Tag Archives: kerry

Benjamin Fulford: Will the revolution finally come this autumn? [full report]

There are growing signs that world events will be allowed to simmer away until this autumn when there may finally be revolution in the West and an end to cabal rule. In fact, it is the moral duty of all aware people to make sure this happens and the West is freed from Babylonian style debt slavery.

The most likely trigger for the revolution is now expected to be Greece. The latest news on that front is that Greece will “bundle” June payments to the IMF. What this means, according to British MI5 intelligence, is that “if Greece bundles it’s June payments, it defaults to the IMF in early July, this will be reported by the IMF Managing Director after 30 more days followed by some 3-4 weeks of procedural talks inside the IMF.” In other words the crunch will come in September.

The fact is the Western banking system, notably the mega-banks, are already bankrupt. They are bankrupt based on the simple fact that, as a whole, Western countries have been importing from the rest of the world, mainly Asia, for the past 30 years using their credit card and the card has maxed out. The Western banks have been pretending this is not the case by creating hundreds of trillions of dollars’ worth of derivatives. These derivatives have very tenuous links to real world things such as Greek people’s income so, something like a Greek default would be enough to send the system into terminal tailspin.

The recent statements from Greek government officials make it very clear they will no longer squeeze Greek citizens to help cabal banks. Here is what the Greek speaker of the House Zoe Konstantopoulou had to say about the debt:

“There is strong evidence on the illegitimacy, odiousness and unsustainability of a large part of what is purported to be the Greek public debt.”

http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-mason-blog/greeces-syriza-party-sticking-script-imf-deal/3717

Getting the Greek government to abandon the EU, join the BRICS bank and accept money from Russia might be the strategy that ends cabal control in Europe. The Greeks have a historical chance to restore Democracy, their invention, to the West. We should find out this autumn.

High level Indonesian government sources meanwhile, contacted the White Dragon Society to inform them that the main gold depository in Indonesia was located inside a military base less than a kilometer from the US embassy in Jakarta. The exact amount of gold was not disclosed but the sources said it was “more than 100,000 tons.” They say the gold bunkers will be opened in

September, thus providing independent verification that some sort of financial “event,” is scheduled for this autumn. However, the Indonesian sources, while claiming to have personally seen the gold, were still not able to provide a verifiable recent photograph. They promised to provide one soon. They said the gold deposits can be identified by governments using satellites.

The Indonesians also said recently elected President Joko Widodo was not doing what he promised and so he would be removed by the end of this year. The Americans, Russians and Chinese have been fighting a proxy war for control of Indonesia and its gold, the sources say. They say officials from the US State Department and some Indonesian generals met recently in the Province of North Sulawesi where there is a significant Christian minority. The State Department officials were asking the generals if starting riots between Christians and Muslims there would be enough to enable the establishment of a military government favorable to the Khazarian cabal. So, unless they are stopped, cabalists with jumbo planes full of fake US dollars will be landing in Indonesia to hire rioters and crisis actors. Indonesia would thus join the Ukraine, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Libya, Syria etc. as yet another cabal created trouble spot.

The Russians, for their part, provided the WDS with a load of detailed financial data on what they say is the cabal’s main instrument of control: the Vanguard Corporation. The Russian documents show that Vanguard is owned by the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, the Bushes, the Clintons, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and other senior Khazarian mobsters. Vanguard in turn controls most major US corporations, especially the nasty ones like Monsanto and Greystone (formerly Blackwater, Academi, Xe etc.)

A joint Russian, German and French intelligence investigation of Vanguard was triggered by the arrest earlier this year in Germany of an assistant to US Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland. The arrested individual was caught trying to transport billions of dollars in high quality counterfeit currency to the Ukraine. He has been cooperating fully with the European task force. He told the investigators that Nuland, Senator John McCain, US Secretary of State John Kerry, CIA Director John Brennan and others were employees of Vanguard. According to the Russians, he testified that Vanguard has “printed billions of high quality fake dollars and paid them to mercenaries in Syria, Iraq, Ukraine, Libya etc.” In addition ISIS was a Vanguard subsidiary, according to this source.

Initial reviews of the Russian information by British MI5 intelligence say “the financials are credible.”

The British say Vanguard subsidiary Monsanto’s efforts to control world food production and availability were part of “Vanguard’s strategy for geo-engineering the world population.”
The Russians also state that a company called Gilead Sciences together with the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer (an offshoot of the Nazi IG Farben Corporation) and the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation were all involved in the spreading of Ebola as well as in the marketing of Ebola cures.

