SEAPORTS REVIEW

November 26, 2006 at 7:56 pm | Posted in Earth, Economics, Financial, Globalization, History, Research | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

history.gif

world.gif

compass.gif

loudspeaker.gif

seaports.gif

SEAPORTS PRESS REVIEW

Monday, November 27, 2006 Volume: 6 Issue: 20

Ray Venturino, publisher

Seaports Press Review, www.seaportspr.com

E-mail: publisher@seaportsoftheamericas.com

Seaports Publications Group

Commonwealth Business Media, Inc.

Ray Venturino, Publisher

33 Washington St., 13th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102

Tel: (973) 848-7207

Email: rventurino@seaportsinfo.com

For Immediate Release

Sponsored by: Port of Oakland

Sponsored by:

AAPA Seaports Series

Port News

Sponsored by:

Weston Solutions, Inc.

Port Services & Technology News

Sponsored by:

North Carolina State Ports Authority

Trade Shows, Conferences & Exhibitions

Sponsored by:

TOC Events Worldwide

Sponsored by: DoveBid, Inc.

Welcome to SEAPORTS PRESS REVIEW, an update of port, shipping,
multimodal, logistics and maritime transportation news and events.

Some have started much sooner, but with Thanksgiving in the U.S. now behind us, the
holiday shopping season has officially begun. So how did our ports handle it? In short,
extremely well.

Reports from the National Retail Federation show that October port numbers had a spike
in container throughput. It was another record year and with the peak season now winding
down, for the most part, ports are operating without congestion, and the truck and rail
systems are handling the volume. Congratulations to our infrastructure.

What’s ahead on the seaports publications front?

1. Last call for advertising your brand and message in the Winter AAPA Seaports Magazine. Insertion orders
are due on Dec. 6, and by Dec. 8, we will need materials. Don’t forget the 4,000 targeted
circulation and bonus distribution at six key industry conferences. Visit www.seaportspr.com and go to "newsletter archive" for our
last few newsletter issues, which give more information on advertising in this magazine.
We hope you will join us.

2. JAXPORT Winter magazine
– Insertion orders are due on Dec. 11 and the deadline for ad materials is Dec. 13.

3. The Port of Miami and Georgia Ports Authority official annual directory deadlines
are closing in as well. Insertion order closing dates are Dec. 8 for Miami, and Dec. 13
for Georgia, with ad materials due Dec. 13 and Dec. 18, respectively.

4. Our new http://www.seaportsinfo.com Web site will go live next week. It will offer greater
functionality and ease of navigation, and host our latest media kit and dedicated port
directory promotional literature. It comes at a perfect time of year as you begin your
budgeting and branding process, both in print and online. My team and I look forward to
building a targeted branding program that complements your business and marketing
objectives.

Now let’s see what’s in the news . . .

Kind regards,

Ray Venturino, publisher

Seaports Press Review, www.seaportspr.com

E-mail: publisher@seaportsoftheamericas.com

Sponsored by: AAPA Seaports Series

DHL Ready to Take on the Holiday Rush – Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Ever Strong, 7th S-Type Greenship Launched for Evergreen in Kobe, Japan – Wednesday,
November 22, 2006

45ft Intermodal Breakthrough for European Car Shippers – Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Lockheed Marrten Forms Savi Group to ‘Turbo Charge’ Turn-Key Supply Chain Solutions –
Tuesday, November 21, 2006

University of Maryland Business School Is Recipient of New IANA Scholarship Program –
Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Sponsored by: Weston Solutions, Inc.

Atwood (Woody) Collins III Appointed to Maryland Port Commission – Tuesday, November
21, 2006

Fraser River Port 3rd Quarter Cargo Stats Reflect Benefits of Diversity – Monday,
November 20, 2006

Georgia’s Ports Achieve Record Growth and Outstanding Service Performance – Monday,
November 20, 2006

Nation’s Two Largest Ports Approve Plan to Reduce Air Pollution and Health Risks –
Monday, November 20, 2006

Port of Tacoma Commission Approves 2007 Budget & Funding of General Obligation Bond
Debt – Monday, November 20, 2006

Sponsored by: North Carolina State Ports Authority

Virginia International Terminals Earns Industry Recognition for Chassis Pool –
Saturday, November 25, 2006

Kalmar Reinforces its Market Leadership in South America with Latest RTG Orders –
Thursday, November 23, 2006

ACL Announces New Libyan Ports to Mediterranean Roro Service – Tuesday, November 21,
2006

Leading European Intermodal Platform Connects to INTTRA – Tuesday, November 21, 2006

New Senior Appointment at TT Club – Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Sponsored by: TOC Events Worldwide

For our current schedule of upcoming Trade Shows, Conferences and Exhibitions, please
visit:

http://www.seaportspr.com/events.cgi

Seaports Publications Group

Commonwealth Business Media, Inc.

Ray Venturino, Publisher

33 Washington St., 13th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102

Tel: (973) 848-7207

Email: rventurino@seaportsinfo.com

Sunday, November 26, 2006

Seaports Press Review

rventurino@joc.com

Ray Venturino rventurino@seaportspr.com

Sunday, November 26, 2006

ROMAN DMOWSKI & MODERN POLITICAL ANTISEMITISM IN POLAND

November 26, 2006 at 1:30 pm | Posted in Books, Globalization, History, Military, Philosophy, Zionism | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

history.gif

world.gif

dmowski.jpg

ROMAN DMOWSKI

b. August 9, 1864, Warsaw – d. January 2, 1939

ROMAN DMOWSKI (b. August 9, 1864, Warsaw – d. January 2, 1939 Drozdowo, Poland) was a Polish politician, statesman, and chief ideologue and co-founder of the National Democratic Party (Endecja).

Biography

Born in the partitioned Poland, as a student he became active in the “Zet” Polish Youth Association (Zwiazek Mlodziezy Polskiej “Zet”), organizing a student street demonstration on the 100th anniversary of the Polish Constitution of May 3, 1791. For this he was imprisoned by the Russian Tsarist authorities for six months in the Warsaw Citadel.

Later Dmowski headed the National League (Liga Narodowa). In 1895 he settled in Lemberg, Austria-Hungary (modern Lviv, Ukraine; known as Lwów to the Poles), and in 1897 co-founded the National-Democratic Party (Stronnictwo Narodowo-Demokratyczne or Endecja). The Endecja was to serve as a political party, a lobbying group and an underground organization that would unite Poles inclined to Dmowski’s views into highly disciplined and committed political group.[1] In 1899, Dmowski founded the Society for National Education as an ancillary group.[2] A brilliant biologist, he won much prestige within the Polish community with his scientific accomplishments. In 1898-1900 he resided in France and Britain. In the face of an ascendant Germany, he argued for tactical Polish cooperation with Tsarist Russia and brought about a pro-Russian reorientation within the National-Democratic Party. In 1901 he returned to Austrian partition of Poland, taking up residence in Kraków.

Upon the outbreak of the Russo-Japanese War in 1904, Dmowski traveled to Japan in a successful effort to prevent her from providing Jozef Pilsudski with Japanese assistance for a planned insurrection in Poland, an insurrection which Dmowski felt would be doomed to failure.[3]

In 1905 Dmowski moved to Warsaw, at the time part of the Russian partition of Poland. During the Russian Revolution of 1905, Dmowski favoured co-operation with the Imperial Russian authorities and welcomed Nicholas II’s October Manifesto of 1905 as a step in the road towards renewed Polish autonomy.[4] During the revolt in Lódz in June 1905, the Endeks, acting under Dmowski’s orders, opposed the uprising led by Pilsudski’s Polish Socialist Party.[5] Indeed, over the course of the “June Days,” as the Lódz uprising is known, a miniature civil war raged with Endek.[6]

For the elections of the First Duma — boycotted by the PPS — the Endeks won 34 out of the 55 seats allocated to Poland.[7] Dmowski himself was a deputy to the Second and Third Russian Dumas and president of the Polish club within it. Before 1914, Dmowski was prepared to settle for Polish autonomy within the Russian Empire, as he believed that an independent Poland would swiftly become dominated by Germany, as Germans (in his view) had a better developed state and stronger social organisation. In light of what he regarded as German superiority, Dmowski felt that a strong Russia was Poland’s best protection, and best chance for reuniting all Polish territories under one rule. In Dmowski’s view the Russian policy of Russification was impossible against Poles, while Germans would be far more successful in
their Germanisation. Dmowski’s great rival Józef Pilsudski argued that Russia was a gre
ater threat to the Poles than either Germany or Austria-Hungary [e.g. “With the Germans, we lose our land. With the Russians, we lose our soul”.]

Throughout his life, Dmowski deeply disliked Pilsudski and everything he stood for.[8] Dmowski came from an impoverished urban background and had little fondness for Poland’s traditional social structure.[9] Instead, Dmowski favored a modernizing program and felt Poles should stop looking back nostalgically at the old Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which Dmowski held in deep contempt and should instead embrace the “modern world.”[10] In particular, Dmowski despised the old Commonwealth for its multi-national structure and religious tolerance.[11] He was especially critical of its failure to create a common identity for various ethnic groups, such as Ukrainians and Belarussians. Dmowski adored science and preferred logic and reason over emotion and passion.[12] Dmowski once told Ignacy Jan Paderewski that music was “mere noise”.[13] Dmowski felt very strongly that Poles should abandon what he considered to be foolish romantic nationalism and useless gestures of defiance and should instead work hard at becoming businessmen and scientists.[14] Dmowski was very much influenced by Social Darwinist, then popular in the Western world and saw life as a merciless struggle between “strong” nations who dominated and “weak” nations who were dominated.[15] In his view nations could be classified in four categories :

1 Nations on the lowest scale of being able or desiring to become independent and self-governing for example in Dmowski’s view the Belarussians.

