Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Monday, June 11, 2018

Shocked to see charge sheeted VC appointed as MP - Minister


A former vice chancellor of the South Eastern University facing a list of charges currently being investigated by the University Grants Commission, has ironically taken oaths as an MP last morning, Higher Education and Cultural Affairs Minister Dr.Wijayadasa Rajapakshe told Parliament yesterday.

“The former Vice Chancellor has had many charges levelled against him. Even the CoPE Committee had received a host of complaints that he was maintaining his home expenses, including water bills and electricity bills with university funds. I was shocked to note that this person who is facing many charges, Dr. Ismail had in fact taken oaths as an MP yesterday morning.

His charge sheet is very long and the CoPE Committee had recommended that he be investigated, which is currently being done by the University Grants Commission. But shockingly, he has taken oaths as an MP. This is not a political party issue, but this is the reality we face today,”Rajapaksha said.

Many issues had been reported at the South Eastern University and the government had taken measures to appoint a new Vice Chancellor.But he too is finding it very hard to carry on his duties due to the issues at the university.

“In fact some female students have complained to us that a lecturer named S.M. Alif is demanding sexual favours from the female students and if they don’t comply, they would not be passed. We have received many complaints about him,” the Higher Education Minister said.

Ismail appointed National List MP

Minister  Rishad Bathiudeen handing over the appointment letter to S.M.M. Ismail.
Minister Rishad Bathiudeen handing over the appointment letter to S.M.M. Ismail.

A.B.ABDULGAFOOR Ampara District Group Corr.-Monday, June 11, 2018

South Eastern University Former Vice Chancellor Dr. S.M.M.Ismail was appointed a national list MP from the United National Party (UNP). He was sworn in, in front of the Speaker Karu Jayasooriya on Friday (8).

Following the resignation of M.H.M. Navavi, All Ceylon Muslim Congress (ACMC) Dr.S.M.M.Ismail was appointed. The party signed an agreement with the UNP at the 2015 General Election pledging its support to the UNP. The ACMC was given one national list MP from the UNP list.

Minister Rizad Badiudeen promised to the Ampara people a national list MP during his election campaign. M. H.M. Navavi was appointed for the first three years. After Navavi’s resignation, Ismail was appointed.

The TNA won one, UNP 4, and UPFA 2 seats in the 2015 General Election. 

Sri Lanka has lost economic sovereignty, target of neoliberal economic hitmen: Tamara Kunanayakam

logo
 Monday, 11 June 2018 

Newly formed SLAPE to generate public discussion

Tamara Kunanayakam, formerly a UN official and Diplomat and presently, civil and human rights activist cum public voice maker, presented last week a well-researched paper on the theme ‘Dynamic Inter-relationships among Economic Policy, International Relations And National Sovereignty’ before a fully-packed audience in Colombo.

The event had jointly been organised by the newly formed Sri Lanka Association for Political Economy, abbreviated as SLAPE, Colombo University’s Economics Department and its Economics Students Association. A summary of her presentation has been published in Sunday Times (available at: http://www.sundaytimes.lk/article/1044003/lankan-think-tanks-controlled-by-us-alleges-former-lankan-ambassador).

Sunday, June 10, 2018

Women on the frontlines risk death for their rights

Palestinian women have been at the frontlines of Great March of Return protests in Gaza, as well as providing logistical support, cultural activities and risking their lives as journalists and medics.
Mahmoud AjourAPA images

Isra Saleh el-Namey- 9 June 2018
Islam Khreis has thrown quite a few stones at Israeli troops lately.
“These are historic days,” the 28-year-old Gaza resident said. “We are telling the whole world that we have never forgotten our legitimate right of return to our stolen villages and towns.”
Stone-throwing is a simple act of resistance for Palestinians. It is a symbolic way of confronting one of the most militarized nations on earth.
It has been a tactic used by some participants in the Great March of Return – protests demanding that Palestinians be allowed home to villages and towns from which Zionist forces expelled them in 1948.
Although photographs of Palestinians launching stones from slingshots tend to show young men, Khreis was among a number women who did so. In fact, she was active across the spectrum. She helped provide first aid to protesters wounded by Israeli snipers, and, as a journalism student at Al-Aqsa University in Gaza, she also conducted interviews with protesters, though, as one unaffiliated, she did so without the protection of any special markings on her clothes.
Khreis feels a sense of camaraderie with men who have ventured close to the boundary separating Gaza and present-day Israel. More than 100 unarmed demonstrators have been killed by Israel since the Great Return March began on 30 March.
“My heart breaks when I see the young men falling on the ground after being hit by the Israeli snipers’ bullets,” Khreis said. “This is the result of the unfair blockade being imposed on Gaza. If those young men had decent jobs, good education, basic services and freedom of movement, they would not have to walk towards their own deaths.”
Of course, many women and girls have also been injured during the protests.
One teenage child, Wesal al-Sheikh Khalil, was killed as she took part in demonstrations on 14 May. And in early June, the 21-year-old nurse Razan al-Najjar was shot dead as she was helping evacuate and treat the wounded.

