Informazione
By Dawud Rimal
Beirut: A diplomatic source has reported that the West has been discussing for some time the issue of the escalating role of Islamists in Lebanon and the Arab countries. The source reports that this discussion might wind up concluding that there is a need to rein in the role of the Islamists. It is along this line of thinking that the West has been encouraging the Lebanese regular army since the 'Abra Battle. [A two-day battle between Lebanese regular army forces and the gang of a Sunni Salafi Shaykh Ahmad al-Asir 'Abra near the southern Lebanese city of Sidon in late June 2013. Translator's note.]
The diplomatic source reports that the changes underway in Egypt were expected by the Western countries and that the leaders of the G8 discussed the matter of Islamists coming to power in a number of Arab countries, including Egypt, in their recent meeting in Northern Ireland. [The Group of Eight or "G8" (Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the USA, and Russia) met in Lough Erne, Northern Ireland, on 17-18 June 2013. Translator's note.]
The diplomatic source reports that during that G8 meeting, Russian President Putin delivered a long intervention on that subject.
The prominent European diplomatic source reports that in his statement, the Russian President addressed the leaders participating in the G8 meeting, saying:
"You want President Bashshar al-Asad to step down? Look at the leaders you've made in the Middle East in the course of what you have dubbed the "Arab Spring." Now the peoples of the region are rejecting those leaders. The revolution against Muhammad Mursi in Egypt continues and anybody who knows the character of Egyptian society is aware of the fact that it is a deeply rooted secular society of varied cultures and civilizations with a history of advanced political activity. It will never accept attempts to impose things upon it by force. As to Receb Tayyib Erdoğan [in Turkey], the street is moving against him and his star is beginning to wane. In Tunisia the Muslim Brotherhood-Salafi rule that you formed there is no longer stable and the fate of Tunisia won't be very far from the army seizing power, because Europe will never accept chaos on its borders and Tunisia is an entry way to Europe." (Putin said this before the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of Tunisia resigned to declare his candidacy for president of the republic. Note by as-Safir.)
Putin went on: "You have spread anarchy in Libya after Mu'ammar al-Qadhdhafi. Nobody can put together an authority capable of working to rebuild the state there. Yemen after the departure of 'Ali 'Abdallah Salih lacks stability in government and there is no peace in the streets. Military and security unrest continues to prevail in all the regions of the country. As to the Persian Gulf, the whole area from Bahrain to the rest of the states there is sitting atop a volcano," Putin said.
The diplomatic source reported the Russian President as saying: "You want Russia to abandon Asad and his regime and go along with an Opposition whose leaders don't know anything except issuing fatwas declaring people heretics, and whose members - who come from a bunch of different countries and have multiple orientations - don't know anything except how to slaughter people and eat human flesh. You use double standards and approach the crisis in Syria using summer and winter styles under one roof. You lie to your own peoples so as to further your interests. This is none of our business. But it is impermissible for you to lie to us and to the countries and peoples of the world, because the international stage is no longer yours alone. Your ability to monopolize it the way you did two decades ago is now gone for good."
Putin continued: "In Syria all of you are standing on the side of the forces that for the last 10 years you have claimed to be fighting against under the rubric of 'fighting terror.' Now today you are with them, helping them to take power across the region. You declare that you're going to arm them and work to facilitate sending their fighters to Syria to bring it down, weaken it, and break it up." Putin asked, "In God's name what kind of democracy are you talking about? You want a democratic regime in Syria to take the place of the Asad regime, but are Turkey and the countries you're allied with in the region blessed with democracy?"
Putin addressed US President Obama specifically, saying: "Your country sent its army to Afghanistan in the year 2001 on the excuse that you are fighting the Taliban and the al-Qa'idah Organization and other fundamentalist terrorists whom your government accused of carrying out the 11 September attacks on New York and Washington. And here you are today making an alliance with them in Syria. And you and your allies are declaring your desire to send them weapons. And here you have Qatar in which you [the US] have your biggest base in the region and in the territory of that country the Taliban are opening a representative office."
