#and maybe now some europeans should learn about what the us and nato did to the left in europe - gladio years of lead etc

[jyndor]

the us has never had anyone's backs but the capitalists. im so sorry, now the empire is squeezing the vassal states closest to it and hopefully those vassals have another way out. but it is unacceptable to even conceive of a militarized germany in particular at a moment when fascism is rising so significantly.

ukraine has been stripped of so much land and resources by everyone and SO many ukrainians have been butchered because russia couldn't hold itself back and nato couldn't stop natoing, the right wing is rising all over europe, europe spends more to militarize and so does MORE austerity measures, and then people hurt even more and go even more reactionary because there is very little REAL left in europe SINCE THE US MADE SURE THE LEFT WOULD BE FINISHED IN THE POST WAR ERA and then what happens?

fuck nato, fuck the us, fuck imperialism, fuck capitalism and fuck putin too ofc.

[xtruss]

What I Got Wrong About Trump’s Second Term! I Didn’t Entirely See This Coming. Here’s Why.

— By Stephen M. Walt | March 10, 2025 | Foreign Policy

U.S. President Donald Trump Puts on Special Glasses to Look at the Solar Eclipse in Washington on August 21, 2017. Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Scholars and political commentators should occasionally look back on their forecasts and consider what they got wrong. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Tom Friedman, Joe Scarborough, Rachel Maddow, Janan Ganesh, Fareed Zakaria, Glenn Greenwald, Anne Applebaum, and other prominent pundits did an annual retrospective on what they had misunderstood or misread over the previous year? None of us are infallible, and if you believe Philip Tetlock, even knowledgeable experts have trouble anticipating the future. Reflecting on our own errors is always instructive and doing so publicly helps everyone learn from our mistakes. I’ve performed this kind of self-criticism on several occasions in the past—see here or here—and it’s time for another round. Read on.

Back in January 2024, I wrote a piece here called “Another Trump Presidency Won’t Much Change U.S. Foreign Policy.” As of March 2025, that sounds pretty stupid. Part of the problem is the clickbait headline (which I didn’t write), and, in fact, some of what I wrote back then has proved correct. I said U.S. President Donald Trump was likely to get tough with NATO (and maybe even withdraw) and that he’d push for a peace deal in Ukraine. But I also thought a second Biden-Harris administration would have sought a peace deal, too, albeit in a more deliberate and responsible way. I still believe that’s what former Vice President Kamala Harris would have done had she been elected.

I thought Trump’s Middle East policy would be a lot like Biden’s and that has proven to be the case thus far. Like former President Joe Biden, Trump is letting Israel do whatever it wants; the only real difference is that Trump doesn’t even pretend to be evenhanded and openly embraces ethnic cleansing instead of merely turning a blind eye to it. Trump is also taking a hard-line approach to China, just as Biden did during his four years in office and as Harris almost certainly would have done. Trump may eventually pursue some sort of grand bargain with Beijing and sell Taiwan down the river, but there’s no sign of it yet. If you look beyond the headline and read the actual article, it doesn’t look quite so silly.

That said, there’s no question that I got some important things wrong.

I underestimated Trump’s hostility to our principal democratic allies. It was obvious that he thought our NATO partners were overly reliant on U.S. protection (a view shared by all recent U.S. presidents), but it’s now clear that he’s actively and deeply hostile to the democratic principles that these states embody and is openly encouraging illiberal forces within them. As I wrote a couple of weeks ago, the administration’s embrace of the European far right is an attempt to promote a form of regime change throughout Europe—in effect, to MAGA-fy it—and to destroy the European Union as a meaningful political institution. I was aware of Trump’s affinity for illiberal leaders like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, and I knew people like Steve Bannon were trying to build a transnational coalition of far-right movements, but I didn’t take those forces seriously enough.

Second, although there was every reason to think that Trump would push for a peace deal and eventually reduce U.S. support for Ukraine, I did not expect him to embrace Russian President Vladimir Putin’s position with such enthusiasm, accuse Ukraine of starting the war, or openly attack Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in public. There may, in fact, be some strategic rationale for what Trump is doing—i.e., he may genuinely believe that the only way to stop the war and eventually drive a wedge between Russia and China is to give Putin everything he wants—but that doesn’t mean this approach will work as intended. It also ignores the long-term impact that this behavior will have on the United States’ standing and image. I still believe a Harris administration would have pressed Ukraine to adopt more realistic objectives and seek a cease-fire, but Harris would have worked with Kyiv and NATO to get the best deal possible and not simply throw Ukraine under the bus.