“Clear message”

Mariam Mattar, 16, was shot in the leg during a recent protest. She was carrying a Palestinian flag at the time.
“I lost consciousness,” she told The Electronic Intifada. “When I woke up, I was in a hospital bed.”
Despite her injury, Mattar fully approves of the protests. “We want to deliver a clear message to the whole world,” she said. “The Palestinian people yearn for a day when they will be able to return to their homes. We hope it will come soon.”
Israel’s widespread use of tear gas – a chemical weapon that in Gaza was sprayed on protesters from drones – has affected many women, too.
Amani Abu Jidian has gone to recent demonstrations – usually held on Fridays – with her children.
“My two sons have insisted on going every Friday,” she said. “I know it is dangerous, so to make sure that they remain safe and not get too close, I have accompanied them as they approached the boundary. I have kept watching them.”
On 11 May, Abu Jidian was inside one of the tents erected in support of the protests when it was attacked by tear gas.
“I felt like I was suffocating,” she said.

Teaching traditions

Even though the tents do not provide any real protection, they have proven to be important gathering places.
Maryam Abu Zubayda, 63, has been making meals for protesters distributed in the tents. These have included traditional dishes like maftoul – Palestinian couscous – and sumaghiya, a beef and chickpea stew.
While visiting the tents, she has been singing national songs and embroidering, all in support of those demonstrating.
“This is a great way for me to spend time with my friends,” she told The Electronic Intifada. “And, at the same time, we are doing a good job of teaching our traditions to the younger generation in order to preserve them for the future.”
Maryam has brought her 7-year-old granddaughter Farah to a tent on some of those days. By going there, Farah has learned songs such as “Zareef al-Tool,” a lament for the towns and villages that Palestinians were forced to leave in 1948.
“I like it when I have finished my lessons and my grandmother agrees to take me with her to the tent,” said Farah. “I enjoyed my time there a lot.”
When Israel has attacked the protests, women have treated the wounded. The killings of Razan al-Najjar and, before her, Mousa Abu Hassanein have highlighted the risks medics face.
Anwar Mohammed, a 26-year-old nurse, has given first aid to protesters who have been shot.
“Our job has been so challenging over the few past weeks,” she said. “We’ve dealt with a very large number of casualties.”
Mohammed has worked from a field hospital but on occasions was asked to approach the boundary to provide emergency assistance.
“The pressure and stress we are under has been huge, particularly during the Friday protests,” she added.
The bravery she has displayed has earned her considerable respect.
“It was something new for the protesters to see female nurses at the frontlines,” she told The Electronic Intifada. “We were exposing ourselves to danger and helping to save lives. But it did not take the protesters long to get used to us. They listened to our instructions and obeyed them.”
Isra Saleh el-Namey is a journalist from Gaza.

Lionel Messi: Champion of freedom
2018-06-08
A golden boot  award for Argentina for displaying moral courage and cancelling its final warm-up match against Israel in Jerusalem ahead of June 16 World Cup in Moscow, in what could be construed as chastisement of Israel’s criminal policies in Gaza. 

“Values, morals and sport have secured a victory and a red card was raised at Israel through the cancellation of the game,” Palestinian Football Association chairman Jibril Rajoub, said on Wednesday, as peace loving people all over the world rejoiced with Palestinians in celebrating the achievement of this noble goal. 

Argentinian striker Lionel Messi and his teammates are the new champions of freedom and anti-colonialism, for they took a stand against injustice. Fellow striker Gonzalo Higuain said the cancellation of the match was the right thing to do. 

Some 39 years ago, it was Sri Lanka which attracted world headlines for taking a courageous stand and refusing to play a match against Israel during the 1979 cricket world cup for International Cricket Conference’s associate members. The tournament was crucial for Sri Lanka, for victory would ensure entry into to the world cup to compete with full members. Despite the walkover conceded to Israel, Sri Lanka won the associate members tournament and went on to beat India in a tournament shocker, in what could be interpreted as a reward for standing up for justice and morality. 
Lionel Messi: Champion of freedom

Those were the days when Sri Lanka’s foreign policy had a moral content displaying political courage to oppose colonialism or oppression in whatever form or wherever it took place.  Insisting that non-alignment should be the theme of Sri Lanka’s foreign policy, veteran diplomat Jayantha Dhanapala in a newspaper article last week lamented that he saw little evidence of it today “when I look at the newspapers and read about foreign policy statements by spokespersons especially with regard to Palestine, the Middle East and to nuclear disarmament.”

