Saswat Blog
All that's Left!
Imperialism
Lebanon Must Kill, Even As She Bleeds
By Saswat Pattanayak
As Lebanon bleeds, it kills.
It kills our conscience every single day,
as we carry on with our mundane plans
to further petty bourgeois career paths as usual.
Lebanon kills our ability to reason with truth,
as we carry on with our
CNN
and BBC
and New York Times.
Lebanon kills our faith in human good,
as we rationalize
that it is human nature to sustain warfare.
Lebanon kills our trusts in our own potential to rise up,
look into our comfortable shining mirrors on the walls,
and discover how unabashedly wretched we must look
if we smile to ourselves today.
Lebanon kills all that is beautiful,
all that is innocent,
all that is glorious,
all that is humane,
all that is kind,
all that is generous,
all that we mean by understanding for social good.
Yes, Lebanon kills, when it bleeds.
Lebanon kills our sense of empathy
when children of Beirut
are massacred in name of
democracy.
Lebanon kills our feelings of cooperation
when we indifferently watch
hapless humans murdered in name of
freedom.
Lebanon kills our pride in our identities
as we stoically listen to
blatant propaganda against Islam.
Lebanon kills our amicability
the moment we buy into
media definition of terrorism.
Lebanon kills our cognition
when we start believing
that there ever was a
kidnapping of Israeli soldiers.
That such kidnapping
has anything to do with the war
against humanity.
Yes, Lebanon kills, when it bleeds.
When we overlook Israel
as one of the biggest militarist regions
of the planet,
Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills our intelligence
when we start assuming
a national defense establishment
is protector of anything human,
be it the armed forces of India,
America,
Pakistan
or Israel.
Lebanon kills our sense of proportion
when we mistake the grieving
agonized
and affected
peoples as the terrorists.
Lebanon kills our basic values of decency
when we have anger
at the defenseless
and support
for Abu Gharibs.
Because we think
the Iraqi prisoners
were terrorists
and invading military rapists
are victors,
Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills our children
and their children
and theirs,
because we have taught them the history
invented by
Rupert Murdorch,
not history
relived by
Howard Zinn.
Lebanon kills our fathers,
and their fathers
and theirs,
because they did not teach us
not to discriminate people
or disown gods,
and Lebanon kills us,
because we have still not learnt enough.
Yes Lebanon kills, when it bleeds.
When the so-called world leaders call
their lavishly delicious meetings
and use profanities
to address the suffering people,
Lebanon kills.
When the leaders perpetrate military race
by aiding Israel’s quests,
Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills our memory
when we conveniently forget
that Israel is the only country in the world
that practices Apartheid even today.
When its lost on us that Israel has not one,
or two,
but 11 different classes of people
who are required to carry identifications
with their ethnic categories
so that they can be officially discriminated,
Lebanon kills.
When its lost on us that Israel as a state
works to benefit its “first class citizens”,
whereas the rest are
condemned in different degrees,
most even not allowed
to own residence in
nine-tenth of the country,
Lebanon kills our knowledge
of contemporary racist history.
Lebanon kills our curiosity to know and grow,
when we conveniently ignore the fact
that Israeli citizens of the
lower classes are routinely arrested,
and tortured
without trial for indefinite periods,
by Israeli ruling class
just as the fascists ever did.
Lebanon kills our power to look beyond
when we do not think twice
even as Palestinians have been living under unethical
inhuman
military occupation since almost 60 years now,
without land,
without rights,
without hopes,
and any sense of belonging
in a land that rightfully belongs to them
and wrongfully occupied now.
That we do not pause
to think 60 years is a human lifespan,
Lebanon kills.
Yes Lebanon kills, when it bleeds.
We, the torchbearers of freedom
and trumpets of liberty
and voters of democracy
are fittingly comfortable
within our definition of these words
whereas using these words
we mandate our leaders
to go ravage millions of innocent women
and children
just because they do not want
our shallow words in their dictionary,
and that is why Lebanon kills.
We the killers of Edward Said
and annihilators of Mesopotamia civilization
are so proud of our conquering heritage
while leaving behind no history for “terrorist children”,
that Lebanon kills.
We visitors to mocking war memorials
and lying history museums
and readers of western civilizations
that validated slavery in name of gods
are so muted by our ignorance
that Lebanon kills.
We fanatic supporters of colonial
and imperial powers of Europe
that forced the Jews
and compelled the Arabs
and enslaved the blacks
and looted the working men and women
of the entire world,
are so happy to be psychologically numb,
and its so sad
that Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills those that refuse to acknowledge
that revolution is the prerogative of the landless
against the landgrabbers,
just as
reactionary military occupation
is the prerogative of
the religious-military-industrial nexus.
And to those of us
who side by the authorized militarists
and take them for agents of freedom,
Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills us
when we start believing in nationalities
as ends to human aspirations,
not as temporary means
to solve the question of bread,
so temporary
that after bread,
land
and peace,
we should know no nations
in order to embrace the worldwide working class.
And worldwide working class
should know
no national boundaries
and ethnicities
and religions,
because these are tools of the oppressors,
if it must come together,
and many of us refuse to believe this,
and hence Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills us
when we blindly lend our support
to the orchastrators of global terrorism
in order to divide and rule our world,
and install their undivided Empire
those who for six decades
now in the name of war
against Communism
and “terror”,
had been working
to in fact cause wars
against working class humanity
in Korea,
in Vietnam,
in China,
in Italy,
in Greece,
in the Philippines.
Also
in Albania,
in Eastern Europe,
in Iran,
in Guatemala,
in Costa Rica,
in Syria,
in the Middle East,
in Indonesia,
in British Guiana,
in Soviet Union,
in Cambodia,
in Laos,
in Haiti,
in Algeria,
in Ecuador,
in The Congo,
in Brazil,
in Peru,
in Dominican Republic,
in Cuba,
when the militarist combines assaulted societies
and bombarded destabilization
in name of promoting “democracy”,
and yet we applaud their victories,
Lebanon kills.
Despite their illegal interventions
also
in Ghana,
in Uruguay,
in Chile,
in Bolivia,
in Iraq,
in Australia,
in Angola,
in Zaire,
in Jamaica,
in Seychelles,
in Grenada,
in Morocco,
in Suriname,
in Libya,
in Nicaragua,
in Panama,
in Bulgaria,
in Afghanistan,
in El Salvador
and now
against the American working class,
we keep silent
and worship their billionaires
and deride the working class communities
of immigrants
and the blacks
and the Muslims,
it really sucks;
and Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills when it bleeds,
because through our callous indifference,
and our reactionary supports
to the national defense forces
that thrives on the military industrial complexes
owned by a handful of global capitalists,
we have allowed the free rein
to exploit the indigenous,
the poor,
the working class people
by infusing in us
vast sea of ignorance
so that we would not challenge
the structure.
In fact
Lebanon kills
our mere existence
as beings
as we so submissively let our minds
be colonized yet again,
by raising toast to their victory,
by worshipping their gods,
by using their profanities,
by playing by their rules,
by spreading their hatred
among ourselves
in the name of their religions,
their moral standards
and their male supremacist,
heterosexist,
individualistic,
self centered,
nationalistic,
oppressive,
religious,
capitalistic,
god-fearing,
inhumane
corporate orders.
Lebanon kills
because we live comfortably
in our racist,
anti-Islam
world of lies,
and we let our world leaders
orchestrate occasions,
deliberately neglect law and order,
and find reasons
to commit genocide
of innocent people
in months of
September
and July
and rest of the year,
in London,
New York
and Mumbai
and rest of the cities,
so that
they can carry on their own agendas
to conquer country after country,
oil fields after oil fields,
economies after economies,
peoples cooperatives after peoples cooperatives,
tribal lands after tribal lands,
indigenous peoples after indigenous people,
forests after forests,
and in fact declare our world as theirs,
as a capitalistic,
patriarchal,
conservative structure.
And hence Lebanon kills,
so that
when we are no more,
our children will at least
have got rid of us all
and a ravaged Lebanon
will guide a new world,
full of hope
because all despairs are getting rid of now,
each moment.
Lebanon must kill,
even as she bleeds.
-Saswat Pattanayak, Peoples’ Poet, 2006
As Lebanon bleeds, it kills.
It kills our conscience every single day,
as we carry on with our mundane plans
to further petty bourgeois career paths as usual.
Lebanon kills our ability to reason with truth,
as we carry on with our
CNN
and BBC
and New York Times.
Lebanon kills our faith in human good,
as we rationalize
that it is human nature to sustain warfare.
Lebanon kills our trusts in our own potential to rise up,
look into our comfortable shining mirrors on the walls,
and discover how unabashedly wretched we must look
if we smile to ourselves today.
Lebanon kills all that is beautiful,
all that is innocent,
all that is glorious,
all that is humane,
all that is kind,
all that is generous,
all that we mean by understanding for social good.
Yes, Lebanon kills, when it bleeds.
Lebanon kills our sense of empathy
when children of Beirut
are massacred in name of
democracy.
Lebanon kills our feelings of cooperation
when we indifferently watch
hapless humans murdered in name of
freedom.
Lebanon kills our pride in our identities
as we stoically listen to
blatant propaganda against Islam.
Lebanon kills our amicability
the moment we buy into
media definition of terrorism.
Lebanon kills our cognition
when we start believing
that there ever was a
kidnapping of Israeli soldiers.
That such kidnapping
has anything to do with the war
against humanity.
Yes, Lebanon kills, when it bleeds.
When we overlook Israel
as one of the biggest militarist regions
of the planet,
Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills our intelligence
when we start assuming
a national defense establishment
is protector of anything human,
be it the armed forces of India,
America,
Pakistan
or Israel.
Lebanon kills our sense of proportion
when we mistake the grieving
agonized
and affected
peoples as the terrorists.