Putin turned to the President of France [François Hollande] to ask, "How can you send your army to Mali to fight fundamentalist terrorists on the one hand, while on the other you are making an alliance with them and supporting them in Syria, and you want to send them heavy weapons to fight the regime there?"
British Prime Minister David Cameron came in for some of Putin's sharpest remarks, when the Russian President told him: "You are loudly demanding that the terrorists in Syria be armed and yet these are the same people two of whom slaughtered a British soldier on a street in London in broad daylight in front of passers by, not caring about your state or your authority. And they have also committed a similar crime against a French soldier in the streets of Paris."
The diplomatic report indicates that the leaders gathered at the summit were surprised then when German Chancellor Angela Merkel supported every word that Putin said in his address. She declared her rejection of any solution in Syria other than a peaceful one, saying "because the military solution will lead Syria and the whole region into the unknown." She strongly opposed arming the Syrian Opposition, "so that these weapons don't get into the hands of the terrorists who plan to use them in attacks against cities in the European Union." She also indicated that she did not want to see some of her European partners getting involved in military and political adventures that would only serve to further deepen their financial and economic deficits, "because Germany is no longer able to serve as a financial and economic rescue line for those countries in order to help cover up their mistakes."
As-Safir newspaper, No 12522, Saturday, 6 July 2013.
===
Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia - ONLUS
https://www.cnj.it/
http://www.facebook.com/cnj.onlus/
=== * ===
Invita i tuoi amici e Tiscali ti premia! Il consiglio di un amico vale più di uno spot in TV. Per ogni nuovo abbonato 30 € di premio per te e per lui! Un amico al mese e parli e navighi sempre gratis: http://freelosophy.tiscali.it/
European Union’s Nabucco pipeline project aborted
By Clara Weiss
13 July 2013
The Nabucco pipeline project, which was to have transported gas from the Caspian Sea to Europe in order to bypass Russia, has been cancelled.
The pipeline, sponsored by the European Union (EU), had already been reduced last summer in length from the original 3,900 km to 1,300 km. The eastern section, which was to have run from Azerbaijan across Georgia and Turkey to the Bulgarian border, was abandoned. Instead, the Trans Anatolian Pipeline (TANAP), funded by Azerbaijan and Turkey, is due to come into operation in 2018.
Nabucco-West, which was to have carried gas from Turkey to Austria, through Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary, was the only remaining part of the original project. At the end of June, it was announced that this project would also be dropped.
The Shah-Deniz II consortium, which runs the largest gas field in Azerbaijan, awarded the contract for the transportation of gas to the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP), which runs through Greece and Albania and under the Adriatic Sea to Southern Italy. This route is 500 km shorter than that proposed by Nabucco-West.
The failure of the Nabucco project was due to a combination of geopolitical factors and business considerations.
Although the TANAP and TAP pipelines will reduce Europe’s dependence on Russian supplies of gas, its capacity of 10 billion cubic metres of gas per year is only around one third of the amount Nabucco was to have carried. This equates to just 1 percent of Europe’s total demand. And while Nabucco was a joint European project, Turkey and Azerbaijan are behind TANAP and TAP.
The decision to abandon Nabucco was not taken in Brussels, but in Baku. According to reports in the Russian media, the Shah-Deniz II consortium invited representatives of the Nabucco and TAP projects to the Azerbaijani embassy in Budapest, where the decision in favour of TAP was announced.
The Austrian firm OMV, which had promoted Nabucco for years, will be affected most by the decision, as well as Bulgaria’s BEH, Romania’s Transgaz, and the Hungarian firm FTSZ. These firms would all have profited from the transport of gas. The German firm RWE, which had been heavily involved in support of Nabucco, withdrew from the project some time ago.
Rival firm E.on is part of the competing project, together with the Swiss concern AXPO and Norway’s Statoil. The latter in turn controls 25.5 per cent of the Shah-Deniz consortium, which awarded the contract to TAP.