In any case, the publication of Vanguard secrets has caused their top investors to try to disconnect themselves from nasty subsidiaries like ISIS. The result is that ISIS now has cash problems and has had to resort to charging North African villagers $3000 per head to be shipped to Italy, according to MI5.

A portion of the Russian report has been pasted to the end of this week’s newsletter. Hopefully this will trigger some serious law enforcement activity against this corporate monstrosity.

In any case, there are other signs the cabal is in trouble. One big event was the resignation of former UK prime minister Tony Blair as special “Middle East Peace Envoy.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tony-blair/11633511/Tony-Blair-resigns-as-Middle-East-peace-envoy.html
What this means is that he has been stripped of diplomatic immunity and can now face war crimes charges for his involvement in the destruction of Iraq. Blair is a known squealer and you can be sure he is singing like a canary about the Bushes and other Khazarian Nazis. Let us hope the British finally get the gumption do the decent thing and take down this mass murderer and his fellow traitors.

The other interesting incident was the fact the US Secretary of State John Kerry “broke his leg in a bicycle accident,” and had to call off his negotiations with Iran. We have not been able to confirm this yet but, past experience makes us believe Kerry was deliberately assaulted by fellow gangsters who were angry about his Iranian deal making.

Asian sources say the nuclear negotiations with Iran had nothing to do with Iran acquiring nuclear weapons because Iran has had nuclear weapons since the time of the Shah. A cousin of the Shah of Iran has also confirmed this. What the so-called Iranian nuclear negotiations are really about is an attempt to get the Iranian nuclear program to stop using Russian supplied Uranium and switch to Western controlled Thorium, the Asian sources say. The Iranians are probably going to end up using both.

In any case, patriots in the US military need remove gangsters like Kerry from power, restore the US republic and end corporate cabal rule ASAP. If not, the United States will continue its descent into third world status. Data on real inflation rates in the US put out by Chapwood Investments show that US economy has shrunk by 21.4% since 2011.

http://www.chapwoodindex.com/

Recent drops in world trade volume also make it clear the current Western dominated financial system is becoming increasingly dysfunctional. The US military needs to march on Washington DC and New York to clean out the Khazarian cabalist nests. Canadian troops are ready to help if asked. It is time for a second American revolution.

Appendix:
Russian research on the Vanguard corporation, the secret controller of the much of the Western corporate power structure.

The four companies that are present in all cases below and in all decisions: Vanguard, Fidelity, BlackRock and State Street. All of them “belong together”, but if to check out carefully the balance of shares, it turns out that in reality all these companies controlled by Vanguard. So, all of these partners or “competitors” of Fidelity, BlackRock and State Street belong to Vanguard Group.

Please, look at the largest, companies in various industries, controlled by the “Big Four”, and upon closer inspection control by Corporation Vanguard: Alcoa Inc. Altria Group Inc., American International Group Inc., AT & T Inc., Boeing Co., Caterpillar Inc., Coca-Cola Co., DuPont & Co., Exxon Mobil Corp., General Electric Co., General Motors Corporation, Hewlett- Packard Co., Home Depot Inc., Honeywell International Inc., Intel Corp., International Business Machines Corp., Johnson & Johnson, JP Morgan Chase & Co., McDonald’s Corp., Merck & Co. Inc., Microsoft Corp., 3M Co., Pfizer Inc., Procter & Gamble Co., United Technologies Corp., Verizon Communications Inc., Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Time Warner, Walt Disney, the corporation «Halliburton», Viacom, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, CBS Corporation, NBC Universal …
To date, tens of trillions of dollars are controlled by these investors, and all of the major global corporations controlled by the group of investors that own asset management group Vanguard: Dick Cheney, the Rothschilds, the Bushes, the Rockefellers, Clintons, Donald Rumsfeld and many other influential people and owners of the Federal Reserve. They virtually monopolized foreign and US defense policy and almost all of the major defense corporations.

Group Vanguard, itself, also controls the major world media. In addition, Corporation Vanguard is working on a number of key figures of the Central Intelligence Agency, including the namesake of a President of Vanguard , the CIA Director John Brennan.
It is important to know who really controls the major banks, and we will start from the United States.

In the first place -JP Morgan Chase with 2.39 trillion dollars of assets. Its large institutional investor is Vanguard Group, Inc. Between the top ten investors the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund, Vanguard Institutional Index Fund and the Vanguard 500 Index Fund.