Lebanon kills our basic values of decency
when we have anger
at the defenseless
and support
for Abu Gharibs.
Because we think
the Iraqi prisoners
were terrorists
and invading military rapists
are victors,
Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills our children
and their children
and theirs,
because we have taught them the history
invented by
Rupert Murdorch,
not history
relived by
Howard Zinn.
Lebanon kills our fathers,
and their fathers
and theirs,
because they did not teach us
not to discriminate people
or disown gods,
and Lebanon kills us,
because we have still not learnt enough.
Yes Lebanon kills, when it bleeds.
When the so-called world leaders call
their lavishly delicious meetings
and use profanities
to address the suffering people,
Lebanon kills.
When the leaders perpetrate military race
by aiding Israel’s quests,
Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills our memory
when we conveniently forget
that Israel is the only country in the world
that practices Apartheid even today.
When its lost on us that Israel has not one,
or two,
but 11 different classes of people
who are required to carry identifications
with their ethnic categories
so that they can be officially discriminated,
Lebanon kills.
When its lost on us that Israel as a state
works to benefit its “first class citizens”,
whereas the rest are
condemned in different degrees,
most even not allowed
to own residence in
nine-tenth of the country,
Lebanon kills our knowledge
of contemporary racist history.
Lebanon kills our curiosity to know and grow,
when we conveniently ignore the fact
that Israeli citizens of the
lower classes are routinely arrested,
and tortured
without trial for indefinite periods,
by Israeli ruling class
just as the fascists ever did.
Lebanon kills our power to look beyond
when we do not think twice
even as Palestinians have been living under unethical
inhuman
military occupation since almost 60 years now,
without land,
without rights,
without hopes,
and any sense of belonging
in a land that rightfully belongs to them
and wrongfully occupied now.
That we do not pause
to think 60 years is a human lifespan,
Lebanon kills.
Yes Lebanon kills, when it bleeds.
We, the torchbearers of freedom
and trumpets of liberty
and voters of democracy
are fittingly comfortable
within our definition of these words
whereas using these words
we mandate our leaders
to go ravage millions of innocent women
and children
just because they do not want
our shallow words in their dictionary,
and that is why Lebanon kills.
We the killers of Edward Said
and annihilators of Mesopotamia civilization
are so proud of our conquering heritage
while leaving behind no history for “terrorist children”,
that Lebanon kills.
We visitors to mocking war memorials
and lying history museums
and readers of western civilizations
that validated slavery in name of gods
are so muted by our ignorance
that Lebanon kills.
We fanatic supporters of colonial
and imperial powers of Europe
that forced the Jews
and compelled the Arabs
and enslaved the blacks
and looted the working men and women
of the entire world,
are so happy to be psychologically numb,
and its so sad
that Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills those that refuse to acknowledge
that revolution is the prerogative of the landless
against the landgrabbers,
just as
reactionary military occupation
is the prerogative of
the religious-military-industrial nexus.
And to those of us
who side by the authorized militarists
and take them for agents of freedom,
Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills us
when we start believing in nationalities
as ends to human aspirations,
not as temporary means
to solve the question of bread,
so temporary
that after bread,
land
and peace,
we should know no nations
in order to embrace the worldwide working class.
And worldwide working class
should know
no national boundaries
and ethnicities
and religions,
because these are tools of the oppressors,
if it must come together,
and many of us refuse to believe this,
and hence Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills us
when we blindly lend our support
to the orchastrators of global terrorism
in order to divide and rule our world,
and install their undivided Empire
those who for six decades
now in the name of war
against Communism
and “terror”,
had been working
to in fact cause wars
against working class humanity
in Korea,
in Vietnam,
in China,
in Italy,
in Greece,
in the Philippines.
Also
in Albania,
in Eastern Europe,
in Iran,
in Guatemala,
in Costa Rica,
in Syria,
in the Middle East,
in Indonesia,
in British Guiana,
in Soviet Union,
in Cambodia,
in Laos,
in Haiti,
in Algeria,
in Ecuador,
in The Congo,
in Brazil,
in Peru,
in Dominican Republic,
in Cuba,
when the militarist combines assaulted societies
and bombarded destabilization
in name of promoting “democracy”,
and yet we applaud their victories,
Lebanon kills.
Despite their illegal interventions
also
in Ghana,
in Uruguay,
in Chile,
in Bolivia,
in Iraq,
in Australia,
in Angola,
in Zaire,
in Jamaica,
in Seychelles,
in Grenada,
in Morocco,
in Suriname,
in Libya,
in Nicaragua,
in Panama,
in Bulgaria,
in Afghanistan,
in El Salvador
and now
against the American working class,
we keep silent
and worship their billionaires
and deride the working class communities
of immigrants
and the blacks
and the Muslims,
it really sucks;
and Lebanon kills.
Lebanon kills when it bleeds,
because through our callous indifference,
and our reactionary supports
to the national defense forces
that thrives on the military industrial complexes
owned by a handful of global capitalists,
we have allowed the free rein
to exploit the indigenous,
the poor,
the working class people
by infusing in us
vast sea of ignorance
so that we would not challenge
the structure.
In fact
Lebanon kills
our mere existence
as beings
as we so submissively let our minds
be colonized yet again,
by raising toast to their victory,
by worshipping their gods,
by using their profanities,
by playing by their rules,
by spreading their hatred
among ourselves
in the name of their religions,
their moral standards
and their male supremacist,
heterosexist,
individualistic,
self centered,
nationalistic,
oppressive,
religious,
capitalistic,
god-fearing,
inhumane
corporate orders.
Lebanon kills
because we live comfortably
in our racist,
anti-Islam
world of lies,
and we let our world leaders
orchestrate occasions,
deliberately neglect law and order,
and find reasons
to commit genocide
of innocent people
in months of
September
and July
and rest of the year,
in London,
New York
and Mumbai
and rest of the cities,
so that
they can carry on their own agendas
to conquer country after country,
oil fields after oil fields,
economies after economies,
peoples cooperatives after peoples cooperatives,
tribal lands after tribal lands,
indigenous peoples after indigenous people,
forests after forests,
and in fact declare our world as theirs,
as a capitalistic,
patriarchal,
conservative structure.
And hence Lebanon kills,
so that
when we are no more,
our children will at least
have got rid of us all
and a ravaged Lebanon
will guide a new world,
full of hope
because all despairs are getting rid of now,
each moment.
Lebanon must kill,
even as she bleeds.
-Saswat Pattanayak, Peoples’ Poet, 2006
|
Fascism then. Fascism now?
Thanks to Dr Todd S Burroughs, who sent this article
link. A very insightful writing. Indicative not just
of the veteran US and major Europe, but also new free
market economies like India. Indeed the Indian
administrations since early 1990s have been often
depicted as Fascist in orientation for their shifts
in focus from eradication of poverty to appeasement
of the homegrown capitalists and foreign investors,
all the while, preaching "nationalistic" sentiments!
Read More...
Mitrokhin Myth and KGB Money
By Saswat Pattanayak
Exactly 21 years ago, Indira Gandhi was assassinated.
And as the war mongers have triumphed ever since, her character sketches are being redrawn.
Latest one is related to the Mitrokhin papers. Vasili Mitrokhin is no more, but the defected ghost continues to hunt the lesser politicians of India and even prompting some right wing nick pickers to demand that they want to see the Supreme Court inquire into the allegations. Apparently the press world over have taken uncanny interest in his work, claiming that he is the most credible source to speak on KGB.
Of course, the serious observers know that Mitrokhin is a disgraced KGB man. Even at the peak of Soviet era, he was being assigned to accompany the Soviet team to Olympic Games. In 1956, he was removed from any field work related to KGB after his mishandling of operational assignments. That was the reason why he was shifted from operational work to archives work and told that he would never be able to work on field again (this indicates his failure as a operative of any worth, and not again, being relegated to the job, not an archivist anyway to begin with or skilled with). Even as an archivist, he was known to be one who stole documents. Traveling (not escaping or anything) to Latvia, well after the era of communism was over in USSR, his first door was CIA. Even in 1992, CIA did not consider him credible and no one believed his fake documents. Clearly American intelligence agency which had outwitted KGB scores of times before leading to the demise of the communist state, was dismissive of this man.
Finally he found a buyer in M16, an agency which is less active than Indian RAW in the post-world war period. And he found a publisher too. So much ado about nothing.
The issues he espouses about India (that Indian politicians have taken money from KGB) are pretty stale and unimportant. Even if they were accurate, there is no reason why anyone in the Congress Party need to be ashamed. In the era of the Cold War, it is an open knowledge that India was on principle supportive of many Soviet stances than the American. The way his book has now snowballed into a major political controversy in India with the opposition BJP demanding that the government should come out with a white paper on the sources of funding of political parties from abroad and set up an inquiry by Supreme Court judge into the allegation contained in the records of the disgraced KGB official, it seems the right wing leaders of India are yet to mature.
Unless of course BJP and the family support what President Nixon and Henry Kissinger were speaking about Indians during the period. Of course during the 70's, the right wingers were all so glued to the Americanization. Decades later, what seems obnoxious must be sounding so just and sane to the right wingers in India.
Is the issue at hand something about money that the Soviet Union’s Ambassador in New Delhi from 1977 to 1983 Yuri Vorontsov has publicly declined? “It’s rubbish! Indira Gandhi or her Congress Party never took KGB money,” he said recently ridiculing the Mitrokhin Papers. He has even further logic:
“Gandhi and the Congress as the ruling party could have raised any amount of money through Indian business houses and were not in need of foreign funds. Yes, I know that the Communist Party received funds from the CPSU (Soviet Communist party) like any Communist Party of the world. It was never a secret for anyone. They (funds) were transferred through non-diplomatic channels, so I am not aware of any transactions,” Vorontsov said.