The second major part owner of Shah-Deniz is BP, which also controls 25.5 per cent. In addition, the Azerbaijani state-owned SOCAR (10 per cent), France’s Total, the Russian firm LUKOIL, the Iranian State Oil Company (NIOC), and the Turkish firm TPAO are all involved.
Planning for Nabucco began in 2002. From the start, the pipeline was a joint European and American project aimed at undermining Russian influence over the European continent by reducing Russian energy imports. Europe currently obtains 36 per cent of its gas and 20 per cent of its oil from Russia.
From a technical standpoint, however, the project never got very far. In 11 years, no country could be found to be an energy supplier. Iran, Turkmenistan, Egypt and Iraq all pulled out, and Azerbaijan finally rejected the idea.
Responding to Nabucco, Russia built the North Stream pipeline, which has been exporting gas from Russia under the Baltic Sea to Germany since 2011. In this way, it has bypassed transit countries such as the Ukraine and Belarus. The pipeline now has two lines and could possibly be expanded in the coming years, even though it is currently only supplying gas at half of its capacity.
In addition, Russia took on the South Stream project in 2007, which is to export gas from Russia, under the Black Sea and through the Balkans to western Europe. Work on South Stream began in December 2012, and it should be completed by 2018. The pipeline will be capable of supplying 63 billion cubic metres of gas per year.
Although representatives of the EU and the US state department declared their support for the decision in favour of TAP, it is a defeat for the EU. It shows how divided member states are over questions of energy and foreign policy. Until recently, there was no unanimous agreement among EU states to build the Nabucco pipeline.
In Germany, which is economically dependent on Russia but orients politically to Washington, there have been sustained conflicts for years over energy policy and relations with Russia. Germany obtains 40 per cent of its gas from Russia and is its most important trading partner in the EU. Questions of foreign policy orientation and the importing of energy from Russia played an important role in the disintegration of the Social Democratic Party (SPD)-Green governing coalition in 2005.
While former chancellor Gerhard Schröder (SPD) backed Russia’s NorthStream pipeline, Joschka Fischer of the Greens called for greater independence from Russian energy imports. In 2009, Fischer became a consultant to the Nabucco consortium. After his election defeat, Schröder became chairman of North Stream’s board of management. In April 2012, SPD politician Henning Woscherau was elected chairman of the board of directors of the South Stream project.
The question of Russian energy supplies also caused divisions throughout the EU. Last year, Hungarian president Victor Orbàn announced his country’s exit from the Nabucco project after differences with the EU over the state budget. Hungary has continued to participate in South Stream, however.
The increased independence of Turkey from Moscow was one of the main goals of the southern route from the outset. Turkey is one of the largest importers of Russian gas, but at the same time is a key political partner of NATO and the EU in Eurasia and the Caspian region. The route will now not be built under the direction of the EU, but instead primarily under the control of Turkey and Azerbaijan. The laying of the TANAP and TAP pipelines will increase the geopolitical importance of these two countries as EU energy partners.
The failure of the Nabucco project was also caused by the fact that it has not appeared economically viable for some time.
Gas expert Rudolf Huber described Nabucco in the Austrian daily Standardas “a relic from the past,” when the expanding market for gas made investment in long-range pipelines more or less secure. Due to the recession, the demand for gas has declined by more than 11 per cent since 2009. It is not currently clear if the supplies from TAP are required.
Through the development of shale gas in the United States, and the growing significance of liquefied gas, the demand on the energy market specifically for natural gas has dropped.
In eastern Europe, where the Nabucco pipeline was to have supplied gas from the Caspian region to countries that are highly dependent on Russian gas, governments are seeking to develop the production of shale and liquefied gas.
The decline in demand for natural gas and the increased importance of shale and liquefied gas has seen the position of Russia’s energy supplier Gazprom sharply weaken. Last year, gas exports to Europe from Gazprom dropped by 10 per cent. In 2012, Norway sold more gas to the EU than Russia for the first time. The growing role of Azerbaijan as an energy supplier for the EU and the TAP will see this tendency intensify.
