Thursday 20th of February 2020

giving the bully the finger...

giving the bully the finger...

President Vladimir Putin’s visit to China on June 25 will continue the tradition of frequent high level Sino-Russian meetings that have been going on since 2014. In 2015 Putin and China’s President Xi Jinping met four times.

During their meeting in Beijing, Putin and Xi are expected to discuss economic cooperation and the geopolitical issues – such as the situation in Syria, the deployment of the American THAAD missile defense system in South Korea, and the growing tension between China and local US allies in the South China Sea.

According to the Russian ambassador to China, Andrey Denisov, Chinese trade with Russia is still no match to its trade with America, but the gap has been narrowing during the last 25 years. “If it had not been for the dramatic fall in oil prices, the volume of trade between Russia and China in 2014 would have exceeded $100 billion,” Denisov told the Interfax news agency.

Moscow and Beijing had to restart trading in the early 1990s almost from scratch: as the frosty relations between Maoist China and the Soviet Union in 1960s-1970s had brought trade almost to a standstill. The Soviet Union and China had ideological differences, which the pre-neocon US used with great skill, reorienting the Chinese economy to cooperation with American companies in the 1980s and 1990s.

Today, the opposite is happening. In Denisov’s words, Russia and China are now seeing eye to eye on Syria, US-inspired “regime changes” in many countries and other important international political problems. Meanwhile, Sino-US cooperation has been put under political pressure by Washington’s concern about China’s “peaceful rise” (the favorite expression of the Chinese foreign ministry, describing China’s growth as devoid of imperial ambitions). The new configuration of forces on the world stage reflects in the dynamic of Putin-Xi summits.

At least two of the last year’s meetings between the leaders had an important symbolic meaning. The BRICS’ summit in Ufa - the capital of an autonomous region with a mostly Muslim population in central Russia - took place in July 2015. The Ufa summit is seen now as the most productive in terms of BRICS’ development projects, with the creation of joint development banks and currency pools. Putin’s attendance of the celebrations commemorating the 70th anniversary of the end of the World War II in China in September 2015 also had an important symbolic meaning. The Chinese celebrations then were boycotted by US President Barak Obama and other Western leaders, despite China being an ally of the US in that war, which by far lost the largest number of people among the countries that fought Imperial Japan.

The Sino-Russian relations are given a special boost by the fact that they are currently based on mutual respect,” said Professor Yang Xiyu, senior fellow at the China Institute of International Studies. “You don’t always see that in China’s relations with Western countries.”

Signs of respect for China from Washington have been especially slow in coming. The absence of President Obama at the parade in Beijing in 2015, which commemorated the victory of the Sino-Russian-American coalition in the war with Japan, was unofficially explained by Obama’s unwillingness to support a show of China’s military might.

US Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, during her campaign in 2015-2016, was not particularly sympathetic to China, describing President Xi as a "shameless".

Descriptions of China as an aggressive power, posing a threat to both its neighbors and the US, have been made this year by senior US defense officials with connections to Clinton. The recent naval exercises in the South China Sea, conducted by American warships with the navies of United States’ allies, had a specific goal of checking Chinese ambitions in the area, i.e. showing Beijing its place. The US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter labeled China's behavior in the South China Sea "self-isolating" and visited American aircraft carriers in the area.

I don’t think Russia needs to get involved in the Sino-American rivalry in the South China Sea directly,” said Aleksandr Lukin, the director of the Center for East Asian Studies at MGIMO University in Moscow. “But this rivalry creates an important part of context for Sino-Russian relations, making the Chinese side to be more forthcoming to Russia’s needs and worries.”

Experts agree that in May 2014 it was Obama’s hostile policy towards both China and Russia that pushed the Chinese to agree to higher prices for Russian natural gas. The natural gas will be supplied to China via the 2,500-mile Power of Siberia pipeline – now under construction. The deal, worth $400 billion over 30 years, was helped by the fact that days earlier Obama promised American support to just about all of China’s rivals in South-East Asia.