Coming back to morality: Notwithstanding regular allegations about corruption in sports, Argentina, like Sri Lanka then, has proved that sport is still made of far superior moral fibre than politics.  But sadly, the stab in the back comes for the oppressed Palestinians from the Arab world itself. While Argentina cancelled the friendly match in deference to Palestinian suffering, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates sent teams to take part in the first leg of the Giro d’Italia cycling race in Israel, in breach of the Arab boycott, in place since 1948.
Razan al-Najjar: Angel of mercy

Morality is in the core of any sport. Sport is rule-based and teaches what is right and wrong. It inculcates values and the virtue of being magnanimous in victory and resilient in defeat.  Children are introduced to sports at a tender age.  When they take part in pre-school sports meets or play a game of carom or hop-scotch with siblings at home, they learn to play the game according to the rules. No parent or teacher will teach a child how to cheat in a game. 

In contrast, politics, in general, is a continuous struggle for power at any cost. There is little or no place for morality in politics. 

While immorality is the norm in politics, however, there are exceptions. Yes, politics and sports have come together as an effective mix to fight the wrong. Sri Lanka’s decision in 1979 not to play the game against Israel was a morally correct political decision.  So was Argentina’s cancellation of its planned tour to Israel this week.
The high point of this rare blend of moral politics and sports was the 1977 Commonwealth Gleneagles agreement which called for the effective boycott of sporting contacts with South Africa which had adopted the abominable apartheid system upholding the supremacy of the white race.   Two years later, Commonwealth leaders meeting in Lusaka adopted a declaration opposing all forms of racism. 

These Commonwealth measures, propped up by non-aligned countries’ principled foreign policies in support of freedom struggles worldwide, contributed in no small measure to end institutionalised racism in South Africa and to enable freedom fighter Nelson Mandela to become the president of the country, though he, like today’s Palestinians freedom fighter, carried the oppressor-given label of terrorist. 

Like South Africa then, Zionist Israel has been a racist state since its illegal founding in 1948 following a 1947 United Nations resolution adopted at a time when more than two thirds of the world’s countries, mostly Asian and Africa nations, had not become independent or UN members.  As recently as Tuesday this week, Israel’s parliament, Knesset, disqualified a private member’s bill that called for all citizens to be treated equally, rejecting the argument the state must recognise the rights of its Arab minority – some 20 percent of the population -- as equal to the Jewish majority. Israel treats its Arab citizens as half citizens and practices discriminatory policies, a fact that has been endorsed by the 2004 and 2005 US State Department country reports and Israel’s own Or Commission report in 2000.

When the Non-Aligned bloc was powerful in world politics in the 1970s, Israel remained a pariah state, condemned for its illegal occupation of Palestinian lands and for continuing the detestable European legacy of colonising the weak, of course with the unstinted support of the United States, which has chosen to ignore morality in its foreign policy. 

But with the Non-Aligned Movement losing its clout following the 1991 demise of the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union, and with the Arab world embracing Washington, the Palestinians became international orphans, looking up, in a desperate hope for peace, to the US, the very nation which funds, arms and encourages Israel to oppress them with impunity.

If nations had adopted morality as the guiding principle of their foreign policies, the 21-year-old Palestinian medic Razan al-Najjar, the angel of mercy who had saved many lives, would not have been killed by an Israeli sniper last week. 

Most Non-Aligned countries are cozying up to the US or have conveniently taken up the position that the peace process set in motion by the 1993 Oslo deal between Israel and the Palestinians should be given a chance. Nay, under pressure from the US, they scaled down their morally correct stand against Israel.

With the peace process now virtually dead or being buried by US President Donald Trump’s Zionist-friendly policies such as shifting the US embassy to Jerusalem, the Palestinians’ only international friends are the global justice activists spread around the world. They have launched the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign, calling on peace loving people and all those who condemn injustice and oppression – people with a conscience – to penalise Israel for denying the Palestinian people their freedom. 

It is encouraging to know that many sports stars and celebrities are supporting the BDS campaign. 

If the peace loving people around the world want to do something for the Palestinians, then they must keep the BDS campaign going. It is time to show the red card to Israel; it is time that the United Nations adopted a resolution calling for the boycott of all forms of sports contacts with Israel until it ends its apartheid system and recognises the Palestinian people’s right to freedom.  
India pledges to ditch single-use plastic by 2022



INDIA’S Prime Minister Narendra Modi this week made the ambitious commitment of eliminating all single-use plastic in the country by 2022.

The country of 1.3 billion people hosted World Environment Day on Tuesday, the theme of which was ‘Beat Plastic Pollution’. The unprecedented announcement will see India move away from single use plastics, where it currently generates 5.6 million tonnes of plastic each year.

“It is the duty of each one of us, to ensure that the quest for material prosperity does not compromise our environment,” Modi said in a statement.

The government also announced its sign-on to the UN’s Clean Seas campaign, which will see the establishment of a campaign to clean up the country’s 7,500km of coastline and a program to measure plastic waste from India into the ocean.