In comparison with Nabucco-West, TAP emerged as a better business prospect due to the smaller number of transit countries. This reduced the costs and political risks involved in the business. Almost two thirds of TAP will run over Greek territory.
Greek prime minister Antonis Samaras hailed TAP in a statement as “The most important and most positive development in the last ten years for our country.” According to Samaras, TAP will put Greece “on the international energy map.”
Through the EU’s austerity measures, Greece has been forced to privatise the state-controlled energy company DEPA, as well as the state gas provider DESFA. DESFA was bought a few weeks ago by the Azerbaijani state company SOCAR, which is also involved in delivering gas for TAP.
While it currently obtains the majority of its gas from Russia, Greece will likely soon become one of the largest importers of gas from Azerbaijan. More than three quarters of Greek gas and 40 per cent of its oil imports currently come from Russia.
The Albanian government also welcomed the project as a sign of the growing geopolitical role of the country. But according to analysts, a worsening of the economic crisis, above all in Greece, could place the completion of the TAP project in doubt.
Aktivisti Nove komunističke partije Jugoslavije (NKPJ) i Saveza komunističke omladine Jugoslavije (SKOJ) učestvovali su 5.jula 2013. godine na antikapitalističkom protestu na Trgu Republike u Beogradu organizovanom preko društvene mreže Fejsbuk.
Na tom protestu komunisti su nosili crvene zastave NKPJ i SKOJ kao i zastave naše socijalističke domovine SFRJ i Socijalističke republike Srbije. Prisutnima na skupu je deljen list “Glasnik SKOJ-a” i letak protiv antinarodnih mera buržoaske pro-imperijalističke vlade Srbije. Komunisti i skojevci su skandirali “ Danas gori Španija, danas gori Grčka, goreće i Srbija samo nek se krčka”, “Neću vlast buržuja, nego radnog naroda”, “EU, napolje, napolje iz Srbije, “Bando buržujska” i druge.
U nekoliko navrata predstavnici organizatora skupa, koji dolaze iz redova raznih anarhističkih struja i lumpenproleterskih struktura, prilazili su aktivistima Partije i SKOJ-a tražeći od njih “da spuste zastave jer okupljeni narod ne želi da stane iza tih simbola”. S obzirom da iza takvog drskog zahteva nije stajala nikakva “volja većine prisutnih” već samovolja desetak anarhista i lumpenproletera, i da komunisti ne prihvataju bilo kakve ultimatume od drugih grupacija ili pojedinaca, članovi NKPJ i SKOJ su odbili da spuste svoje zastave koje su se ponosno i prkosno vijorile do samog kraja skupa. Tri puta su anarhisti i lumpenproleteri pokušali pretnjama da privole komuniste da sklone zastave tvrdeći “ nas je više i moraćete da spustite vaša obeležja”, vičući u pokušaju da zaplaše i govoreći da u slučaju da se njihova samovolja ne ispuni može doći do problema. S obzirom da komunisti, kako u svetu tako i u Srbiji, ne prihvataju anarho-fašističke metode pritiska, aktivisti NKPJ su mirno i staloženo, ali istovremeno borbeno i odlučno, objasnili onima koji su od njih to tražili da od ispunjenja drskih zahteva za spuštanjem zastava nema ništa niti da za to postoji racionalan razlog. Situacija je u pojedinim trenucima bila na ivici incidenta pa je redarska sekcija NKPJ i SKOJ bila u pripravnosti za samoodbranu ali srećom do toga nije došlo.
Razlozi zbog kojih NKPJ i SKOJ nisu želeli da sklone svoje zastave su sledeći:
1.
NKPJ i SKOJ su se odazvali pozivu za učešće na antikapitalističkom protestu. S obzirom da zastave i drugi transparenti NKPJ i SKOJ predstavljaju simbol borbe protiv kapitalističke eksploatacije njihovo isticanje na samoproklamovanom antikapitalističkom skupu je u potpunosti prihvatljivo, uobičajeno i normalno.
2.
