nel 2008 ha fatto un mezzo disastro con i finanziamenti per la democrazia e i programmi di governo in Egitto, passando dai 50 milioni di dollari dell'Amministrazione precedente a meno della metà, 20 milioni di dollari. I fondi per le organizzazioni non governative passarono da 32 a soli sette milioni di dollari. L'Amministrazione precedente aveva ridotto in generale gli aiuti all'Egitto, ma aveva mantenuto costanti quelli per i gruppi dei diritti civili.

Obama riequilibrò la situazione per non sembrare troppo ostile al potere di Mubarak e, peggio ancora, restrinse la lista dei gruppi che avevano diritto a ricevere il denaro del contribuente americano soltanto a quelli approvati dal governo egiziano - che due anni dopo sarebbe scomparso per la rivoluzione. Il governo americano ha appena dato 100 mila dollari a piazza Tahrir, come fondo per i feriti e le vittime. Ma è imbarazzato da un documento del dipartimento di stato del 2009, in piena era Mubarak, che autorizza la vendita di lacrimogeni e di equipaggiamenti antisommossa da parte di imprese americane all'Egitto per 500 mila dollari. C'è anche l'altro binario dei finanziamenti stranieri, quelli che arrivano non a gruppi o partiti ma direttamente al governo del Cairo.

La situazione economica è disastrosa e, dalla rivoluzione in poi, l'Egitto ha ricevuto circa un miliardo di dollari dai paesi del Golfo per riempire i buchi nel bilancio l'esercito riceve più o meno la stessa somma da parte degli Stati Uniti. Ora il paese avrà altri 200 milioni di dollari dal Fondo monetario arabo, un fondo comune con base ad Abu Dhabi, e una seconda franche da 270 milioni arriverà a dicembre. Il governo egiziano aveva rispedito al mittente l'offerta di aiuto arrivata a giugno dal Fondo monetario internazionale, temendo in futuro troppe interferenze nella propria politica economica. Ma adesso ha riconsiderato la proposta: vanno bene anche i soldi del Fmi. A ottobre il Qatar ha promesso ai generali al governo un investimento risolutivo di dieci miliardi di dollari in Egitto. Non è possibile sapere chi prevarrà alle elezioni, ma chiunque sia non potrà sottrarsi a questa protezione dall'esterno.

Tuesday, November 29

Non fa niente, tanto il pieno non si poteva fare.

Romano Prodi, a former Italian prime minister and former president of the European Commission, says in a Spiegel interview that Germany, as the most powerful country on the Continent, must finally step up and show the courage to resolve the debt crisis.

SPIEGEL: Do you, like European Commission President José Manuel Barroso, support the introduction of euro bonds in order to steer Europe out of the crisis?

Prodi: The European Central Bank needs to play a proper role in the crisis and euro bonds also need to be issued. Together with my colleague, I proposed bonds that are to be guaranteed by the state's gold reserves and other funds.

SPIEGEL: And what effect would these measures have?

Prodi: Think about one thing: Why is it that nobody attacks the dollar? Looking at the United States budget, the dollar is in a much worse situation than the euro. The debt state of California is much worse off than the Greek one. But the dollar is defended, also by the Fed. That makes the dollar a big, strong dog. And nobody bites a big dog.

SPIEGEL: Could the euro become a big dog, too?

Prodi: If there is the political will. Look, Germany has a really powerful position right now. Germany is the new China.

SPIEGEL: Surely that is an overstatement.

Prodi: Let's take the German-French summit. By now it is a German-German summit. You cannot say it loudly, but it is true: Chancellor Merkel, in the end, is obliged to dictate the rules.

SPIEGEL: So you are convinced that the German attitude towards euro bonds has to change in order to solve the euro crisis?

Prodi: Germany has to take a decision for Europe, or the game is over. But I don't think there is anyone in Germany who is willing to give up Europe.

SPIEGEL: You are very optimistic about the idea that the crisis can be overcome. Where does that optimism come from?

Prodi: Rationality will assert itself. Germany cannot give up its fantastic economic situation in the world.

SPIEGEL: The economic situation in Italy is more of a cause for concern. Suddenly, though, after years at a standstill, everything happened very fast: Former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi resigned, the technocrat cabinet of Mario Monti passed a confidence vote -- all in the course of one week. Has there been a change the country?

Prodi: It all went too slowly. Italy is in the midst of a deep crisis that should not have come to this point. Berlusconi simply had to leave.

SPIEGEL: Did he really leave?

Prodi: I'm not so sure about that. After my resignation from the office of prime minister, I simply went back to my hometown Bologna. He instead gives constant statements demonstrating his will to leave the door open for a possible return to the political stage.

SPIEGEL: He has said he would like to return "with double power."

Prodi: Indeed, he seems to be more active in politics today than when he was the prime minister.

SPIEGEL: Could he become dangerous for his successor Monti?