2 Nations capable of self-governing themselves with awakened nationalistic
aspirations-for example Ukrainians

3 Nations wishing to regain independence with centuries-old cultures and statehoods past (e.g. Poles).

4 Nations on the highest ladder of social development and tradition, possessing a country currently (e.g. Germans).

In his 1902 book Mysli nowoczesnego Polaka (Thoughts of a Modern Pole), Dmowski denounced all forms of Polish Romantic nationalism and traditional
Polish values.[16] He sharply criticized the idea of Poland as a spiritual concept and as a cultural idea.[17] Instead Dmowski argued that Poland was a merely a physical entity that needed to be brought into existence through pragmatic bargaining and negotiating, not via what Dmowski considered to be pointless revolts doomed to failure before they even began against the partitioning powers.[18] For Dmowski, what the Poles needed was a “healthy national egoism” that would not be guided by what Dmowski regarded as the unrealistic political principles of Christianity.[19] In the same book, Dmowski blamed the fall of the old Commonwealth in its tradition of tolerance.[20] While critical of Christianity, Dmowski viewed some sub-groups of Christianity (other than Catholicism) as beneficial to certain nations. This was particularly true of Anglicanism and German Protestantism. Later in 1927 he revised this earlier views and renounced his criticism of Catholicism, seeing it as an essential part of Polish identity. Dmowski saw all minorities as weakening agents within the nation that needed to be purged.[21]
In regards to the Jewish minority, in Mysli nowoczesnego Polaka, Dmowski wrote “…in the character of this race [the Jews], so many different values strange to our moral constitution and harmful to our life have accumulated that assimilation with a larger number of Jews would destroy us, replacing us with decadent elements, rather than with those young creative foundations upon which we are building the future”.[22]

In 1914 Dmowski praised the Grand Duke Nicholas’s Proclamation of August 15, 1914 which
vaguely assured the Czar’s Polish subjects that there would be greater autonomy for
“Congress Poland” after the war, and that the Austrian provinces of East and
West Galicia together with Pomerania province of Prussia would be annexed to the Kingdom
of Poland when the German Empire and Austria-Hungary were defeated.[23] However,
subsequent attempts on the part of Dmowski to have the Russians make firmer commitments
along the lines of the Grand Duke Nicholas’s Proclamation were met with elusive
answers.[24]

In 1915 Dmowski went abroad to campaign on behalf of Poland in the capitals of the
western Allies. During his lobbying efforts, his friends included such opinion makers as
the British journalist Wickham Steed. In particular, Dmowski was very successful in
France, where made a very favourable impression on public opinion.[25] In 1917, in Paris,
he created a Polish National Committee aimed at rebuilding a Polish state. In September
1917, the Polish National Committee was recognized by the French as the legitimate
government of Poland.[26] The British and the Americans were less enthusiastic about
Dmowski’s National Committee, but likewise recognized it as Poland’s government in
1918.[27] However, the Americans refused to provide backing for what they regarded as
Dmowski’s excessive territorial claims. The American President Woodrow Wilson reported
“I saw M. Dmowski and M. Paderewsi in Washington, and I asked them to define Poland
for me, as they understood it, and they presented me with a map in which they claimed a
large part of the earth”.[28]

In part, Wilson’s objections stemmed from dislike of Dmowski personally. One British
diplomat stated, “he was a clever man, and clever men are distrusted: he was logical
in his political theories and we hate logic: and he was persistent with a tenacity which
was calculated to drive everybody mad”.[29]
Another
area of objection to Dmowski was to his anti-semitic remarks, as in a speech he delivered
at a dinner organized by the writer G. K. Chesterton, that began with the words, “my
religion came from Jesus Christ, who was murdered by the Jews”.[30]
A number of American and British Jewish organizations campaigned during the war against their governments recognizing
the National Committee.[31] Another leading critic of Dmowski was the historian
Sir Lewis Namier, who served as the British
Foreign Office’s resident expert on Poland during the war and who claimed to be personally
offended by anti-semitic remarks made by Dmowski. Namier fought hard against British recognition of Dmowski and “his
chauvinist gang”.[32]

At the end of World War I, two governments claimed to be the legitimate governments of Poland: Dmowski’s in Paris and Pilsudski’s
in Warsaw. To put an end to the rival claims of Pilsudski and Dmowski, the composer Ignacy
Jan Paderewski met with both men and persuaded them to reluctantly join forces.[33]. Both
men had something
that
the other needed. Pilsudski was in possession of Poland after the War, but as the Pole who
fought with the Austrians for the Central Powers and against the Russians during the war,
he was distrusted by the Allies. Pilsudski’s newly reborn Polish Army

needed arms from the Allies, something that only Dmowski could persuade the Allies to
deliver upon[34]. Beyond that, the French were planning to send the Blue Army of General
Józef Haller de Hallenburg — loyal to Dmowski — back to Poland. The fear was th
at if Pilsudski and Dmowski did not put aside their
differences, a civil war might break out between the partisans of Pilsudski and
Dmowski[35]. Paderewski was successful in working a compromise in which Dmowski and
himself were to represent Poland at the
Paris Peace Conference while Pilsudski was to serve as
provisional president of Poland[36].

As a Polish delegate at the Paris Peace Conference and a signer of the Versailles
Treaty, Dmowski exerted a substantial influence on the Treaty’s favorable decisions
regarding Poland. On January 29, 1919, Dmowski met with the Supreme Council of the Allies
for the first time. At the meeting, Dmowski stated that he had little interest in laying
claim to areas of Ukraine and Lithuania that were formerly part of Poland, but no longer
had a Polish majority. At the same time Dmowski strongly pressed for the return of Polish
territories with Polish-speaking majorities taken by Prussia from Poland in 1790s. Dmowski
himself admitted that from a purely historical point of view, the Polish claims to Silesia
were not entirely strong, but he claimed it for Poland on economic grounds, especially the
coal fields[37]. Moreover, Dmowski claimed that German statistics had lied about the
number of ethnic Poles living in eastern Germany and that, “these Poles were some of
the most educated and highly cultured in the nation, with a strong sense of nationality
and men of progressive ideas”[38]. In addition, Dmowski, with the strong backing of
the French, wanted to send the “Blue Army” to Po
land via Danzig, Germany (modern Gdansk, Poland); it was
the intention of both Dmowski and the French that the Blue Army create a territorial fait
accompli[39]. This proposal created much opposition from the Germans, the British and the
Americans, and fin
ally
the Blue Army was sent to Poland in April 1919 via land [40]. Pilsudski was opposed to
needlessly annoying the Allies, and it has been suggested that he did not care much about
the Danzig issue[41].

In regards to Lithuania, Dmowski didn’t view Lithuanians as having a strong national
identity, and viewed their social organisation as tribal. Those areas of Lithuania that
had either Polish majorities or minorities were claimed by Dmowski on the grounds of
self-determination. In the areas with Polish minorities, the Poles would act as a
civilizing influence; only the northern part of Lithuania, which had a solid Lithuanian
majority, was Dmowski willing to concede to the Lithuanians[42]. These claims caused
Dmowski to have very acrimonious disputes with the Lithuanian delegation at Paris[43].
With regard to the former Austrian province of East Galicia, Dmowski claimed that the
local Ukrainians were quite incapable of ruling themselves and also required the
civilizing influence of Polish leadership[44].
In
addition, Dmowski wished to acquire the oil-fields of Galica[
45].
However, only the French supported Polish claims to Galica wholeheartedly. In the end, it
was the actual fighting on the ground in Galica, and not the decisions of the diplomats in
Paris, that decided that the region would be part of Poland[46]. The French did not back
Dmowski’s aspirations in the Teschen area, and instead supported the claims of
Czechoslovak.[47]

Dmowski himself was disappointed with the Treaty of Versailles, partly because he was
strongly opposed to the Minorities Treaty imposed on Poland and partly because he wanted
the German-Polish border to be somewhat farther to the west then what the Versailles had
allowed. Both of these disappointments Dmowski blamed on what Dmowski claimed what the
“international Jewish conspiracy”.
Throughout his life, Dmowski maintained that the British Prime Minister David Lloyd George
had been bribed by a syndicate of
German-Jewish
financiers
to give Poland what Dmowski considered to be an
unfavourable frontier with Germany. Dmowski’s relations with Lloyd George were very poor.
Dmowski found Lloyd George to be arrogant, unscrupulous and a consistent advocate of
ruling against Polish claims to the West and the East[48]. Dmowski was very offended by
Lloyd George’s ignorance of Polish affairs and in particular was enraged by Lloyd George’s
lack of knowledge about river traffic on the Vistula[49]. Dmowski
called Lloyd George “the agent of the Jews”[50].

A political opponent of Józef Pilsudski, Dmowski favored what he called a
“national state,” a state in which the citizens would speak Polish and be of the
Roman Catholic faith. If Pilsudski’s vision of Poland was
Jagiellon, a multinational federation (Miedzymorze federation), Dmowski’s vision was the earlier Piast, ethnically and
religiously homogeneous
.
Pilsudski believed in a wide definition of Polish citizenship in which peoples of
different languages, cultures and faiths were to be united by a common loyalty to the
reborn Polish state. Dmowski regarded Pilsudski’s views as dangerous nonsense, and felt
that the presence of large number of ethnic minorities would undermine the security of
Polish state. At the Paris Peace Conference, he argued strenuously against the Minority
Rights Treaty forced on Poland
by the Allies.

Dmowski was an anti-Semite and Social Darwinist who saw life as a zero-sum game in
which any gain made by one group came at the expense of another. Dmowski often stated his
belief in a “international Jewish conspiracy” aimed against Poland.
In his essay “Zydzi wobec
wojny”, which comprises pages 301-308 of his 1926 book Polityka Polska i
odbudowanie panstwa
, Dmowski claimed that
Zionism was only a cloak to disguise the Jewish ambition to rule the world. Dmowski
asserted that once a Jewish state was established in Palestine, this would serve as a
nucleus for the Jewish take-over of the world.[51] In the same essay, Dmowski accused the
Jews of being Poland’s most dangerous enemy and of working hand in hand with the Germans
to dismember Poland.[52] Dmowski believe that the 3,000,000 Polish Jews could not be
assimilated and that they were far too numerous. In his own words, “a little salt may
improve the taste of the soup, but too much will spoil it.”[53]

For Dmowski, one of Poland’s principal problems was that not enough Polish-speaking
Catholics were middle-class, while too many ethnic Germans and
Jews were. To remedy this perceived problem, he
favored a policy of confiscating the wealth of
Jews and ethnic Germans and redistributing it to Polish Catholics. Dmowski was never
able to have this program passed into law by the
Sejm, but the National Democrats did frequently organize “Buy Polish”
boycott campaigns against German and
Jewish shops. The first of Dmowski’s anti-Semitic boycotts had organized in 1912 when
he attempted to organize a total boycott of
Jewish businesses in Warsaw as “punishment” for the defeat of some Endek
candidates in the elections for the Duma, which Dmowski blamed on the Warsaw’s
Jewish population[54]. Throughout his life,
Dmowski associated
Jews with
Germans as Poland’s principle enemies; the origins of this identification steams from
Dmowski’s deep anger over the forcible “Germanization” policies carried by the
German government against its Polish minority during the Imperial period, and over the
fact that most
Jews living in
the disputed German/Polish territories had chosen to assimilate into German culture, not
Polish culture[55]. In Dmowski’s opinion
Jewish community was not attracted to the cause of Polish independence and was likely
to ally itself with potential enemies of Polish state if it would benefit their status
[56].

