#Philip Zelikow

[mimacedonia-blog]

Chupito de macedonia (nº10)

Voy a recuperar una vieja sección donde publicaba la mejor lectura de la semana.

El proceso para llegar a ella ha sido en sentido inverso, es decir, me han llevado a ella un par de buenos análisis sobre la publicación del artículo en cuestión. El primero fue este de Noah Smith, con un tono muy pesimista y que te deja cierta sensación de inevitabilidad. El otro, de Lawrence Freedman, más ponderado y que pese a tener una visión anglosajona, se le nota más cercano a lo que sería una posición europea de la encrucijada a la que se enfrentan las democracias occidentales de corte liberal.

Al final no me quedó más remedio que acudir a la fuente, donde Philip Zelikow, profesor de Historia en la Universidad de Virginia y diplomático en varias posiciones del Departamento de Estado desde la administración Reagan a la de Obama, presenta el posible nuevo Eje al que encaran los EE.UU. y sus aliados, y donde el creciente ruido de sables puede desembocar en una III Guerra Mundial.

Valiéndose de ejemplos históricos, analiza en profundidad como la formación de los Ejes o Bloques no está predeterminada y son hechos muy puntuales y las constantes evaluaciones de la situación, lo que pueden inclinar a un lado o a otro a ciertos actores.

Como lectura histórica es muy recomendable, sobre todo la etapa entre 1940 y 1941, donde las relaciones entre EE.UU y Japón, futuros beligerantes en la II Guerra Mundial, se estaban aún definiendo. Algo que choca con la habitual creencia popular de un Eje Alemania-Italia-Japón consolidado desde la etapa de entreguerras.

Pese a ser un artículo basado en la Historia, el otro punto más interesante del mismo es la presentación de escenarios que hace Zelikow del conflicto China-Taiwan.

Por último, para no cerrar de forma muy pesimista, pero sin caer en el falsas ilusiones, presenta algunas de las fortalezas con las que cuentan los aliados de cara a presentar batalla al nuevo Eje.

Quizá sea una lectura que te deje sin dormir bien durante los próximos tres o cuatros años, pero sin duda estarás leyendo uno de los mejores análisis del momento sobre el futuro a corto/medio plazo de los nuevos bloques mundiales.

[mariacallous]

Americans on November 5 will be electing a wartime president. This isn’t a prediction. It’s reality.

Neither candidate has yet spoken plainly enough to the American people about the perils represented by the growing geopolitical and defense industrial collaboration among China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. This axis of aggressors may be unprecedented in the potential peril it represents.

Neither candidate has outlined the sort of generational strategy that will be required by the United States to address this challenge. Irrespective of whether former President Donald Trump or Vice President Kamala Harris is elected, this will be the unavoidable context of their presidency. One will become commander-in-chief at the most perilous geopolitical moment since the Cold War—and perhaps since World War II.

In that spirit, Washington Post columnist George F. Will this week compared the 2024 US elections to the 1940 US elections, when the United States hadn’t yet formally declared war on Imperial Japan, Hitler’s Germany, or Mussolini’s Italy.

What was different then was that one of the two candidates, incumbent President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, sensed he was about to become a wartime president and was acting like it. FDR, wrote Will, “was nudging a mostly isolationist nation toward involvement in a global conflict” with his 1937 “quarantine speech” on aggressor nations and through his subsequent military buildup.

FDR’s opponent was Republican businessman Wendell Willkie, who like FDR was more internationalist than isolationist, in the tradition of his party’s elites of that time. “In three weeks,” Will writes, “Americans will not have a comparably reassuring choice when they select the president who will determine the nation’s conduct during World War III, which has begun.”

The point is that just as World War II began with “a cascade of crises,” initiated by the coalescing axis of Japan, Germany, and Italy, so today there is a similar axis—China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Will reckons our current global crisis began no later than Russia’s 2014 seizure of Crimea.

This isn’t the first time that I have quoted diplomat-historian Philip Zelikow in this column. Writing in Texas National Security Review this summer, Zelikow reckoned that the next president has a 20-30 percent chance of being involved in worldwide warfare, which he differentiates from a world war in that not all parties will be involved in every aspect or region.