Prodi: Not at the moment -- Monti is too highly regarded for that. But Berlusconi won't give in. He has lost his magic, but I am convinced he will try again.

SPIEGEL: Are you afraid of that?

Prodi: You cannot imagine how I have suffered in the last years. Wherever I went, it was all "bunga bunga". In Beijing, they laughed at my wife and I. Even in Kenya, the park rangers pointed at the monkeys in the trees and said, "Look, they are doing 'bunga bunga'."

SPIEGEL: Is the momentary resignation of politicians to make way for an expert government the right solution for Italy?

Prodi: For the next months for sure. We have two personalities who can give the markets guarantees of rational behavior. The one, Mario Draghi, is chief of the European Central Bank. The other is prime minister. Both are excellent economists and Europeans who are widely respected around the world.

SPIEGEL: Will that be enough to convince Italians that it is necessary to make sacrifices in order to emerge from the crisis?

Prodi: It is less about the cruelties and more about changing structures and liberalizing markets. I struggled to do so in my time as prime minister and I had to face huge difficulties in parliament.

SPIEGEL: In Greece, efforts to change the structures and mentality of a country also haven't worked out so far.

Prodi: You cannot compare the two. We don't have to shrink the salaries of our public employees by 30 percent. Our budget deficit in 2012 will be only half as big as the French one. We do, however, need a strong government, and we did not have it until now. Besides, we have two problems that differentiate Italy from the other European states: widespread tax evasion and a shadow economy.

SPIEGEL: You are talking about corruption and the mafia.

Prodi: Think about the murders in Duisburg and you can see just how ominous Italy's organized crime is capable of being. We have to act quickly in these areas.

SPIEGEL: Tax evasion is not so easy to eliminate.

Prodi: My experiences in that regard have been different. When I was prime minister, the tax income was raised simply by announcing that we planned to fight tax evasion. The laws were not even ready at the time. What is needed is a credible determination.

SPIEGEL: Despite the change of government, market pressure on Italy hasn't decreased. Why?

Prodi: This illustrates that the crisis is not about Italy anymore. Sure, Italy is a weak point in an overall crisis. And when I was in Washington two weeks ago, it was embarrassing for me to hear that the weak point of world finance was Italy.

SPIEGEL: Do you not agree with that?

Prodi: It is difficult for me to watch when, for example, a company like Siemens comes to Italy to hire away engineers in order to bring them to Germany because their qualifications are excellent. I myself have two nephews who completed their doctorate degrees in Italy and are now working in Germany. Two more are working in France.

SPIEGEL: In that sense things have not changed that much since the 1960s, a time when many Italians emigrated to Germany.

Prodi: Back then it was the poor people who left Italy. Today it is the highly educated part of the country that leaves. It is an immense drama. But the enduring nervousness of the markets shows that this has now become an attack aimed at the euro. If we had acted with more decisiveness two months ago, we would have overcome the crisis by now. But now it is too late for small steps -- and whether or not we can change the course will depend on the next (EU) summit (on Dec. 9).

SPIEGEL: What needs to be done?

Prodi: To satisfy the markets, we need an act of solidarity in European politics.

SPIEGEL: Does that mean that Germany has to pay? Either through euro bonds that will live on Germany's creditworthiness, or by the European Central Bank buying up government bonds on a large scale, which could lead to inflation?

Prodi: It depends on Germany. We need the political will to resolve the crisis. Of course I know that the Germans are afraid they will be the only ones who pay.

SPIEGEL: It is understandable. By now, Chancellor Angela Merkel appears to be completely isolated, with all partners exerting huge pressure on her. Will that be effective?

Prodi: That is the way politics works. But let's be rational. Is Germany better off with the euro or without it?

SPIEGEL: With the euro.

Prodi: Sure. The return of the deutsche mark would lead to its revaluation and exports would collapse. If the euro really were to break apart, it would be like a volcanic explosion. Nobody knows where the stones would fall.

SPIEGEL: On the other hand, the prospect of large-scale inflation ...

Prodi: ... would be political suicide in Germany, I know. But it is also political suicide not to show strength in guiding a country. There are measures which can be adopted in this crisis.

SPIEGEL: How is Europe going to change as a result of the crisis?

Prodi: Europe has always become stronger through crises. But the next Europe will look different. There will be some states that will collaborate ever more intensely. And there will be states that, step by step, will claim more exceptions for themselves and will be looking for something like a Europe à la carte. The core of Europe will take more and more decisions together, while the others will be more and more on the rim of it.

SPIEGEL: In other words, a two-speed Europe?

Prodi: It could even be more than two speeds. But for the future of Europe, we have to keep our fingers crossed and hope that it will not have the same destiny that was designated for Italy in the Renaissance.

SPIEGEL: You mean a Europe that is fragmented and no longer competitive in the world?

Prodi: Venice, Florence, Milan, Genoa -- these cities once dominated the sciences, arts, military and the economy and paved the way for the first globalization of the world. And then, because they were divided, they allowed other powers such as Spain and France to surpass them. Today it is not only Europe and America that are driving globalization, but also China and other Asian powers.