In second place – Bank of America with assets 2.17 trillion. Its large institutional investor is Vanguard Group, Inc. The top ten investors – investment funds – Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund, Vanguard Institutional Index Fund, Vanguard 500 Index Fund and Vanguard / Windsor II.

The third place — Citigroup with assets 1,88 trillion. The biggest investor —Vanguard Group, Inc. First ten: Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund, Vanguard Institutional Index Fund, Vanguard 500 Index Fund, Vanguard/Windsor II, Vanguard/Wellington Fund, Inc. и Fidelity Contra Fund, Inc. We should consider that some of them, for example, «Fidelity» – this is also Vanguard, and some others, for example, «JPMorgan», is fully controlled by Vanguard, as well. «Fidelity» and its structures belong to Vanguard…

And finally, Warren Buffett’s favorite–Wells Fargo. Assets: 1.44 trillion, deposits: 1.01 trillion. The list of the largest institutional investors: Vanguard Group, Inc. is only in second place, but this is offset by the top ten investors – investment funds: Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund, Fidelity Contra Fund, Inc., Vanguard Institutional Index Fund, Vanguard 500 Index Fund and Vanguard / Wellington Fund, Inc. (All of them are Vanguard’s “daughters”)

That’s what the picture of the investigation loomed today. The largest companies in the world- are banks Bank of America, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley. Let’s see who their major shareholders. Bank of America, State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, FMR (Fidelity), Paulson, JP Morgan, T. Rowe, Capital World Investors, AXA, Bank of NY, Mellon.

JP Morgan: State Street Corp., Vanguard Group, FMR (it is Fidelity), BlackRock, T. Rowe, AXA, Capital World Investor, Capital Research Global Investor, Northern Trust Corp. and Bank of Mellon.

Citigroup: State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, Paulson, FMR, Capital World Investor, JP Morgan, Northern Trust Corporation, Fairhome Capital Mgmt and Bank of NY Mellon.

Wells Fargo: Berkshire Hathaway, FMR, State Street, Vanguard Group, Capital World Investors, BlackRock, Wellington Mgmt, AXA, T. Rowe and Davis Selected Advisers

Check yourself again: As I mentioned above, the leading financial company is fully controlled by ten institutional and/or stock shareholders of which are the nucleus of the four companies that are present in all cases and in all decisions: Vanguard, Fidelity, BlackRock and State Street.

All of them “belong together”, but if to check out carefully the balance of shares, it turns out that in reality all these companies controlled by Vanguard. So, all of these partners or “competitors” Fidelity, BlackRock and State Street belong to Vanguard Group..
Monsanto

The corporation «Monsanto» hated by millions of people around the world, and especially in the US, but its owners did not care about it for a simple reason: no one thought about its real hosts. August 26, 2014. As the owners of «Monsanto» public perceives individuals: William U. Parfet, owning, 284,642 shares of the company, Hugh Grant – 253715, Robert T. Fraley- 95212, Brett D. Begemann – 103523 and David F. Snively to 62072 shares. Impressively, all of them – are very rich and influential people. Total all individuals – the owners of the corporation «Monsanto» have 799,164 shares.

However, the first in the list of institutional shareholders is (who would you think ?) Vanguard Group, Inc. from 31201773 shares, that is 39 or more times greater than the leading “owners” of the company in total.

Let’s see another list of shareholders «Monsanto» – mutual funds: Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund – 8118741 action, Vanguard / Primecap Fund – 6663460, Vanguard Institutional Index Fund – 5226511 and Vanguard 500 Index Fund – 517 086.
At this point, there are not any of the new players, but one new company involved: Fidelity Grows Company Fund with 4072871 shares. The trick is that the mutual fund Fidelity Investment Services working closely with Vanguard Group.

Go down to the list: Vanguard Specialized-Dividend Appreciation Index Fund – More shares 3641513. Do your eyes dazzle by Vanguard? But there is no questions for regulatory agencies: the shares are distributed among the different funds, and all of them are different legal entities!

As a leading figure of «Monsanto» known by the public is Mr. Hugh Grant with the aforementioned 253,715 shares of the corporation. He served as a President, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Grant does not explain to any nobody, in whose hands are the reins of Monsanto’s power in reality!
Google
Google!?! You search, and you guess that Google owns by a Russian Jew, Mr. Sergey Brin.
First, find a list of the owners. There are Eric E. Schmidt -1240463 shares, John L. Doerr -2767 shares, Sergey Brin -75000 shares, David C. Drummond -21332 stocks and shares Paul S. Otellini -643. Tough Guys.