NKPJ i SKOJ su uvek spremni na zajedničku antikapitalističku akciju sa svima onima koji se iskreno bore protiv buržoaskog eksploatatorskog sistema, ali nijedna od tih antikapitalističkih grupacija, uključujući tu i anarhiste, niti može niti sme da određuje komunistima kakve zastave i transparente će da nose na skupovima. To je unutrašnja stvar NKPJ i SKOJ na koju bilo ko van njihovih organizacinih struktura niti treba niti može da utiče. Kada god anarhisti u Srbiji postupaju racionalno u klasnoj borbi, NKPJ i SKOJ su spremni na zajednički nastup u segmentima u kojima je to moguće. Međutim, kada god anarhisti u Srbiji pokušaju da nameću svoju samovolju komunistima, NKPJ i SKOJ će to tretirati kao anarho-fašistički atak kome će se beskompromisno suprotstaviti.
3.
Jedan od anarhističkih i lumpenproleterskih “argumenata” zašto komunisti treba da spuste zastave je bio da “je reč o protestu naroda, i da narod nije za komunističke zastave”. Međutim, sem desetak anarhista i lumpenproletera, niko od prisutnih na skupu, nije uputio reč kritike niti je izrazio bilo kakav revolt protiv komunističkih, jugoslovenskih i zastava SR Srbije. Takođe, komunisti su deo naroda, NKPJ i SKOJ su njegov neodvojiv deo, a zastave i drugi komunistički transparenti su simboli borbe radnog naroda za slobodu i pravdu, zbog čega crvene zastave većini prisutnih nisu smetale.
4.
Anarhistički i lumpenproleterski elementi koji su organizovali protest pokušali su da ga predstave kao “nepartijski” i “direktnodemokratski” pod firmom da se navodno protive svakoj političkoj manipulaciji. Međutim, upravo su oni bili ti koji su se ponašali politikantski pokušavajući svim prisutnima na skupu da nametnu utopistički i nenaučni anarhistički način borbe i ideologiju. Većina prisutnih na skupu nisu bili anarhisti, pa samim tim nemaju razloga da prihvate antidijalektičke anarhističke stavove o “autoritarnosti” organizacija koje se bore protiv kapitalizma i dogmatske tvrdnje da se “spontanom individualnom borbom” radni narod može izboriti za svoja prava. Dakle, istina je da su upravo anarhisti na skupu 5.jula nastupili sektaški razbijajući ujedinjeni front revolucionarne levice iz politikantskih razloga sprovođenja anarhističke demagogije o “direktnoj demokratiji”. NKPJ i SKOJ ističu da je reč o apsurdnom, nenaučnom i nedijalektičkom pristupu unapred osuđenom na propast jer je bilo kakav “direktno demokratski” oblik borbe nemoguće ostvariti u uslovima kapitalističkog okruženja. Direktno demokratski način odlučivanja moći će da se sprovede tek kada kapitalizam kao sistem bude iskorenjen u potpunosti, tek kada ceo svet postane socijalistički. Onog ternutka kada država bude odumirala, direktno demokratski oblici odlučivanja će zaživeti. Dakle, direktna demokratija je moguća, ali samo u komunističkom besklasnom društvu. U uslovima postojanja kapitalističkog okruženja nemoguće je ostvariti kako komunističko besklasno društvo tako i direktnu demokratiju. Zbog toga je, kako pravilno uči marksizam-lenjinizam, potrebna izgradnja socijalističkog društvenog uređenja kao tranzicionog puta ka komunizmu. To što anarhisti ne prihvataju socijalističku državu i proletersku političku partiju je deo njihove utopističke dogme ali to nije razlog da drugima nameću svoju demagošku antidijalektičku političku strategiju licemerno se još predstavljajući kao “antipolitikanti”. Na skupu 5.jula im to nije pošlo za rukom ni sa aktivistima NKPJ i SKOJ niti sa većinom prisutnih.
5.