SPIEGEL: And you fear that the European Union could be left behind?

Prodi: Yes, there are signals of that. The EU may still be No. 1 in terms of gross domestic product, the exporting sector and industrial production. But in the Middle East, people are already asking this: If you are excellent in so many areas, then why do you not have any authority? Why don't you have any power? That is an unbelievable situation.

"Balkan arrest warrant" against crime in region.

The event will be organized by the Serbian Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of the Interior.  The Ministry of Justice stressed that the regional arrest warrant would be the most powerful weapon in combating organized crime, because it would expand the territory on which criminals are denied shelter.
The warrant should also shorten the time-consuming process of extradition of criminals from the Western Balkans and Southeast Europe to 45 days.
State Secretary of the Ministry of Justice Slobodan Homen expects that a preliminary act, which would enable the "forming" of the warrant, will be signed during the two-day conference.

Such warrant already exists for all EU countries, and it solved the problem of criminal proceedings and prosecution of criminals, he stressed. If the initiative for the regional arrest warrant gets political support, regional experts should, by end of 2011, write the text of a convention, modeled on the European arrest warrant, to which all interested countries could accede to. The regional arrest warrant should actually be a court decision, issued by one country with the desire that another regional country arrests or extradites a criminal wanted in order to serve a sentence or be prosecuted.

According to the initiative advocated by the Serbian Ministry of Justice, the warrant would be applicable for all crimes which require imprisonment of more than three years, as well as for verdicts which refer to four-month prison sentences and up. Serbia first presented its initiative at the regional conference held in Belgrade on October 4-5, 2010, and then again in Slovenia, at Brdo near Kranj, on April 15, 2011.

Montenegro will not abandon euro. This was confirmed by Montenegrin Prime Minister Igor Lukšić.

Lukšić said he does not believe the euro will collapse or that Montenegro, with a population of 650,000, will suffer an economic crisis like Greece's, even though both countries largely rely on tourism and foreigninvestments. "I think that the tying of the Montenegrin economy with the euro is a much better option than the adventure of printing your own currency," Lukšić stated for the U.S. news agency Associated Press, the Montenegrin media report. n Lukšić projected a 2.5-percent GDP growth for 2012, but he left open the possibility that the eurozone turbulence could cause lower growth or even a recession in Montenegro.

Carlo De Stefano: AUGURI !!!

Carlo De Stefano è, senza dubbio, il maggior esperto in Italia di Antiterrorismo e con un lungo impegno in materia di Ordine pubblico. Il prefetto De Stefano, nato ad Avellino nel 1943, "due figli e un nipotino" come tiene a ricordare, torna al Viminale che aveva lasciato, da capo dell'UCIGOS, nel dicembre del 2009. Era approdato all'antiterrorismo nel 2001 circa un mese prima degli attentati alle torri gemelle. "Ero tornato all'Antiterrorismo il 9 agosto 2001 - ha raccontato in una recente intervista all'ANSA - dopo averci lavorato a lungo in anni caldi. Ci stavamo tutti "leccando le ferite" del G8 di Genova, quando alle tre del pomeriggio dell'11 settembre in pochi minuti ci rendemmo conto che il terrorismo islamico aveva messo a segno qualcosa di enorme. Immediatamente gli apparati italiani capirono che l'obiettivo degli attentati non era solo quello di colpire l'America ma tutti i paesi amici, dunque l'Italia era nel mirino".

Dunque De Stefano coordina le attività investigative della Polizia di Prevenzione e delle DIGOS delle Questure di tutta Italia negli anni dell'emergenza di terrorismo islamico. E presiede il Comitato di Analisi Strategica Antiterrorismo (CASA) dalla sua costituzione nel dicembre 2003 fino a tutto il 2009 quando per lui arriva la pensione. Entrato nell'amministrazione della Pubblica Sicurezza nel 1968, dopo la laurea in giurisprudenza e la specializzazione in diritto penale e criminologia, ha lavorato alle Questure di Milano, Roma e Bari. E' stato Questore di Avellino e poi di Firenze.  Dal '95 al '97 prima alla Direzione Antidroga e poi ai Servizi di Informazione della Direzione centrale della Polizia di Prevenzione. Nella sua lunga carriera è stato tra l'altro responsabile della Sicurezza del presidente Sandro Pertini. Attualmente è consigliere scientifico della Fondazione ICSA (Intelligence Culture and Strategic Analysis) fondata dal Presidente Emerito della Repubblica Prof. Sen. Francesco Cossiga.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn: Who set up him ?

