Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this article |
News :: International
It's Still 1945 in Europe --- In Washington's View -- Stop US Imperialism!
by Eric Margolis
14 Jul 2014
Click on image for a larger version
Just how independent is the European Union? Given recent events involving the United States and its European allies, one really must wonder.
First, there was the US National Security Agency brazenly tapping German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s private cellphone and, very likely, many more vip’s in Germany, a key US ally and Europe’s most important nation.
Washington and the NSA shrugged off this horribly embarrassing incident with the usual “well, everyone does it.”
Not true. Imagine the stink if Germany bugged President Barack Obama’s Blackberry. Chancellor Merkel was humiliated but she downplayed the scandal, unable or unwilling to chastise the US by taking any real punitive action – like closing one of the 69-year old US military bases in Germany.
Next, Britain’s Mutual Defense Agreement with the US is up for renewal. This 1958 pact is the foundation of the much ballyhooed US-British “Special Relationship.”
This writer has reported for years that Britain cannot fire its nuclear-armed missiles without Washington turning the key via special codes. Now, we learn that Britain’s nukes also contain components that only the US can provide. France, at least, has an independent nuclear force.
In 2003, US CIA agents kidnap a Muslim cleric off the street in Milano. Italian courts indict and convict 23 US agents of this crime and orders them extradited to Italy. The US refused the legitimate extradition request.
US officials charge UBS bank with helping Americans avoid taxes – a perfectly legal act in Switzerland, the bank’s home.
The head of UBS wealth management, Raoul Weil, was arrested in Italy and sent to the US under house arrest where he waits trial. Washington shut down a second important private Swiss bank and sends others running. The Swiss banks, no angels, risked seeing their US operations shut down unless they violated the basic Swiss bank secrecy law by giving up many of their client’s names.
Now, France’s leading bank, BNP, is being forced to pay a mammoth fine of $8.79 billion for violating US and New York State sanctions against Sudan, Iran and Cuba. Such dealing was entirely legal under French and EU law, but the US was determined to expand its punitive laws to Europe -a process called “lawfare.” BNP’s business in the US was threatened. BNP’s humiliation was hailed as a victory by Israel against Iran.
Shockingly, France’s government made no more than a few peeps of protest, yet another example of abject weakness by President Francois Hollande who is often compared to a large jellyfish by French critics. Paris could have told the Americans “non!” and threatened to seize US assets in France. Instead, it groveled.
Of late, two Americans were caught red-handed spying on Germany’s government. The CIA station chief in Berlin was ordered expelled. Germany repeatedly asked the US to be included on its lilly-white list of allies supposedly not to be spied upon: Canada, Britain, Israel, Australia, New Zealand. The US refused.
No one knew whether President Barack Obama was actually aware of this espionage. He will, of course, deny being in the loop. But further serious damage was inflicted on US relations with Germany and the European Union.
Unwisely, Washington still deals with Europe and the EU as if dealing with minor vassal states: “foot soldiers for America’s nuclear knights,” in the pithy words of Germany’s late defense minister, Franz Josef Strauss. Washington’s arrogance and contempt for Europe was best illustrated by State Department neocon Victoria Nuland’s reply when asked if the EU should get more involved in US attempts to overthrow Ukraine’s pro-Russian government, “f-k the EU.”
Washington has never accepted any European state or the EU as an equal. While official US policy backs a united Europe, unofficially the US has sometimes tried to thwart or delay unification – particularly a European armed force. NATO – 76% financed and run by Washington – is still the EU’s police force and America’s big stick in Europe.
At times, it looks as if not so much has changed in Europe since 1945. The Soviets are gone, but the more amiable Americans are still around. But it often seems that Washington is almost trying to alienate its natural European allies by treating them like banana republics with old world charm.
This work is in the public domain
Why is Stefan Kornelius so angry over the CIA spying scandal in Germany?
by Johannes Stern
(No verified email address)
16 Jul 2014
15 July 2014
In recent days, readers of the daily Süddeutsche Zeitung have rubbed their eyes in disbelief. On the opinion pages, repeated anti-American commentaries on the current CIA spying scandal have appeared under the byline of Stefan Kornelius, the paper’s chief foreign policy correspondent.
Last Thursday, Kornelius gave free rein to his rage over the discovery of another suspected US agent in the defence ministry. He accused the US of “spying on everything and everyone, whether enemy or friend, from country boys to potential opponents.” He called the spying “chutzpah” that showed “the arrogance of power” and called on Berlin to finally make “a political response to the infiltration.”
In the Saturday edition a week before, in an article entitled “Destruction of an Alliance,” Kornelius warned: “If it is confirmed that the American intelligence service had a double agent in the BND [German foreign intelligence agency], then Germany and the US will slide into a political crisis, the depth of which is difficult to exaggerate.”
Kornelius sharply condemned the US decision “after the revelations from Edward Snowden and the outrage at the wire-tapping of the chancellor’s mobile telephone … to continue to operate in the same manner in the heart of the BND.” This was “either stupid or insolent.” Then he charged that US President Barack Obama either “did not have his agencies under control or is lying.” Both were “unforgivable.”