Or is the real issue about Indira Gandhi’s decision at that point: to support Soviet Union or to submit to the United States?
Here are excerpts from Gandhi’s letter to Nixon:
New Delhi, August 7, 1971.
It is not for us to object to the United States maintaining, as you, Mr. President, have put it, "a constructive relationship with Pakistan" so that the U.S. may "retain some influence in working with them towards important decisions to be made in that country." We have waited patiently and with restraint, hoping for a turn in the tide of events which the Government, Parliament and people of India could recognize as a step towards a political settlement.
I believe that the Government of the United States supports the view that the posting of U.N. observers on either side of the frontiers of India and East Bengal could solve the problem of the refugees. We regret that we do not see the situation in this light. India is an open democracy. We have a large diplomatic corps and many representatives of the world press. We have had visits of parliamentary delegations from various countries. All are free to travel and to visit the refugee camps. They see for themselves that although we are doing all we can for the refugees, life in the camps is one of deprivation and acute discomfort. Hence it is unrealistic to think that the presence of a group of U.N. observers could give any feeling of assurance to the evacuees when every day they see new evacuees pouring in with stories of atrocities. Would the League of Nations Observers have succeeded in persuading the refugees who fled from Hitler's tyranny to return even whilst the pogroms against the Jews and political opponents of Nazism continued unabated? In our view, the intentions of the U.N. Observers might be more credible if their efforts were directed at stopping the continuing outflow of these unfortunate people and at creating conditions which, to any reasonable person, would assure the safety of life and liberty of the refugee who wishes to return to East Bengal.
I should like to mention one other matter. Our Government was greatly embarrassed that soon after our Foreign Minister's return from his Washington visit and despite the statements made by Ambassador Keating in Bombay on April 16 and by the State Department's spokesman on April 15, 1971, came the news of fresh supplies of U.S. arms to Pakistan.
It was a sad chapter in the history of our subcontinent when the United States began to supply arms to Pakistan in 1954 and continued doing so up to 1965. These arms have been used against us, as indeed we feared they would be. And now these arms are being used against their own people whose only fault appears to be that they took seriously President Yahya Khan's promises to restore democracy.
In the midst of all the human tragedy, it is some relief to contemplate the voyage of the astronauts in the Apollo-15. These valiant men and the team of scientists supporting them represent man's eternal longing to break from the constraints of time and space. As I write this, the astronauts are heading homewards, back to our earth. We pray for their safety and success. Please accept, Mr. President, our warm felicitations.
I was glad to have your message regarding your initiative to normalise relations with the People's Republic of China. We have welcomed this move and we wish you well.
And here is what Nixon and Kissinger were upto:
President Nixon and Henry Kissinger met in the Oval Office of the White House on the morning of November 5, 1971, to discuss Nixon's conversation with Prime Minister Gandhi on the previous day. Kissinger's overall assessment was that “the Indians are bastards anyway. They are starting a war there. To them East Pakistan is no longer the issue. Now, I found it very interesting how she carried on to you yesterday about West Pakistan.” He felt, however, that Nixon had achieved his objective in the conversation: “While she was a bitch, we got what we wanted too. She will not be able to go home and say that the United States didn't give her a warm reception and therefore in despair she's got to go to war.” Kissinger judged that Gandhi had been thwarted in her objective: “She would rather have had you give her a cool reception so that she could say that she was really put upon.” Nixon agreed: “We really slobbered over the old witch.” Kissinger felt that on matters of substance, nothing of importance had been conceded: “You slobbered over her in things that did not matter, but in things that did matter, you didn't give her an inch.” Nixon and Kissinger agreed that in the upcoming conversation with Gandhi the approach to take was to be “a shade cooler” and allow her to do more to carry the conversation than had been the case in the initial conversation. (National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, White House Tapes, Recording of conversation between Nixon and Kissinger, November 5, 1971, 8:51-9:00 a.m., Oval Office, Conversation No. 615-4)
Now if there would have any reason for outrage, Indians very well have one. When will the BJP, keeping aside its hawkish mindset, get it straight.
Maybe this time. Here is the telephonic conversation between President Nixon (P) and Kissinger (K):
/1/ Source: Library of Congress, Manuscript Division, Kissinger Papers, Box 370, Telephone Conversations, Chronological File. No classification marking. The President vacationed in Key Biscayne, Florida, December 3-5; Kissinger was in Washington.
December 3, 1971, 10:45 a.m.
K: Two matters I want to raise. It appears that West Pakistan has attacked because situation in East collapsing. State wants to use it as a pretext not to put out statement/2/ at noon. I think it's more reason to cancel programs. State believes and I agree that we should take it to the Security Council once actions are confirmed. If a major war [develops] without going to the Security Council it would be a confession of poverty.
/2/ Reference is to a statement announcing the cut-off of military assistance to India.
P: Who will object?
K: India and the Soviet Union.
P: So we have to.
K: Apparently no one else will. Even the liberal papers are supporting that.
P: I am for that. We have to cut off arms aid to India. We should have done it earlier. Allow India bias.
K: Yes.
P: Sisco's part? He isn't pro-Indian. It's what they want below.
K: Sisco has no convictions. Liberal, [omission in the source text], socialist syndrome. The Indians will just add-
P: I have decided it and there is no appeal.
K: I also think-
P: I wrote it independently of anyone and I am surprised it hasn't been done.
K: It won't reach the UN tomorrow or late today. We shouldn't make a catastrophe of everything we have done and why Indian actions unjustified.
P: So West Pakistan giving trouble there.
K: If they lose half of their country without fighting they will be destroyed. They may also be destroyed this way but they will go down fighting.
P: They will have enough for a few days. It puts the Soviets on the spot.
K: I think I should give a brief note to the Russians so that they don't jump around about conversation yesterday and say we are going on your conversation with Gromyko./3/ A strong blast at their Vietnam friends and behavior on India. We are moving on our side but they are not doing enough on theirs.
P: On India certainly but on VN I wonder if it sounds hollow.
[Omitted here is discussion unrelated to South Asia.]
P: Pakistan thing makes your heart sick. For them to be done so by the Indians and after we have warned the bitch. Their [omission in the source text] and that but they have brought it on. We have to cut off arms. Why not? Because attacked by W. Pakistan. Tell them that when India talked about W. Pakistan attacking them it's like Russian claiming to be attacked by Finland.
K: They will do it or we will do it from Key Biscayne. It's a hell of a way but we can do it and I will get that message to the Soviets.
Exactly 21 years ago, Indira Gandhi was assassinated.
And as the war mongers have triumphed ever since, her character sketches are being redrawn.
Latest one is related to the Mitrokhin papers. Vasili Mitrokhin is no more, but the defected ghost continues to hunt the lesser politicians of India and even prompting some right wing nick pickers to demand that they want to see the Supreme Court inquire into the allegations. Apparently the press world over have taken uncanny interest in his work, claiming that he is the most credible source to speak on KGB.
Of course, the serious observers know that Mitrokhin is a disgraced KGB man. Even at the peak of Soviet era, he was being assigned to accompany the Soviet team to Olympic Games. In 1956, he was removed from any field work related to KGB after his mishandling of operational assignments. That was the reason why he was shifted from operational work to archives work and told that he would never be able to work on field again (this indicates his failure as a operative of any worth, and not again, being relegated to the job, not an archivist anyway to begin with or skilled with). Even as an archivist, he was known to be one who stole documents. Traveling (not escaping or anything) to Latvia, well after the era of communism was over in USSR, his first door was CIA. Even in 1992, CIA did not consider him credible and no one believed his fake documents. Clearly American intelligence agency which had outwitted KGB scores of times before leading to the demise of the communist state, was dismissive of this man.
Finally he found a buyer in M16, an agency which is less active than Indian RAW in the post-world war period. And he found a publisher too. So much ado about nothing.
The issues he espouses about India (that Indian politicians have taken money from KGB) are pretty stale and unimportant. Even if they were accurate, there is no reason why anyone in the Congress Party need to be ashamed. In the era of the Cold War, it is an open knowledge that India was on principle supportive of many Soviet stances than the American. The way his book has now snowballed into a major political controversy in India with the opposition BJP demanding that the government should come out with a white paper on the sources of funding of political parties from abroad and set up an inquiry by Supreme Court judge into the allegation contained in the records of the disgraced KGB official, it seems the right wing leaders of India are yet to mature.
Unless of course BJP and the family support what President Nixon and Henry Kissinger were speaking about Indians during the period. Of course during the 70's, the right wingers were all so glued to the Americanization. Decades later, what seems obnoxious must be sounding so just and sane to the right wingers in India.
Is the issue at hand something about money that the Soviet Union’s Ambassador in New Delhi from 1977 to 1983 Yuri Vorontsov has publicly declined? “It’s rubbish! Indira Gandhi or her Congress Party never took KGB money,” he said recently ridiculing the Mitrokhin Papers. He has even further logic:
“Gandhi and the Congress as the ruling party could have raised any amount of money through Indian business houses and were not in need of foreign funds. Yes, I know that the Communist Party received funds from the CPSU (Soviet Communist party) like any Communist Party of the world. It was never a secret for anyone. They (funds) were transferred through non-diplomatic channels, so I am not aware of any transactions,” Vorontsov said.
Or is the real issue about Indira Gandhi’s decision at that point: to support Soviet Union or to submit to the United States?
Here are excerpts from Gandhi’s letter to Nixon:
New Delhi, August 7, 1971.
It is not for us to object to the United States maintaining, as you, Mr. President, have put it, "a constructive relationship with Pakistan" so that the U.S. may "retain some influence in working with them towards important decisions to be made in that country." We have waited patiently and with restraint, hoping for a turn in the tide of events which the Government, Parliament and people of India could recognize as a step towards a political settlement.