In less than a year, the sexual assault case against former IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn came and went as did his career. International tabloids billed the news as a monumental scandal, but months after the case exploded, the allegations dissolved and fizzled to nothing. Or maybe not. According to writer Edward Jay Epstein, there is a large likelihood that the since-dismissed charges against DSK were part of a vast, international conspiracy — and he has the documentation to back up his case. In a piece published this week in the New York Review of Books, Epstein goes over hotel records, telephone correspondence and court files to try to make sense of the case against DSK. From May 14, 2011 until only recently, Strauss-Kahn was embroiled in a heated legal dispute with Nafissatou Diallo, a maid at the posh Sofitel New York hotel. Diallo had attested the DSK sexually assaulted her in his presidential suite that afternoon, but after months of investigation, prosecution had no choice but to dismiss the case after declaring the maid’s account discreditable.

DNA samples found in Strauss-Kahn’s room confirm that something sexual did indeed happen between the two parties, but DSK declared it consensual at the time. The following few months launched a he-said-she-said back-and-forth that dissolved once Diallo was found unreliable by prosecutors; but now Epstein insists that there was more to the case than just a chambermaid’s made-up tale of rape. Of the events of May 14 that made it to the papers, Epstein now writes that some of the more mysterious of incidents largely went unreported. For starters, Strauss-Kahn was warned earlier that morning that personal correspondence from his Blackberry cell phone had been mysteriously forwarded into the hands of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who DSK was expected to run against in the 2012 elections. Upon hearing the news, Strauss-Kahn contacted people to have his phone examined for any tinkering that could have been carried out once he made it to Paris later that day, though only two hours later his phone was gone.

Experts say that whoever found DSK’s phone managed to quickly disable the GPS signal from it and investigators have to this day not recovered the phone. Strauss-Kahn contacted the Sofitel hotel once he realized the phone had gone missing that afternoon. At that point the police had already become involved in the supposed sex crime and when DSK called back the Sofitel a second time, hotel security confirmed that they had the phone. On the contrary, they did not (or at least never turned it over).

Coincidently, the head of security for Accor, the company that owns the hotel, was out enjoying a soccer match with President Sarkozy that very afternoon. That same afternoon, Xavier Graff, the duty officer at the Accor Group in Paris, said via email, “bringing down DSK.” Though Graff later called the correspondence a joke, he lost his position at Accor. According to the documentation obtained by Epstein, a conspiracy involving Diallo and the staff of Sofitel, Accor and Sarkozy causes suspicion that this was more than just a case to exhort money from the wealthy DSK, as prosecutors originally had considered.

Diallo had discussed in the days after the incident with an imprisoned pal how much money could be made through a settlement and offered several false testimonies. Now, however, Epstein reveals that the chambermaid also lied to the court about her whereabouts immediately before and after the incident, and hotel records confirm that she went in and out of a nearby Sofitel suite that day, possibly while the room was occupied by someone else — although she told prosecutors that this wasn’t the case.

Diallo also reentered DSK’s own room after the encounter, which time stamps reveal could have lasted no longer than seven minutes. With DSK slated to pose heavy competition for Sarkozy in the election until the scandal led to charges, house arrest and an international scandal, was the French president involved in a vast conspiracy to keep Strauss-Kahn from usurping him from office? His office doesn’t think so. "It is complete fantasy!" Claude Gueant, the French Interior Minister and former chief of staff to Sarkozy, tells BBC.“What is the point? So DSK lost his phone. Just because he lost his phone, it doesn't mean there is conspiracy,” he says.  Epstein, on the other day, begs to differ. “Whatever happened to his phone, and the content on it, his political prospects were effectively ended by the events of that day,” he writes.

Riccardo Muti: “You can’t be resident abroad and then denigrate Italy”.

Maestro Riccardo Muti, heir to, and supreme exponent of, Italy’s musical heritage, attacked fellow musicians who join the chorus criticising Italian politicians but are resident abroad for tax purposes. “I am resident in Italy and I know that many of my fellow conductors, directors and singers are not”, he told Armando Torno on Radio24. “That’s their choice and they are free to do whatever they want. But I cannot stand the ones that then criticise politics and ministers”.

Muti will take the podium to inaugurate the opera season in Rome with Verdi’s Macbeth, a musical version of Shakespeare’s tragedy. A few months ago, the Rome opera house appointed Muti as its honorary life conductor. Recently, he was also given the "Paolo Borsellino, Italian hero” prize for his “very high artistic and moral merits”. It was this event that offered him the opportunity to talk about musicians who give up their nationality in order to pay less tax. “Obviously, this prize will be taxed but I am still happy to be resident for tax purposes in Italy”.

Russia launches new missile defense to cover Atlantic

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has ordered operational the newest Russian radar system that protects from missile attacks and covers all Europe and Atlantic. Medvedev personally arrived in Russia’s westernmost exclave of Kaliningrad and received a report from the Space Defense Troops commander that the radar station was fully ready for the launch. After this, the president gave the order to put the radar on combat duty.At the ceremony Medvedev said that the radar launch was a sign to the Western partners that Russia was ready to promptly respond to threats that arise with the start of the European missile defense. "I expect that this step will be regarded by Western partners as the first signal of our country's readiness to appropriately respond to the threats posed by the missile defense system to our strategic nuclear forces," the Russian President said.