Third, I underestimated Trump’s willingness to gamble on a highly unorthodox economic policy. I expected him to use the threat of tariffs as a bargaining tool, but I thought he (or his advisors) understood that starting a trade war would hurt the U.S. economy and jeopardize his entire political program. After the election last November, I was briefly reassured when most of his economic team seemed like sensible people who understood basic macroeconomics (which Trump does not), and I assumed that cranks like Peter Navarro would have little influence. I now think I was wrong here: The officials who should know better are echoing Trump’s nonsense, and Navarro seems to have the president’s ear. If you voted for Trump, I hope you like higher prices, a rising deficit, a shrinking investment portfolio, and a shredded safety net.

Lastly, although Trump’s contempt for rules and norms was well established long before he first ran for president, I’ve been surprised by his willingness to flout some of the most well-established principles of the post-World War II order. Threatening to take Greenland by force, re-occupy the Panama Canal Zone, annex Canada, and ethnically cleanse Palestinians from Gaza are all gross violations of principles that have been broadly accepted for decades. These are also principles that the United States has generally respected, frequently defended, and from which it has benefited greatly. Moreover, Trump isn’t breaking these rules because the United States is facing a grave national emergency (which would make it easier for other states to give Washington a temporary pass); he’s trying to blow up the whole order because he thinks the United States will be better off in a world where autocracy is ascendant and leaders do whatever they want. I freely admit that transforming the United States from a defender of international order to a malevolent rogue state was not on my bingo card.

If I could go back in time and rewrite that earlier column, I’d offer a different (and louder) set of warnings. In my defense, I did say that Trump’s impact on U.S. domestic politics would be harmful, and a column published shortly before the election described him as a serious threat to the U.S. constitutional order and democracy itself. Yet, even then, I underestimated how radical and self-destructive his domestic program would be, and how willing Congress and many corporate leaders would be to surrender to it. Nor did I anticipate the uniquely destructive role that Elon Musk—the ultimate “unelected government official”—would play in Trump 2.0.

But it was obvious to me that a second Trump term would be big trouble. Oh, how I wish I had been wrong about that.

— Stephen M. Walt is a Columnist at Foreign Policy and the Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Relations at Harvard University.

[rauthschild]

The need for Rare Earth Minerals, especially Lithium, took a big nose dive this past week, with China's announcement that it has developed a means to recharge Lithium batteries "indefinitely".

This means that instead of having to buy new Lithium batteries to power electric cars and other machinery, and therefore mine new Lithium for these new batteries, the need for new Lithium has been rendered obsolete in the near term.

So there is no longer the "critical need" for Lithium.

Please note that although a great deal of attention has been focused on Ukraine's five percent (5%) of the world's Rare Earth Minerals, no intelligent discussion has been devoted to the vast amounts of Rare Earth Minerals that both Russia and America already possess.

Neither Russia nor The United States need Rare Earth Minerals, and if they did, they could easily obtain them from Africa. So the whole focus on the Ukrainian Rare Earth Minerals deal is another Red Herring; rather, Trump was trying to recoup some of the money that Joe Biden wasted on the Ukrainian War, and bring about the one thing that Britain never wants ---- peace.

Here is a fairly good recount of the situation to date:

Throughout, remember that this country doesn't need Rare Earth Minerals; all we have to do is overturn Teddy Roosevelt's Natural Resource Conservation Plan and start mining --- and maybe we should do so anyway.

The Resource Conservation Plan hasn't substantially changed since 1908. It has served us well, but like any "Rainy Day" provision, the heirs have to recognize rain and dip into the savings bank when appropriate.

A more interesting issue has surfaced in the disparity between the U.S. and Ukrainian claims regarding the amount of U.S. Aid that Ukraine has received.

Congressional appropriations and additional aid through Non-Governmental Organizations indicate that around $500 Billion in aid was sent to Ukraine during the Biden Administration, not counting loan guarantees and other benefits.