Go down below to the most important institutional investors, and in the first place is State Street Corporation with 22757690 shares, constituting 6.73% of the company as much as Google. So who is the real owner ?!

In second place with a certain abbreviation is FMRLLC with its 20368861 shares and 6.02%. Nothing mysterious. This is Fidelity Management and Research.
The third –Vanguard Group, Inc. with 14624137 shares and 4.32%. At this stage of counting the total share of Vanguard and Fidelity is already 10.34%. Big Boys.

Important!
However, we go further: among the most important investment funds of the investors of Google: first is Fidelity Contra fund Inc. with 6925967 shares or 2.05%, on the fourth –Fidelity Growth Company Fund (1,809,678, 0.54%) and on the sixth -Vanguard / Primecap Fund (1,417,843, 0.42%).

Total aggregate Vanguard and Fidelity Corporations shares of Google on August 28, 2014 is 45,146,486 (forty-five million one hundred forty-six thousand four hundred eighty-six shares), while the whole world “knows” that Mr. Sergey Brin owns the Google. Mr. Brin has seventy five thousand shares. I informed you already that Vanguard owns the Fidelity
In contrast to the Vanguard and Fidelity, holding voting shares, Brin interests in income rather than in control, so all of his shares belong to the category B that filed under section 14 (A) of the Act of 1934 “On Securities Exchanges ” declaration signed by Eric Schmidt. The number of category A shares that owned by Sergey Brin is 0.

However, Brin as a Director, who voting by proxy uses not his shares, but information about the owners of these shares I did not find, and it is possible that among owners of these shares would be the same Vanguard.

Microsoft

Please, see who controls Microsoft. To do this again we will use “boring” German data, this time on

https://de.finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=MSFT
List of Direct owners—individuals as of on August 28, 2014: Steven A. Ballmerc 333,254,734 shares, William H. Gates III -c 297992934, Mason G. Morfit -827 shares, Brian Kevin Turner -1295454, and Steven J. Sinofsky to 1176195 shares.

List of major institutional investors opens Vanguard Group, Inc. to 386749214 shares, and in fourth place here FMR (Fidelity!), LLC to 272942627. In the first place on the list of the most important foundations Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund with 115,585,047 shares, and below there are Vanguard Institutional Index Fund-Institutional Index Fund -75214603 and Vanguard 500 Indexm Fund -74414992.

AT&T

Now, we will take a quick look at the AT&T. The top ten institutional investors it looks like: The Vanguard Group, Inc., State Street Corporation, Evercore Trust Company, NA, BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, NA, Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, BlackRock Fund Advisors, Northern Trust Corporation, Dimensional Fund Advisors LP, Capital Research Global Investors and BlackRock Group Limited. Only the owners of Evercore Trust Company are not recognized, but the other nine are Vanguard.

The Top Ten institutional investors – investment funds
The top ten institutional investors – investment funds: Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund, Vanguard 500 Index Fund, SPDR S & P 500 ETF Trust, Vanguard Institutional Index Fund-Institutional Index Fund, Capital Income Builder, Inc., Franklin Custodian Funds-Income Fund, Spartan 500 Index Fund, Shares Core S & P 500 ETF, DFA US Large Cap Value Series and Vanguard Index-Value Index Fund. From this list it is not clear to me who owns the Shares Core S & P 500 ETF and the DFA US Large Cap Value Series. Other eight out of ten are Vanguard.

https://de.finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=T%2C+&ql=1

Comcast
Please ask me about Comcast and its purchase of 100% shares of Time Warner Cable, of a “daughter” of its alleged largest competitor, media conglomerate AT&T Cable. This “daughter”, Time Warner Cable controls 60% of both the Internet and cable television in the United States.

96.69% stake in Comcast is in the hands of institutional investors. Here are the first five: STRS Ohio – 150,105,674, Capital World Investors – 134,729,551, Vanguard Group, Inc. – 125 644 169, State Street Corp. – 104 763 362, and FMR LLC -73 866 510.

http://www.nasdaq.com/de/symbol/cmcsa/ownership-summary

I show to you above, but not many of other Americans know that State Street and Fidelity (FMR) are Vanguard, too.

Facts on Ebola

Gilead Sciences,
I do not remember if the FBI agents requested me to investigate transmitted contactless Virus Ebola, which was developed in CIA’s secret laboratory in Guinea by specialists of the American biotechnology company «Gilead Sciences», after which the epidemic was spread covering several countries.

The Headquarter of «Gilead Sciences» is located in Foster City, California. If the FBI agents requested me to investigate Ebola, I inform you below about the real owners of the «Gilead Sciences»! If the FBI did not request me to investigate Ebola, please, delete the information below.