After the launch the president held a conference with top commanders of the Russian Military Forces. There he said that Russia was ready to listen to proposals on missile defense, but repeated that “verbal statements alone will not suffice.“If our signal is not heard, as I said on November 23 we will deploy other means of defense, including approving harsh counter-measures and the deployment of a strike group,” Medvedev said. “If other steps are taken, we are ready to listen to them, but in any case, verbal statements alone will not suffice,” the president said. "When they tell us ‘this is not meant against you,’ I would like to say the following today – dear friends, this radar station that started its work today is also not meant against you. But it is meant for us and for the tasks that we set before us,” Medvedev said.

The Voronezh-DM station has been working in test mode for the whole of 2011. There were no technical failures over this period, Interfax news agency reported, quoting a source in the Defense Ministry. The source also said that the Kaliningrad station will be the third of its kind, with the first two already working in Leningrad and Krasnodar Regions. With the effective detection range of 6,000 kilometers, the Voronezh-DM is processing the reports of missile strikes on military and civilian combat posts. The station is capable of working in connection with Moscow’s missile defense system. The commander of the Russian Space Defense Troops, Lieutenant-General Oleg Ostapenko has said earlier that the new station in Kaliningrad would allow control of the entire European and Atlantic regions.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev last week said that Russia would strengthen its defenses and deploy missiles and anti-missile components to Kaliningrad as a reply to the US and NATO constant push towards creating the European Missile Defense system with components stationed near the Russian border. Russia opposes the program, saying it threatens the balance of nuclear forces and demands legally-binding guarantees that the system will not be used against it. The Western side says the new missile defense it built against the threat from rogue states, but so far provided no such guarantees to Russia.

Iran: 150.000 missiles response to Israeli Jerichos

Saber-rattling rhetoric in the Middle East is reaching new heights. Israel is reportedly deploying its long-range Jericho missiles around Jerusalem, while the Iranian defense minister threatened massive missile retaliation against Israel. The threat to launch “150,000 or more” missiles was voiced by Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi on Sunday as he was delivering a speech before army volunteers. Earlier Iranian officials threatened retaliation against both Israel and NATO, should an attack on Iran be carried out. Meanwhile Israel is reportedly deploying its own missiles around Jerusalem and in the West Bank. The missiles carried into position by military tracks resemble the Jericho missiles, says Aaron Klein, head of the Jerusalem bureau for WorldNetDaily, citing several eyewitness accounts. The reporter speculates that this may be a military drill, possibly linked to the earlier rocket test fire. The missile launched from the Palmachim test center was reportedly meant to test a new engine for the long-range Jericho III design.

Its specifications are classified, but military experts believe the Israeli missile to be capable of carrying a nuclear warhead to any destination in the Middle East, most of Europe, North America and Africa.

Klein believes such a drill may be carried out either as a step in the escalating conflict over Iranian nuclear program or due to the unstable situation in Syria. Israel’s ongoing row with Iran came back to the fore in the wake of a critical UN nuclear watchdog report, which alleged that Tehran may be working on creating a nuclear weapon and, as some commentators said, gave Israel the grounds for a pre-emptive strike on Iran’s nuclear sites.
Syria’s civil unrest and governmental crackdown on the opposition has led to several rounds of sanctions imposed on the country and speculations that an intervention similar to that in Libya may follow. President Assad warned that such a move would result in a major regional conflict. Israel would then become a natural target for Syrian allies like Hamas and Hezbollah in such a scenario. The Israeli Defense Force would not comment on the alleged missile deployment.

UK Embassy stormed in Tehran

Dozens of Iranian students have stormed the UK embassy in Tehran, chanting “death to England.” Before police intervened, protesters pelted the embassy with stones and petrol bombs, brought down the flag, and destroyed a pile of classified documents. During the clashes with protesters, Iranian police have used tear gas to disperse the crowd, Fars news agency reported. Police have also been using water cannons to push the protesters back from the embassy’s main entrance and force them to climb down from the gate. Reinforcements were called to the scene, including heavily armed riot police. The police have managed to take control of the rally and forced all but some 50 protesters to leave the territory of the Embassy. Police have released six employees of the embassy who had been taken hostage in the compound in northern Tehran earlier today, Fars reported. Reports by the Mehr news agency that six UK staff had been taken hostage when students raided a north Tehran diplomatic compound were withdrawn shortly after they were posted. No explanation was given for the report, nor its removal.

Earlier a group of students climbed over the embassy’s gate, rushed to the building and started showering it with stones and petrol bombs. Some of the protesters managed to get inside the building and were reported to be throwing documents from the windows. Meanwhile, a separate group of protesters broke into another British embassy compound and seized classified documents, official Irna news agency reported. Protesters also were burning documents seized from the Embassy’s offices, Mehr News Agency reported. The protesters chanted “Down with Britain”, “Down with America”, “Down with Israel” and “Students are Awake and Hate Britain,” according to Fars news agency. One of the protesters was seen climbing the wall with a portrait of Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II that was apparently looted from the embassy. The British government has confirmed "a serious incursion" at UK embassy in Tehran and asked Iranian government to make every effort to end the crisis immediately.