Kornelius concluded by demanding serious consequences for Washington. “The US now has to publicly explain why and under whose orders the partner German intelligence agency was infiltrated. After what has happened politically, this case of spying must have personnel consequences … whoever is responsible for this damage, whether in Washington or Berlin, must go.”
Kornelius’s comments are in such stark contrast to his customary pro-US propaganda that even the New York Times took notice. Kornelius, “normally an outspoken Atlanticist” according to the Times, is notorious for his defence of US-led wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria. In recent weeks and months, he denounced Russia and called for stronger measures against the Putin regime. At the same time, he consistently defended the strategic alliance between Germany and the US, which he did not wish to see disrupted by anything, including spying by the US National Security Agency (NSA).
In previous comments on NSA spying, Kornelius spoke out against granting asylum to Edward Snowden and warned that his revelations should not be allowed to jeopardise the alliance with the US. Last November, he wrote: “So Snowden is demanding a political decision from Germany with major implications: for or against the US? Based on all historical experience, all interests of security policy, and all political reason, the decision cannot be made lightly.”
The question is raised: why is Kornelius now responding so angrily? Why is he not downplaying US spying by referring to “Germany’s strategic interests” as in the past, but rather demanding “serious consequences” for the US?
Kornelius’s shift in rhetoric is directly connected to the deepening tensions in US-German relations. Leading German politicians, including Chancellor Merkel, President Gauck and foreign minister Steinmeier have reacted to the spying affair with an unusually strong criticism of the US. Last Thursday, Berlin even called for the highest-ranking US intelligence official in Germany to leave the country. While the Obama administration responded with frosty silence, US media outlets spoke of the deepest crisis in US-German relations since the end of World War II.
Kornelius’s complaint about the undermining of the alliance with the US also has a personal component. His career as one of the leading propagandists for US foreign policy in Germany has been based on the close strategic relationship between Germany and the US, which is now increasingly being called into question.
Kornelius is a member of or has close ties to a number of pro-US think tanks, including the Atlantic Bridge, the German Atlantic Society and the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies. In 2003, he won the Arthur F. Burns Journalism Award in the category “best commentary on US-German relations”.
In terms of his ability to regurgitate the political line of the White House or Pentagon in the form of lead articles, he was perhaps outdone only by Josef Joffe, co-editor of Die Zeit .
These times are now probably over. In his recent commentaries, Kornelius comes across as an angry gambler who senses that he has backed the wrong horse. Not only will Kornelius’s articles garner him fewer cocktail receptions and awards ceremonies on the other side of the Atlantic, but they will receive less praise and recognition from the German ruling elite.
An article in the latest edition of Der Spiegel, which openly questions the alliance and calls for more independence from Washington, states: “It is no longer cool to find America cool. A few years ago, the post of American ambassador was highly coveted. Now, in personal political terms, it is damaged goods.”
With his angry change of course, Kornelius is also responding to the fact that his pro-US propaganda is meeting growing anger among the population. Over recent months, the media have been bombarded with outraged letters from readers due to their one-sided reporting of the fascist coup and civil war in Ukraine, as well as their anti-Russian propaganda.
When the ZDF comedy show “Die Anstalt” exposed the numerous connections between leading German journalists and think tanks before a broad television audience at the end of March and made the link with their pro-war propaganda, prominent journalists lost patience.
In an embarrassing Skype interview with the NDR magazine Zapp on May 14, Kornelius went on the offensive. Along with “Die Anstalt”, he attacked the dissertation of the Leipzig-based media studies academic Uwe Krüger. He had demonstrated how the relations of journalists with the pro-US and NATO milieu influenced their journalistic output. “Extreme left-wing blogs” and Wikipedia would now spread this information and attempt to “discredit” him as a journalist and “disparage” his ties, Kornelius complained.
He sought to defend his close network by claiming that all of the organisations he has contact with are “all honourable, democratic and extremely transparent organisations where foreign policy is discussed.” He was merely there as a member to conduct “research” and earn his “daily bread.” Clearly in an attempt to disprove the accusation of closeness to the US, he stressed that he is also a member of the German-Russian forum and that he travels “also to the Chinese and Indians and everywhere else.”
Kornelius is certainly no expert at formulating his thoughts precisely. In the interview, seemingly without noticing it, he completely undermined his own pretensions to being an independent journalist. He also indicated that in order to earn his “daily bread,” he may travel more in the future to Moscow, Beijing or New Delhi than to Washington or New York.
For the time being, Kornelius and other bourgeois scribblers and politicians have decided to adopt a stronger tone towards the US. His future orientation will ultimately depend on the course the German ruling elite steers as it tries to return to an aggressive and militarist foreign policy. It seems safe to say that, due to his on-the-spot “research,” Kornelius will be excellently informed as to which way the winds are blowing.
As he explained in the interview, he also has close ties to the German Society for Foreign Policy, which is close to the government, and sits on the committee of the federal academy for security policy (BAKS), the leadership of which is decided upon alternately by the defence and foreign ministries.