To this, Zelensky says he has received only $77 Billion and it was in military equipment stockpiles -- not cash, which is fairly credible, as large amounts of this surplus military equipment wound up on the international black market and was resold to countries in the Middle East.

Sounds like -- as usual -- "Foreign Aid" to Ukraine was derailed and laundered back into the pockets of the Usual Suspects, in which case, we should be collecting from George Soros and the DNC, instead.

What about Europe's role in all this? Mr. Starmer and other EU government officers have misled Zelensky to think that they have and will deploy the resources to protect Ukraine -- when they don't and won't -- without The United States.

Of all the commentaries, perhaps Jeffrey Sachs' evaluation of the situation in the most correct and balanced way to look at it all, beginning with the eastward expansion of NATO in direct contravention of American promises not to expand NATO "one inch" to the East:

But so everyone understands:

It isn't that we learned everything from the British; it's that the British have been using us as a storefront.

They commandeered our bureaucracy and unlawfully converted our military to serve as a Mercenary Force in 1861. We've been their Bitches ever since.

That's why there has been such a stunning similarity. Until now.

Contrary to Mr. Starmer and Mr. Merz, Ukraine is no longer a matter of urgent concern to us.

If the European people wake up and look around, they will see that the same Players have done the same thing to their unique National Governments --- overtaken the bureaucracies, dismantled the militaries, leveraged the courts and universities --- and quietly installed commercial police states in preparation for imposing their brand of Corporate Feudalism.

Notice to Principals is Notice to Agents; Notice to Agents is Notice to Principals.

[todaynewsstories]

Georgian presidential front-runner aims at multilateralism to thaw frozen conflicts | Europe| News and current affairs from around the continent | DW

Salome Zurabishvili is an independent candidate for the Georgian presidency endorsed by the Georgian Dream party. Born in Paris to a family of Georgian emigres, she was educated in France and served as a career diplomat, and was appointed ambassador of France to Georgia in 2003. She left that post to become a foreign minister in then-President Mikheil Saakashvili‘s government (2004-2006). Expected to emerge victorious in last Sunday’s elections, she is now facing a runoff election after narrowly placing first.

DW’s Zhanna Nemtsova spoke with Zurabishvili about how the country has changed since Saakashvili’s era and what she thinks about recent criticism of her French accent in Georgian.

Deutsche Welle: You position yourself as an independent candidate, but you are supported by the ruling party “Georgian Dream,” which is chaired by Georgia’s richest man, Bidzina Ivanishvili, who controls the country politically. So you’re an independent candidate only rhetorically, aren’t you?

Salome Zurabishvili: I am independent. I presented my candidature before the ruling party made a decision whether to present one of their own or to support someone. That doesn’t change me and my principles.

Read more: Georgia set for runoff vote between ex-French envoy and government critic

So you are not controlled by Bidzina Ivanishvili?

I’ve not been controlled by anyone in my life. I’m not going to be controlled by Mr. Ivanishvili because I didn’t have any agreement with him before being supported. I didn’t have any preconditions.

You quit politics in 2010 and you were quoted as saying there is no effective democracy in the country. Has Georgia become more democratic in a decade after Saakashvili stepped away?

Of course.

So the fact that Ivanishvili controls everything does not prevent Georgia from stepping away from democratic principles?

He doesn’t control more than Saakashvili did – in his time he controlled also the parliament. Today there are two strong opposition parties in the parliament that have their say. There are some local authorities that are not controlled and the media are not controlled at all, although they used to be one hundred percent in the hands of Saakashvili. Today you have five television stations that are in the hands of the opposition. So we are now in a free-expression democratic country, where maybe the balance of power is not yet good enough, where there should be more multipartyism. That’s what Georgia has always wanted to be heading for.

Your program touches upon many different issues, including the problem of occupied territories (Editor’s note: Abkhazia and South Ossetia declared their independence from Georgia in 2008, which was recognized by Russia) and the NATO accession. Do you really think that you can bring some change in this respect?

The president has, if anywhere, a big power of representation in the foreign policy. And I know this field quite well from my past posts in France and Georgia. I know that it depends a lot on personal initiatives, ideas and contacts – three things plus the experience which I have. But now in this case it will depend on our relationship with our European and American partners. It doesn’t depend on a direct new type of relationship with Russia that would be “go alone without those partners.” And we have to try to figure out with our partners what would be the new ways for Georgia to move from this rather stagnant situation where we couldn’t do anything with these occupied territories.