Britain’s Foreign & Commonwealth Office is outraged by the incursion of a "significant number of demonstrators" into the British embassy in Tehran. "We are outraged by this. It is utterly unacceptable and we condemn it,” a statement at the FCO’s internet site says. Meanwhile, the Russian Foreign Ministry has condemned the attack on the UK embassy in Iran. "The actions of the crowd of protesters, committed in breach of the commonly accepted principles of international law, which guarantee immunity for the territory and property of diplomatic missions, are unacceptable and deserve condemnation," the ministry’s statement said. “We hope that the Iranian authorities will take necessary measures to immediately restore order, investigate the incident and prevent a repeat of such incidents.” Tuesday’s protest was initially staged as a peaceful one, as thousands gathered to commemorate the anniversary of Iranian nuclear scientist Majid Shahriari’s death. According to the Iranian government he was murdered in a joint operation by Israel’s Mossad and UK’s MI6.

This siege comes two days after Iran downgraded the diplomatic and trade ties with UK. That was done in response to earlier UK government’s decision to tighten economic sanctions against Tehran over its nuclear program. Just about a month ago, on November 4, Iran marked the anniversary of the 1979 seizure of the US embassy with thousands of Iranians chanting “death to America” in front of what they call “the den of spies.” On November 4, 1979, revolutionary-minded Iranian students stormed the US embassy and took 52 diplomats hostage in support of the Islamic Revolution. The US citizens were held hostage for 444 days up to January 20, 1981. This conflict resulted in breaking of all diplomatic and economic ties between the countries for more than three decades.

Mark Almond, a visiting professor of international relations from Bilkent University in Turkey, believes that the attack on the UK embassy is more of a “symbolic incident” than a repetition of the hostage crisis on 1979. “The British Embassy staff seemed to be expecting this and escaped through the back door,” he said. Almond says that the real question is whether this situation will be used to raise tensions and whether “Iran’s nuclear projects are going to be attacked by the West, by the United States and its allies, either directly with military forces, or indirectly using some kind of cyber warfare.” Almond added that situation

What is happening in Europe has a name: George SOROS and his Open Society Foundations.

There is mounting speculation that the euro zone will break apart, or even that the single currency will be abandoned altogether. The warning signs are mounting, and fresh news is adding to the gloom every day. Britain's financial watchdog has instructed banks to brace for a possible break-up of the euro zone. British currency trader CLS Bank is reportedly conducting stress tests to prepare for this worst-case scenario.

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski made a dramatic appeal to Germany on Monday to prevent a collapse of the currency union, saying: "We are standing on the edge of a precipice."

German investors are jettisoning derivatives on a large scale because they have lost confidence in the instruments. For the first time, it appears, people across Europe regard the downfall of the euro as a real possibility.

Is it really for the first time, though? In fact, scenarios for the euro's breakup are older than the currency itself. At the end of 1998, Harvard Law School Professor Hal Scott published a paper called "When the Euro Falls Apart." He put the chances of the euro failing at around 10 percent.

Today, that's a real prospect. According to Mark Cliffe, the chief economist of ING Bank, "even the most ardent euro admirer must concede that the probability of countries leaving or the breakup of the euro zone is no longer zero."

The economist Nouriel Roubini, known as "Dr. Doom" because he predicted the 2008 financial crisis, recently put the likelihood of the euro zone collapsing at 45 percent. But such expert forecasts sound abstract to most people. It often sounds as if such scenarios wouldn't be so bad for Germany. In fact the consequences would be catastrophic for Europe and for its largest economy.

Bomb voyage: 600 Libyans "already fighting in Syria".

The Libyan government apparently wants to share its successful experience of overthrowing the Gaddafi regime with like-minded Syrians. It has sent 600 of its troops to support local militants against the Assad regime, according to media reports. The fighters have joined the Free Syria Army, the militant group carrying out attacks on government forces in Syria, reports the Egyptian news website Al-Ray Al-Arabi citing its sources. The report says the troops entered Syria through Turkish territory. The alleged incursion happened with the consent of the chairman of the Libyan National Transitional Council (NTC) Mustafa Abdul Jalil. The NTC allegedly welcomed volunteers to join the surge. Last Friday British media reported a secret meeting between NTC envoys and Syrian rebels had been held in Istanbul. The Libyan governing body reportedly pledged to supply arms, money and fighters to the Syrians. Bashar Assad’s government has repeatedly accused foreign forces of smuggling armed groups and weapons into Syria and thus fueling the ongoing violence.