The nominal owners—individuals: Dr. John C. Martin (President, Chief Executive Officer), Norbert W. Bischofberger, John F. Milligan, Etienne Davignon and James M. Denny.

The real control of major institutional shareholders of «Gilead Sciences» belongs to Vanguard Group, Inc. Other major shareholders of mutual investments: Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund; Vanguard Institutional Index Fund, and Vanguard 500 Index Fund.

source:

http://benjaminfulford.net/

share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneDigg thisShare on Google+Share on LinkedInShare on StumbleUponPin on PinterestFlattr the authorShare on TumblrShare on RedditBuffer this page

SOTT EXCLUSIVE: Must-read statement by Russian FM Sergey Lavrov

Behind this friendly exterior lies a Fawkesian force to be reckoned with!

On the heels of the publication of President Putin’s lengthy interview with ITAR-TASS (which rivals the 14-year-old First Person interviews in terms of their scope and candidness), the Russian Foreign Ministry has published an important speech given by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the XXII Assembly of the Council on Foreign and Defence Policy, given last week.(Don’t miss his TASS interview, either, given back in September.)

For those who have actually read his words or seen him speak, you’ll know Lavrov is an intelligent man. He’s also an expert diplomat — always polite, always professional, always keeps his cool. So you can be sure there is a lot going on behind and between the words he says, both for him personally and those around him. Even then, based on what he does say, you can bet he leaves his Western ‘colleagues’ steaming.

And what does he say? Read on and see for yourself.

As far as I know, this year’s Assembly will focus on prospects for accelerating domestic growth in Russia. There is no doubt that concerted efforts by our society as a whole to bring about comprehensive economic, social and spiritual development are a prerequisite for making Russia’s future sustainable. That said, by virtue of my professional duties, I have to focus on foreign policy issues, which are still relevant for the Assembly’s agenda, since in this interconnected, globalised world, isolating internal development from the outside world is impossible. Russia’s President Vladimir Putin provided a detailed analysis of the international developments at the Valdai Club meeting in Sochi, as well as in his interviews during his trip to Asia. For this reason, I won’t offer any conceptual observations, as everything has already been said. Nevertheless, I would like to share with you some considerations based on our day-to-day foreign policy efforts. It is not my intention to deliver a comprehensive or clear outlook, since at this stage all forecasts are provisional, no matter who makes them. Moreover, diplomats seek to influence developments as they unfold, not contemplate them.

See:

Then there are Putin’s pre-G20 interviews:

Naturally, I will start with Ukraine. Long before the country was plunged into the crisis, there was a feeling in the air that Russia’s relations with the EU and with the West were about to reach their moment of truth. It was clear that we could no longer continue to put issues in our relations on the back burner and that a choice had to be made between a genuine partnership or, as the saying goes, “breaking pots.” It goes without saying that Russia opted for the former alternative, while unfortunately our Western partners settled for the latter, whether consciously or not. In fact, they went all out in Ukraine and supported extremists, thereby giving up their own principles of democratic regime change. What came out of it was an attempt to play chicken with Russia, to see who blinks first. As bullies say, they wanted to Russia to “chicken out” (I can’t find a better word for it), to force us to swallow the humiliation of Russians and native speakers of Russian in Ukraine.

Honourable Leslie Gelb, whom you know all too well, wrote that Ukraine’s Association Agreement with the EU had nothing to do with inviting Ukraine to join the EU and was aimed in the short term at preventing it from joining the Customs Union. This is what an impartial and unbiased person said. When they deliberately decided to go down the path of escalation in Ukraine, they forgot many things, and had a clear understanding of how such moves would be viewed in Russia. They forgot the advice of, say, Otto von Bismarck, who had said that disparaging the millions-strong great Russian people would be the biggest political mistake.

President Vladimir Putin said the other day that no one in history has yet managed to subjugate Russia to its influence. This is not an assessment, but a statement of fact. Yet such an attempt has been made to quench the thirst for expanding the geopolitical space under Western control, out of a mercantile fear to lose the spoils of what they across the Atlantic had persuaded themselves was the victory in the Cold War.

The plus of today’s situation is that everything has clicked into its place and the calculus behind the West’s actions has been revealed despite its professed readiness to build a security community, a common European home. To quote (singer/song-writer) Bulat Okudzhava, “The past is getting clearer and clearer.” The clarity is becoming more tangible. Today our task is not only to sort out the past (although that must be done), but most importantly, to think about the future.