The EU is also helping Russian-Chinese cooperation by threatening to reduce its “dependence” on Russian energy. The recent threat by the European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker to apply the same EU legislation to the newly planned Nord Stream-2 pipeline - which foiled Russia’s South Stream project to supply gas to Greece and Italy - will no doubt make Russia’s “turn to the East” timelier than ever.

Russia’s turn to China is natural, and wise people would not need the EU and the US to tell them that Russia had to look east at last,” said Sergey Karaganov, Dean of the Faculty of World Economy and International Affairs at the Moscow-based Higher School of Economics. “But we had a lot of illusions about the West, for many years after the fall of communism in 1991. We should thank the disastrous leadership of Mr. Obama and the Eurocrats for setting us on the right path.

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/348210-china-putin-visit-russia-xi/

 

soros was also the money behind the panama papers...

 

China Gives 'Tough Response' to George Soros’ Attempts of Currency War



Billionaire investor George Soros has a new enemy as the businessman with a net worth of $24 billion has recently engaged in an information war against the Chinese government, an article on the French news and analytics website Boulevard Voltaire read.

George Soros declared war on the Chinese currency at the World Economic Forum at Davos and his influence has already affected fluctuations at global financial markets.

Soros said he would bet against Asian currencies, predicting a "hard landing" for the Chinese economy, according to Bloomberg.

However, in response, Beijing recommended not to take Soros’ predictions seriously.

 

On June 7, the Chinese government warned the billionaire from starting a currency war against yuan. In a press-release, the government said that attempts by Soros to take on the renminbi and Hong Kong dollar were "doomed to fail."
Recently, the well-informed American website ZeroHedge published an article which stated that the US is suffering from a "Dutch disease" and "financial predators."The article was in response to Soros who last week once again predicted an economic collapse in China.
In 1992, Soros dealt a blow to the British pound, bringing the Bank of England to its knees. The British government had to withdraw its national currency from the European exchange system. This is enough for the Chinese government to be alarmed over Soros’ predictions, the article read.

Beijing’s response to Soros is part of China’s tough measures against those trying to provoke a meltdown in the Chinese market, it added.

"Currently, there is a downturn in the Chinese economy. Neocons are trying to use the situation to destroy everyone threating to American hegemony, including China," the author wrote. 

George Soros is a well-known American business magnate and philanthropist. The financier rules a huge financial empire and has written 12 books on subjects ranging from terrorism to global capitalism and is one of the richest, most influential people in the world.

http://sputniknews.com/business/20160621/1041690520/soros-china-currency-war.html

 

something worth reading...

 


American Exceptionalisms

 

The old kept us out of conflict; the new leads to empire.

 

By RICHARD GAMBLE • September 4, 2012

read more: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/american-exceptionalisms/

 

for a peaceful europe...

Russia should be integrated into a new collective peace and security system which will add significantly to a more stable Europe, Sarah Wagenknecht, member of Germany's Left Party, told Sputnik.

In an interview with Sputnik, Sarah Wagenknecht, a member of Germany's Left Party, called for her country to withdraw from NATO and create a new collective security system of which Russia should be a member.


The interview came ahead of the NATO summit which kicks off in Warsaw on July 8.According to Wagenknecht, "NATO is increasingly becoming an alliance of war" which is under the influence of the United States and poses a "concrete threat" to Europe's peace and stability.She said that the Left Party does not want such a dangerous development, which is why the party proposes an alternative.

"We stand for the idea once offered by Willy Brandt. This is related to the creation of a collective security system, which will proceed from the assumption that that peace and security in Europe is only possible in cooperation with Russia, not without it," Wagenknecht said.

Asked about how Russia could be integrated into such a system, she called for Russia's full-fledged membership.