I believe that the Government of the United States supports the view that the posting of U.N. observers on either side of the frontiers of India and East Bengal could solve the problem of the refugees. We regret that we do not see the situation in this light. India is an open democracy. We have a large diplomatic corps and many representatives of the world press. We have had visits of parliamentary delegations from various countries. All are free to travel and to visit the refugee camps. They see for themselves that although we are doing all we can for the refugees, life in the camps is one of deprivation and acute discomfort. Hence it is unrealistic to think that the presence of a group of U.N. observers could give any feeling of assurance to the evacuees when every day they see new evacuees pouring in with stories of atrocities. Would the League of Nations Observers have succeeded in persuading the refugees who fled from Hitler's tyranny to return even whilst the pogroms against the Jews and political opponents of Nazism continued unabated? In our view, the intentions of the U.N. Observers might be more credible if their efforts were directed at stopping the continuing outflow of these unfortunate people and at creating conditions which, to any reasonable person, would assure the safety of life and liberty of the refugee who wishes to return to East Bengal.
I should like to mention one other matter. Our Government was greatly embarrassed that soon after our Foreign Minister's return from his Washington visit and despite the statements made by Ambassador Keating in Bombay on April 16 and by the State Department's spokesman on April 15, 1971, came the news of fresh supplies of U.S. arms to Pakistan.
It was a sad chapter in the history of our subcontinent when the United States began to supply arms to Pakistan in 1954 and continued doing so up to 1965. These arms have been used against us, as indeed we feared they would be. And now these arms are being used against their own people whose only fault appears to be that they took seriously President Yahya Khan's promises to restore democracy.
In the midst of all the human tragedy, it is some relief to contemplate the voyage of the astronauts in the Apollo-15. These valiant men and the team of scientists supporting them represent man's eternal longing to break from the constraints of time and space. As I write this, the astronauts are heading homewards, back to our earth. We pray for their safety and success. Please accept, Mr. President, our warm felicitations.
I was glad to have your message regarding your initiative to normalise relations with the People's Republic of China. We have welcomed this move and we wish you well.
And here is what Nixon and Kissinger were upto:
President Nixon and Henry Kissinger met in the Oval Office of the White House on the morning of November 5, 1971, to discuss Nixon's conversation with Prime Minister Gandhi on the previous day. Kissinger's overall assessment was that “the Indians are bastards anyway. They are starting a war there. To them East Pakistan is no longer the issue. Now, I found it very interesting how she carried on to you yesterday about West Pakistan.” He felt, however, that Nixon had achieved his objective in the conversation: “While she was a bitch, we got what we wanted too. She will not be able to go home and say that the United States didn't give her a warm reception and therefore in despair she's got to go to war.” Kissinger judged that Gandhi had been thwarted in her objective: “She would rather have had you give her a cool reception so that she could say that she was really put upon.” Nixon agreed: “We really slobbered over the old witch.” Kissinger felt that on matters of substance, nothing of importance had been conceded: “You slobbered over her in things that did not matter, but in things that did matter, you didn't give her an inch.” Nixon and Kissinger agreed that in the upcoming conversation with Gandhi the approach to take was to be “a shade cooler” and allow her to do more to carry the conversation than had been the case in the initial conversation. (National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, White House Tapes, Recording of conversation between Nixon and Kissinger, November 5, 1971, 8:51-9:00 a.m., Oval Office, Conversation No. 615-4)
Now if there would have any reason for outrage, Indians very well have one. When will the BJP, keeping aside its hawkish mindset, get it straight.
Maybe this time. Here is the telephonic conversation between President Nixon (P) and Kissinger (K):
/1/ Source: Library of Congress, Manuscript Division, Kissinger Papers, Box 370, Telephone Conversations, Chronological File. No classification marking. The President vacationed in Key Biscayne, Florida, December 3-5; Kissinger was in Washington.
December 3, 1971, 10:45 a.m.
K: Two matters I want to raise. It appears that West Pakistan has attacked because situation in East collapsing. State wants to use it as a pretext not to put out statement/2/ at noon. I think it's more reason to cancel programs. State believes and I agree that we should take it to the Security Council once actions are confirmed. If a major war [develops] without going to the Security Council it would be a confession of poverty.
/2/ Reference is to a statement announcing the cut-off of military assistance to India.
P: Who will object?
K: India and the Soviet Union.
P: So we have to.
K: Apparently no one else will. Even the liberal papers are supporting that.
P: I am for that. We have to cut off arms aid to India. We should have done it earlier. Allow India bias.
K: Yes.
P: Sisco's part? He isn't pro-Indian. It's what they want below.
K: Sisco has no convictions. Liberal, [omission in the source text], socialist syndrome. The Indians will just add-
P: I have decided it and there is no appeal.
K: I also think-
P: I wrote it independently of anyone and I am surprised it hasn't been done.
K: It won't reach the UN tomorrow or late today. We shouldn't make a catastrophe of everything we have done and why Indian actions unjustified.
P: So West Pakistan giving trouble there.
K: If they lose half of their country without fighting they will be destroyed. They may also be destroyed this way but they will go down fighting.
P: They will have enough for a few days. It puts the Soviets on the spot.
K: I think I should give a brief note to the Russians so that they don't jump around about conversation yesterday and say we are going on your conversation with Gromyko./3/ A strong blast at their Vietnam friends and behavior on India. We are moving on our side but they are not doing enough on theirs.
P: On India certainly but on VN I wonder if it sounds hollow.
[Omitted here is discussion unrelated to South Asia.]
P: Pakistan thing makes your heart sick. For them to be done so by the Indians and after we have warned the bitch. Their [omission in the source text] and that but they have brought it on. We have to cut off arms. Why not? Because attacked by W. Pakistan. Tell them that when India talked about W. Pakistan attacking them it's like Russian claiming to be attacked by Finland.
K: They will do it or we will do it from Key Biscayne. It's a hell of a way but we can do it and I will get that message to the Soviets.
Lesser Gifts of the Western Gods
By Saswat Pattanayak
The other side to child labor. Does it provide for a hope?
This postcolonial report won the “One World Broadcasting Trust / Unicef 1998 Advancement of Children’s Rights award”. And now available for direct viewing online. Click here to watch.
Also important to remember that Titu makes a living, nurtures a dream and does not give up. The reality is indeed more interesting than any fiction. And more painful.
Recent Oscar fancies include child prostitution in south Asia. Indeed, the movie Born Into Brothels: Calcutta's Red Light Kids got India the Oscar she needed as much as late Mother Teresa got the Nobel Prize that India deserved! Apparently the story of Sonagachi was not meant to be shown to Indians, because the film makers think it would violate the identity issues of children (as though Calcuttans don’t have cyber cafes on the streets).
Makes one wonder about the socio-economic parameters and where the line is drawn between 'subject to exploitation' and 'right to make a living'. More importantly, one needs ponder the grueling reasons behind any further justification. And the other pressing question is regarding the exoticism of third world poverty.
At the one hand, child labor (commercial sex or injurious workplace) is a reality. Not everyone has the privilege to escape this reality. Nor the audacity. Nor the worldview. Nor the comfort or time to devise a luxurious worldview.
On the other hand, it’s a perpetuation of an oppression cycle. Its not simply another work. It never is. It's a systematic byproduct of an evil world system we abide by, that has such intrinsic elements well woven. One can argue the case for the Netherlands and the red lights there may not blind the eyes with as much discomfort as streets of Kolkata. Or the thousands of software sweatshops sponsored by the first world for the 'call centers' to take orders 24/7, which are indeed glorified tech-slavery of our age!
The well meaning audience may put the blame squarely upon the individuals who are voluntary participants in the process of unjust labor. But the point many miss is that Bangladesh, as in this movie, is a residue of a bigger world whose rules are largely written by systems of such oppression that we have all contributed in nurturing, especially people in the first world. Geographical disadvantages, political readiness, economic standing and class divides are just few of them. Titu is just one protagonist, who like millions of other child laborers and commercial sex workers, deserves all the praises of the world to be able to persist to live despite the inflicted hardships.
And yes, Ross Kauffman and Zana Briski need not fear about identities of children born to third world prostitutes. The children do not feel ashamed of their parents. If they were, they would not pose for the camera. It’s the detached film-makers who need feel ashamed for telling the story that’s been narrated almost all the time (that children get exploited in Dhaka or Kolkata), but for not telling the story of how it came to such a pass (that Dhaka nearly got driven to a stage of no-return thanks to American interventions using Saudis to uproot Mujibur Rehman because of his stress on secularism and pro-Soviet stances; or the implantation of Missionaries of Charity, which in the name of so-called God’s grace, aggravates poverty by declaring not a war, but preaching that “poverty is gift of God” so that generations of slum children grow up to earn it dividends and also become starry-eyed participants in such stereotypical movies).
In any case, I think there is some hope. It’s surely a triumph of the laborers. And a disaster for the capital evangelists who presume that liberalized economy, after all, is where the buck stops. And the mind.
The other side to child labor. Does it provide for a hope?
This postcolonial report won the “One World Broadcasting Trust / Unicef 1998 Advancement of Children’s Rights award”. And now available for direct viewing online. Click here to watch.
Also important to remember that Titu makes a living, nurtures a dream and does not give up. The reality is indeed more interesting than any fiction. And more painful.
Recent Oscar fancies include child prostitution in south Asia. Indeed, the movie Born Into Brothels: Calcutta's Red Light Kids got India the Oscar she needed as much as late Mother Teresa got the Nobel Prize that India deserved! Apparently the story of Sonagachi was not meant to be shown to Indians, because the film makers think it would violate the identity issues of children (as though Calcuttans don’t have cyber cafes on the streets).