In mid-October the Libyan NTC was the first government to recognize the rebel Syrian National Council as the legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. The Libyan population is in possession of many weapons, which they received during the civil war by plundering military depots, through smuggling or as aid from NATO members and countries like Qatar, which took part in the ousting of Muammar Gaddafi. The NTC has difficulties in disarming the ex-rebels, who want to keep their firearms, either for personal protection or as means to make their living. In November, the Libyan capital, Tripoli, saw a mass protest by the rebels, who demanded that the NTC pay their wages. Some even threatened to overthrow the new government the way they did with the previous one, unless their demands are met. Funneling armed, underemployed and eager-to-fight youngsters to another country could be a convenient move for the NTC. The Syrian government, however, is likely to see them as mercenaries, which NATO member Turkey allowed into their country as an alternative to a full-scale military campaign, which is impossible without the sanction of the United Nations Security Council.

Lavrov speaks against "ultimatums to Syria"

Sergei Lavrov (Beta, file) Sergei Lavrov (Beta, file)  "It is now most important to stop issuing ultimatums and work on returning the situation to the political field," he said, according to the Russian Interfax news agency.  The Arab League on Monday placed Syria under economic sanctions in order to pressure the country's authorities to end repression over anti-government protests.  Lavrov spoke about the importance of a peaceful solution to the crisis, and mentioned the example of Yemen:  "All these countries, including those who are now demanding measures to be undertaken against Syria, had a very different stance toward Yemen, where negotiations about a peaceful solution, proposed by the Cooperation Council for the States of the Gulf, lasted for months."

In Yemen, the top Russian official continued, the peace plan was signed after a display of patience and perseverance, and after equal pressure was exerted on all partners.  "Such approach is also need for the Syrian problem, because ultimatums issued by some states, especially the Arab League, won't solve the problem," stated Lavrov.  He also described as "unfair" calls to introduce an arms embargo against Syria, adding that militant groups opposing the government were armed "from abroad".  On Monday, U.S. and German ambassadors to the UN said it was time to renew negotiations at the Security Council on a draft resolution that would condemn repression against demonstrators in Syria.  Last month, Russia and China vetoed a similar draft submitted by western countries.

US govt demands WikiLeaks destroy all files

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has told a media summit that the US government has ordered him to destroy all the material WikiLeaks holds on them – published and unpublished - and to stop using government insiders to gather fresh material. “[When we released our documents] the Pentagon said we must destroy everything we published and were going to publish,” Assange said. ”And if we didn’t, we would be ‘compelled to do so,’” the summit’s website says. Assange made the allegation as he addressed the News 2011 Summit in Hong Kong via Skype. News executives and media owners from over 80 countries have gathered there to discuss editorial principles and tools as well as business models for the news media. Reports say Assange has been under police pressure to stop talking – exactly the kind of oppressive official action he has been working to highlight. He was met with a storm of applause from journalists as he appeared on the screen.

Speaking about modern journalism, Assange claimed it was facing crisis of a legitimacy today and accused the mainstream press of corruption and bias. Answering a question from the moderator on whether he considers himself a journalist, Assange said, "Of course I'm a goddamned journalist," and emphasized the role WikiLeaks played in some significant events, such as the revolution in Tunisia. The WikiLeaks founder has dubbed the Internet the biggest surveillance machine ever built: “Any information stored in Gmail or Yahoo is accessible by any government agency." Julian Assange is facing extradition from the UK to Sweden on rape charges. His defense believes the move could lead to their client facing prosecution in America for his involvement in WikiLeaks.

Sunday, November 27


Gli stralci dei verbali di interrogatorio nelle inchieste su ENAC, ENAV e FINMECCANICA sono agghiaccianti. Vent'anni dopo, tutto è restato come prima. Trasferito a Roma, il non più giovane PM del pool milanese di Francesco Saverio Borrelli, Gerardo D'Ambrosio, Piercamillo Davigo e Antonio Di Pietro, il dottor Paolo lelo, accerta per la via delle confessioni le stesse ruberie di partito, con gli stessi meccanismi, negli stessi luoghi, con la stessa trasversalità. È identico il linguaggio delle transazioni, uguali più o meno le cifre, i destinatari, uomini e tesorieri dell'UDC, ministri e sindad del PdL, e ce n'è per il PD il cui nome, nota il magistrato, si confonde in bocca ai corruttori istituzionali come Lorenzo Borgogni con quello del partito di maggioranza, salta la differenza della elle, e basta. Un disastro che ferisce la maggioranza tripartita che ha appena dato vita al governo dei tecnici, e che appena fino a ieri si divideva in maggioranza di governo, minoranza di Opposizione e vorace terzo polo. Ma il vero sfregio è alla politica, alla sua credibilità, alla fiduda che nel Paese è possibile riporre in meccanismi di potere radicalmente inquinati dal giro di denaro illegale, dal finanziamento alle forze parlamentari di cui approfittano, con i loro conti protetti, manager di prima dasse e mediatori di terza dasse.