Zelikow, who recently expanded on these ideas among experts at the Atlantic Council, reckons that the next three years mark a moment of maximum danger. Should the United States navigate this period successfully, alongside global allies and partners, the underlying strengths of the American economy, defense industry, tech, and society should kick in and show their edge over those of the authoritarians.

The problem in the short term is that the United States is facing challengers in Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping, who may see a window of opportunity in the United States’ domestic distractions, a defense sector not yet adequate for emerging challenges, and an electorate that questions the value and necessity of US international engagement. Both leaders might calculate that acting more forcefully against Ukraine and Taiwan now could produce a greater chance of success than a few years in the future.

Wrote George Will: “From Russia’s western border to the waters where China is aggressively encroaching on Philippine sovereignty, the theater of today’s wars and almost-war episodes spans six of the globe’s 24 time zones.” He says this is what “the gathering storm” of world war looks like, borrowing the title of the first volume of Winston Churchill’s World War II memoirs.

Will charges the two presidential candidates with “reckless disregard” for failing to provide voters “any evidence of awareness, let alone serious thinking about, the growing global conflagration.”

If that sounds like hyperbole to you, it’s worth reading FDR’s third inaugural address in January 1941, almost a year before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, which prompted Congress to declare war on Japan the following day.

“To us there has come a time,” said Roosevelt, “in the midst of swift happenings, to pause for a moment and take stock—to recall what our place in history has been, and to rediscover what we are and what we may be. If we do not, we risk the real peril of isolation, the real peril of inaction. Lives of nations are determined not by the count of years, but by the lifetime of the human spirit.”

War isn’t inevitable now any more than it was then. When disregarded, however, gathering storms of the sort we’re navigating gain strength.

“In the face of great perils never before encountered,” Roosevelt concluded, “our strong purpose is to protect and to perpetuate the integrity of democracy. For this we muster the spirit of America, and the faith of America.”

[ophilosoraptoro]

Loose Change Final Cut 2007

"Loose Change Final Cut sets out to prove the official story of 9/11 - 'that the impact of two planes flying into two World Trade Center towers and the resulting fires caused three World Trade Center steel framed buildings to collapse' is false. Using witness testimony, expert analysis, news footage, and corroborating evidence this film is the most explosive and important film of the decade. Starring George W Bush, Condoleeza RIce, DIck Cheney, Philip Zelikow, Dan Rather, the late Peter Jennings, contributors from Fox News, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, firefighters, first responders and 9/11 victims, the film exposes the inconsistencies and lies put forward by the Bush administration in the hours, days and weeks after 9/11, and their role in hoaxing the American people that 19 Islamic terrorists were the sole perpetrators of 9/11, the crime of the century."

[wolf-grimoire]

THE KIDS DON'T BUY IT... (the US propaganda machine is really actually dead)

The Great Nation of America the Make Her Great Again has lost the propaganda war against herself. This is both good and very bad news. Because, for as long as I can remember—and likely as long as you can too—Western media was virtually the only dog around. It kept us on the same page. From the same nightly briefing around the tube with Dan Rather to the series finale of the Sopranos, we were all in it together. Not anymore. Now, we’re tribal viewers, tribal in our propaganda tastes. And this means, of course, we’re ripe to be balkanized by savvy media overlords.

            In many ways, our media unity was a strength. We knew ourselves as American citizens, not as members of the global tribe. The ubiquity of net technologies changed this a little, introducing some to foreign news sites or blogs or even social media. But the arrival of the global identity is ultimately brand new. Here in the states especially, Tik Tok has allowed for the proliferation of global opinion like never before, but even as recently as the last pandemic, something like public shaming and outright censorship kept American hearts firmly rooted in we’re the good guys territory. And this was despite the whole rabid Trump vs. Decency sentiment shared by half the country. Throughout it all, Americans huffed their own propaganda, content on the same old supply. Fastforward to the end of Biden’s first term, and everything has changed.

            Somehow, Americans themselves have turned on their own propaganda machine.

            Not merely the straightforward uncut propaganda coming out of the Pentagon. Surely, we’ve bucked that stuff before. Suddenly it’s the whole goddamn thing we’ve had enough of—Disney, Nickelodian, Fox and other media giants have all been demoted. Rather than trusting their worldview and accepting their products in good faith, Americans have waged a bipartisan information war against the giants. Viral exposes, memes, and good taste leave the Disney and their ilk struggling in a new geography of total suspicion, digilence, high accountability, and a newfound self respect.