Makes one wonder about the socio-economic parameters and where the line is drawn between 'subject to exploitation' and 'right to make a living'. More importantly, one needs ponder the grueling reasons behind any further justification. And the other pressing question is regarding the exoticism of third world poverty.
At the one hand, child labor (commercial sex or injurious workplace) is a reality. Not everyone has the privilege to escape this reality. Nor the audacity. Nor the worldview. Nor the comfort or time to devise a luxurious worldview.
On the other hand, it’s a perpetuation of an oppression cycle. Its not simply another work. It never is. It's a systematic byproduct of an evil world system we abide by, that has such intrinsic elements well woven. One can argue the case for the Netherlands and the red lights there may not blind the eyes with as much discomfort as streets of Kolkata. Or the thousands of software sweatshops sponsored by the first world for the 'call centers' to take orders 24/7, which are indeed glorified tech-slavery of our age!
The well meaning audience may put the blame squarely upon the individuals who are voluntary participants in the process of unjust labor. But the point many miss is that Bangladesh, as in this movie, is a residue of a bigger world whose rules are largely written by systems of such oppression that we have all contributed in nurturing, especially people in the first world. Geographical disadvantages, political readiness, economic standing and class divides are just few of them. Titu is just one protagonist, who like millions of other child laborers and commercial sex workers, deserves all the praises of the world to be able to persist to live despite the inflicted hardships.
And yes, Ross Kauffman and Zana Briski need not fear about identities of children born to third world prostitutes. The children do not feel ashamed of their parents. If they were, they would not pose for the camera. It’s the detached film-makers who need feel ashamed for telling the story that’s been narrated almost all the time (that children get exploited in Dhaka or Kolkata), but for not telling the story of how it came to such a pass (that Dhaka nearly got driven to a stage of no-return thanks to American interventions using Saudis to uproot Mujibur Rehman because of his stress on secularism and pro-Soviet stances; or the implantation of Missionaries of Charity, which in the name of so-called God’s grace, aggravates poverty by declaring not a war, but preaching that “poverty is gift of God” so that generations of slum children grow up to earn it dividends and also become starry-eyed participants in such stereotypical movies).
In any case, I think there is some hope. It’s surely a triumph of the laborers. And a disaster for the capital evangelists who presume that liberalized economy, after all, is where the buck stops. And the mind.
Ignorance 007 - Part II
By Saswat Pattanayak
Welcome to the world of History-telling. American ishtyle.
Time on its cover story (anniversary special) educates the readers about Hiroshima, with a Japanese witness on its cover holding a picture postcard.
The essay by Michael Elliott says:
Eight days later, Elliot says, it was over. According to him, if the first bomb was not enough justification to call it over, the second must have been, since Nagasaki was attacked on August 9.
Not only the war was presumably over, the act of throwing the bomb was a beautiful act also. As Elliot has a Japanese eyewitness describe the greatest disaster to have ever caused as something, “like a burst of light from an unearthly photo shoot, big enough to cover the sky, "blue-yellow and very beautiful."
Time goes on:
More celebrations!
And the aftermath, according to Time:
Sounds sick to my stomach. Such narrative that proclaims that the world war was over because Japan was bombed (nay, even more sophisticatedly, detonated, not attacked!). For, some of us who are among the rest of those who don’t subscribe to this narrative know for sure when and how the war was ended. And if we still wondered why US had to bomb Japan even after the war was over, now we know the news: that the war was not actually over. It needed one Hiroshima and then again, one Nagasaki to call it over!
What logic does Elliot has in saying Hiroshima was not enough to call it over, if at all in his weirdest philosophy, all we need is some bombings to end wars? Why did we need another bomb after 8 days? No logic, just plain statement: “An awful weapon had saved lives; a terrible instrument of war had brought peace…..”
Brought peace? For whom? For the generations of Japanese who lived with the scar and became numb enough to traverse from royal monarchies to economic imperialists without an utter?
The underlying theme of the Anniversary Special (see the celebratory tone! Calling it an anniversary special than maybe a Guilt-ridden Summer Remembrance) of the magazine is to say that we needed to bomb Japan so that we shall have peace. Moreover, it was not a bad thing to bomb after all. Hey, we got an eyewitness to say that the after-effects of the bombing was “blue-yellow and very beautiful”!
Such sick!
And finally Time declares that the bombs (which are bad in the hands of the “terrorists”, it concludes too) led to nuclear arsenal competitions leading to cold war which brought long lasting peace!
Notice the web of lies: First,
that the war got over because of the bomb
(whereas in actual, the war had long ended after
which US surprised everyone by bombing Japan
mercilessly, first Hiroshima and then again
Nagasaki), second, that the after-effects of
bombing was beautiful experience (whereas the
gruesome truth is that all of us know what
happened to generations of people, even as Time
could manage to get an old man stand with a
picture of the bombing as to show how beautiful
event it was to celebrate), third, that the
bombings saved lives (whereas we know that
millions have died for no good reason at all),
fourth, that the people after all grew up to
live well (whereas we know the systematic
tortures on Japanese-Americans which go largely
untold for several suppressive reasons), fifth,
that cold war brought peace (whereas nothing
could be further from the truth).
Cold war was not that cold. We know millions of innocent civilians who have been systematically annihilated in the name of protecting them from Communism (even within the country, McCarthyism was such a reality) with active interventions in third-world countries of Asia, Latin America and Africa. That was the hottest war series ever continued. And thanks to the whole suspicion trail of nuclear arsenal acquisitions of rivaling blocs.
And today, after the end of so-called Cold War, we know that the same bomb greed has led many countries to feel insecure, join the arms race, whereas they could involve in developmental works they have drained out resources to build arsenals to join the club, we know of the numerous nuclear plant leaks and disasters--most of which are so embarrassing that they are not discussed, we also know that many misguided youth and deliberately led religious fanatics are in quest of the formula too, not to be left out of the race.
And the world is most unsafe than ever before. We are having televised wars and children are bombing neighbors on their video games. More bombs don’t make the world safer place. I am sure the readers of Time know of this. Or I doubt. I am still waiting to read few letters to the editor.
Welcome to the world of History-telling. American ishtyle.
Time on its cover story (anniversary special) educates the readers about Hiroshima, with a Japanese witness on its cover holding a picture postcard.
The essay by Michael Elliott says:
The atom bombs dropped over Japan ended a terrible war and persuaded the world never to use nuclear weapons again. Time quotes Van Kirk on the B-29 remembering that "somebody said—and I thought so too--'This war is over.'"
Eight days later, Elliot says, it was over. According to him, if the first bomb was not enough justification to call it over, the second must have been, since Nagasaki was attacked on August 9.
Ever since, there has been controversy over when the war would have ended had the bomb not been dropped on Hiroshima--a second was detonated over the city of Nagasaki on Aug. 9—and how many Japanese and Americans would have died before it did.
Not only the war was presumably over, the act of throwing the bomb was a beautiful act also. As Elliot has a Japanese eyewitness describe the greatest disaster to have ever caused as something, “like a burst of light from an unearthly photo shoot, big enough to cover the sky, "blue-yellow and very beautiful."
Time goes on:
But, plainly, the most terrible war ever known ended earlier than it would have because of the Enola Gay's mission. The bombs cost tens of thousands of lives—perhaps 120,000 were killed immediately in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, with many more dying later from the effects of radiation—but they saved lives too.
More celebrations!
When he heard the news of Hiroshima, writer Paul Fussell, then a 21-year-old second lieutenant leading a rifle platoon in France and mentally preparing for the hell that an invasion of Japan was bound to be, thought, "We were going to live. We were going to grow up to adulthood after all."
And the aftermath, according to Time:
An awful weapon had saved lives; a terrible instrument of war had brought peace…..
Buried in silos in the wheat fields of North Dakota, tucked into the torpedo tubes of Soviet submarines parked in the North Atlantic, slung in the bomb bays of B-52s, the American and Soviet nuclear arsenals mutually assured the destruction of both sides if hostilities commenced. The cold war turned into a long peace.
Sounds sick to my stomach. Such narrative that proclaims that the world war was over because Japan was bombed (nay, even more sophisticatedly, detonated, not attacked!). For, some of us who are among the rest of those who don’t subscribe to this narrative know for sure when and how the war was ended. And if we still wondered why US had to bomb Japan even after the war was over, now we know the news: that the war was not actually over. It needed one Hiroshima and then again, one Nagasaki to call it over!
What logic does Elliot has in saying Hiroshima was not enough to call it over, if at all in his weirdest philosophy, all we need is some bombings to end wars? Why did we need another bomb after 8 days? No logic, just plain statement: “An awful weapon had saved lives; a terrible instrument of war had brought peace…..”
Brought peace? For whom? For the generations of Japanese who lived with the scar and became numb enough to traverse from royal monarchies to economic imperialists without an utter?
The underlying theme of the Anniversary Special (see the celebratory tone! Calling it an anniversary special than maybe a Guilt-ridden Summer Remembrance) of the magazine is to say that we needed to bomb Japan so that we shall have peace. Moreover, it was not a bad thing to bomb after all. Hey, we got an eyewitness to say that the after-effects of the bombing was “blue-yellow and very beautiful”!
Such sick!
And finally Time declares that the bombs (which are bad in the hands of the “terrorists”, it concludes too) led to nuclear arsenal competitions leading to cold war which brought long lasting peace!
Notice the web of lies: First,
that the war got over because of the bomb
(whereas in actual, the war had long ended after
which US surprised everyone by bombing Japan
mercilessly, first Hiroshima and then again
Nagasaki), second, that the after-effects of
bombing was beautiful experience (whereas the
gruesome truth is that all of us know what
happened to generations of people, even as Time
could manage to get an old man stand with a
picture of the bombing as to show how beautiful
event it was to celebrate), third, that the
bombings saved lives (whereas we know that
millions have died for no good reason at all),
fourth, that the people after all grew up to
live well (whereas we know the systematic
tortures on Japanese-Americans which go largely
untold for several suppressive reasons), fifth,
that cold war brought peace (whereas nothing
could be further from the truth).