Dmowski was a deputy to the 1919 Sejm and minister of foreign affairs from October to
December 1923. When it came time to write a Polish constitution in the early 1920s, the
National Democrats insisted
upon a weak
presidency and strong legislative branch. Dmowski was convinced that Pilsudski would
become president, and saw a weak executive mandate as the best way of crippling his rival.
The constitution of 1921 did indeed outline a government with a we
ak executive branch, and a disgusted Pilsudski refused to
seek the presidency. Instead, Pilsudski persuaded a friend of his, Gabriel Narutowicz to
run for President. When Narutowicz was elected President by the Sejm in 1922, Dmowski was
outraged. Narutowic
z was elected with the support of the parties
representing the Jewish, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Lithuanian and German minorities. In
Dmowski’s view, only those parties representing those of the Roman Catholic faith and of
Polish language and culture should have been allowed to elect the President. After
Narutowicz’s election, the National Democrats started a major campaign of
vilification of the “Jewish president” elected by “foreigners”. Subsequently, a National Democrat named
Eligiusz Niewiadomski assassinated Narutowicz.

In 1926 Dmowski founded the Camp of Great Poland (Obóz Wielkiej Polski), and in 1928
the National Party (Stronnictwo Narodowe). In 1934, a section of the youth wing of the
Endecja found Dmowski insufficiently anti-Semitic for their taste and broke away to found
the more radical National Radical Camp (known by its Polish acronym as the ONR)[57].
Dmowski had long advocated emigration of the entire Jewish population of Poland as the
solution to what Dmowski regarded as Poland’s “Jewish problem”
[58], came to argue for increasing harsh
measures against the Jewish minority[59], though Dmowski never advocated killing Jews[60].
Dmowski’s last major campaign was a series of attacks on the alleged
“Judo-Masonic” associates of President Ignacy Moscicki
[61].

Dmowski died January 2, 1939, in Drozdowo, near Lomza, where he had spent the last few
years of his life. He never married.

Writings

Mysli nowoczesnego Polaka (Thoughts of a Modern Pole), 1902.

Niemcy, Rosja a sprawa polska (Germany, Russia and the Polish Cause), 1908.

Upadek mysli konserwatywnej w Polsce (The Decline of Conservative Thought in
Poland), 1914.

Polityka polska i odbudowanie panstwa (Polish Politics and the Rebuilding of the
State), 1925.

See also

Polish-Soviet War

References

1. Zamoyski, Adam The Polish Way page 329.

2. Ibid pages 329-330.

3. Ibid page 330.

4. Ibid.

5. Ibid.

6. Ibid.

7. Ibid page 332.

8. Macmillan, Margaret Paris 1919 page 209.

9. Ibid.

10. Ibid.

11. Ibid.

12. Ibid.

13. Ibid.

14. Ibid.

15.Ibid.

16. Zamoyski, Adam The Polish Way page 329.

17. Ibid.

18. Ibid.

19. Ibid.

20. Ibid.

21. Ibid.

Mendelsohn, Ezra The Jews of East Central Europe page 38.

Zamoyski, Adam The Polish Way page 333.

Ibid.

Ibid page 334.

Ibid.

Macmillan, Margaret Paris 1919 pages 209-210 & 212.

Ibid pages 212-213.

Ibid page 210.

Ibid page 212.

Ibid.

Ibid.

Ibid page 213.

Ibid pages 213-214.

Ibid page 214.

Ibid pages 213-214.

Ibid.

Ibid.

Ibid.

Ibid.

Lundgreen-Nielsen, K. The Polish Problem at the Paris Peace Conference pages
131-134 & pages 231-233

Ibid.

Ibid pages 223-224.

Ibid page 225.

Ibid page 225.

Ibid pages 225-226.

Ibid pages 238-240.

Ibid page 217.

Ibid.

Ibid.

Mendelsohn, Ezra The Jews of East Central Europe pages 38 & 261.

Ibid page 38.

Paulsson, Gunnar S., Secret City: The Hidden Jews of Warsaw, 1940-1945,
Yale University Press, 2003, ISBN 0-300-09546-5, Google Books, p. 37

Ibid page 21.

Ibid page 41.

Ibid.

Ibid pages 68-70.

Ibid page 39.

Ibid page 70.

Zamoyski, Adam The Polish Way page 347.

61. Ibid.

Further reading

Cang, Joel “The Opposition Parties in Poland and Their Attitude towards the Jews
and the Jewish Question” pages 241-256 from Jewish Social Studies, Volume 1,
Issue #2, 1939.

Davies, Norman “Lloyd George and Poland, 1919-20″” from Journal of
Contemporary History
, Volume 6, Issue 3, 1971.

Fountain, Alvin Marcus Roman Dmowski: Party, Tactics, Ideology 1895-1907,
Boulder : East European Monographs, 1980 ISBN 0-914710-53-2.

Groth, Alexander “Dmowski, Pilsudski and Ethnic Conflict in Pre-1939 Poland”
pages 69-91 from Canadian Slavic Studies, Volume 3, 1969.

Kormarnicki, Titus Rebirth of the Polish Republic: A Study in the Diplomatic History of
Europe, 1914-1920, London, 1957.

Lundgreen-Nielsen, K. The Polish Problem at the Paris Peace Conference: A Study in the
Policies of the Great Powers and the Poles, 1918-1919: Odense, 1979.

Macmillan, Margaret Paris 1919 : Six Months That Changed The World, New
York : Random House, 2003, 2002, 2001 ISBN 0-375-50826-0.

Mendelsohn, Ezra The Jews of East Central Europe Between The World Wars,
Bloomington : Indiana University Press, 1983 ISBN 0-253-33160-9.

Wandycz, Piotr Stefen “Dmowski’s Policy and the Paris Peace Conference: Success or
Failure?” from The Reconstruction of Poland, 1914-23, edited by P. Latawski: London,
1992.

Zamoyski, Adam The Polish Way A Thousand-Year History of the Poles and their Culture,
London: John Murray Ltd, 1987 ISBN 0-7195-4674-5.

Porter, Brian, When Nationalism Began to Hate. Imagining Modern Politics in
Nineteenth-Century Poland, New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. ISBN
0-19-515187-9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Dmowski

Roman DMOWSKI (1864-1839)

Leader and ideologue of the Polish nationalist movement, political writer and novelist
(under the penname Kazimierz Wybranowski, he published Dziedzictwo [“Heritage”],
1931, and other works). B. Aug. 9, 1864, Kamionek near Warsaw, as a son of a small
businessman. He edited many journals published by the nationalist camp, among them the
theoretical organ of the League, Przegl¹d Wszechpolski. In 1903 he published Myœli
nowoczesnego Polaka (“Reflections of a Modern Pole”), a work expounding the
programme of the national-democratic movement. During World War I Dmowski – opposed to the
conservatives from Galicia (he wrote Upadek myœli konserwatywnej w Polsce [“The
Decline of Conservative Thought in Poland”], 1914), who opted for co-operation with
Austria-Hungary and Germany – headed the Polish National Committee (Komitet Narodowy
Polski, KNP), supporting the idea of unifying Polish lands under the Tsarist sceptre. In
1919 he was elected deputy to the Sejm. In 1919-1923 he
worked for governments presided over by W. Witos, for a short period serving as foreign
minister. After the May coup he founded the Great Poland Camp (Obóz Wielkiej Polski), and
wrote Œwiat powojenny i Polska (“Postwar World and Poland”, 1931) and
Przewrót (“The Coup”, 1934). In mid-1930s he withdrew from active political
life. D. Jan. 2, 1939, Drozdów.

The selected fragments are from W kwestii komunizmu (“On the Communist
Question”), reprinted from the underground press G³osy: Poznañ 1984, pp. 2-5 and
8-15.

The most outstanding political phenomenon of the twentieth century, sharply
distinguishing it from the previous one, is communist activity. […]

It is true that communism owes its victory in Russia to the specific conditions of this
country and the particular circumstances in which it launched its assault; it is true that
communist propaganda in other parts of the world is carried out almost exclusively by the
Soviet State, making use of the resources afforded by political power and control of the
treasury; it is true that even in western states communist organizations to a large extent
rely on the financial support of the Soviets. But communism in the West draws its strength
largely from the current crisis of European civilization – from the breakdown of economic
life, the political disintegration, and the collapse of the ability to govern, and last
but not least, from the moral chaos pervading the Western world.

When the countries of our civilization make desperate efforts to avoid slipping into
ruin, and societies cling to every hope for the return of recent prosperity, communism
predicts the inevitable bankruptcy of capitalism and announces that it will save the
nations through the collectivist system. It looks with disdain at the political impotence,
on the convulsions and absurdities of contemporary democracy (read: Freemasonry), having
up its sleeve an infallible method of strong government – the “dictatorship of the
proletariat”. Communism understands that breaking away from moral chaos is not so
simple, that it cannot be done in one fell swoop, but it sees the way out in educating the
masses in the spirit of its ideals: collective ownership and collective action, easy
sexual mores, godlessness, and so on.