Talks about Russia’s isolation do not merit serious discussion. I need hardly dwell on this before this audience. Of course, one can damage our economy, and damage is being done, but only by doing harm to those who are taking corresponding measures and, equally important, destroying the system of international economic relations, the principles on which it is based. Formerly, when sanctions were applied (I worked at the Russian mission to the UN at the time) our Western partners, when discussing the DPRK, Iran or other states, said that it was necessary to formulate the restrictions in such a way as to keep within humanitarian limits and not to cause damage to the social sphere and the economy, and to selectively target only the elite. Today everything is the other way around: Western leaders are publicly declaring that the sanctions should destroy the economy and trigger popular protests. So, as regards the conceptual approach to the use of coercive measures the West unequivocally demonstrates that it does not merely seek to change Russian policy (which in itself is illusory), but it seeks to change the regime — and practically nobody denies this.

President Vladimir Putin, speaking with journalists recently, said that today’s Western leaders have a limited planning horizon. Indeed, it is dangerous when decisions on key problems of the development of the world and humankind as a whole are taken on the basis of short electoral cycles: in the United States the cycle is two years and each time one has to think of or do something to win votes. This is the negative side of the democratic process, but we cannot afford to ignore it. We cannot accept the logic when we are told to resign, relax and take it as a given that everyone has to suffer because there are elections in the United States every two years. This is just not right. We will not resign ourselves to this because the stakes are too high in the fight against terror, the threats of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and many bloody conflicts whose negative impact goes far beyond the framework of the corresponding states and regions. The wish to do something to gain unilateral advantages or to endear oneself to the electorate ahead of another election leads to chaos and confusion in international relations.

Not only that; they are psychopaths, and don’t have the capacity for thinking in terms of long-term consequences. They live in the moment, no matter how destructive that moment may be.

We hear the daily repeated mantra that Washington is aware of its own exclusiveness and its duty to bear this burden, to lead the rest of the world. Rudyard Kipling spoke about “the white man’s burden.” I hope that this is not what drives Americans. The world today is not white or black, but multi-coloured and heterogeneous. Leadership in this world can be assured not by persuading oneself of one’s exclusiveness and God-given duty to be responsible for everyone, but only by the ability and craft in forming a consensus. If the US partners committed their power to this goal, this would be priceless, and Russia would be actively helping them.

However, so far, US administrative resources still work only in the NATO framework, and then with substantial reservations, and its writ does not reach beyond the North Atlantic Alliance. One proof of this is the results of US attempts to make the world community follow its line in connection with the anti-Russian sanctions and principles. I have spoken about it more than once and we have ample proof of the fact that American ambassadors and envoys across the world seek meetings at the highest level to argue that the corresponding countries are obliged to punish Russia together with them or else face the consequences. This is done with regard to all countries, including our closest allies (this speaks volumes about the kind of analysts Washington has). An overwhelming majority of the states with which we have a continuing dialogue without any restrictions and isolation, as you see, value Russia’s independent role in the international arena. Not because they like it when somebody challenges the Americans, but because they realise that the world order will not be stable if nobody is allowed to speak his mind (although privately the overwhelming majority do express their opinion, but they do not want to do so publicly for fear of Washington’s reprisals).

Many reasonable analysts understand that there is a widening gap between the global ambitions of the US Administration and the country’s real potential. The world is changing and, as has always happened in history, at some point somebody’s influence and power reach their peak and then somebody begins to develop still faster and more effectively. One should study history and proceed from realities. The seven developing economies headed by BRICS already have a bigger GDP than the Western G7. One should proceed from the facts of life, and not from a misconceived sense of one’s own grandeur.

It has become fashionable to argue that Russia is waging a kind of “hybrid war” in Crimea and in Ukraine. It is an interesting term, but I would apply it above all to the United States and its war strategy – it is truly a hybrid war aimed not so much at defeating the enemy militarily as at changing the regimes in the states that pursue a policy Washington does not like. It is using financial and economic pressure, information attacks, using others on the perimeter of a corresponding state as proxies and of course information and ideological pressure through externally financed non-governmental organisations. Is it not a hybrid process and not what we call war? It would be interesting to discuss the concept of the hybrid war to see who is waging it and is it only about “little green men.”

Apparently the toolkit of our US partners, who have become adept at using it, is much larger.