Cold war was not that cold. We know millions of innocent civilians who have been systematically annihilated in the name of protecting them from Communism (even within the country, McCarthyism was such a reality) with active interventions in third-world countries of Asia, Latin America and Africa. That was the hottest war series ever continued. And thanks to the whole suspicion trail of nuclear arsenal acquisitions of rivaling blocs.
And today, after the end of so-called Cold War, we know that the same bomb greed has led many countries to feel insecure, join the arms race, whereas they could involve in developmental works they have drained out resources to build arsenals to join the club, we know of the numerous nuclear plant leaks and disasters--most of which are so embarrassing that they are not discussed, we also know that many misguided youth and deliberately led religious fanatics are in quest of the formula too, not to be left out of the race.
And the world is most unsafe than ever before. We are having televised wars and children are bombing neighbors on their video games. More bombs don’t make the world safer place. I am sure the readers of Time know of this. Or I doubt. I am still waiting to read few letters to the editor.
With God On Our Side
03/08/05 22:25 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
The rebel-poet of a bygone era. And his spell.
Why a poet must choose a side. Even as Dylan himself would dispute his activism. A generation or two stayed awake. Thanks to him. Read More...
Why a poet must choose a side. Even as Dylan himself would dispute his activism. A generation or two stayed awake. Thanks to him. Read More...
Iran War: Not Another Life
People who want peace at any cost are increasingly
becoming rare. This, notwithstanding an inherent
human necessity for survival. Possibly because of the
way, “war” as a word has been normalized by the media
as not one aberration, but one natural everyday
process, that folks don’t pay much attention to
necessity for survival.
Well, yet another war story, depending on where one comes from. For those of us who can’t stand war, its not just inhuman, but grossly unacceptable. Let not the protests begin after a thousand American working class youths are murdered on the front. The protest has to begin now. Not to “bring the boys back home”. But not to send them at the first place to the frontiers of war. We have seen enough of the sadistic pleasures of cowardice heads of the states. And now we got to show them (the global allies of imperialistic defense manufacturers) the might of resistant and organized peaceniks. Read More...
Well, yet another war story, depending on where one comes from. For those of us who can’t stand war, its not just inhuman, but grossly unacceptable. Let not the protests begin after a thousand American working class youths are murdered on the front. The protest has to begin now. Not to “bring the boys back home”. But not to send them at the first place to the frontiers of war. We have seen enough of the sadistic pleasures of cowardice heads of the states. And now we got to show them (the global allies of imperialistic defense manufacturers) the might of resistant and organized peaceniks. Read More...
Divided States of Europe
By Saswat Pattanayak
The European Union will stay a wishful nightmare. After the French, the Dutch have now stomped down the proposed bill to create the second elite world of “United States of Europe,” throwing the Britain on the spot.
This clearly is a major victory against the capitalist propagandists who intended to use the Union as a commercial and defense weapon. Three cheers to the grassroots activism shown by the working class population of French and the Dutch who have time and again defeated the interests of classicist, elitist and colonialist ruling classes of their countries.
History bears witness to the recent past misadventures of the European colonialists in the Third World countries. The French occupation of Indo-China and Algeria are gross reminders of how blissfully draconic have stayed a certain section of imperialists even towards the 1970s. South Africa was more recent an example of ravaged peoples who were allowed seats of power only in the 1990s. Of course, not with a condition that the brute rulers would leave the land and compensate the exploited people with their dues. Rather, in an unenviable situation where the former rulers continued to dominate all economic sectors and refused to let go of any privileges.
Lest history also be forgotten for convenience, some progressive people have come up against any coalition of the hegemonists in the Europe any more. No more allies and axis this time, they triumphantly have declared.
But I do not think all people voted against such proposed legislation out of an altruistic intention of not going the American way. On the contrary, learning from history, it could be well argued that self-interests inherent in nationalistic prides (therefore, racial and fascistic) have led to such decision on most parts. Because as it appears, the solution does not lie in not believing in a union of colonialist states, the solution instead lies in building up the coalition of a world body that would address global concern from local standpoints. And of course a world body which would punish unapologetic apostles of lynching, for example, and punish the oppressive war-wagers.
Unless the Dutch and the French fellow citizens not demand for a referendum to disband the NATO and join a global coalition of working class people to form a World Body without an elitist security council, its not believable that the intentions of our awakened peoples are in the desirable direction, and not in yet another dangerously nationalist, segregationist path.
And no one is even asking for a referendum to see how many come forward to apologize for the bloody history of interventionist policies historically taken up in the name of NATO, and before that, White Pride.
The European Union will stay a wishful nightmare. After the French, the Dutch have now stomped down the proposed bill to create the second elite world of “United States of Europe,” throwing the Britain on the spot.
This clearly is a major victory against the capitalist propagandists who intended to use the Union as a commercial and defense weapon. Three cheers to the grassroots activism shown by the working class population of French and the Dutch who have time and again defeated the interests of classicist, elitist and colonialist ruling classes of their countries.
History bears witness to the recent past misadventures of the European colonialists in the Third World countries. The French occupation of Indo-China and Algeria are gross reminders of how blissfully draconic have stayed a certain section of imperialists even towards the 1970s. South Africa was more recent an example of ravaged peoples who were allowed seats of power only in the 1990s. Of course, not with a condition that the brute rulers would leave the land and compensate the exploited people with their dues. Rather, in an unenviable situation where the former rulers continued to dominate all economic sectors and refused to let go of any privileges.
Lest history also be forgotten for convenience, some progressive people have come up against any coalition of the hegemonists in the Europe any more. No more allies and axis this time, they triumphantly have declared.
But I do not think all people voted against such proposed legislation out of an altruistic intention of not going the American way. On the contrary, learning from history, it could be well argued that self-interests inherent in nationalistic prides (therefore, racial and fascistic) have led to such decision on most parts. Because as it appears, the solution does not lie in not believing in a union of colonialist states, the solution instead lies in building up the coalition of a world body that would address global concern from local standpoints. And of course a world body which would punish unapologetic apostles of lynching, for example, and punish the oppressive war-wagers.
Unless the Dutch and the French fellow citizens not demand for a referendum to disband the NATO and join a global coalition of working class people to form a World Body without an elitist security council, its not believable that the intentions of our awakened peoples are in the desirable direction, and not in yet another dangerously nationalist, segregationist path.
And no one is even asking for a referendum to see how many come forward to apologize for the bloody history of interventionist policies historically taken up in the name of NATO, and before that, White Pride.
May 1 Address
01/05/05 23:58 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
Speech given by commander in chief Fidel Castro Ruz,
President of the Republic of Cuba at the International
May day celebration in Revolution Square on May 1, 2005
http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/discursos/2005/ing/f010505i.html
President of the Republic of Cuba at the International
May day celebration in Revolution Square on May 1, 2005
http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/discursos/2005/ing/f010505i.html
(Cheering)Read More...
Listen, hold on for just a bit longer, because today you will be lucky and I won’t be speaking at great length.
(Cheering, and shouts of "No!")
Nature is on our side, look at the breeze
and the clouds; everything is on the side of our noble cause.
Dear personalities and fighters from more than 60 nations who are sharing this historic May Day with us;
Threat Perception and Indifference
By Saswat Pattanayak
"...We only wish we had more cameras to show the world their true defeat...." The Iraqi Resistance speech videotaped on December 13 2004 has been released, titled Title: Communiqué Number 6. I do not know how many of you saw the video or read the transcript, but I am certain that the knowledge of it will help.
The dangers of not acknowledging that things as terrible as inflicted by American administration on Iraq can also happen to American people, is one of no less magnitude. Comfortable psychological numbness has its temporary relief. But not to pay heed to the Resistance Speech may result only in the great disbelief. I wonder why the mainstream press would not publish the transcript in detail. And when the press here talk about the resistance movement in Iraq, why the interpretation is to the effect that ‘we’ are now under a threat of terrorism and hence we need to deploy more forces.
Elsewhere I had brought up the news of sending more troops. I will talk about the perils in another piece. But for now, every American and the world citizen has a right to know what the resistance speech contains.
The perception that certain speech can cause problems for the American people is like claiming that certain television shows are the cause behind all the crimes. Quite the contrary I believe the average American has to be sensitized enough by the knowledge that the plot is thickening now and hence will be either more prepared to send the children to warfront or resist the war itself.
In doing the resistance, the speech here may not inspire, but for sure inform that there is a need here to stop the ongoing war for good.
We need to panic more. The proud administrators who claim that there has not been an attack on America after 9/11, obviously do not believe that the thousands of deaths of young Americans on Iraqi soil is not the staging of the video games, but a reality that the attack on Americans is going on. Only this time, we know for sure who has ordered the attack. You are right, not Iraq.
Here is excerpts from the speech...(so that we all panic a bit more. and put a stop to this madness called war. And yes, war will not end war like it almost used to. Because unlike ever before in history this time, we-the United States at least, have the weapons of mass destruction—And mass weapon knows no nationalities. The illusion is that some children–not our children, or at least not us (sic!)–are dying to make us safe in our land. But the reality is the struggle going on in that far away land to declare otherwise. Excerpts from what Islamic Jihad Army claims:
"It is our duty, as well as our right, to fight back the occupying forces, which their nations will be held morally and economically responsible; for what their elected governments have destroyed and stolen from our land.
We have not crossed the oceans and seas to occupy Britain or the U.S. nor are we responsible for 9/11. These are only a few of the lies that these criminals present to cover their true plans for the control of the energy resources of the world, in face of a growing China and a strong unified Europe . It is Ironic that the Iraqi’s are to bear the full face of this large and growing conflict on behalf of the rest of this sleeping world.