            Devastatingly for the machine, all this change has raised America’s collective expectations when it comes to our own entertaining propaganda. America’s total denial of the half assed bunk being pushed for propaganda these days really is a problem, however.

The truth is that US foreign policy in the Middle East and our military spending in Ukraine, coupled with the massive systemic failures at home—from immigration and border issues to inflation and economic pressure—average Americans are disgusted. We cannot watch our tax dollars being poured into the genocidal military campaigns being waged by Israeli PM Netanyahu’s regime and simply nod along.

            Incredibly, the Biden administration acts oblivious to the bipartisan disgust. It’s no wonder. Since Bush the Younger, every president has embraced largely the same psychopathic cadre of arms dealers, bankers, and warmongers. Examples like Bush-era lawyer Philip Zelikow, who led the 9/11 Commission while being instrumental in designing the invasion and strategy of the Iraq war, and he’s likely to be picked to lead the upcoming Covid-19 Commission.

            Only this time, we remember the lies about Iraq’s non-existent nukes, and we all see what’s really playing out in Gaza. Many see the same horrifying disregard for human life in our military support for Ukraine despite hundreds of thousands of losses and the total leveling of a culture with almost no real chance of victory. We all see the callousness of the gunrunners that control our foreign policy, and we’re tired.

            The danger now is real, and it’s clear.

            By breaking away from our own establishment’s narratives, we both win and lose the propaganda war. Two things are bound to happen:

            Our own rogue system and its panicking agents will do anything necessary to stay in power, and the slipping grip on our minds and souls will be supplemented by a new grip on our wallets, freedoms, and bodies.

            The second part is this: when our elite lose the propaganda war, it’s a global loss. As ordinary people, we can’t broadcast ourselves effectively to the whole of the globe like our sinking mess of an establishment can. Foreign adversaries and any others looking to fill the vacuum will absolutely profit and benefit enormously from America’s losses.

            Attempts at fomenting chaos inside the country will come both from our own establishment and intelligence agencies and known and unknown foreign actors. We can be sure of that. Much of the time, the most effective propaganda is simply the truth—half cocked, emulcified and cut with baby powder, but a version of real events none the less.

            A real break with the machine’s narratives at the critical mass we seem to have reached is, in my lifetime, unprecedented. It doesn’t make me giddy, though. I’m wary of it all. There’s an paranoia, a tension in the climate. More and more, a growing dread.

            Now is the time to keep your head. Apply pressure. Regimes do not die peacefully in the Land of Make Wall Street Great Again Land. Act accordingly.

[coolthingsisee]

Confiscation of Russian Assets

I've been a bit skeptical about seizure of Russian assets, mostly on pragmatic grounds: Seizing a sovereign's money when one is not yet actually at war with the sovereign strikes me as a perilous matter, not quite as much as seizing the sovereign's territory but still a big deal. I was also unsure that this sort of thing is even allowed under generally accepted international law principles. I personally don't view such principles as binding, when we're talking about disputes among adversaries. (Among friends or at least generally peaceful trading partners, I think they are extremely important, because there are huge practical benefits from everyone knowing the rules and following them.) But I do think that even when dealing with adversaries, there are practical reasons to at least pay some attention to them. When this came up in conversation last week with my colleague here at Hoover, Philip Zelikow, he told me that such seizure is indeed consistent with international law, though of course that doesn't resolve the pragmatic question of whether it's wise. There's a report on the subject on which he is one of the authors, "On Proposed Countermeasures Against Russia to Compensate Injured States for Losses Caused by Russia's War of Aggression Against Ukraine" (May 20, 2024), which I thought I'd pass along for those of our readers who are interested; naturally, I'll be glad to post serious arguments on the other side as well. An excerpt: For the reasons set out below, the authors of this Memorandum – experienced public international lawyers and practitioners from Belgium, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Nigeria, the United Kingdom, and the United States – having given their most serious consideration to this issue, conclude that it would be lawful, under international law, for States which have frozen Russian State assets to take additional countermeasures against Russia, given its ongoing breach of the most fundamental rules of international law, in the form of transfers of Russian State assets as compensation for the damage resulting directly from Russia's unlawful conduct. Only Russian State assets would be affected. No new measures would be imposed on assets that are genuinely privately owned…. There is no doubt about the illegality of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, occupation of Ukrainian territory or annexation of large parts of it. By these actions, Russia has violated the most fundamental rules of international law, enshrined, inter alia, in the United Nations Charter, Article 2, paragraph 4, which prohibits the use or threat of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of another State. The principle is embodied in UN General Assembly ("UNGA") resolution 2625 (1970), the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States, which reflects customary international law and declares unlawful and inadmissible the acquisition of another State's territory by force. These rules are a cornerstone of the post-World War II international legal order; indeed, they are indispensable to the foundation upon which the entire rules-based order is built…. In the face of blatant violation of a State's international legal obligations, international law permits other States to respond with "countermeasures". Lawful countermeasures are measures that would be unlawful if imposed against an innocent State, that is, one that has not violated its international obligations, but are permitted if they are taken against an offending State and are intended to induce the offending State to cease its unlawful conduct, and comply with its obligation to compensate States that have been injured by that conduct, including to effectuate that compensation with the offending State's assets…. There's much more at the link. Source link Read the full article