“The choices that we make today, will define our collective future,” said Modi. “Through awareness, technology, and a genuine global partnership, I am sure we can make the right choices. Let us all join together to beat plastic pollution and make this planet a better place to live.”

Environment minister Dr Harsh Vardhan reiterated that all Indian states would ban single-use plastics by 2022 in order to “achieve the India of our dreams.”

“India is already a global leader in recycling,” wrote Vardhan in the Hindustan Times. “We’re also a leader in innovation. That’s why we’re committed to leading the world in finding solutions to this problem.”

An estimated eight million metric tonnes of plastic goes into the world’s oceans each year – equivalent to a full garbage truck every minute.

The UN estimates that the world uses 500 million plastic bags per year.

Germany was defeated on the Eastern front, not Normandy

Soviet forces lost upwards of 20 million men. Total US losses, including the Pacific, were one million. To Marshal Stalin, D-Day, the North African and Italian campaign were merely diversionary side-shows to tie down Axis forces while the Red Army pushed on to Berlin.

by Eric S. Margolis-
( June 10, 2018, Toronto, Sri Lanka Guardian) On my many walking visits to the vast Normandy battlefield in France, I kept recalling the ever so wise dictum of Prussia’s great monarch, Frederick the Great: ‘he who defends everything, defends nothing.’ On this 74th anniversary of the D-Day landings, it’s well worth recalling the old warrior-king.
Adolf Hitler, a veteran of the infantry, should certainly have known better. Defending the European coast from Brittany to Norway was an impossibility given Germany’s military and economic weakness in 1944. But he did not understand this. Having so brilliantly overcome France’s Maginot Line fortifications in 1940, Hitler and his High Command repeated the same strategic and tactical errors as the French only four years later: not having enough reserves to effectively counter-attack enemy breakthrough forces.
Germany’s vaunted Atlantic Wall looked formidable on paper, but it was too long, too thin, lacked defensive depth and was lacking in adequate reserve forces. The linear Maginot Line suffered the same failings. America’s fortifications protecting Manila and Britain’s ‘impregnable’ fortifications at Singapore also proved worthless. The Japanese merely marched into their undefended rears.
In 1940, the German Wehrmacht was modern history’s supreme fighting machine. But only four years later, the Wehrmacht was broken. Most Americans, British and Canadians believe that D-Day was the decisive stroke that ended WWII in Europe. But this is not true.
Germany’s mighty Wehrmacht, which included the Luftwaffe, was destroyed by Stalin’s Soviet Union. The Red Army claims to have destroyed 507 German divisions, 48,000 German tanks, 77,000 German aircraft, and 100 divisions of Axis troops allied to Germany from Italy, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, and Finland.
Few Americans have ever heard of the Soviet Far East offensive of 1945, a huge operation that extended from Central Asia to Manchuria and the Pacific. At least 450,000 Japanese soldiers were killed, wounded or captured by the Red Army, 32% of Japan’s total wartime military losses. The Soviets were poised to invade Japan when the US struck it with two nuclear weapons.
Of Germany’s 10 million casualties in WWII, 75% were inflicted by the Red Army. The once mighty Luftwaffe was decimated over Russia. Almost all German military production went to supplying the 1,600 km Eastern Front where Germany’s elite forces were ground up in titanic battles like Kursk and Stalingrad that involved millions of soldiers.
Soviet forces lost upwards of 20 million men. Total US losses, including the Pacific, were one million. To Marshal Stalin, D-Day, the North African and Italian campaign were merely diversionary side-shows to tie down Axis forces while the Red Army pushed on to Berlin.
D-Day was without doubt one of the greatest logistical feats of modern military history. Think of General Motors versus the German warrior Siegfried. For every US tank the Germans destroyed, ten more arrived. Each German tank was almost irreplaceable. Transporting over one million men and their heavy equipment across the Channel was a triumph. But who remembers that Germany crossed the heavily defended Rhine River into France in 1940?
By June, 1944, German forces at Normandy and along the entire Channel coast had almost no diesel fuel or gasoline. Their tanks and trucks were immobilized. Allied air power shot up everything that moved, including a staff car carrying Marshal Erwin Rommel strafed by Canada’s own gallant future aviator general, Richard Rohmer. German units in Normandy were below 40% combat effectiveness even without their shortages in fuel.
The Germans in France were also very short of ammunition, supplies and communications. Units could only move by night, and then very slowly. Hitler was reluctant to release armored forces from his reserves. Massive Allied bombing of Normandy alone killed 15,000 to 20,000 French civilians and shattered many cities and towns.
Churchill once said, ‘you will never know war until you fight Germans.’ With no air cover or fuel and heavily outnumbered, German forces in Normandy managed to mount a stout resistance, inflicting 209,000 casualties on US, Canadian, British, Free French and allied forces. German losses were around 200,000.
The most important point of the great invasion is that without it, the Red Army would have reached Paris and the Channel Ports by the end of 1944, making Stalin the master of all Europe except Spain. Of course, the Allies could have reached a peace agreement with Germany in 1944, which Hitler was seeking and Gen. George Patton was rumored to be advocating. But the German-hating Churchill and left-leaning Roosevelt were too bloody-minded to consider a peace that would have kept Stalin out of at least some of Eastern Europe.
Copyright Eric S. Margolis 2018