In attempting to establish their pre-eminence at a time when new economic, financial and political power centres are emerging, the Americans provoke counteraction in keeping with Newton’s third law and contribute to the emergence of structures, mechanisms, and movements that seek alternatives to the American recipes for solving the pressing problems. I am not referring to anti-Americanism, still less about forming coalitions spearheaded against the United States, but only about the natural wish of a growing number of countries to secure their vital interests and do it the way they think right, and not what they are told “from across the pond.” Nobody is going to play anti-US games just to spite the United States. We face attempts and facts of extra-territorial use of US legislation, the kidnapping of our citizens in spite of existing treaties with Washington whereby these issues are to be resolved through law enforcement and judicial bodies.

According to its doctrine of national security, the United States has the right to use force anywhere, anytime without necessarily asking the UN Security Council for approval. A coalition against the Islamic State was formed unbeknownst to the Security Council. I asked Secretary of State John Kerry why have not they gone to the UN Security Council for this.

He told me that if they did, they would have to somehow designate the status of Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad. Of course, they had to because Syria is a sovereign state and still a member of the UN (no one excluded it from UN membership). The secretary of state said it was wrong because the United States is combating terrorism and the al-Assad regime is the most important factor that galvanises terrorists from around the world and acts as a magnet attracting them to this region in an attempt to overthrow the Syrian regime.

I believe this is perverse logic. If we are talking about precedents (the United States adheres to case law), it is worth remembering the chemical disarmament in Syria when the Assad regime was a completely legitimate partner of the United States, Russia, the OPCW and others. The Americans maintain talks with the Taliban as well. Whenever the United States has an opportunity to benefit from something, it acts quite pragmatically. I’m not sure why the ideologically-driven position took the upper hand this time and the United States chose to believe that Assad cannot be a partner. Perhaps, this is not so much an operation against the Islamic State as paving the way for toppling al-Assad under the guise of a counter-terrorist operation.

This is exactly what is happening.

So far, those who are not guided by real problems, but rather by a desire to quickly grab things from freshly turned up ground. It is deplorable. Exporting revolutions – be they democratic, communist or others – never brings any good.

State, public and civilisational structures are actually disintegrating in the MENA region. The destructive energy released in the process can scorch states that are located far beyond this region. Terrorists (including the Islamic State) are claiming a national status. Moreover, they are already beginning to create quasi-governmental bodies there that engage in the administrative work.

On this backdrop, minorities, including Christians, are banished. In Europe, these issues are deemed not politically correct. They are ashamed when we invite them to do something about it together at the OSCE. They wonder why would we focus specifically on Christians? How is that special? The OSCE has held a series of events dedicated to keeping memories about the Holocaust and its victims alive. A few years ago, the OSCE started holding events against Islamophobia. We will be offering an analysis of the processes leading to Christianophobia.

On 4-5 December, OSCE ministerial meetings will be held in Basel, where we will present this proposal. The majority of EU member states elude this topic, because they are ashamed to talk about it. Just as they were ashamed to include in what was then the EU constitution drafted by Valery Giscard d’Estaing a phrase that Europe has Christian roots.

If you don’t remember or respect your own roots and traditions, how would you respect the traditions and values of other people? This is straightforward logic. Comparing what’s happening now in the Middle East to a period of religious wars in Europe, Israeli political scientist Avineri said that the current turmoil is unlikely to end with what the West means when it says “democratic reforms.”

They cannot respect their own traditions because their traditions and values have become an empty shell, an ideological mask to cover what they really are: psychopaths.

The Arab-Israeli conflict is dead in the water. It’s hard to play on several boards at a time. The Americans are trying to accomplish this, but it doesn’t work for them. In 2013, they took nine months to sort out the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I will not go into the reasons, they are known, but they failed at this as well. Now, they asked for more time to try to achieve some progress before the end of 2014, so that the Palestinians wouldn’t go to the UN and sign the Statute of the International Criminal Court, etc. Suddenly, it transpired that negotiations on Iran are underway. The US State Department dumped Palestine to focus on Iran.

US Secretary of State John Kerry and I agreed to talk on this subject some time soon. It’s important to understand that you can’t keep the problem of the Palestinian state deeply frozen forever. Failure to resolve it for nearly 70 years has been a major argument of those who recruit extremists in their ranks, “there’s no justice: it was promised to create two states; the Jewish one was created, but they will never create an Arab state.” Used on a hungry Arab street, these arguments sound quite plausible, and they start calling for a fight for justice using other methods.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said at the Valdai Club meeting in Sochi that we need a new version of interdependence. This was a very topical statement. The leading powers must return to the negotiating table and agree on a new framework that takes into account the basic legitimate interests of all the key parties (I can’t tell you what it should be called, but it should be based on the UN Charter), to agree on reasonable self-imposed restrictions and collective risk management in a system of international relations underpinned by democratic values. Our Western partners promote respect for the rule of law, democracy and minority opinion within countries, while failing to stand up for the same values in international affairs. This leaves Russia as a pioneer in promoting democracy, justice and rule of international law. A new world order can only be polycentric and should reflect the diversity of cultures and civilisations in today’s world.