[donshafi911]

The Monster Gets Their Guys in the Room, #2 - by Sage Hana

Philip Zelikow, Covid and 9/11 Commissioner — Read on sagehana.substack.com/p/the-monster-gets-their-guys-in-the-b82

[bunkerblogwebradio]

O fazedor de mitos ou quem é Philip Zelikow

“Nunca as massas ansiaram pela verdade. Dos fatos que as incomodam, elas fogem e preferem idolatrar o equívoco quando este se predispuser a lhes enganar. Quem conseguir iludi-las tornar-se-á em breve seu senhor; quem procurar esclarecê-las, invariavelmente suas vítimas”. Gustave Le Bon

Esta citação de Le Bon é tão característica para o mundo de hoje, sobre como as massas pensam. Por isso a propaganda funciona tão bem através da mídia, e o “homem das ruas” acredita em qualquer mentira e qualquer mito que lhe é contado. Quem tenta destruir esta ilusão construída por mentiras, frequentemente é ofendido e declarado maluco.

Le Bon disse que as massas, devido às suas características, são principalmente suscetíveis à manipulações através de um auto-intitulado líder. A enorme credulidade, a falta de discernimento próprio, a forte emoção e o contágio espiritual, as levam à falta de resistência diante de ensinamentos irracionais. Por isso a maioria das pessoas acredita ainda que o 11 de setembro foi obra de 19 árabes malvados. Mas se conseguimos provar-lhes que não existiram terroristas e este ataque foi encenado pelo próprio governo, a massa não quer saber de nada, a verdade não lhe agrada de forma alguma.

Quem colocou este mito sobre o 11/9 no mundo e quem é seu mestre?

No mundo das ilusões de Orwell, a fofoca é tudo. Invente uma boa estória, espalhe-a através do Ministério da Verdade (a mídia) e permaneça firme, não importa quão ridícula ela for. Em resumo, quando a mídia consegue tirar a atenção da guerra contra o Iraque e a transferi para Paris Hilton e seu fútil estilo de vida, então tudo é possível.

Na procura pelo savoir-faire em como o governo Bush conseguiu manipular a percepção da opinião pública, eu me deparei com um interessante resumo sobre Philip Zelikow, diretor da comissão de investigação sobre o 11/9. Justamente um insider do governo Bush, o arquiteto da doutrina de segurança dos Neocons e especialista em criar mitos, foi encarregado de investigar a si mesmo e a seu patrão. Se isso não for um gritante conflito de interesses, então eu não sei de mais nada.

A tarefa de Zelikow foi manobrar a comissão e a investigação apenas em uma direção, a qual representasse positivamente as ações do governo Bush frente ao 11/9. Como diretor executivo, ele teve o controle total sobre o que constou no relatório final da comissão. Ele manipulou todos os aspectos da investigação, determinou qual testemunho deveria ser considerado ou suprimido, quais provas eram relevantes ou não, quais perguntas deveriam ser respondidas ou deixadas em aberto, e ele se encarregou de que todas as repartições do governo e do aparato militar fossem isentadas de qualquer culpa.