Licemerje i dvostruki aršini anarhista i lumpenproletera su još jedan razlog zbog kojih NKPJ i SKOJ nisu sklonili svoje zastave i još jedan dokaz perfidnosti koje sprovode prvenstveno razne anarhističke frakcije koje deluju u Srbiji. Naime, dok su lumpenproletrski organizatori skupa bezuspešno pokušavali da uklone crvene komunističke zastave licemerno su “tolerisali” vojorenje jedne crne anarhističke zastave. Dakle, iz toga se sasvim jasno vidi da su lumpenproleterima i anarhistima smetale samo crvene zastave na protestu.
Iako su NKPJ i SKOJ očekivali provokacije anarhista, nadajući se iskreno ipak da do njih neće doći, iako su očekivali jalovost i bezidejnost na skupu, s obzirom na to ko ga zakazuje, doneta je odluka da se uzme učešće na protestu kako bi se podržala antikapitalistička manifestacija. Time su NKPJ i SKOJ pokazali svoje anti-sektaštvo i principijelnu težnju za stvaranje ujedinjenog fronta radnog naroda kao jedinog rešenja za suprotstavljanje samovolji međunarodne i srpske buržoazije. Aktivisti Partije i SKOJ niti su delovali samoreklamerski niti su pokušavali da preuzmu skup, već su skandirajući opšteprihvaćene antikapitalističke parole demonstrirali potrebu za ujedinjenu akciju svih onih koji se bore za prava radnog naroda. NKPJ i SKOJ poručuju da se radni narod ne može izboriti za svoja prava niti može suprotstaviti kapitalističkoj eksploataciji “spontanom”, “individualnom” i “direktnodemoratskom borbom”. Takva taktika nigde u svetu niti daje bilo kakve rezultate niti postiže bilo kakav uspeh. Istorija pokazuje da je anarhistička praksa suprotstavljanja kapitalizmu utopistička, bezidejna i unapred osuđena na propast.
S obzirom da je buržoazija ujedinjena i pozicionirana u svojim reakcinarnim organizacijama za odbranu eksploatatorskog sistema, po istom principu mora biti ujedinjen i pozicioniran u svojoj borbenoj organizaciji radni narod kako bi se izborio za slobodu i pravdu. Samo organizovanom borbom, samo stvaranjem borbene organizacije koja će biti alternativa kapitalističkom izrabljivanju može se sprovesti samooslobođenje radničke klase od diktature kapitala. Takođe, organizovanje antikapitalističkog protesta nije stvar volje nekolicine pojedinaca već je potreban konkretan razlog za protest i odgovarajuća organizaciona forma. U Srbiji konkretno to znači, da radni ljudi treba da se ujedine, odnosno okupe oko ideje odbrane aktuelnog zakona o radu od izmena koje planira vladajuća buržaozija koje će za radnog čoveka biti još lošije jer će omogućiti veći stepen eksploatacije i olakšati kapitalističkim poslodavcima otpuštanje radnika. Zbog toga radni narod Srbije treba da se usprotivi antinarodnim merama “za borbu protiv krize” koje je donela buržoaska pro-imperijalistička vlada Srbije a naročito reakcionarnim izmenama zakona o radu. Sve istinske levičarske organizacije i pojedinci, sve klasno svesne sindikalne organizacije treba da se ujedine u jedinstveni narodni radnički front koji će se koordiniranom akcijom i delovanjem suprotstaviti reakcionarnoj politici kapitalističkih vlastodržaca. U cilju agitovanja za stvaranje takvog ujedinjenog narodnog radničkog fronta, u cilju stvaranja takve opštenarodne antikapitalističke organizacije. u cilju sprečavanja reakcionarnih izmena zakona o radu, su delovali aktivisti NKPJ i SKOJ na antikapitalističkom protestu 5.jula na Trgu Republike u Beogradu. Samo organizovanim otporom buržaziji, samo stvaranjem borbenog fronta, radni narod može ostvariti pobedu u borbi za svoju egzistenciju i prava.
Sekretarijat SKOJ-a
Beograd, 5. jul 2013.god.