Trudeau 'stabbed us in back' on trade, says Trump chief economic adviser


Justin Trudeau's G7 comments that angered Donald Trump – video

 @oliverlaughland-
Donald’s Trump’s chief economic adviser said the US pulled out of a G7 communique because the Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau, “stabbed us in the back” and accused the leader of one America’s most important allies of playing a “sophomoric political stunt for domestic consumption”.

In an extraordinary interview with CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday, Larry Kudlow, who was present for negotiations at the G7 summit in Quebec over the weekend, said Trudeau had instigated “a betrayal” and was “essentially double-crossing President Trump”.

Trudeau used a media conference on Saturday to reject a US demand for a sunset clause in the North American trade agreement, Nafta, that Trump has at different times pressed to abolish or renegotiate. The prime minister also said Canada would “move forward with retaliatory measures” in response to the Trump administration’s move to impose tariffs on aluminium and steel imports from the European Union, Mexico and Canada.

The move enraged Trump, who branded his Canadian counterpart “dishonest and weak” in a furious tweet, announcing the US would pull out of an agreed communique.

The G7 communique said the leaders of seven of the most powerful countries in the world agreed on the need for “free, fair, and mutually beneficial trade” and the importance of fighting protectionism.
Kudlow added that Trump had made the decision to pull out of the agreement in an attempt to save face ahead of his historic summit with North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, in Singapore.

“Potus [the president of the United States] is not going to let a Canadian prime minister push him around – push him, Potus around, on the eve of this,” Kudlow said. “He is not going to permit any show of weakness on the trip to negotiate with North Korea. Nor should he.”


There’s a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy with President Donald J Trump
Peter Navarro

The onslaught continued as Trump’s trade adviser Peter Navarro appeared on Fox News Sunday and said Trudeau deserved “a special place in hell”.

“There’s a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy with President Donald J Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out the door and that’s what Bad Faith Justin Trudeau did with that stunt press conference,” Navarro said, adding that his comments had come “right from Air Force One”.

Kudlow, a staunch conservative who regularly pounded his fists on the desk throughout his interview on CNN, argued that Trudeau’s comments were “a great disservice to the whole G7”.

A representative of Trudeau did not respond to a request for comment but Canadian foreign minister Chrystia Freeland told reporters in Quebec City: “Canada does not conduct its diplomacy through ad hominem attacks … and we refrain particularly from ad hominem attacks when it comes from a close ally.”

Leaders of other G7 member states hit back at the Trump administration’s decision to pull out of the joint statement. The office of the French president, Emmanuel Macron, issued a statement saying cooperation on the international stage “cannot be dictated by fits of anger and throwaway remarks”.

The statement continued: “We spend two days working out a [joint] statement and commitments. We are sticking to them and whoever reneges on them is showing incoherence and inconsistency.”

A photo released on Twitter by the German government spokesman, Steffen Seibert. Photograph: Jesco Denzel/AFP/Getty Images

The office of the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, published a suggestive photograph showing Trump surrounded by other leaders. German foreign minister Heiko Maas wrote on Twitter: “You can destroy an incredible amount of trust very quickly in a tweet. That makes it all the more important that Europe stands together and defends its interests even more offensively.”

Merkel later told ARD television: “The withdrawal, so to speak, via tweet is of course ... sobering and a bit depressing.”

Donald Tusk, president of the European council, sent a tweet in rebuke of Navarro’s comment. There was “a special place in heaven”, Tusk said, for Trudeau, whom the former Polish prime minister thanked for the “perfect organization” of the summit.
The Trump administration’s move also received domestic criticism, from both moderate Republicans and Democrats.

In a statement published on Twitter the Republican Arizona senator John McCain said: “To our allies: bipartisan majorities of Americans remain pro-free trade, pro-globalization & supportive of alliances based on 70 years of shared values. Americans stand with you, even if our president doesn’t.”

Dianne Feinstein, the senior Democratic senator from California, told CNN that “to walk away from our allies in this way” was “a mistake”.

“[The] rules-based international order is being challenged,” she said.
  • Additional reporting by Ashifa Kassam in Toronto
President Trump speaks during a visit to San Diego to review border wall prototypes. Evan Vucci
 It was an image that, in its Rockwellian presentation and characters, seemed to capture an emerging era. 

European leaders stood arrayed on one side of a narrow conference room table, leaning in. On the other side: President Trump, seated alone, his arms folded. 