You are aware of Russia’s commitment to ensuring indivisibility of security in international affairs and holding it in international law. I won’t elaborate on this.

I would like to support the point the SVOP has been making that Russia won’t succeed in becoming a major, successful and confident power of the 21st century without developing its eastern regions. Sergei Karaganov was among the first to conceptualise this idea, and I fully agree. Taking Russia’s relations with the Asia Pacific countries to a new level is an absolute priority. Russia worked along these lines at the Beijing APEC meeting and the G20 forum. We will continue moving in this direction in the new environment created by the upcoming launch of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) on 1 January 2015.

We have been treated as “subhumans.” For over a decade, Russia has been trying to establish partnership ties with NATO through CSTO. These efforts were not just about putting NATO and CSTO “in the same league.” As a matter of fact, CSTO is focused on catching drug dealers and illegal migrants around the Afghan border, and the North-Atlantic Treaty Organisation is the backbone of the international security forces, which, among other things, were tasked with fighting the terrorist threat and eliminating its financing schemes, which involve drug trafficking. We tried everything: we pleaded and then demanded real-time contact, so that once NATO detects a caravan transporting drugs and is unable to stop it, it alerts us across the border, so that this caravan could be intercepted by CSTO forces. They simply refused to talk to us. In private conversations, our NATO well-wishers (and I actually mean this in the positive way) told us that the alliance can’t view CSTO as an equal partner for ideological reasons. Until recently, we saw the same condescending and arrogant attitude with respect to the Eurasian economic integration. And that despite the fact that countries intending to join the EAEU have much more in common in terms of their economies, history and culture than many EU members. This union is not about creating barriers with anyone. We always stress how open this union is expected to be. I strongly believe that it will make a significant contribution to building a bridge between Europe and Asia Pacific.

I can’t fail to mention Russia’s comprehensive partnership with China. Important bilateral decisions have been taken, paving the way to an energy alliance between Russia and China. But there’s more to it. We can now even talk about the emerging technology alliance between the two countries. Russia’s tandem with Beijing is a crucial factor for ensuring international stability and at least some balance in international affairs, as well as ensuring the rule of international law. We will make full use of our relations with India and Vietnam, Russia’s strategic partners, as well as the ASEAN countries. We are also open to expanding cooperation with Japan, if our Japanese neighbours can look at their national interests and stop looking back at some overseas powers.

There is no doubt that the European Union is our largest collective partner. No one intends to “shoot himself in the foot” by renouncing cooperation with Europe, although it is now clear that business as usual is no longer an option. This is what our European partners are telling us, but neither do we want to operate the old way. They believed that Russia owed them something, while we want to be on an equal footing. For this reason, things will never be the same again. That said, I’m confident that we will be able to overcome this period, lessons will be learned and a new foundation for our relations will emerge.

The idea of creating a single economic and humanitarian space from Lisbon to Vladivostok can now be heard here and there and is gaining traction. Germany’s Foreign Minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, has said publicly (while we have been saying it for a long time) that the EU and the EAEU should engage in dialogue. The statement President Vladimir Putin made in Brussels in January 2014, when he proposed the first step by launching negotiations on a free-trade zone between the EU and the Customs Union with an eye on 2020, is no longer viewed as something exotic. All of this has already become part of diplomacy and real politics. Although this is so far only a matter of discussion, I strongly believe that we will one day achieve what is called “the integration of integrations.” This is one of the key topics we want to promote within the OSCE at the Ministerial Council in Basel. Russia is about to assume BRICS and SCO presidency. The two organisations will hold their summits in Ufa. These are very promising organisations for the new age. They are not blocks (especially BRICS), but groups where members share the same interests, representing countries from all continents that share common approaches regarding the future of the global economy, finance and politics.

source:

http://www.sott.net/article/289461-SOTT-EXCLUSIVE-Must-read-statement-by-Russian-FM-Sergey-Lavrov

share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneDigg thisShare on Google+Share on LinkedInShare on StumbleUponPin on PinterestFlattr the authorShare on TumblrShare on RedditBuffer this page

Earth and beyond