"Russia should become a member of this new structure. In addition, the focus should be placed on the peaceful resolution of conflicts through dialogue and discussions, something that runs counter to the policy on Russia pursued by Western countries in recent years," she pointed out, citing anti-Russian sanctions and Russia's exclusion from the G-8 group.

Anakonda. Die #NATO auf Reptilienniveau — https://t.co/uHK685f4fy

— linksfraktion (@Linksfraktion) 4 июля 2016 г.

Separately, Wagenknecht mentioned a video earlier posted by the Left Party on YouTube, which drew parallels between NATO and reptiles, a clear reference to the alliance's recent war games codenamed Anaconda.

"Apparently, NATO would like to identify itself as anaconda. And in this vein, the Anaconda drills can be seen as preparation for a possible war, which is provoked by the United States for boosting its clout in Europe," she said.

Wagenknecht added that by calling for the creation of a collective peace and security system, the Left Party wants Germany to do "what France has done for many years, namely, the withdrawal from NATO."

Meanwhile, the two-day NATO summit is expected to formally approve the deployment of the alliance's four battalions in Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. Discussing ways to deter alleged Russian aggression will also be high on the agenda.


As for the Anaconda-2016 drills, they were held in Poland last month and involved a total of 31,000 troops from 24 countries as well as about 3,000 items of military equipment.With this largest war games since the end of the Cold War-era,  NATO seeks to demonstrate that it has taken Eastern European countries under its protection, sending a signal of deterrence to Russia, according to the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung.
http://sputniknews.com/world/20160706/1042500185/russia-europe-security-system.html

tit for tat and зуб за зуб...

Russia has expelled two US diplomats, including one who was the subject of an unprovoked attack by a Russian policeman outside the embassy in Moscow last month.

Sergei Ryabkov, the Russian deputy foreign minister, accused the US diplomats of being CIA agents and declared them “persona non grata for activities incompatible with their diplomatic status”.

The expulsions come in retaliation to a US decision to order two Russian diplomats to leave Washington DC following the attack. The pair were expelled on 17 June but the move was only announced on Friday.

State Department spokesman John Kirby said that on 6 June, a Russian policeman attacked an accredited US diplomat entering the US embassy compound after the American official identified himself.

Moscow, however, claimed that the US diplomat was a CIA agent who attacked the policeman as he tried to stop him to check his identification as he returned from a spying mission.

Russian state-controlled television has broadcast what appeared to be grainy footage of the attack, that appears to contradict the Russian report.

A man can be seen leaving a taxi and is almost immediately attacked by a policeman, who bursts from a sentry box and wrestles him to the ground. With the officer pinning him down, the man managed to push himself through a door into the embassy.

The expulsions had been kept secret until the footage was aired on Russian TV, with Ryabkov accusing US diplomats in Washington of failing to keep their word after asking Moscow not to publicise the moves.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/09/russia-expels-two-us-diplomats-over-incident-with-moscow-policeman

 

Russian intelligence officer, Aleksandr Poteyev, who was sentenced for treason in absentia by Russia after blowing the cover of a spy ring in the US, has reportedly died. Moscow, however, is not confirming the news or taking the defector of its wanted list.

“According to some information, Poteyev has died in the US. This data is currently being verified,” an informed source told Interfax early Thursday.

Another source confirmed that the news of Poteev’s death has reached Moscow, but stressed that “it could well be disinformation aimed at ensuring that the traitor would simply be forgotten.”

 

read more: https://www.rt.com/news/349932-russia-spy-dead-us/

washington's bad will..


Russian Harassment and Other Fables

Moscow is no longer the capital of an evil empire. Why is Washington stuck in a Cold War mindset?

By PHILIP GIRALDI • July 13, 2016
Whenever the subject of American foreign-policy catastrophes comes up, the word “Iraq” immediately comes to mind. But George W. Bush’s ill-fated invasion of that hapless land in reality did not do irreparable damage to the United States. That is not to trivialize the costs, including trillions of dollars and the deaths of thousands of Americans plus hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, but the reality is that the U.S. homeland was not attacked and the economy has not collapsed, making Iraq a war that should never have been fought but not a defeat in historic terms.