The photo, released Saturday on German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Instagram account and later tweeted by Trump national security adviser John Bolton, fast became a Rorschach test for an increasingly troubled relationship. 

Trump was clearly isolated. But was he making an overdue stand against an expiring global order? Or was he just the odd man out in the world’s most powerful club? 

The enchantingly unreadable facial expressions make it impossible to know.

On the day after the Group of Seven summit blew up in spectacular fashion, with Trump using idle time on an airport runway to insult his host and repudiate an agreement he had made with allied leaders only hours earlier, emotions were far easier to divine.

President Trump removed the U.S. from a joint G-7 agreement on June 9, and blamed Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for "false statements." 
Allies were indignant. They were defiant. Yet they were hardly shocked by the outcome of a critical global gathering that had gone worse than any that longtime foreign policy players had seen. 

“It was not a surprise,” said Norbert Röttgen, chair of the foreign affairs committee in Germany’s parliament, the Bundestag. “The president acted and reacted in the childish way he could be expected to.”

To the United States’ closest partners, the pattern has become disturbingly familiar. Trump’s abandonment of the Paris climate accord and the Iran nuclear agreement and his decision to impose protectionist tariffs on European steel and aluminum products have established a level of animosity between the United States and Europe that, by many measures, surpasses even the rift over the Iraq War.

The depth of exasperation showed in a Sunday afternoon statement from French President Emmanuel Macron’s office. 

“International cooperation cannot be dictated by fits of anger and throwaway remarks,” the statement said. “Let's be serious and worthy of our people.”

After President Trump withdrew from the G-7 joint statement, his advisers blamed Canada's Justin Trudeau while lawmakers and Democrats criticized Trump. 
Merkel told an ARD television interviewer, “The withdrawal, so to speak, via tweet is of course . . . sobering and a bit depressing.”

For many in Europe, the question is how best to preserve any kind of multilateral cooperation. Dealing with Trump’s whims and last-minute changes of mind has proven a strategic nightmare. 
“How is it possible to work this way if once you have agreed to something, two hours later the guy decides he doesn’t agree with what he agreed with?” said François Heisbourg, a former French presidential national security adviser. “Is there any space for a multilateral order under these circumstances?”

Trump’s choice to abandon the G-7 communique was announced in a pair of tweets as he prepared to lift off early from the two-day summit in Quebec City. The decision — which came with an attack on Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for being “weak and dishonest” — directly contradicted an announcement by Trudeau minutes earlier in which he declared that all seven member-states had signed the joint statement.

In that announcement, Trudeau had said the summit was “very successful,” but he also said Canada would retaliate against metals tariffs that had been aimed at allies.

Following Trump’s tweets, Trudeau’s office issued a statement saying he “said nothing he hasn’t said before — both in public, and in private conversations with the President.”

The dispute was joined on Sunday by Larry Kudlow, Trump’s chief economic adviser, who accused Trudeau of “betrayal” in advance of the president’s summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and said that Trudeau had “stabbed us in the back.” 

How to handle Trump has become one of the most pressing issues confronting U.S. allies. 

Röttgen, the Bundestag's foreign affairs committee chairman, said they have learned to anticipate his outbursts and U-turns, and should respond to them accordingly. He criticized Merkel’s team for releasing the much-discussed photo.

“By portraying him as the naughty boy in the room, he will stick even more to his behavior and it will get worse,” said Röttgen, who is a member of Merkel’s center-right Christian Democratic Union. “We have to ignore his behavior and concentrate on what is left of the substance of the transatlantic relationship.”

Just how much is left is a matter of debate. Bolton, Trump’s national security adviser, wrote in his tweet of the photo that it was “Just another #G7 where other countries expect America will always be their bank. The President made it clear today. No more.”

Others used the image to mock Trump: “Just tell us what Vladimir has on you,” European Parliament member Guy Verhofstadt imagined Merkel saying. “Maybe we can help.” 

The relationship between the United States and its allies could be frayed even further if the trade war escalates — a scenario that Röttgen said he expects, with the United States in his view likely to move against German carmakers.

But Röttgen derived at least some hope from Trump’s proposal for entirely tariff-free trade among allies. Although Trump coupled the idea with a threat, and most experts see the notion as far-fetched, Röttgen said it is at least a basis for discussion.

Of all European countries, Germany has the most to lose from a trade war with the United States. The United States had a $151 billion trade deficit in goods with the European Union last year. Germany alone, with its high-end automobile and appliance exports, accounted for $64 billion of that.

Trump has repeatedly complained on Twitter about German automobiles flooding the U.S. market and has asked his administration to examine possible tariffs as a way to curb their popularity among American consumers, a point he reiterated on Twitter on Saturday.

But amid the animosity, there were signs among otherwise frustrated allied leaders that they see Trump and his “America First” agenda as an aberration and not necessarily as expressive of a new reality.