When I say that communism draws its strength from the decay that is advancing fast in
our world, from the ever more pervading chaos, from the mounting sum of human misery and
general disaffection, I do not mean that people are attracted to it solely because it is a
negation of the unpleasant reality of today, that they adopt it blindly, without
reflecting upon whether the reality offered by communism is any better. One could say that
about the sheep, but the shepherds invariably attach positive values to communism. This is
true not only of the leaders of communist organizations, but also and above all of
spiritual guides, as well as all those – much more numerous than we think – who have a
more or less articulated, more or less pronounced affection for communism. […]

Communism in contemporary Europe is not a minor force, but one of the protagonists in
today’s historical drama. To understand its role, to realize what impact it has on the
plot development in this drama, is one of the foremost needs of the moment.

Communism is no longer just a theory, a program for the future. Because of the Russian
Revolution and the creation of the Soviet State, it is already an experiment, with almost
fifteen years of existence. Although this experiment is taking place on a terrain somewhat
exotic for a European, it provides an abundance of eloquent and instructive facts, and
knowing these facts, the human imagination can envisage in quite concrete detail what
would happen if the communist program were to be effected in Europe. […]

Many people tenaciously work for communism, relentlessly fight for it, and eagerly
await its victory. Moreover, if so, it cannot be entirely a phantom, a lie, it must
contain something that represents a value for these people, a value surpassing everything
that might come to them from different quarters. […]

If communism is a serious force, if this force is growing, it is not because faith in
Marxist economic theory, in the salutary effects of the collectivist system, is also
growing. The ascendancy of communism can only be explained by the fact that its program
contains other values – speaking more persuasively to the real people of today – values
which in our times are not less, but more relevant.

Karl Marx, the father of today’s communism, was more than just an economist. He was
also a politician, and if we look closer, he was above all else a politician. He was
preoccupied with the idea of seizing power, and he did not conceive power in
nineteenth-century terms. Neither Marx, nor his friends and followers were inebriated with
the wafts of the “Springtime of Nations”, they were not intoxicated with ideas
of freedom. The Communist Manifesto is neither an academic treatise, nor the diatribe of a
people’s champion; the ingeniously conceived and promising idea of the “dictatorship
of the proletariat” should not leave us in any doubt as to how power will be
exercised once it is taken. Long before the twentieth-century Russian experiment, the
manifesto was capable of being correctly understood.

If the main nineteenth-century descendant and representative of Marxist ideas, social
democracy, struck a compromise with capitalism and its brother parliamentarism; if it
focused its energy on the struggle for the present interests of workers and reached for
power through legislative bodies, this happened under the pressure of the working masses,
more concerned with improving their present lot than with the future “dictatorship of
the proletariat”. Very important here was the Masonic takeover of the party and the
inclination of its ruling bodies toward Masonic policies. Another important factor was the
fact that such a transformation and such achievements of the socialist policy made the
condition of socialist intellectuals much more bearable, if not quite comfortable.

However, both within social democracy and outside it, there remained strong forces
faithful to Marxist assumptions, forces for which “social revolution” and the
“dictatorship of the proletariat” were not empty agitative slogans. […] The
soil where orthodox Marxism could sprout most profusely was offered by Russia, thanks to
the characteristics of the Russian mind and to the large number of Jews
in this country; furthermore, readiness to implement the communist program, to experiment,
was greatest in Russia. Forces destined to become the first executors of the Marxist plan,
pledging their complete orthodoxy, called themselves Bolsheviks.

In the mind of Marx and Marxists, was seizing power a means to introducing collectivism
or was the collectivist program a means to winning and maintaining power?

If one could have doubts on that score in the last century, today, in the face of the
Russian experiment and the behavior of the communist movement in Europe, these doubts
should have been dispelled.

The principal, the essential point of the communist program is taking power and this
point constitutes its main attraction. This point has nothing demonic about it.
Incidentally, communists are too frequently demonized: they are flesh-and-blood,
down-to-earth people, more down-to-earth than those who look at a communist as the devil
incarnate. The pursuit of power has existed from the dawn of
humanity and has been one of the driving forces behind its history. Strong individualities
always aimed at gaining power over society, and strong nations at overpowering their
neighbors.

In the nineteenth century, with the ascendancy of Freemasonry, euphemistically calling
itself democracy, the meaning of the term “power” underwent rapid changes. It
ceased to be genuine power. Its titular holder, often sporting a royal crown, had to obey
some moron placed above him in the lodge, while the latter received his orders from his
superiors, unknown to the general public. Democratic rulers, prime ministers, and other
ministers could not enforce their own opinion and will in the most important matters. They
had to make do with the trappings and appearances of power, which, however, hold a great
appeal for ordinary people.

Yet if under democratic government power ceased to satisfy the ambitions of the strong,
it acquired other attractions. With the extraordinary growth of the bureaucratic machine,
it offered a large pool of offices, and when connections with financial spheres grew more
intimate, income tied to power increased handsomely. Hence power in the democratic system
became a stronger-than-ever economic attraction for individual people and for entire
political parties. It does not matter that you have to do many things which in normal
circumstances you would reject or which you do not always understand; in exchange you are
in control of so many benefits, you can with such ease multiply the number of your
adherents, and often you also have the opportunity of rapidly making a personal fortune.

Great individualities lusting after real power, and great ambitions desiring to govern
over people and to pass on to posterity the memory of their actions do not occur very
frequently. Even rarer are great consciences, wanting to use power not for themselves, not
for their own advantage, ambition, or glory. People who are attracted by honors,
trappings, great influence, and concrete advantages are legion. No wonder, then, that in
the democratic system the pursuit of power, any power, has become almost endemic.

In this system people acquire power through parliamentary work, or take a shortcut and
are directly planted in positions of power by Masonic lodges. However, there are those who
for some reason or other can attain power through neither of these ways, although they
fervently desire it. For them only one road remains: to stage a revolution. […]

The communist program is the program of a certain type of intelligentsia, having its
own psychology, a mindset formed in specific a direction, to which it owes its integrity
as a group. It has a program focused above all on seizing power and taking the position in
society which in today’s Europe is occupied by, as the socialists call it, the
“bourgeoisie”.

The most outstanding feature of the psychology of a Marxist, constituting the soil on
which his mindset grows, is his hatred of the past and of everything which exists in us
and in our life as a legacy of this past. The intensity of this hatred in some individuals
has always astounded me.

The strength of customs, habits, and instincts inherited from past generations, their
power over the human soul is so great as to have provoked the complaint that the dead rule
over us. The history of nations knows of partial and gradual, generations-long
emancipations from this power, the disintegration of traditional instincts, not only in
some social groups, but in whole societies. It always been the result of contact with
foreign societies, with foreign civilizations, and of surrendering to their influence.

But it would be impossible to give an example of such a sudden renunciation of the past
spanning just one generation and approaching its complete abandonment; it would be
impossible to give an example of the premeditation of this process being. Even the
beginnings of
Islam cannot
compete with Marxism on that score. What force could have caused it? What did these people
find support in for mounting such a radical challenge against the rule of the past,
against the concepts and instincts of their community? […]

Such support could not have been provided in Europe by anything which was European,
which originated in Europe, which lived by its tradition. Marxism, such as we know it,
could appear and gain such force only because there existed in European countries a strong
and well-organized element for which Europe’s past was not its past, Europe’s heritage was
not its heritage, for which the social instincts, customs, concepts, and beliefs of
European nations were alien. It had its own instincts, customs, concepts, and beliefs,
which not only separated it from European societies, but also made it sharply at odds with
them. Marxism in its entirety could be born only in a
Jewish womb, as a Jewish
progeny, and was thereby already a denial of everything that the European past created
within us and within our lives.

The origin of Marxism also explains another of its intellectual features, connected
with the first one. For an out-and-out Marxist the society in which he grew up and lives
is alien. His moral attitude to society closely resembles the attitude which Israel always
took towards foreign peoples. It divides men into those whom one can and should
proselytize and those who should be annihilated. Unless they are Jews, Marxists are in a
sense proselytes of Judaism.

We must leave at that the subject of Marx, the origin of his economics and, more
importantly, his politics, although much remains to be clarified in this respect. It is a
fact that Marx himself not only was a
Jew, but also came from a rabbinical family; and if we make a list of the most
eminent, leading representatives of Marxism since its beginnings, in their own countries,
be they social democrats or communists –
Jews will take up almost half of the list.

The ground for Marxism had been prepared by modern capitalism: not only by the changes
which occurred in the economic system and in the social constitution of European nations,
but also, and above all else, by the great ascendancy of Jews. Free competition gave a
huge advantage to ruthless forces, not constrained by any “superstitions”, that
is not subject to the moral precepts of Christianity, not bound by allegiance to society,
not commanded by its tradition, and devoid of social instincts. The most classic force in
this
respect were Jews, for
whom everything European was alien; in the system based on economic freedom, in which
society as a whole had been almost entirely cut off from influence on the economic
activity of the individual, they were destined to become the victors, the masters of the
situation.
Other factors of their ascendancy were Freemasonry and
the political constitution of European states since the time of the “Declaration of
the Rights of Man”. Hence in the middle of the nineteenth century, in the era when
Marxism was born, they were already immensely powerful. Not only due to money they had
accumulated, to their role in economic life, but also due to their positions in social
life and the influence they had started to exert on the intellectual life of Europe. Only
thanks to that position and to the great importance accorded to
Jews in Europe by the system which they called
capitalist, were the birth of the Marxist program and the proselytism it achieved
possible.

The dominance of economic and political liberalism, as well as the influence of Jews on the European society based on that
dominance, had another effect, of paramount importance for the purposes of Marxism. The
human individual was becoming more and more emancipated from the rule of tradition, he
loosened the moral bonds tying him to society, was freeing himself from the obligations
towards society, was more and more in a position to oppose society in the area of
politics, religion, morality, customs, etc. […] The number of individuals attempting to
tear off all constraints, aiming at absolute anarchy, was growing rapidly.

This cast of mind does not furnish the substance from which the Marxist organization is
molded, for Marxism is not aiming at anarchy, but at the “dictatorship of the
proletariat”, and we know how it conceives this term and what individual freedom
looks like in its plans. However, this cast of mind was and still is very useful for
Marxists, as it leads to the disintegration of European societies, and this constitutes
the precondition of their victory. […]

The strength of communism, then, lies not only in the Marxists, with their separate
mentality and the politics based on that mentality, and in the organizations of which they
are the leaders. Apart from these, it is constituted by forces – numerous in European
countries – spreading moral anarchy, antisocial forces, and finally
Jews, often independently of their station and role
in social life.