Toda vez que uma prova apontasse para uma participação do Estado ou claramente não se encaixasse na versão oficial, Zelikow liquidou o fato. Ele conseguiu ao final que a comissão afirmasse que Bin Laden e seus 19 ajudantes executaram os ataques de 11 de setembro e eles teriam conseguido isso porque as autoridades norte-americanas foram totalmente surpreendidas, aconteceu uma pane atrás da outra e todo o conjunto foi uma cadeia de infelizes acasos. Ninguém foi responsável pelo fracasso, ninguém teve que assumir, ninguém foi despedido, ao contrário, Bush promoveu a todos e recompensou, muita paz e amor… e os árabes malvados foram os autores, ponto final. Esta lenda tornou-se o relato oficial do 11/9 que é considerado agora um mito. Por isso o relatório oficial completo é a maior farsa de todos os tempos. A mais pura ação de limpeza e manipulação para divulgar como o mito do 11/9 aconteceu e proteger então os reais autores.

Caso o autor deste texto pudesse escrever livremente e não fosse preso por aquilo que pensa, ele certamente escolheria outro evento histórico como a maior farsa de todos os tempos – NR.

Segundo a Wikipédia:

A área de especialidade acadêmica do Professor Zelikow está na criação e manutenção, em suas palavras, de um “mito público” ou “suposição pública”, o qual ele define como “crença” que deve ser assumida como verdade e incorporada no meio. Em seu trabalho acadêmico, ele se especializou naquilo que denomina “queimar e formar” acontecimentos, que tornam um grande papel e por isso mantêm sua força, mesmo se as gerações que os vivenciaram não exista mais. Ele disse que a força do relato de uma história está ligada em como o leitor pode se identificar com as ações de cada uma das personagens. Se o leitor não pode fazer uma ligação com sua própria vida, então os acontecimentos da estória não vão atingi-lo.

Não é o mesmo que dizer que não existe história nem verdade, o que existe na realidade é apenas a manipulação dos acontecimentos de cada época, as quais por sua vez servem aos gerentes da sociedade? Resulta disto que se o governo de um país encena seu próprio “acontecimento chocante”, então eles podem escrever o livro de história que mais lhes convém. Se este é o caso, então toda esta “guerra contra o terror” é claramente fruto de um surto e apenas uma manobra de relações públicas sem ligação com a realidade.

Wikipédia ainda nos traz o seguinte sobre Zelikow, que esclarece o ponto acima:

Na edição de novembro/dezembro de 1998 da revista Foreign Affairs, Zelikow escreveu um artigo em conjunto com o antigo chefe da CIA, intitulado “Catastrophic Terrorism” (terrorismo catastrófico), onde ele jogo com os pensamentos, se o ataque terrorista contra o Word Trade Center em 1993 tivesse tido sucesso, então o horror e caos resultantes teria superado nossa possibilidade em descrevê-lo. Tal ato de terrorismo catastrófico significaria um divisor de águas na história dos EUA. Significaria a perda de vida e posse sem paralelo em tempos de paz e enterraria o mais íntimo sentimento de segurança do americano, assim como ocorreu após o primeiro teste soviético com uma bomba atômica em 1949. E assim como Pearl Haborr, este acontecimento iria separar o futuro do presente, em um antes e depois. Os EUA iriam responder com medidas draconianas, limitar os direitos civis, ampliar a vigilância sobre os próprios cidadãos, promover o encarceramento de suspeitos e utilizar de violência mortal.

Olá… ele escreveu isso em 1998?

Impressionante. É como Zelikow soubesse o que aconteceria três anos mais tarde a 11 de setembro de 2001, e seu desdobramento. Com este artigo ele escreveu o plano do verdadeiro desenrolar, mostrou às elites as possibilidades e como executá-las, desviou a atenção com “medidas draconianas” (restrição dos direitos civis), formando um cenário bastante atrativo aos poderosos e à casta política.