Macron emphasized his belief that Trump’s vision of America was at odds with American values.
“President Trump saw that he had a united front before him,” Macron saidvia Twitter. “To find itself isolated in a concert of nations is contrary to American history.”

Other European leaders, meanwhile, continued their attempts to try to tamp down transatlantic disagreements. Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May preferred tact to confrontation, even after Trump allies allegedly told the Telegraph newspaper that the U.S. president had grown weary of May’s “schoolmistress tone.”

Asked Saturday evening by the medial whether she “liked working with him,” May responded, “We have a very good relationship with President Trump.” 

May did, however, say that she and Trump had “a very frank discussion” about trade. May is not only hoping that Trump lift new tariffs on European aluminum and steel, but that he will promise a favorable pro-Brexit trade deal with the United Kingdom after it leaves the European bloc.

There were also a few palpable cracks in what Macron had called a European “united front,” 
especially on the subject of Russia. Trump had called for Russia to be readmitted into the G-7 group, much to the dismay of leaders of Germany, Britain and France. 

Not so with Italy. Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, who arrived in Quebec less than a week after the swearing-in ceremony for his new populist government, took Trump’s side. 

He said on Twitter that Russia’s return to the group was “in the interests of everybody.” He softened his stance in other remarks, telling reporters that Italy is not seeking sanctions to be removed “overnight.” 

With virtually no political profile before arriving in Quebec, Conte is a little-known academic chosen as a compromise representative of two insurgent parties now governing Italy. But he seemed to make an impression on Trump, who wrote on Twitter that Conte would soon visit the White House. “He will do a great job — the people of Italy got it right!” Trump wrote.

Political analysts in Rome were skeptical of Conte cozying up too much to Trump. 

“Conte went too far ahead with Trump,” said Roberto D’Alimonte, a political-science professor at LUISS Guido Carli, a university in Rome. “And then he backtracked a little and realized he was out of step with our natural partners.”

In a front-page analysis story Sunday, one of Italy’s major dailies, the center-left La Repubblica, said of Conte that “every move made by the premier has been conceived so as to break the European front and attempt to build an anti-EU axis with Trump.” 

But if that was the goal, there was clear defiance in the European response.

Peter Altmaier, the German economy minister and one of Merkel’s closest allies, tweeted Sunday that “The West doesn’t break so easily.”

“We are all The West, if we live and defend its values,” he wrote. “Especially, when it’s difficult.”
In much of the European media, the tendency was to underscore the historical significance of the rift between the United States and its continental allies.

For Le Monde, a leading French daily newspaper, Trump’s approach seemed a deliberate attack on the postwar consensus. “Donald Trump is the same age as the world order put in place by the United States at the end of the Second World War, but one would swear he decided that the latter will not survive him,” the newspaper wrote.

Der Spiegel, the German weekly, called Trump’s performance in Quebec “a scandal without precedent” and said that Merkel and other U.S. allies must be prepared for anything — especially on trade, a topic dear to German hearts.

McAuley reported from Paris. Chico Harlan and Stefano Pitrelli in Rome, William Booth in London, and Luisa Beck in Berlin contributed to this report.

‘Pay-to-Play’ the only game in the Trump Presidency!

WELCOME TO UNBELIEVABLE CORRUPTION . . .


article_image
by Selvam Canagaratna- 

"They say the gods themselves / Are moved by gifts. And gold does more with men than words."

– Euripides, Medea (431 B.C.)

Nobody can accuse the leading members of Donald Trumpʼs Administration of not faithfully following the bossʼ lead when it comes to engaging openly in the game of ʻPay-to-Playʼ.

Take, for instance, Republican politician John Michael Mulvaney.

In November 2017, Trump appointed him to serve as Acting Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) – but under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, which allows the President to appoint an interim replacement without Senate confirmation! It so happened that Mulvaney’s appointment was contested by the Bureau’s then Deputy Director, Leandra English, but a federal judge ruled in Mulvaney’s favour, thus allowing him to simultaneously be Acting Director of both the CFPB as well as the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

David A. Graham, writing in The Atlantic on April 25 this year, was cryptic in his intro: ‟The problem isn’t that Mick Mulvaney wasn’t being honest. It’s that he was a little too honest."

Explained Graham: ‟Speaking to the American Bankers Association at a conference in Washington on April 24th, Mulvaney had this unambiguous advice for those gathered: If you want to play, you better pay."

One has to hand it to Mulvaney for, er… well, I guess, his forthrightness. He confided to members of the American Bankers Association: ‟We had a hierarchy in my office in Congress," (according to The New York Times). "If you’re a lobbyist who never gave us money, I didn’t talk to you. If you’re a lobbyist who gave us money, I might talk to you." He then added, "However, If you came from back home and sat in my lobby, I talked to you without exception, regardless of the financial contributions."