Dall'eterno ritorno dell'identico esce fuori che la promessa di moralizzazione giudiziaria fatta dalla magistratura è stata un'illusione demagogica, la tutela dall' illegalità è impossibile con i mezzi ordinari della giustizia penale. Se le cose stanno così, le famose inchieste che rovesciarono come un calzino la Repubblica furono un nulla di fatto. E l'unica via per risolvere il problema, fatta salva la riserva corruttiva sempre viva ovunque e dovuta all'avidità personale, è la via della riforma di politica, istituzioni e della funzione di mercato delle aziende pubbliche. I partiti devono smettere di esistere come luoghi di chiacchiera decisionale e di puro potere, devono trasformarsi in cartelli elettorali che fanno fund raising, che si occupano dei finanziamenti regolari dell'attività pubblica cercando legalmente soldi per vincere le elezioni, perché quello è l'unico contenuto accettabile di un'attività militante, e per il resto la politica della dedsione, del governo la fanno le istituzioni, gli eletti, gli amministratori.

L'altra cura seria è la fine di ogni commistione tra potere pubblico e responsabilità d'impresa nel mercato, la via delle privatizzazioni, delle responsabilità manageriali affidate al rapporto col mercato e non col taglieggiamento di chi tira i fili del teatrino corruttivo. Salvaguardando i tesori industriali e tecnologici che, col caso Finmeccanica finiscono nella discarica dei cattivi comportamenti anche quando riescono, e c'erano riusciti, a competere sui mercati nel campo degli armamenti, dei sistemi informativi integrati e riservati, sui quali negli altri paesi il segreto di stato e il controllo arbitrale sulla magistratura, la protezione dei governi, impediscono a ogni magistrato di distruggerela ricchezza e la Sicurezza della nazione. Ora un processo avvilente dovrà dimostrare quali siano le vere responsabilità individuali, e penali. Ma le responsabilità politiche del disastro sono nostre, equamente divise tra opinione pubblica illusa dalla demagogia, magistratura illusionista e pseudo-riformatrice, e politici e manager in qualche caso finanziatori impropri della vita pubblica, in molti altri casi semplicemente LADRI.
Il resto è ipocrisia.

Saturday, November 26


In the video you are about to see, George Soros talks about "the creation of a New World Order", he discusses the need for a "managed decline" of the U.S. dollar and he talks at length of the global need for a true world currency. So just who is George Soros? Well, he is a billionaire "philanthropist" who came to be known as "the Man Who Broke the Bank of England" when he raked in a staggering one billion dollars during the 1992 "Black Wednesday" currency crisis. These days Soros is most famous for being perhaps the most "politically active" (at least openly) billionaire in the world. His Open Society Institute is in more than 60 countries and it spends approximately $600 million a year promoting the ideals that Soros wants promoted. Soros and his pet organizations have played a key role in quite a few "revolutions" around the globe over the last several decades, but these days the main goal of George Soros is to bring political change to the United States.

So exactly what is it that George Soros is trying to accomplish? Well, in a nutshell, what he wants is a Big Brother-style one world government based on extreme European-style socialism, strict population control and the radical green agenda. It would be a world where the state tightly regulates everything that we do for the greater benefit of the environment and of society as a whole.

However, Soros is not the "mastermind of the New World Order" that some have tried to make him out to be.  The truth is that to those in the international banking elite, Soros is considered to be something of a "black sheep" and an "outsider".  Much of what Soros is trying to accomplish lines up with the goals of the international banking elite, but what they don't like is that Soros won't stop publicly talking about a global currency and a "New World Order".  Of course the international banking elite very much want a global currency and a "New World Order", but what they don't need is a "squeaky wheel" like Soros running around drawing unneeded attention to those goals.

Also, Soros does not seem to understand that both sides of the political spectrum in the United States are deeply influenced by the international banking elite.  Sadly, the truth is that the same handful of elitist organizations has dominated the cabinets of every single president that we have had since World War II.  If you doubt this, just check out how many members of each presidential administration over the last 40 years have belonged to either the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission or the Bilderberg Group.  If you have never looked into this before, you will be absolutely shocked.  No matter what president we elect, it is always the exact same organizations that always dominate their cabinets.

But Soros still seems very much trapped within the left/right paradigm and he seems absolutely obsessed with destroying the Republican Party.  For example, Soros spent an insane amount of money attempting to defeat George W. Bush back in 2004.  According to the Center for Responsive Politics, George Soros donated $23,581,000 during that election cycle to political organizations that were trying to keep Bush from being reelected.

Soros has also been a tremendous backer of Barack Obama, although lately Soros seems a bit disenchanted with him.  Through organizations such as the Center for American Progress and, Soros is constantly trying to influence the state of American politics. So what is George Soros thinking about these days?  Well, in the video posted below you will see Soros discussing "an orderly decline" of the U.S. dollar, the coming global currency and the importance of the New World Order....