E por coincidência tudo aconteceu como Zelikow previu. Exatamente como Pearl Habor, o evento de 11 de setembro de 2001 “separou o futuro do presente, em um antes e depois”. O mundo pós-11/9 nos brindou como uma nova realidade, onde uma elite conduz suas guerras de forma ilimitada e pode estabelecer um Estado policial, onde a liberdade pessoal não pode ser mais garantida e onde é permitida a vigilância, detenção e utilização de violência mortal. É um mundo onde a percepção de segurança dos norte-americanos, mas também a nossa em menores proporções, foi destruída e contínua baixa, como um meio para conduzir a opinião pública.

Como Zelikow deu a entender, o mundo pós-11/9 é totalmente dependente do “mito público”, de lendas inventadas pelos gerentes da sociedade, os quais mantêm a ilusão que existe lá fora um malvado inimigo chamado “terrorismo”, e somente através de vultuosas despesas em armas e segurança e através do sacrifício dos direitos civis, o governo pode nos proteger dele.

O que vemos agora? Existem apenas duas armas existentes no arsenal imperialista: violência e ilusão. Novos “acontecimentos” são encenados para poder ser contado um “mito” sobre os “executores”, e com isso deixar fluir em violência as reações já pré-programadas.

Nós já fomos lembrados que a realidade não importa mais, apenas a percepção da realidade é importante. O poder dos mitos governa em primeiro plano. Por isso é nossa tarefa destruir estes mitos, revelá-los e também a seus executores. Philip Zelikow é sem dúvida a pessoa que carrega mais responsabilidade pela criação e divulgação do mito sobre o 11/9.

[icymirss]

...there is a silver lining to this tragic tale of terror and tyranny. The elite are only required to propagate "noble lies" like 9/11 because the public's perceptions and opinions matter. The corollary of this observation is that if people do not fall for the noble lie, then the would-be elite won't be able to implement their agenda. So now we have another question to ask ourselves: If a new "catastrsophic and catalyzing event" happened tomorrow, and if it was immediately blamed on Iran or Venezuela or Russia or China or any of the neocons' other bogeymen, would the public blindly support the government in a headlong rush to war or would they question what they were being told?

[bookloversofbath]

The Kennedy Tapes: Inside the White House during the Cuban Missile Crisis :: Edited by Ernest Richard May & Philip Zelikow

The Kennedy Tapes: Inside the White House during the Cuban Missile Crisis :: Edited by Ernest Richard May & Philip Zelikow

The Kennedy Tapes: Inside the White House during the Cuban Missile Crisis :: Edited by Ernest Richard May & Philip Zelikow soon to be presented for sale on the fabulous BookLovers of Bath web site!

Cambridge & London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1997, Hardback in dust wrapper.

Contains: Black & white photographs; List of sources;

From the cover: October 1962: The United States…

[kramlabs]

Predictably, Zelikow, leader of the 9/11 (coverup) Commission to head Covid Commission

https://news.virginia.edu/content/qa-philip-zelikow-911-commission-leader-take-stock-covid-lessons

Hat tip Corbett Report:

https://youtu.be/iew3DIBAOLM

[mariacallous]

Meduza: Why the West should (or maybe shouldn’t) seize all those frozen Russian sovereign assets

In mid-December 2023, The Financial Times reported that the U.S. government had “privately taken a more assertive stance in recent weeks” on backing the confiscation of roughly $300 billion in frozen Russian sovereign assets to provide an alternative funding stream for Kyiv. The news comes amid faltering efforts in Europe and Washington to approve the budgetary allocations needed to sustain aid for Ukraine. Kyiv’s most ardent supporters in the West say the seizure of the immobilized Russian state assets is long overdue. In fact, that the seizure hasn’t happened already is both alarming and confounding to many people. For a better grasp of the arguments for and against expropriating the Russian state of such vast wealth, Meduza summarizes a handful of recent opinion essays on the subject (and thanks Maximilian Hess for his insights on this subject).

Three problems with taking Russia’s money

In an op-ed published on January 4 in The Financial Times, Cornell University Assistant Professor of History Nicholas Mulder outlines three problems with seizing Russia’s frozen sovereign assets in the West:

It would exert “no meaningful additional economic pressure” on Moscow.

It is not Western states’ prerogative and would risk directly drawing them into the war.