Mulvaney’s spokesperson promptly sprang to his defence, saying his boss was making the point that constituents contacting their representatives was "more important than lobbyists and it’s more important than money." But, noted Graham, Mulvaney was making that point to a large conference of bankers, whom the CFPB ostensibly regulates, and thus advising them on how best to persuade his former colleagues on Capitol Hill to sharply curtail the powers of the agency he leads.

In effect, explained Graham, Mulvaney was simply mapping out two paths for purchasing influence: donating directly to legislators, and investing in a grassroots campaign to undermine the CFPB. Persuading Congress to act, he said, is among the "fundamental underpinnings of our representative democracy. And you have to continue to do it."

Added Graham by way of explanation: ‟That’s a message that has one resonance when delivered to a town-hall meeting, and a rather different meaning when offered to a room full of corporate leaders and lobbyists.

‟It’s not exactly news that money makes Washington move," concluded Graham‚ "but in the past, members of the political establishment have at least tried to pretend that isn’t true. The surprise is that Mulvaney was willing to say so out loud, with reporters present!"

But when it comes to self-incrimination, no politician has come anywhere near Donald J. Trump. Consider this:

Sarah K. Burris, writing on the Raw Story website on May 13th, noted: "Nested in Christopher Steele’s dossier on President Donald Trump are two pieces of research that could spell the end of his presidency, whether Republicans want it or not.

"Before taking off for a Mother’s Day of golfing, Trump tweeted out that he’s working with the Chinese President to bring back a phone company accused of spying on hundreds of millions of users. His tweet read:

"President Xi of China, and I, are working together to give massive Chinese phone company, ZTE, a way to get back into business, fast. Too many jobs in China lost. Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!"

Little doubt that Trump’s needless – and utterly foolish – boastfull tweet has already caught the attention of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team of investigators.

Sarah Burris also told readers that young investigative journalist Scott Stedman had posted two screen captures from the Steele dossier that outline ways in which Trump’s tweet could be indicative of a bribery scheme: "TRUMP’s business dealings in China and other emerging markets . . . were substantial and involved the payment of large bribes and kickbacks which, were they to become public, would be potentially very damaging to their campaign," the excerpt said.

MSNBC commentator Malcolm Nance explained that this could be an example of bribery, which is listed among the "high crimes against the Constitution."

Section 4 of Article Two of the United States Constitution outlines that the "President‚ Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

But, as Sarah Burris explained, these types of dealings are, in fact, ʻbusiness as usualʼ for Trump, who once wanted to legalize bribery! On occasion, Trump has denounced the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), which was passed after the Watergate scandal to make it illegal for any American to bribe a foreign official.

"What are we prosecuting people to keep China honest?" Trump asked during a May 2012 phone-in to CNBC. "Now every other country goes into these places and they do what they have to do. It’s a horrible law, and it should be changed. I mean, we’re like the policemen for the world, and it’s ridiculous."

Far less prominent – until quite recently at least, but also far more successful – than Mick Mulvaney in the Trump Administrationʼs Ê»Pay-to-Playʼ drive has been Donaldʼs own long-time Ê»fixerʼ-cum-personal attorney, Michael Cohen.

Federal prosecutors in New York are now investigating Cohen, and that probe appears largely focused on Cohen’s Ê»robust’ efforts after Trump’s election to pitch his supposedly Ê»close relationshipʼ with the President to individuals and companies seeking Ê»assistanceʼ from the new administration.

Michael Avenatti, a lawyer for porn star Stormy Daniels (who reportedly had a sexual encounter with Trump way back in 2006) revealed several substantial payments received by Cohen, which were detailed in SFAs – or Ê»Suspicious Financial Activityʼ reports – compiled by a bank Cohen used. AT&T, Swiss pharmaceutical giant Novartis, and Columbus Nova, the US investment manager for Viktor Vekselberg, a Russian oligarch recently sanctioned by the US Treasury Department, have all confirmed making substantial payments to a Cohen firm called Essential Consultants LLC. After news of these payments surfaced, several companies claimed that Cohen failed to deliver the assistance they sought.

Beth A. Rosenson, Professor of Political Science at the University of Florida, who has researched and written about conflicts of interest for 20 years, observed: "From my perspective, Trumpʼs conflicts of interest are unprecedented in scope."

Among the Trump Organizationʼs holdings are 16 hotels, 17 golf courses, a modeling agency, a production agency and at least 25 residential real estate properties (17 domestically, 8 overseas). His over 500 companies have dealings in 25 countries including India, Panama, Scotland and the Philippines.

"Thatʼs not all: Trump leases his DC hotel from the federal government and appoints the head of the agency that monitors his lease! Trump also owes millions in loans, including over US $300 million in loans to Deutsche Bank, which is under investigation by the federal government. He also owes money to at least seven other banks for his heavily mortgaged properties; and one of his real estate partnerships has a loan from the state-owned Bank of China."

Conflicts galore!