SVANTE ARRHENIUS: CO2 FORECASTS

November 26, 2006 at 12:02 pm | Posted in Earth, Globalization, History, Research, Science & Technology | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

history.gif

world.gif

compass.gif

loudspeaker.gif

SVANTE ARRHENIUS

February 19, 1859
October 2, 1927

Arhenius estimated that a doubling of CO2 would cause a temperature rise of 5 degrees Celsius [1], recent values from IPCC place this
value (the
Climate sensitivity) at between 1.5 and 4.5 degrees. What is remarkable is that through a combination of skill and luck he came within a factor of two of the IPCC estimate. His calculations were important only in a qualitative way in showing that this was a significant effect. Arrhenius expected CO2 levels to rise at a rate given by emissions at his time. Since then, industrial carbon dioxide levels have risen at a much faster rate
: Arrhenius expected CO2 doubling to take about 3000 years; it is now generally expected to take about a century.

SVANTE AUGUST ARRHENIUS

Born February 19, 1859 Vik, Sweden

Died October 2, 1927 Stockholm, Sweden

Residence Sweden

Nationality Sweden

Field Physical chemist

Institution Royal Institute of Technology

Alma Mater University of Uppsala University of Stockholm

Doctoral Advisor Eric Edlund

Doctoral Students Oskar Benjamin Klein

Known for Arrhenius equation

Notable Prizes Nobel Prize for Chemistry
(1903)

Svante August Arrhenius (February 19,
1859October 2, 1927) was a Swedish chemist and one of the founders of the science of physical chemistry. The Arrhenius equation and the lunar crater Arrhenius
are named after him.

Early years

Arrhenius was born at Vik (also spelled Wik or Wijk), near Uppsala,
Sweden, the son of Svante Gustav and Carolina Thunberg
Arrhenius. His father had been a land surveyor for Uppsala University, moving up to a supervisory
position. At the age of three, Arrhenius taught himself to read, despite his parents’
wishes, and by watching his father’s addition of numbers in his account books, became an arithmetical prodigy.

In later life, Arrhenius enjoyed using masses of data to discover mathematical
relationships and laws. At age 8, he entered the local cathedral school, starting in the fifth grade, distinguishing himself in physics and mathematics, and
graduating as the youngest and most able student in 1876.

At the University of Uppsala, he was unsatisfied with the chief instructor of physics
and the only faculty member who could have supervised him in chemistry, so he left to
study at the Physical Institute of the Swedish Academy of Sciences in Stockholm under the physicist Erik Edlund in 1881. His work specialized on the conductivities of electrolytes.
In 1884, based on this work, he submitted a 150-page dissertation
on electrolytic conductivity to Uppsala for the doctorate.
It did not impress the professors, and he received the lowest possible passing grade.
Later this very work would earn him the Nobel
Prize in Chemistry
.

There were 56 theses put forth in the 1884 dissertation, and most would still be
accepted today unchanged or with minor modifications. The most important idea in the
dissertation was his explanation of the fact that neither pure salts
nor pure water is a conductor,
but solutions of salts in water are.

Arrhenius’ explanation was that in forming a solution, the salt dissociates into
charged particles (which Michael Faraday had given the
name ions many years earlier). Faraday’s belief had been that ions
were produced in the process of electrolysis; Arrhenius
proposed that, even in the absence of an electric current, solutions of salts contained
ions. He thus proposed that chemical reactions in solution were reactions between ions.
For weak electrolytes this is still believed to be the case, but modifications (by Peter J. W. Debye and Erich
Hückel
) were found necessary to account for the behavior of strong electrolytes.

The dissertation was not very impressive to the professors at Uppsala, but Arrhenius
sent it to a number of scientists in Europe who were developing the new science of physical chemistry, such as Rudolf Clausius, Wilhelm
Ostwald
, and J. H. van ‘t Hoff. They were far
more impressed, and Ostwald even came to Uppsala to persuade Arrhenius to join his
research team. Arrhenius declined, however, as he preferred to stay in Sweden for a while
(his father was very ill and would die in 1885) and had received
an appointment at Uppsala.

Middle period

Arrhenius next received a travel grant from the Swedish Academy of Sciences, which
enabled him to study with Ostwald in Riga (now in Latvia), with Friedrich
Kohlrausch
in Würzburg, Germany,
with Ludwig Boltzmann in Graz, Austria, and with van ‘t Hoff in Amsterdam.

In 1889 Arrhenius explained the fact that most reactions
require added heat energy to proceed by formulating the concept of activation energy, an energy barrier that must be
overcome before two molecules will react. The Arrhenius
equation
gives the quantitative basis of the relationship between the activation
energy and the rate at which a reaction proceeds.

In 1891 he became a lecturer at Stockholms Högskola
(now Stockholm University), being promoted to
professor of physics (with much opposition) in 1895, and rector in 1896.

He was married twice, to Sofia Rudbeck, (who bore him one son) from 1894 to 1896, and to Maria Johansson (who
bore him two daughters and a son), from 1905 onward.

In 1901 Arrhenius was elected to the Swedish Academy of
Sciences, against strong opposition. In 1903 he became the first
Swede to be awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry.
In 1905, upon the founding of the Nobel Institute for Physical
Research at Stockholm, he was appointed rector of the
institute, the position where he remained until retirement in 1927.

Later years

Eventually, Arrhenius’ theories became generally accepted and he turned to other
scientific topics. In 1902 he began to investigate physiological problems in terms of
chemical theory. He determined that reactions in living organisms and in the test tube
followed the same laws. In 1904 he delivered at the university of California a course of
lectures, the object of which was to illustrate the application of the methods of physical
chemistry to the study of the theory of toxins and antitoxins, and which were published in
1907 under the title Immunochemistry. He also turned his attention to geology (the origin of ice ages), astronomy, physical
cosmology
, and astrophysics, accounting for the birth
of the solar system by interstellar collision. He
considered radiation pressure as accounting for comets, the solar corona, the aurora borealis, and zodiacal
light
.

He thought life might have been carried from planet to planet by the transport of spores, the theory now known as panspermia.
He thought of the idea of a universal language, proposing a modification of the English language.

In an extension of his ionic
theory
Arrhenius proposed definitions for acids and bases, in 1884. He believed that acids were substances which
produce hydrogen ions in solution and that bases were substances which produce hydroxide
ions in solution.

In his last years he wrote both textbooks and popular books, trying to emphasize the
need for further work on the topics he discussed.

In September, 1927, he came down with an attack of acute intestinal
catarrh, died on October 2, and
was buried in Uppsala.

Greenhouse effect as cause for ice ages

Svante Arrhenius developed a theory to explain the ice ages, and first formulated the idea
that changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could substantially alter
the surface temperature through the
greenhouse effect (“On the Influence of
Carbonic Acid in the Air Upon the Temperature of the Ground
“, Philosophical Magazine 1896(41): 237-76). He was influenced
by the work of others, including
Joseph
Fourier
‘s argument that the earth’s atmosphere
acted like the glass of a hot-house. Arrhenius used the infrared observations of the moon
by
Frank Washington Very and Samuel Pierpont Langley at the Allegheny Observatory in Pittsburgh to calculate the absorption of CO2 and
water vapour. Using the just published
Stefan’s
law
he formulated his greenhouse law. In its
original form, Arrhenius’ greenhouse law reads as follows:

if the quantity of carbonic acid increases in geometric progression, the augmentation of
the temperature will increase nearly in arithmetic progression.

Which is still valid in the simplified expression by Myhre et al(1998).

delta F = a ln(C/C0)

Arrhenius’ high absorption values for CO2, however, met criticism by Knut Ångström in 1900, who published the first modern infrared spectrum of CO2
with two absorption bands. Arrhenius replied strongly in 1901 (Annalen der Physik),
dismissing the critique altogether. He touched the subject briefly in a technical book
titled Lehrbuch der kosmischen Physik (1903). He later wrote Världarnas
utveckling
(1906), German translation: Das Werden der Welten (1907), English
translation: Worlds in the Making (1908) directed at a general audience, where the
suggested that the human emission of CO2 would be strong enough to prevent the
world from entering a new ice age, and that a warmer earth would be needed to feed the
rapidly increasing population. From that, the hot-house theory gained more attention.
Nevertheless, until about 1960, most scientists dismissed the hot-house / greenhouse
effect as implausible for the cause of ice ages as
Milutin Milankovitch had presented a mechanism using orbital changes of the earth.

Arhenius estimated that a doubling of CO2 would cause a temperature rise of
5 degrees Celsius
[1], recent values from IPCC place this
value (the
Climate sensitivity) at between 1.5 and 4.5 degrees. What is remarkable is that
through a combination of skill and luck he came within a factor of two of the IPCC
estimate. His calculations were important only in a qualitative way in showing that this
was a significant effect. Arrhenius expected CO2 levels to rise at a rate given
by emissions at his time. Since then, industrial carbon dioxide levels have risen at a
much faster rate: Arrhenius expected CO2 doubling to take about 3000 years; it
is now generally expected to take about a century.

See also

References

  • Svante Arrhenius, 1884, Recherches sur la conductivité galvanique des électrolytes,
    doctoral dissertation, Stockholm, Royal Publishing House, P.A. Norstedt & Söner, 89
    pages.
  • Svante Arrhenius, 1896a, Ueber den Einfluss des Atmosphärischen Kohlensäurengehalts
    auf die Temperatur der Erdoberfläche
    , in the Proceedings of the Royal Swedish
    Academy of Science,
    Stockholm 1896, Volume 22, I N. 1, pages 1–101.
  • Svante Arrhenius, 1896b, On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the
    Temperature of the Ground
    , London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine
    and Journal of Science (fifth series), April 1896. vol 41, pages
    237–275.
  • Svante Arrhenius, 1901a, Ueber die Wärmeabsorption durch Kohlensäure, Annalen
    der Physik, Vol 4, 1901, pages 690–705.
  • Svante Arrhenius, 1901b, Über Die Wärmeabsorption Durch Kohlensäure Und Ihren
    Einfluss Auf Die Temperatur Der Erdoberfläche
    . Abstract of the proceedings of the
    Royal Academy of Science, 58, 25–58.
  • Svante Arrhenius, 1903, Lehrbuch der Kosmischen Physik, Vol I and II, S. Hirschel
    publishing house, Leipzig, 1026 pages.
  • Svante Arrhenius, 1908, Das Werden der Welten, Academic Publishing House,
    Leipzig, 208 pages.