We do not require arms or fighters, for we have plenty.
XXX
We ask you to form a world wide front against war and sanctions. A front that is governed by the wise and knowing. A front that will bring reform and order. New institutions that would replace the now corrupt.
Stop using the U.S. dollar, use the Euro or a basket of currencies. Reduce or halt your consumption of British and U.S. products. Put an end to Zionism before it ends the world. Educate those in doubt of the true nature of this conflict and do not believe their media for their casualties are far higher than they admit.
XXX
The enemy is on the run. They are in fear of a resistance movement they can not see nor predict.
We, now choose when, where, and how to strike. And as our ancestors drew the first sparks of civilization, we will redefine the word “conquest.“
This conflict is no longer considered a localized war. Nor can the world remain hostage to the never-ending and regenerated fear that the American people suffer from in general.
We will pin them here in Iraq to drain their resources, manpower, and their will to fight. We will make them spend as much as they steal, if not more
And to the American soldiers we say, you can also choose to fight tyranny with us. Lay down your weapons, and seek refuge in our mosques, churches and homes. We will protect you. And we will get you out of Iraq , as we have done with a few others before you.
XXX
Go back to your homes, families, and loved ones. This is not your war. Nor are you fighting for a true cause in Iraq .
And to George W. Bush, we say, “You have asked us to ‘Bring it on’, and so have we. Like never expected. Have you another challenge?” XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
If this does not make people conscious of the perils of war in general, nothing ever will. Its time to take a stand. And the stand cannot be for indifference. We cannot be indifferent any more, as I have discussed,the numbness will not help.
"...We only wish we had more cameras to show the world their true defeat...." The Iraqi Resistance speech videotaped on December 13 2004 has been released, titled Title: Communiqué Number 6. I do not know how many of you saw the video or read the transcript, but I am certain that the knowledge of it will help.
The dangers of not acknowledging that things as terrible as inflicted by American administration on Iraq can also happen to American people, is one of no less magnitude. Comfortable psychological numbness has its temporary relief. But not to pay heed to the Resistance Speech may result only in the great disbelief. I wonder why the mainstream press would not publish the transcript in detail. And when the press here talk about the resistance movement in Iraq, why the interpretation is to the effect that ‘we’ are now under a threat of terrorism and hence we need to deploy more forces.
Elsewhere I had brought up the news of sending more troops. I will talk about the perils in another piece. But for now, every American and the world citizen has a right to know what the resistance speech contains.
The perception that certain speech can cause problems for the American people is like claiming that certain television shows are the cause behind all the crimes. Quite the contrary I believe the average American has to be sensitized enough by the knowledge that the plot is thickening now and hence will be either more prepared to send the children to warfront or resist the war itself.
In doing the resistance, the speech here may not inspire, but for sure inform that there is a need here to stop the ongoing war for good.
We need to panic more. The proud administrators who claim that there has not been an attack on America after 9/11, obviously do not believe that the thousands of deaths of young Americans on Iraqi soil is not the staging of the video games, but a reality that the attack on Americans is going on. Only this time, we know for sure who has ordered the attack. You are right, not Iraq.
Here is excerpts from the speech...(so that we all panic a bit more. and put a stop to this madness called war. And yes, war will not end war like it almost used to. Because unlike ever before in history this time, we-the United States at least, have the weapons of mass destruction—And mass weapon knows no nationalities. The illusion is that some children–not our children, or at least not us (sic!)–are dying to make us safe in our land. But the reality is the struggle going on in that far away land to declare otherwise. Excerpts from what Islamic Jihad Army claims:
"It is our duty, as well as our right, to fight back the occupying forces, which their nations will be held morally and economically responsible; for what their elected governments have destroyed and stolen from our land.
We have not crossed the oceans and seas to occupy Britain or the U.S. nor are we responsible for 9/11. These are only a few of the lies that these criminals present to cover their true plans for the control of the energy resources of the world, in face of a growing China and a strong unified Europe . It is Ironic that the Iraqi’s are to bear the full face of this large and growing conflict on behalf of the rest of this sleeping world.
We do not require arms or fighters, for we have plenty.
XXX
We ask you to form a world wide front against war and sanctions. A front that is governed by the wise and knowing. A front that will bring reform and order. New institutions that would replace the now corrupt.
Stop using the U.S. dollar, use the Euro or a basket of currencies. Reduce or halt your consumption of British and U.S. products. Put an end to Zionism before it ends the world. Educate those in doubt of the true nature of this conflict and do not believe their media for their casualties are far higher than they admit.
XXX
The enemy is on the run. They are in fear of a resistance movement they can not see nor predict.
We, now choose when, where, and how to strike. And as our ancestors drew the first sparks of civilization, we will redefine the word “conquest.“
This conflict is no longer considered a localized war. Nor can the world remain hostage to the never-ending and regenerated fear that the American people suffer from in general.
We will pin them here in Iraq to drain their resources, manpower, and their will to fight. We will make them spend as much as they steal, if not more
And to the American soldiers we say, you can also choose to fight tyranny with us. Lay down your weapons, and seek refuge in our mosques, churches and homes. We will protect you. And we will get you out of Iraq , as we have done with a few others before you.
XXX
Go back to your homes, families, and loved ones. This is not your war. Nor are you fighting for a true cause in Iraq .
And to George W. Bush, we say, “You have asked us to ‘Bring it on’, and so have we. Like never expected. Have you another challenge?” XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
If this does not make people conscious of the perils of war in general, nothing ever will. Its time to take a stand. And the stand cannot be for indifference. We cannot be indifferent any more, as I have discussed,the numbness will not help.
US troops all time high!
05/12/04 09:18 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Editorial
Fox 5 news commentary:
“After much criticism of the US Government for not sending enough troops to Iraq, the President has finally increased the troops number. From 138,000 now, the number will increase to 150,000 coming week.”
Now, who criticized the US for not sending troops?
Just a pointer home: to make sure that the protests around the country to “bring the troops back home” continues: the statistics shows that 150,000 is more than 148,000–number of soldiers who were sent to Iraq at the peak of invasion in May 2003.
“After much criticism of the US Government for not sending enough troops to Iraq, the President has finally increased the troops number. From 138,000 now, the number will increase to 150,000 coming week.”
Now, who criticized the US for not sending troops?
Just a pointer home: to make sure that the protests around the country to “bring the troops back home” continues: the statistics shows that 150,000 is more than 148,000–number of soldiers who were sent to Iraq at the peak of invasion in May 2003.
American Museum finally Opens
21/09/04 09:49 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Editorial
The Smithsonian Institution's Museum of the American
Indian on the Mall in Washington finally saw light.
Not just long due, but also long suppressed, the idea
is a great relief in its materialized form.
What least can one afford to pay as a tribute to the peoples who were forced to convert to the Jesusland? For peoples who were perished so that the corporate American Dream can be established? A museum?
Well, it appears some talks will surely take place between intersections of minorities in this country. Hopefully it will not be played on the same cards of favoritism that strives to attract attention of the Whites.
What least can one afford to pay as a tribute to the peoples who were forced to convert to the Jesusland? For peoples who were perished so that the corporate American Dream can be established? A museum?
Well, it appears some talks will surely take place between intersections of minorities in this country. Hopefully it will not be played on the same cards of favoritism that strives to attract attention of the Whites.
Neo Cons on the Run?
Since Blogger may not always keep it alive, try the
link. or read the story below. I think it's
revealing. And I view Cons as Cons. You know what I
mean 
http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2004/06/continuing-triumph-of-neoconservatism.html
It has become very fashionable to believe that the neocons are on the run, and their hold over American politics has finally come to an end. Nothing could be further from the truth. Although Iraq isn't going well, and the torture issue is proving to be a bit of an embarrassment for certain Washington elites, the power of the neocons continues pretty much unabated. They are keeping a low profile until it is clear that oil prices will stay low enough for Bush to be reelected, but their ultimate plans for the Middle East and the world remain in place, and are quietly advancing. Americans who think that some fairy godmother - either the CIA, 'patriotic' U. S. generals, or the U. S. Congress - is going to rescue them are dreaming in technicolor. All kinds of terrible legal things are supposed to be in the works for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, and all the infamous neocons from Wolfowitz on down. Just who exactly will be bringing all these people to justice? Read More...
http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2004/06/continuing-triumph-of-neoconservatism.html
It has become very fashionable to believe that the neocons are on the run, and their hold over American politics has finally come to an end. Nothing could be further from the truth. Although Iraq isn't going well, and the torture issue is proving to be a bit of an embarrassment for certain Washington elites, the power of the neocons continues pretty much unabated. They are keeping a low profile until it is clear that oil prices will stay low enough for Bush to be reelected, but their ultimate plans for the Middle East and the world remain in place, and are quietly advancing. Americans who think that some fairy godmother - either the CIA, 'patriotic' U. S. generals, or the U. S. Congress - is going to rescue them are dreaming in technicolor. All kinds of terrible legal things are supposed to be in the works for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, and all the infamous neocons from Wolfowitz on down. Just who exactly will be bringing all these people to justice? Read More...
World Economic Outlook
18/04/04 07:56 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
The World Economic Outlook presents the IMF staff's analysis and projections of economic developments at the global level, in major country groups (classified by region, stage of development, etc.), and in many individual countries. It focuses on major economic policy issues as well as on the analysis of economic developments and prospects.
Click here to see it all...Its not worth reading it all, anyway....
Arundhati Roy: Do turkeys enjoy thanksgiving?
That inimitable Arundhati Roy's speech at the WSF...
Do turkeys enjoy thanksgiving?