One thinks of Russia less frequently when U.S. policy failures are examined. In 1991, Russia was a superpower. Today it is a convenience, a straw man fortuitously produced whenever someone in power wants to justify weapons expenditures or the initiation of new military interventions in faraway places. Much of the negative interaction between Washington and Moscow is driven by the consensus among policymakers, the Western media, and the inside-the-beltway crowd that Russia is again—or perhaps is still and always will be—the enemy du jour. But frequently forgotten or ignored is the fact that Moscow, even in its much-reduced state, continues to control the only military resource on the planet that can destroy the United States, suggesting caution should be in order when one goes about goading the bear.

Truly, the unwillingness to takes steps after 1991 to assist Russia in its post-communism transformation into a stable, prosperous, and secure state modeled on the West is the most significant foreign-policy failure by both Democratic and Republican administrations over the past 30 years. The spoliation of Russia’s natural resources carried out by Western carpetbaggers working with local grifters-turned-oligarchs under Boris Yeltsin, the expansion of NATO to Russia’s doorstep initiated by Bill Clinton, and the interference in Russia’s internal affairs by the U.S. government (including the Magnitsky Act) have exploited Russian vulnerability and have produced a series of governments in Moscow that have become increasingly paranoid and disinclined to cooperate with what they see as a threatening Washington.

There have also been unnecessary slights and insults along the way, including sanctions on Russian officials and a refusal to attend the Sochi Olympics, to cite only two examples. The drive by Washington democracy-promoters and global hegemonists working together to push Ukraine into the Western economic and political sphere was a major miscalculation, as they failed to realize—or did not care—that what takes place in Kiev is to Moscow a vital interest. Heedless of that reality, the Obama administration, which recently endorsed the somewhat bizarre entry of Montenegro into the NATO alliance, is already treating Georgia and Ukraine as if they were de facto members. Hillary Clinton, who has likened Vladimir Putin to Adolf Hitler, has pledged to bring about their full membership in the alliance. It would not in any way make Americans more secure—quite the contrary, as the United States is pledging itself under the NATO Article 5 to defend both countries. Moscow for its part would be forced to react to such expansion.

 

Read more: 

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/russian-harassment-and-other-fables/

why are the USA so anti-chinese...?

Is it because the Chinese have territorial ambitions that could accidentally walk upon the toes of the 850 US bases around the world? Not really...

The USA are pissed off because the Chinese are doing well, technologically. The USA even claim the Chinese "steal" US intellectual property in order to achieve this.  

 

For example today, we see:

 

Chinese car brands are staking a leadership claim in the global race to dominate electric vehicles, unveiling and promoting more than 100 new models at the country's annual auto show.

More than two-thirds of the hybrid and fully electric plug-in cars on display in Beijing are from Chinese brands, despite international car giants trying hard to court the huge local market with the unveiling of several new electric SUVs.

New energy vehicles (NEVs) aren't just fashionable in China's big cities — they are also being actively pushed by China's government through subsidies for manufacturers and a planned cap-and-trade quota system that will force car companies to make at least 10 per cent of their output NEVs or face fines.

"China is already a powerhouse of advanced alternative propulsion systems and that will be the market of the future where winners and losers of the automotive industry will be decided," said Ralf Speth, CEO of Jaguar Land Rover, which is promoting a fully electric SUV to be manufactured in China called the I-Pace.

Last year 24.7 million passenger cars were sold in China, of which 777,000 of them were electric or hybrid vehicles.

While the overall growth of the world's biggest auto market has slowed substantially, electric vehicle sales are rising faster than in Western markets.

 

Read more:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-26/china-goes-electric-as-trade-tensi...

 

Yep... How many electric car manufacturers you know about, that are not Elon Musk's, worldwide... One two, three and a half? Why are the Chinese moving in on this market? How can they do it? Aren't they supposed to be backwards compared to the glorious US of A?