External links

Obituaries

US EMPIRE: K. GAJENDRA SINGH

November 26, 2006 at 6:08 am | Posted in Globalization, History, India, Military, Oil & Gas, Research, USA | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

history.gif

world.gif

compass.gif

The US Empire –Beginning of the End Game

The US Empire –Beginning of the End Game

By K Gajendra Singh

Gajendrak@hotmail.com

25 November, 2006.

"We are the leading nation, the most moral, born with the redemptive mission to
create what the Puritan preacher Jonathan Winthrop called the ‘City on the Hill’, the
democracy ‘of the people and by the people’ that originated the modern world with our
repudiation of monarchy and inherited privilege…

Continue

Since ‘Hezbollah Singes Samson’s Locks’ in August , this is my first piece– a long
essay on the
Decline of the US empire. Arrogant Neocons and even so called respected US academics like Prof Paul
Kennedy freely used the word empire in 2002 and 2003.

The world is now different and looks depressing with human race moving towards
destruction. The radiation poisoning horrible death of a former Russian agent in London,
which West and British media and authorities , as usual , are trying to pin on Putin and
Russia ,to soften him on EU energy charter , should open every ones eyes to deathly use of
dirty bombs. But what about the western crimes of using depleted uranium munitions in
Iraq, Afghanistan and earlier in Yugoslavia. Living in virtual reality , West believes
that the shoe can not be on the other foot. It was on 11 September.

Cheers and take care . Gajendra Singh 25 November , 2006 .Bucharest

FOUNDATION FOR INDO-TURKIC STUDIES

Tel/Fax ; 0040213163021 Amb (Rtd) K Gajendra Singh

Emails; Gajendrak@hotmail.com
Flat No 5, 3rd Floor

KGSingh@Yahoo.com
9, Sos Cotroceni,

Web site. Bucharest (Romania)

www.tarafits.com
25 November, 2006.

The US Empire –Beginning of the End Game

By K Gajendra Singh

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15729.htm

11/24/06 "Information
Clearing House
"
— – A 15th century Ottoman Sultan Murat II arranged for
Mehmet II , not the favourite son , to be trained in the art of governing at the capital
city Edirne ,under an able Grand Vizier. Mehmet II had been a wild and disobedient brat,
so Murat II advised his teacher use of the rod , which was done to good effect. A Sunni,
Sultan Mehmet II fell under the unwholesome influence of a Shia cleric, fought with the
Grand Vizier and the military Janissaries rebelled. Before Mehmet II could create further
mess, Murat II returned from Manisa, where he had retired for spiritual pursuits and took
back the reins of the empire.

US President George W. Bush, has made such an unholy mess of US polity and its foreign
policy that Papa George W. H Bush, a former President , had to create a bipartisan
Baker-Hamilton Commission, not only to salvage , whatever remains of his son’s Presidency,
but to arrest the fast decline of the hyper power, still with enormous powers of
destruction. Bush courtiers, led by the Neo-cons with their racist Straussian policies,
till 2003 were claiming Washington to be the new Rome, but alas without redeeming graces
of an empire, are now ratting on the Bush Regime.

With the Ottoman star on the rise , after the course correction , Mehmet II went on to
conquer Constantinople in 1453 , became Fethi (the Victorious) and extinguished the
millennia old Byzantine empire. This laid the foundations for the Ottoman expansion
westwards who twice knocked at the Gates of Vienna, a memory which still rankles , which
Europe now uses to keep Turkey outside the Europe Union . The ebb and flow of domination
between the East and the West is as old as history, beginning with the Greek –Persian
rivalry. US led Christian West, now dominates and exploits Muslim Middle East, Asia and
Africa and is ranged against Orthodox Slavs. Iranians remain a hard nut to crack.

Bush has only succeeded in putting the US empire’s decline into fast forward mode. Nothing
is likely to reverse the course , much to the relief of most of the world , victim of its
unilateralist policies. In 6 years USA ,from being a fairly popular country , with its
many good points in spite of flaws , has become one of the most unpopular .The US regime
has become the most hated , with Bush being rated a greater danger to the world peace than
even North Korean dictator Kim Il Jong, even among neighbours and allies like UK.

On Papa Bush’s course correction, let me quote from Tom Engelhardt ;

"Sooner or later, failure has a way of stripping most of us of our dreams and
pretensions.

‘So let’s start with a tiny history of failure. George W. Bush’s life trajectory of
failing upward has had a rhythm to it — and a rubric, "crony capitalism."
Daddy’s friends and contacts helped him into and — after he failed — out of the oil
business, into and out of the baseball business, into and now, it seems, out of the failed
game of global politics. His is, as the
Boston
Globe’s
Michael Kranish and John Aloysius Farrell put it back in
2002, "the story of a man who struck out numerous times before being bailed out by
big hitters who often were family members, friends, or supporters of his father."

‘It’s appropriate, then, that the man who bailed him out in Florida when he essentially
lost the presidency in 2000, Bush family consigliere James A. Baker III, would reappear
six years later, in the wake of another failed election, to bail him out again now that
he’s screwed up the oil heartlands of the planet.

"Daddy — we’re talking here about former President George H.W. Bush — has three
adopted boys: His former National Security Advisor (and alter ego) Brent Scowcroft, who
went into opposition to the younger Bush’s Iraq policy even before the invasion of 2003
and now lurks quietly in the wings; his former CIA Director Robert Gates; and Baker."

When driven by the Neo-Cons and other war lords , the Bush Administration was beating the
war drums against Iraq , in my Asia Times article of 24 August, 2002 , "Bush Family’s
Phony wars" I had warned that the invasion of Iraq would open a Pandora’s box in the
region. As history showed it is easy to start a war but difficult to predict its ultimate
outcome . ( Extracts below from the article are italicized )

"For the Bush family, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is the tempting Apple in the
Middle Eastern Garden of Eden. The results of succumbing to the temptation to take a bite
could be as disastrous as they were for Adam and Eve. "

Bush is now received formally only because he is the US President .People from Britain to
India demonstrate against his visit .A few days ago in Indonesia , there were vociferous
protests against his visit , with his handlers risking a bare 6 hours stay in the country.
In the most populous Muslim nation, US popularity has come down from 70% in 2001 to 30 %
now , as it has all around the globe even among allied nations. At the Asian Pacific
summit in Vietnam, leaders rebuffed Bush’s line on north Korea , which has become a
nuclear power with missiles, because of flawed US policy and its preoccupation with the
Iraqi quagmire.

In the 7 November mid-term US elections , in which his Republican party lost control of
both the Senate and the House and many Governor mansions, when many party candidates
declined to even have Bush for canvassing , he has become a dead ‘lame duck’ .
Pre-election polls showed electorate opposed to Iraq war and Bush’s performance by 2 to
1.You can not fool all the people all the time , not even the Americans , where 5 big
corporations controlling 90% of US media have kept US public misinformed. But nearly three
thousand GI body bags from Iraq war and twenty thousand maimed and injured GIs can no
longer be kept hidden.

Americans proudly call their state ‘US Incorporated’, which it has truly become, a mighty
but a dangerous company ; manufacturing , selling arms and using them recklessly all
around the world ( while experimenting with chemicals and depleted Uranium munitions ) The
Mongols , Turks and other wild tribes used arms for expanding empires but in US Inc , arms
manufacture and its use has become an end itself , to hell with the US public interest.
From hundreds of billions of US taxpayers money spent so far since the illegal invasion of
Iraq , the US arms manufacturers remain the main beneficiaries .

They are Lockheed Martin , Boeing , Northrop Grumman , Raytheon , General Dynamics,
Honeywell Halliburton, BAE Systems and thousands of smaller defense companies and
subcontractors.

Dwight D. Eisenhower (1890-1969), 34th US President in his Farewell Address on
Jan. 17, 1961 said ,"[The] conjunction of an immense military establishment and a
large arms industry is new in the American experience. . . . In the councils of
government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought
or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of
misplaced power exists and will persist." —

But now this monster has imposed itself on USA and is expanding , going for more lethal
and profitable means of destruction even against international treaties and conventions
.The end of the Cold War did not reduce this monster’s appetite .US now spends over $ 400
billion on defence ie for attacking other nations , almost equal to what the rest of the
world does .Russia spends a mere fraction of it. Members of US Congress are too deeply
involved through lobbies and influence peddling and keep this monster alive and kicking.
Tame generals after retirement can look forward to cushy jobs in the defence industry.
Currently this monster is fed by an almost equal US trade deficit.

The other players in the ruling US oligarchy are energy interests whose members and
nominees are the major decision makers in the US Administration .President Bush ,
Vice-President Dick Cheney , Secretary of State Condi Rice , US Ambassador in Baghdad ,
you name it . While Americans with gas guzzlers , who contribute half carbon dioxide to
climate warming , have paid dearly at the gas station , by manipulation and insider
trading US and UK oil multinationals have reaped massive profits .But to US chagrin
,higher oil prices have enriched energy rich Russia, Iran and Venezuela and stand up to
USA. While US hold over oil reserves is becoming shaky in the Middle East , emerging
economic powers China and India are tying up energy resources around the world .

"In 1991 George Bush Sr. sought the removal of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. He
failed and left the region in a mess. Now his son, President George W. Bush, having
inherited Dick Cheney and other chieftains from his father’s presidency, is pursuing the
family vendetta. Ordinary Iraqis continue to pay the price of this vendetta, with more
than half a million children reported to have died from lack of medicines and malnutrition
since the 1990 embargo. Iraq’s US-friendly neighbors like Jordan and Turkey are suffering
too. –

" It is difficult to know what to believe of the leaks regarding the US’s current
options to oust Saddam, ranging from assassination, fomenting a coup or internal
rebellion, air strikes against Baghdad and other Iraqi command centers, to a vast
amphibious invasion with massive air support, involving up to 250,000 soldiers. The latest
plan, involving around 60,000 troops backed by heavy air power, will begin with a swift
attack on Saddam’s elite Republican Guards around Baghdad, in the hope that the regular
Iraqi army would then abandon Saddam. Such balderdash. The result of any such actions
could be as catastrophic as Adam and Eve’s expulsion from the Garden of Eden."