By Arundhati Roy
LAST JANUARY thousands of us from across the world gathered in Porto Allegre in Brazil and declared — reiterated — that "Another World is Possible". A few thousand miles north, in Washington, George Bush and his aides were thinking the same thing.
Our project was the World Social Forum. Theirs — to further what many call The Project for the New American Century.
In the great cities of Europe and America, where a few years ago these things would only have been whispered, now people are openly talking about the good side of Imperialism and the need for a strong Empire to police an unruly world. The new missionaries want order at the cost of justice. Discipline at the cost of dignity. And ascendancy at any price. Occasionally some of us are invited to `debate' the issue on `neutral' platforms provided by the corporate media. Debating Imperialism is a bit like debating the pros and cons of rape. What can we say? That we really miss it? Read More...
Idi Amin and his friends of the World
By Saswat Pattanayak
Good riddance to bad rubbish…
Well almost. I don’t think we had a good riddance of this character at all. The notorious former Ugandan dictator, Idi Amin, has died in exile in Saudi Arabia today.
And who saved him from being killed or lapidated (stoning one to death)? For someone who wiped out 400,000 people like a fascists, the media portrayed him as a buffoon and a cannibal!
Additional news came about how Soviet Union was the sole member in the UN security council to reject a motion to declare Uganda of committing human rights violation. And alongside, US and Britain even went ahead and denounced Amin and closed their embassies.
Well, between easy and difficult, the West chose the easy and cut-off all relations. As if the people in Uganda were the worse humans to deal with! As if it were all the faults of Ugandanians. So the solution was to oppose UN and impose sanctions and cut off business. So that the people suffer.
Suffer for doing what? For resenting against Amin of course!
How many countries can claim to have a leadership which is supported by the majority of its people, anyway? Worse, why should Amin had a place if not ably supported by some external forces. The blame went to the Reds, without any substantiation, except the UN vote which to me, sounds ridiculous, since any sanction is not good for the people of the country. Since the rulers don’t care, sanctions or no sanctions.
Here are some pointers (click here for an article by Steven Niven):
Saudi Arabia shielded one of the biggest anti-human institutions. How come nothing happened to this host country? Next logical question: Who shields the Saudis? Only answer: Of course we know!
Good riddance to bad rubbish…
Well almost. I don’t think we had a good riddance of this character at all. The notorious former Ugandan dictator, Idi Amin, has died in exile in Saudi Arabia today.
And who saved him from being killed or lapidated (stoning one to death)? For someone who wiped out 400,000 people like a fascists, the media portrayed him as a buffoon and a cannibal!
Additional news came about how Soviet Union was the sole member in the UN security council to reject a motion to declare Uganda of committing human rights violation. And alongside, US and Britain even went ahead and denounced Amin and closed their embassies.
Well, between easy and difficult, the West chose the easy and cut-off all relations. As if the people in Uganda were the worse humans to deal with! As if it were all the faults of Ugandanians. So the solution was to oppose UN and impose sanctions and cut off business. So that the people suffer.
Suffer for doing what? For resenting against Amin of course!
How many countries can claim to have a leadership which is supported by the majority of its people, anyway? Worse, why should Amin had a place if not ably supported by some external forces. The blame went to the Reds, without any substantiation, except the UN vote which to me, sounds ridiculous, since any sanction is not good for the people of the country. Since the rulers don’t care, sanctions or no sanctions.
Here are some pointers (click here for an article by Steven Niven):
The United States' officially hostile stance obscured its ongoing support of Amin's regime. It continued to provide military helicopters and parts long after the US had claimed to have cut off aid and also provided "special police training" to high ranking officers in Amin's SRBPSU. In July 1979, the Washington Post quoted a CIA official's explanation for assisting the Ugandan secret police. His answer suggests that, like the other governments who assisted Amin, the US believed that it could control and manipulate him. "By training Amin's men," the CIA official remarked, "we were able to have some influence over Amin. It was also a possibility that we could go back to the trainees later for intelligence operations."
In December 1986, the New York Times reported that CIA operatives provided bombs, military equipment, and training to Amin in 1975, to assist him in subduing domestic unrest, in spite of congressional legislation forbidding such sales. The Times report, issued during the unfolding Iran-Contra scandal, noted that "there was no indication whether George [H.W] Bush, the director of Central Intelligence at the time, was aware of the operation." Throughout the 1970s, former CIA operatives funneled sophisticated surveillance equipment made by American companies to the Ugandan secret police. British companies — including the state-owned car manufacturer, British Leyland — likewise provided Amin with state-of-the-art surveillance and military equipment, even though the UK broke diplomatic relations with Uganda in 1976. Ironically, British trade with Uganda continued even though, as the Sunday Herald of Glasgow reported yesterday, Britain's Labour Government was at the same time considering assassinating Amin.
Saudi Arabia shielded one of the biggest anti-human institutions. How come nothing happened to this host country? Next logical question: Who shields the Saudis? Only answer: Of course we know!
A World to Win
I came across this news service--A World to Win News
Service. They have the following to say:
"While we are not yet able to offer well-rounded and rapid coverage based on a network of correspondents, the world situation - including US imperialism's ongoing wars on the Oppressed Countries, the people's growing resistance and their equally growing revolutionary needs and movements - has made it necessary for us to enter the battle for a public opinion based on the truth now, even though we can only do that in a modest way now. AWTWNS is published only electronically. All its articles may be reprinted, excerpted or used in any other way as long as it is credited."
You can find them here
"While we are not yet able to offer well-rounded and rapid coverage based on a network of correspondents, the world situation - including US imperialism's ongoing wars on the Oppressed Countries, the people's growing resistance and their equally growing revolutionary needs and movements - has made it necessary for us to enter the battle for a public opinion based on the truth now, even though we can only do that in a modest way now. AWTWNS is published only electronically. All its articles may be reprinted, excerpted or used in any other way as long as it is credited."
You can find them here
Yet another aimless Treaty!
One has heard of the SALT and NPT and the CTBT.
Here is yet another one: MTSOR.
Moscow Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions.
And the following is a lesser known joint statement passed early this month:
On May 24, 2002, we pledged to build a new strategic relationship between the United States of America and the Russian Federation. We declared our partnership, and our commitment to work together to advance stability, security, and prosperity for our peoples, and to work jointly to counter global challenges and help resolve regional conflicts. We also declared that where we had differences, we would work to resolve them in a spirit of mutual respect.
We have met again to reaffirm our Nations’ partnership and our commitment to meet together the challenges of the 21st century.
With the completion of the ratification procedures by the United States Senate, and the two houses of the Russian Federal Assembly, we have been able to exchange instruments of ratification for the Moscow Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions. The Treaty takes effect immediately. The deep reductions of strategic nuclear warheads that it codifies are another indication of the transformed relationship between our two countries.
We will intensify efforts to confront the global threats of terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery, that threaten our peoples and freedom-loving peoples around the world.
In this regard, we declare our intention to advance concrete joint projects in the area of missile defense which will help deepen relations between the United States and Russia.
How long shall things stay on the paper? As long as it results in Russian reductions….
Here is yet another one: MTSOR.
Moscow Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions.
And the following is a lesser known joint statement passed early this month:
On May 24, 2002, we pledged to build a new strategic relationship between the United States of America and the Russian Federation. We declared our partnership, and our commitment to work together to advance stability, security, and prosperity for our peoples, and to work jointly to counter global challenges and help resolve regional conflicts. We also declared that where we had differences, we would work to resolve them in a spirit of mutual respect.
We have met again to reaffirm our Nations’ partnership and our commitment to meet together the challenges of the 21st century.
With the completion of the ratification procedures by the United States Senate, and the two houses of the Russian Federal Assembly, we have been able to exchange instruments of ratification for the Moscow Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions. The Treaty takes effect immediately. The deep reductions of strategic nuclear warheads that it codifies are another indication of the transformed relationship between our two countries.
We will intensify efforts to confront the global threats of terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery, that threaten our peoples and freedom-loving peoples around the world.
In this regard, we declare our intention to advance concrete joint projects in the area of missile defense which will help deepen relations between the United States and Russia.
How long shall things stay on the paper? As long as it results in Russian reductions….
Jul 2007
Jun 2007
May 2007
Apr 2007
Mar 2007
Feb 2007
Jan 2007
Dec 2006
Nov 2006
Oct 2006
Sep 2006
Aug 2006
Jul 2006
Jun 2006
May 2006
Apr 2006
Mar 2006
Feb 2006
Jan 2006
Dec 2005
Nov 2005
Oct 2005
Sep 2005
Aug 2005
Jul 2005
Jun 2005
May 2005
Apr 2005
Mar 2005
Feb 2005
Jan 2005
Dec 2004
Nov 2004
Oct 2004
Sep 2004
Aug 2004
Jul 2004
Jun 2004
May 2004
Apr 2004
Mar 2004
Feb 2004
Jan 2004
Dec 2003
Nov 2003
Oct 2003
Sep 2003
Aug 2003
Jul 2003
Jun 2003
Jun 2007
May 2007
Apr 2007
Mar 2007
Feb 2007
Jan 2007
Dec 2006
Nov 2006
Oct 2006
Sep 2006
Aug 2006
Jul 2006
Jun 2006
May 2006
Apr 2006
Mar 2006
Feb 2006
Jan 2006
Dec 2005
Nov 2005
Oct 2005
Sep 2005
Aug 2005
Jul 2005
Jun 2005
May 2005
Apr 2005
Mar 2005
Feb 2005
Jan 2005
Dec 2004
Nov 2004
Oct 2004
Sep 2004
Aug 2004
Jul 2004
Jun 2004
May 2004
Apr 2004
Mar 2004
Feb 2004
Jan 2004
Dec 2003
Nov 2003
Oct 2003
Sep 2003
Aug 2003
Jul 2003
Jun 2003