It would constitute a “destabilizing precedent” that would alienate non-Western states and “dismantle a building block” of the current world order.

Mulder also says the asset seizure is “economically unnecessary,” arguing that the transatlantic economy can “easily sustain” its annual $100-billion aid to Ukraine (though he doesn’t explain how to overcome the current political difficulties of allocating these resources).

Protections for state assets rely on reciprocity. that Moscow has abandoned

Back on July 27, 2023, three experts wrote an article challenging The Economist’s reluctance to endorse the seizure of Russia’s frozen state assets. Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, historian Philip Zelikow, and former World Bank President Robert Zoellick argued that transferring frozen Russian assets into escrow to compensate Kyiv would mirror actions against Iraqi state assets in 1992 to compensate Kuwait. This move, the authors say, “poses no added risk to the stability of reserve currencies” and would induce Russia to compensate Ukraine. 

Summers, Zelikow, and Zoellick say such countermeasures “have long been recognized as extra-judicial state measures of self-help” while also arguing that findings by the International Court of Justice and the U.N. General Assembly expand the legal case for seizing Russia’s state assets. They insist that state assets, in contrast to private assets, “are protected from other sovereigns only by customary obligations of reciprocal regard,” which means due process is unnecessary except in moves against oligarchs. Meanwhile, Russia has demonstrated no reciprocity here, seizing Western companies by presidential decree.

‘That’s what dictatorships do’

The editorial from The Economist on July 20, 2023, that prompted the response from Summers, Zelikow, and Zoellick says the legal case isn’t yet solid enough to justify seizing Russia’s state assets, which the magazine says are protected “under international law, and typically under domestic law, too” — not merely by “customary obligations” of reciprocity. The West could simply “grab” everything, “but that is what dictatorships do.” Before a “watertight case” with help from the U.N. General Assembly and ICJ is ready, the West should settle for seizing the income generated by Russian assets — a meager $3 billion annually, but “well worth having” in perpetuity.

Reparations are normal and time-honored

Writing in The Financial Times on January 2, economic historian and sovereign debt expert Simon Hinrichsen argues that “war reparations are common in peace settlements.” Haiti, Germany, France, and Finland have paid significant damages in the last two centuries, he notes, and the U.S. used Japanese and German frozen assets to settle WWII claims and seized Iraqi assets in 1991 and 2003. 

However, a peace settlement (even an apology) is “unrealistic” with Russia, “which makes confiscation a good solution,” says Hinrichsen. Reparations are an established norm under customary international law as old as 241 B.C., he argues, and even China has no reason to fear for the safety of its reserves held in euros and dollars, so long as it doesn’t “illegally invade other countries.” 

Ukraine is running out of time, and the West has nothing to lose

On December 13, 2023, scholar and former diplomat Nigel Gould-Davies argued in The Moscow Times that Ukraine can’t wait for compensation from Russia until after the war, as the G7 currently envisages. Moscow will never voluntarily agree to reparations and has no incentive to help rebuild Ukraine, says Gould-Davies. He endorses the legal arguments from Summers, Zelikow, and Zoellick in The Economist, writing that “an asset seizure can be a proportionate countermeasure to a grave breach of international norms” despite the sovereign immunity enjoyed by state assets. 

Gould-Davies rejects the case against seizing the frozen Russian Central Bank reserves (believed to be worth more than $300 billion), arguing that a coordinated takeover of Russian assets would preserve Western currencies “as a store of value,” set no legal precedent against private assets, and not deter other states from depositing their reserves in Western banking systems any more than the “far more significant precedent” of immobilizing Russian assets at the start of the war. Not seizing Russia’s frozen assets “risks a grand strategic failure” and misses an opportunity to send “a powerful signal of Western resolve to the Kremlin.”

[mediamonarchy]

#NewWorldNextWeek: 9/11 Cover Up Director Appointed to Chair COVID Cover Up Group (Video)

#NewWorldNextWeek: 9/11 Cover Up Director Appointed to Chair COVID Cover Up Group (Video)

Welcome to New World Next Week – the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week: Story #1: Philip Zelikow, Former Exec. Dir. Of 9/11 Commission, To Chair Covid Commission https://news.virginia.edu/content/qa-philip-zelikow-911-commission-leader-take-stock-covid-lessons “Zelikow” Search On…

[bigtickhk]

To Build a Better World: Choices to End the Cold War and Create a Global Commonwealth by Condoleezza Rice and Philip Zelikow https://amzn.to/2noadfr

[thehillnewsntumun]

BREAKING NEWS: TRAITORS IDENTIFIED?!