The current plans being discussed either by the Administration or by the incoming
Democrats party , equally complicit in the illegal invasion of Iraq ( as were the Labour
and Conservative parties in UK ) are as fanciful as the plans leaked out before the
invasion or those actually implemented .

" Secretary of State Colin Powell, one of a few sane voices in the administration,
remains opposed to a military strike just as he was in 1991, as it has no clear strategic
objectives. Recent media leaks from the Pentagon and the State Department suggested that
"many senior US military officers contend that Saddam Hussein poses no immediate
threat and that the United States should continue its policy of containment rather than
invade Iraq". Soon another leak countered that some in the Establishment favored an
"inside-out" plan to "take Baghdad and one or two key command centers and
weapons depots first, in hopes of cutting off the country’s leadership and causing a quick
collapse of the government". Such a plan was once dismissed by General Anthony Zinni,
the US Middle East envoy, as a recipe for a "Bay of Goats" disaster, like the
1961 Bay of Pigs fiasco in Cuba."

Recently , the Pentagon suggested three options for Iraq : send in more troops, shrink the
force but stay, or pull out. These have been described as Go Big, Go Long and Go Home. But
one solution gaining favour among military commanders is summed up as "Go Big but
Short While Transitioning to Go Long". No Go home for the time being.

"A US attack could dangerously destabilize the region, harm the global economy, and
infuriate Arab and Muslim masses. Former British chief of staff Field Marshal Lord
Bramall, warned in a letter to The Times that
an invasion would pour "petrol rather than water" on the flames and provide
al-Qaeda with more recruits. He quoted a predecessor who during the 1956 Suez crisis said:
"Of course we can get to Cairo, but what I want to know is what the bloody hell we do
when we get there?"

But Bush Administration driven by Neo-Cons , Iraqi quislings like Ahmed Chalabi and Iyyad
Alawi thought that after the "Shock and Awe" , the Iraqi natives will welcome US
troops with flowers and obey commands in spite of the history of successful Iraqi
resistance against British occupation in 1920 and 30s. So much for planning.

Powell was cajoled into lying about WMDs in the Security Council before the invasion ,
smirching his own standing and seriously denting US credibility in the world. After he was
eased out, his chief aide publicly denounced the cabal of Cheney , Defence Secretary
Rumsfeld and other neo-cons for having high jacked US policy making . Even when it was
proved by US teams that there were no WMDs or plans for nuclear bombs or connection
between Iraq and Al Qaeda , Cheney and others continued to disseminate lies .A retired US
Ambassador , who exposed the US lie on Iraq getting Uranium from Niger, was harassed ,
cover of his wife Valery Plame , a CIA operative exposed , a crime under US laws.

"Bay of Goats"

US and UK troops now face a Dunkirk in Iraq , with US convoys being stopped near the
Kuwait border and mercenaries escorting them being abducted .The time for escape is
running out from the blow back of the ‘Desert Storm". Billions of dollars have been
outsourced to mercenaries outfits and others with little audit or control over the loot.
Even the British , who occupy regions inhabited by Shias , who were happy with the
overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s Sunni regime but oppose foreign occupation , are quitting
Basra and are camping in the safety of the Desert , protected by jets and helicopter gun
ships .

" However, there is room for hope that worse may not come to worst: a saving grace of
the US constitutional system of checks and balances is that Bush may be the most powerful
man in the world, but he can’t ignore Congress. And, however much George Bush Sr might
hate Saddam, he would not want his son’s presidency to end in disgrace."

It is quite clear that such hopes based on "US constitutional system of checks and
balances ‘ did not materialize .The system has degenerated and collapsed and needs drastic
overhaul . It is morphing into a dictatorship , with Patriot laws , racial profiling ,
unauthorized telephone tapping and spying in universities .The retraction of liberties in
UK is equally bad , with big brother watching every move on video cameras and hundreds of
British born and bred Muslims ready to volunteer even as suicide bombers.

A people elect the government they deserve as they did in USA in 2000 and 2004 .Only in
USA a Presidency can be won by legal jiggery pokey , when lawyers , even when elevated to
the august Supreme Court still remain loyal party lawyers and did not allow votes for Al
Gore, Bush’s rival to be counted . This has for ever tarnished the standing and
credibility of US legal system and its democratic pretensions. It is not the only
fundamental flaw from which the US democracy suffers . How can there be democracy , when 5
Corporate entities control media ,where billions of dollars are required to be collected
against IOU’s to fight elections . There are lobbies galore , more than 50 for each
Congressman , which spend US$ 2.4 Billion (Billion ) a year in wining, dining and
corrupting the lawmakers .The many Congress scandals are only a tip of the iceberg of
corruption.

Most of the Congressmen are millionaires and each term enriches them further .No wonder
the poor in US remain neglected , their number increasing and income disparities widening
. There are 37 million poor , one in every four blacks . The top 1 percent of the
population now owns 33.4 percent of US wealth while the bottom 50 percent has 2.5 percent.
The Bush-Cheney team has racked up another $3 trillion in debt in just 6 years. The US
national debt now stands at $8.4 trillion dollars while the trade deficit has ballooned to
$800 billion, nearly 7% of GDP.

Unless these and other flaws are corrected , US will remain an incorporated company and
not a true democracy. It has morphed into a vehicle for the corporate interests , of the
corporate interests and by the corporate interests . Period . Capitalism may be driven by
greed , but in USA , greed has become end all and be all , the new faith and cult .
Rampant consumerism has become its daily ritual , planet earth warming may be damned .
Greedy scientists can be hired to say whatever you want , that tobacco smoking was not
linked to cancer .

"Bush left reality behind. Now we are all trapped’

US analyst William Pfaff recently wrote ,"For Americans, Iraq has ceased to be a
video game running along the edge of public consciousness. The midterm congressional
elections demonstrate that the US public wants to get out of Iraq almost as much as the
British, as does the attention suddenly given to the Baker-Hamilton Commission, which was
actually set up months ago.

"But how is exit to be accomplished? Clearly the White House does not know, nor does
the US army. The Baker-Hamilton Commission is unlikely to know, as its members were chosen
because they represent the higher reaches of the conventional wisdom.

"In America, it’s as though Bush, his inner cabinet, and the neocons have been
playing a video game, with fictional characters and victims, virtual death and torture.
Now the disc has suddenly finished, and it’s time to shut down the player.

"This is not just a figure of speech. American policy has been running on images
rather than evidence of real nations and people doing things for real human motives. It
has been populated by abstractions: Global Terrorist Conspiracies, Rogue Nations, Fanatics
Who Hate Our Freedoms, Generations of Terrorism and The Global Menace of Al-Qaeda.

"We are the leading nation, the most moral, born with the redemptive mission to
create what the Puritan preacher Jonathan Winthrop called the ‘City on the Hill’, the
democracy ‘of the people and by the people’ that originated the modern world with our
repudiation of monarchy and inherited privilege, establishing the greatest of republics,
saving the Four Freedoms for the world by winning (alone!) both First and Second World
Wars, then the Cold War, and now confronting the ultimate test of the ‘long war’ against
Evil itself, incarnate as Terror.

"Today this is the language of government, journalism, politics and foreign policy in
the US, spoken in the policy discussions at Washington think-tanks and on the editorial
pages of newspapers.

"Is this Orwellian? Or is it just demagogy, politicians’ lies, White House spin,
journalistic laziness, formulations conceived to sell books? Or could it be cynical
manipulation by apprentice dictators, energy industry and weapons-maker magnates, closet
fascists? It is not Orwellian in that the neocon ideologues, George Bush and Tony Blair,
certainly believe all this. They are not being manipulated.

"It is not Orwellian because the creators of this cartoon-like conceptual world have
themselves become actors in the virtual universe their ideas and actions have made. They
have left reality behind – or they simply ignore it, as they did in invading Iraq."

Let me quote from another of my 4 year old piece "The decline of the American Century
‘ of 11 September, 2002 Asia Times online;

"If the American public were told that an attack on Iraq would not be like the
1990-91 computer game [ which the US media obediently disseminated ] and might cause many
thousands of casualties (given the low US threshold last tested in Mogadishu), that Arabs
might destroy oilfields which bring prosperity to oil companies and cheap gas to their
cars, and that US nationals might even be attacked in Muslim countries, Bush’s popularity
would plummet immediately.

"What is needed is not regime change or so-called "US-ushered democracy" in
Iraq (as in Afghanistan), in a region of Hama Rule- "rule or die". Saudi Arabia
is ruled by an incongruous alliance of luxury-loving princes and Wahhabis, who
enforce medieval punishments at home and promote fanaticism abroad, yet Washington does
not demand regime change there. Another repressive US-supported regime in Egypt continues
to provide recruits for al-Qaeda. Opening a Pandora’s box in the Middle East would release
bottled up historical forces with unpredictable results, like Ayatollah Khomeini after the
ouster of the Shah of Iran.

"The United States, with 5 percent of the world’s population, controls 30 percent of
world resources. And US corporate interests, forming perhaps 1 percent of this population,
control these massive resources. They want to control the world without accountability,
not even to the American people.

"Perhaps it is in the United States itself where its ill-informed and misinformed
people need not just a regime change but a system change. Where energy and
military-industry corporate interests have hijacked power from the people to pursue their
narrow objectives. Where corporate chiefs enjoy coercive powers even the Communist Party
chiefs in the former Soviet Union would have envied. Where blacks, Hispanics and the poor
cannot freely choose a president (as in Florida, where only by not counting their votes
did George Bush become the president).

The United States needs a regime and a system under which people can question, without
being labeled unpatriotic or enemies, failures of a system that could not and cannot
protect them."