Well, it's complicated but in a nutshell, this stems from two different philosophies. While for the US, it's "God bless America" and use your army to destroy (bash) people who stand in your way, in China, the master plan is based on engineering at all level, including social constructs. How many kilometres of fast trains in the USA? Zero. In China? 20,000. Did I hear "whoosh"?...

Where are the most powerful computers in the world? China. And the list of engineering feat goes on and on, including EDUCATION. In America a lot of education is geared to prevent people from going to prison while swindling the system for maximum cash. It's called Harvard economic college or such. 

In China, there has been a quiet revolution. An evolution towards engineering improvements. It started a while back — and a certain Qian Xuesen was an essential cog in this play at all level of Chinese society. Qian Xuesen has become a folk hero.

So the US of A resent the Chinese... The US of A want competition AS LONG AS THEY ARE WINNING. Lose and they are whingeing to the point they become dangerous...

----------------------

Qian Xuesen, or Hsue-Shen Tsien (11 December 1911 – 31 October 2009), was a Chinese engineer who contributed to aerodynamics and rocket science. Recruited from MIT, he joined Theodore von Karman's group at Caltech, including the founding of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.[1] Later, he returned to China and made important contributions to China's missile and space program.

During the Second Red Scare, in the 1950s, the US federal government accused him of communist sympathies. In 1950, despite protests by his colleagues, he was stripped of his security clearance.[2] He decided to return to China, but he was detained at Terminal Island, near Los Angeles.[3]

After spending five years under virtual house arrest,[4]he was released in 1955 in exchange for the repatriation of American pilots who had been captured during the Korean War. He left the United States in September 1955 on the American President Lines passenger liner SS President Cleveland, arriving in China via Hong Kong.[5]

Upon his return, he helped lead the Chinese nuclear weapons program. This effort ultimately led to China's first successful atomic bomb test and hydrogen bomb test, making China the fifth nuclear weapons state, and achieving the fastest fission-to-fusion development in history. Additionally, Qian's work led to the development of the Dongfeng ballistic missile and the Chinese space program. For his contributions, he became known as the "Father of Chinese Rocketry", nicknamed the "King of Rocketry".[6][7]

 

Read more:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qian_Xuesen

 

Read also:

SHANGHAI, CHINA—It's rare that a scientist becomes a folk hero. But in China, Qian Xuesen draws crowds almost a decade after his death. On a Saturday morning in a three-story museum here, tourists admire Qian's faded green sofa set, the worn leather briefcase he carried for 4 decades, and a picture of him shaking hands with opera star Luciano Pavarotti. They file past a relic from a turning point in Qian's life—and in China's rise as a superpower: a framed ticket from his 1955 voyage from San Francisco, California, to Hong Kong in China aboard the SS President Cleveland. Once a professor at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California, he had been accused of having communist sympathies in the heat of the Red Scare and placed under virtual house arrest. Upon his release, he and his family set sail for his motherland.

After arriving in China, Qian went on to spearhead the rapid ascent of the country's nuclear weapons program, an achievement that explains some of the adulation. But his legacy is still unfolding in a second area that could have great consequences for China—and for the world. Qian, who died in 2009 at the age of 97, helped lay the groundwork for China's modern surveillance state.

Early in his career, he embraced systems engineering—an interdisciplinary field focused on understanding the general properties common to all physical and societal systems, and using that knowledge to exert control. By mapping a system's dynamics and constraints, including any feedback loops, systems theorists learn how to intervene in it and shape outcomes. Since the field's founding in the 1950s, systems approaches have been applied to areas as varied as biology and transportation infrastructure.

read more:

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/03/revered-rocket-scientist-set-moti...

 

Read from top.

Oh, and in regard to "mass surveillance of its citizens", China is not close to what the US of A are doing to their own and the rest of the world. One can say its a booming industry...