Update 45 July 29, 2003 Although Philip D. Zelikow has been identified as the so-called Media Star known as the “White House Mole” . It seems that it isn’t just him but…others too?!? According to a CNN Exclusive Report, leaked audio recordings between an unknown individual known as “W” and Deputy for Finance and Administration Tracy J. Shycroff may point to the DEPUTY as another mole. Although Mr. Shycroff denied any accusations that he may be involved in the White House Flower Attack and the Attempted Assassination of Max Cleland, when confronted with similar items to the attack, it is noticeable that Mr. Shycroff began hyperventilating and telling “W” to leave. However, during an interview with an aide, it was revealed that Aides to the Commission Chairman had been meeting with Shycroff’s staff in a private room for, “Budgeting Allotments''. This revelation has caused Congress to go into uproar with bills being submitted to lessen the Commission Budget. After the news broke, 50,000 people went to Washington D.C. to protest, calling for the removal of all Commissioners and Staff for their disgusting infringement on an investigation into Modern America’s worst tragedy. It seems that the 9/11 Commission Report can’t come soon enough.

[ntumun2022-presscorps]

BREAKING:  9/11 Commission Member Nearly Assassinated!

Ong You Jie (Gerard) | Fox News 

HCC: This morning, April 2nd 2003, Max Cleland, Former Secretary of State of Georgia and Vietnam War veteran, missed an incoming bullet by just a few inches. However, the impact of the bullet was powerful enough to almost knock over the wheelchair-using 9/11 commission member.

Unfortunately, the assassin managed to escape but an official investigation has been launched by the Federal Bureau of Intelligence (F.B.I) to uncover the motivation and apprehend the criminal.

Although assassinations of politicians are not unheard of, this is an unprecedented attempt in history as Mr Max Cleland is currently serving as an active member of a public investigation commission, the 9/11 commission.

Speculations have risen that pointed fingers at the 9/11 Truth Movement and its members for being the ones behind this assassination attempt. As frustration grows regarding the inability of the commission to produce any concrete findings, subscriptions to such ideological groups are increasing by the day.

With this security breach, the safety of American citizens - our friends, families, brothers and sisters - has once again been highlighted as a focus of paramount, national importance. This assassination attempt is evidence that more action must be taken to reimpose law and order in a post-9/11 America. Commission member Philip D. Zelikow also shared this view, stating that: “About 70% of American citizens believe that the 9/11 commission is useless and slow”. He then expressed his wish that the commission should progress forward at a faster pace, in order to compensate for the prior disappointments and to quell negative emotions amongst society.

The recent, catastrophic bombing of the symbolic Statue of Liberty also resulted in heavy fire and scrutiny against the 9/11 commission. The public criticised the commission for not only failing to unravel the truth behind America’s greatest tragedy but also for failing to prevent future attacks on American soil.

This is a call to action for our American patriots. The perpetual flow of terrorists entering our land and committing crimes against our democracy must be halted. We should start by pressuring the Saudi Arabian government to hand over information on the hijackers. We should also call upon the international community to stop fuelling conspiracy theories.

We are facing a national security crisis. The time to act has long passed. To the members of the 9/11 commission and the US government: your actions speak louder than your words.

Stop bickering and start acting.

[gnatswatting]

• The supreme measure of a mature, professional institution -- or government -- is how it handles failure: its capacity for honest self-examination and thoughtful accountability. —Philip Zelikow

The 9/11 Commission Report: The Attack from Planning to Aftermath Afterward: The Twilight War

NOTE: This is from a special edition of the report of the official 9/11 Commission's 2004 report which was produced for the tenth anniversary of the 2001 terror attacks. As authorized by members of the commission, the last two chapters of the original report which contained the commission's recommendations were replaced by an Afterward by the commission's Executive Director Philip Zelikow which was written as an extended essay. This citation is from that Afterward called "The Twilight War".