What now;

The 10 key members of the Baker-Hamilton Commission are not military strategists or
geopolitical thinkers who might offer a solution to Iraq , They are basically old
establishment hands extending back to the Reagan era. Jim Baker , with help from his buddy
Eduard Shevardnadze and a trusting and naïve Mikhail Gorbachev , frightened by Ronald
Regan’s threat of Star wars , and later a drugged Yeltsin, Soviet Union was dismantled ,
with West entering Russian strategic space . In Iraq and the region, those on the other
side are apart from Iran, Syria , a resurgent and wiser Russia under Vladimir Putin and
rising giant China , which holds US trillion dollars .

The situation is complex with great possibilities of the conflict spreading beyond Iraq .
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a key figure in the region recently told "Der
Spiegel," "When the ethnic-religious break occurs in one country, it will not
fail to occur elsewhere, too." He concluded, "It would be as it was at the end
of the Soviet Union, only much worse. Large wars, small wars — no one would be able to
get a grip on the consequences."

Joost Hiltermann, Middle East project director for the International
Crisis Group,
said, "We’re not talking about just a full-scale civil war. This
would be a failed-state situation with fighting among various groups." He concluded
grimly, "The war will be over Iraq, over its dead body."

Many in US have suggested partitioning Iraq .Prince Turki al-Faisal, the Saudi ambassador,
sees the consequences: "To envision that you can divide Iraq into three parts is to
envision ethnic cleansing on a massive scale, sectarian killing on a massive scale."

Even the cold warrior Henry Kissinger, whom many would like to try for war crimes and who
reportedly egged on Bush to stay the course till ‘victory ‘ was achieved , now admits a
military victory in Iraq was no longer possible. He told the BBC that the dramatic
collapse of Iraq would have "disastrous consequences."

Kissinger called for an international conference including Iraq’s neighbors, the permanent
members of the United Nations Security Council and India and Pakistan to find out a
solution.

Richard Haass, President of the Council on Foreign Relations told SPIEGEL that the Middle East could become dangerous for years
to come. He added that "the old Middle East — an era which I believe has only
recently ended — was one in which the United States enjoyed tremendous dominance and
freedom of maneuver. Oil was available at fairly low prices , the region was largely at
peace. I believe largely because of the American decision to go to war in Iraq and how it
has been carried out, –It’s one of history’s ironies that the first war in Iraq, a war of
necessity, marked the beginning of the American era in the Middle East and the second Iraq
war, a war of choice, has precipitated its end."

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in Geneva on 21 November that "The United
States in a way is trapped in Iraq . It cannot stay and it cannot leave. There are those
who maintain that its presence is a problem and there are those who say that if it leaves
precipitously, the situation will get worse." He added that the departure of U.S.
troops from Iraq "should not lead to a further deterioration of the situation."
The goal should be to leave when Iraqi authorities can ensure a "reasonable, secure
environment.

Annan, who retires at the end of the year said the war in Iraq, and the failure of the
U.N. Security Council to prevent the invasion by U.S.-led forces, was the biggest regret
he had from his 10-year tenure. "I firmly believe that the war could have been
avoided," "The inspectors should have had a bit more time." US media dogs
were launched at him when he described US invasion of Iraq against the UN Charter and
hence illegal.

Annan welcomed moves to involve Syria and Iran in trying to foster stability in Iraq
because it would help bring peace to the region.

New Moves;

News stories are appearing about the US contacts with the Iraqi Resistance , including
Baker telling a Saddam Hussein lawyer that Tariq Aziz, former deputy prime minister, would
be released from detention by the end of this year, hoping that he will negotiate with the
US on behalf of the Baath Party leadership. Condi Rice has appealed to the Gulf
Cooperation Council to serve as intermediaries between the US and armed Sunni resistance
groups [ except Al Qaeda]

National Security adviser Stephen Hadley carried a six-point message for Iraqi officials
on his recent trip to Baghdad: to include Iraqi resistance and opposition leaders in any
initiative towards national reconciliation; general amnesty for the armed resistance
fighters, dissolve the Iraqi commission charged with banning the Baath party; cancel any
federalism proposal to divide Iraq into three regions, and combine central authority for
the central government with greater self-rule for local governors , distribute oil
revenues in a fair manner to all Iraqis, including the Sunnis whose regions lack the
resources.

Prime Minister Al-Maliki was not agreeable since his Shiite followers believe that their
historic moment has arrived after one thousand years of Sunni domination. Leaks of talks
with the Resistance have been common since even 2003 .There is no reason to disbelieve
that these US measure are nothing more than the historic tactics of divide-and-rule.

Hard facts on the ground;

It is quite clear that the accusations like WMDs, Iraq’s nuclear program and Iraq’s
linkages with Al Qaeda were just excuses as the then US Deputy Defence Secretary Paul
Wolfowitz arrogantly boasted after the occupation . It was to control the region , rich in
oil and after vanquishing Iran , even control the Caspian Sea basin
energy resources too
. Azerbaijan and Georgia are already in the US pocket .
Wolfowitz, now President of the World Bank , also told the US Congress that Iraqi oil
revenues would pay for its reconstruction and enrich US multinationals . Yes , crony
capitalism and rampant loot of Iraq revenues have enriched US companies like Haliburton ,
Bechtel and Republican party members apart from the corrupt ruling quisling government in
Iraq .

Except the oil ministry everything in Iraq , even the human heritage Museums were allowed
to be looted, ( but because of the Resistance the oil production has been less than during
Saddam days ) but under Pentagon supervision , US has gone ahead and built many military
bases , about which very little information comes out. Nor is the US media curious to
write about it. The US has 55 bases of different sizes in Iraq ; five or six of these are
massive including Balad Air Base, north of Baghdad, the huge base first named Camp Victory
adjacent to Baghdad International Airport, and al-Asad Air Base in western Anbar province,
are enormous – big enough to be reasonable-sized US towns with multiple bus routes,
neighborhoods, a range of fast-food restaurants, multiple shops, pools, mini-golf courses
and the like. Ready for long stay!

Several billion dollars have already been sunk into them. Balad, for instance, already
handled the levels of daily air traffic one would normally see at Chicago’s ultra-busy
O’Hare and being enlarged .The four mega-bases would serve as permanent US jumping-off
spots in what Bush administration edcall "the arc of instability" . In all, the
work is still in progress.

A United Press International reported: "Following hints US troops may remain in Iraq
for years, the United States is reportedly building a massive military base at Arbil , in
Kurdish northern Iraq." Iraqi Kurdistan , which has functioned as a US protectorate
since 1991 Gulf war has always been a logical fallback position for US forces
"withdrawing" from a failed Iraq. Turkey had accused Israel of training Kurds
there for subversive activities against neighbours.

And the new US embassy building now going up inside Baghdad’s well-fortified Green Zone
and , almost the size of Vatican City, with "100% independence from city
utilities", not to speak of a "swimming pool, gym, commissary, food court and
American Club, all housed in a recreation building" and its own anti-missile system.
One wonders how long US could use it .Recently a car bomb was attempted inside the secure
Green Zone fortress.

You bet USA will easily be parted from these strategic assets .

Barring some exceptions, the Western discourse inflicted on the world with control of
media and communications , specially from USA is racist and colonist.

A human tragedy of biblical proportions;

The prestigious British medical journal Lancet
based on John Hopkins Medical school study estimated the death of Iraqi following the US
invasion and occupation at over 655,000 ( equal to the American civil war ). Similar
methodology is used to compute deaths in other wars and famines around the world. When
asked at a media conference if, given the Lancet study, Bush stood by the number he had
previously cited of 30,000 Iraqi deaths,( in December , 2005 ) .Bush responded, "You
know, I stand by the figure. A lot of innocent people have lost their life – 600,000, or
whatever they guessed at, is just – it’s not credible." Western leaders and media
have either ignored these colossal crimes or followed Bush line.

From Colin Powell to US Generals like Tommy Franks all have reiterated ;" We do not
do body counts." But whenever a Western hostage is taken or a western soldier killed
, you have the whole family , relations and friends and neighbours being interviewed on
Western channels. As if non westerners were an inferior human breed.

According to the United Nations’ refugee agency (UNHCR) more than three million Iraqis who
have been forced to flee their homes to other areas of Iraq and to neighbouring countries
are facing bleak future with UNHCR funds having been reduced. 1.5 million Iraqis are
internally displaced in Iraq, while 1.6 million Iraqis are refugees in neighbouring
countries, the majority in Syria and Jordan.

The discourse on West spreading democracy is just a different version of Christian West’s
‘ self evident’ manifest destiny to civilize the natives of the world .Look at the
temerity in describing the illegal invasion of Iraq ; Operation Iraqi freedom. And the
charade of bringing democracy in the Middle East , when the Western record has been
suppression of nationalist and democratic aspirations and forces all around the world .
Now that Iraqis whether Sunnis or Shias remain fiercely opposed to the occupation,
Neo-cons mutter ‘Iraqis don’t deserve freedom and democracy." They are an inferior
breed.

Western leaders have prostituted words like liberty, freedom and democracy. Nobody likes
to be colonised or enslaved ; the Turks, the Algerians, the Vietnamese ,the Afghans , and
the Iraqis who fought against the British occupation even in 1920 and 30s. Still the
arrogant West wants to colonise, exploit and impose its values on other nations. Chapters
and verses have been written in Western media that the Iraqi occupation and colonization
would have succeeded with more troops . It would have only meant even more horrendous
bloodletting then taking place now , over 100 Iraqis being killed every day . The
Vietnamese sacrificed 2 million people and the Algerians one million for their liberty.

Bush and Blair have only endangered the security of many European nations. UK has become
the most exposed although some terror alerts were exaggerated for political reasons ie to
impose curbs on freedom .Unless US policies are changed ,sooner than later USA will face
resistance from its marginalised black community specially black Muslims. How the blacks
and Hispanics have remained marginalized became clear at how the Katrina disaster was
mishandled.

K Gajendra Singh, Indian ambassador (retired),
served as ambassador to Turkey and Azerbaijan from August 1992 to April 1996. Prior to
that, he served terms as ambassador to Jordan, Romania and Senegal. He is currently chairman of the Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies. E-mail: Gajendrak@hotmail.com.

The US Empire –Beginning of the End Game

gajendra singh kgajendrasingh@gmail.com

Saturday, November 25, 2006


Entries and comments feeds.