It’s almost every other day that we have people abducted from there. We have to discuss with the European mission (Editor’s note: EU Monitoring Mission in Georgia) what additional measures could be taken without demarcating a border because that’s our red line.

Read more: Georgia slams Russian ‘occupation’ ahead of NATO war games

You were born in France and were a French career diplomat who became a Georgian politician. Your relatives moved to France in the beginning of the 20th century; they were political emigrants. Why were they forced to flee the country back then?

My grandparents moved to France because of the Russian aggression after the first independence of Georgia in 1918. Three years of independence were crushed by the invasion of the Russian army. At that time people who were in the government or around the government left to Turkey. They thought they would keep the government in exile alive in order to be able to return as soon as the Russian army would be defeated. This exile took longer than they thought. Turkey remained with Russia at that time.

And then the Georgian official immigration had to move to France, which was a country that continued to recognize the government in exile the longest, until 1974. But the treaty that France signed with Russia in 1974 included a clause that said that France had to stop officially recognizing the government in exile. Still, the immigration stayed in France, which remained a main host country for the Georgian political emigration.

What could you respond to those who criticize you or just make a remark that your Georgian is not perfect, that you have some French accent?

The first time I came to Georgia I was 36 years old. I had learned Georgian in my family and then by myself by reading and translating. And during my youth we had practically no contact with Georgians except for those living in the immigration. There was no social network, there were no TVs. So the language was really “home based.” So I’m quite proud of it. I’ve been living in the country for 16 years, I’ve been a foreign minister, I’ve been elected as a member of the parliament and it’s very interesting that the criticism has started just two months ago. I have an example of the Latvian President [Vaira] Vike-Freiberga who returned to her country, Latvia, from Canada. She was also criticized for her language. And she was elected president and brought Latvia to the EU and NATO. So I’m ready to be criticized if I can manage the same result.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

Georgia, melting pot of cultures

Multicultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious: This is Georgia. The breathtakingly beautiful country between the Caucasus and the Black Sea is one of the oldest settlement areas of mankind. Today about 3.7 million people live in this small country with its magnificent nature and culture.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

The capital Tiblisi

The metropolis of Tbilisi is Georgia’s cultural centre. And it has been since the 5th century. The city has known Roman, Arab, Turkish, Persian and other conquerors. Russia invaded Georgia in 1799 and remained there until the end of the Soviet era. They all left their traces. Tbilisi celebrates the present day with new constructions such as the Peace Bridge and the Concert Hall (right).

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

Old town and fortress

Since the 3rd century, the Narikala fortress has kept watch over the old town with the typical balconies and carvings on the houses. The panorama path up to the fortress leads through a labyrinth of alleys. The massive castle has seen conquerors come and go, was destroyed and rebuilt again and again. Only a lightning strike in the powder warehouse (1827) turned it into a ruin.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

Where the royals resided

The Metekhi Virgin Mary Church can be seen on the steep bank of the Kura, which flows through Tbilisi. From the 12th century, the residence of the Georgian kings was located on this site, as is indicated by the equestrian monument next to the church. It depicts King Vakhtang Gorgasali, the founder of Tbilisi. In 1937, under Soviet rule, the residence was demolished. The church survived.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

700 years of bathing culture

The Abanotubani district with its hot thermal springs is considered the oldest part of Tbilisi. The springs have been used for 700 years. The Persian-style bathhouses were built later, in the 17th century. The bathing rooms are located under the domed brick vaults. A number of them are still in use today and are a popular meeting place to bathe and chat.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

7,000 years of wine cultivation

They are called Chinuri, Chichwi or Orbeluri. Grape varieties from Georgia enjoy an excellent reputation. The largest wine-growing areas are in the east of the country, in Kakheti. Archaeological finds prove that wine was cultivated in Georgia over 7,000 years ago. And even this very day wine is cultivated in amphorae. UNESCO declared this method an intangible cultural heritage.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

70 years of Soviet rule

When you travel through the country, you will encounter relics from Soviet era: Houses, factories, monuments or, as here, this viewing platform on a former military road near Kazbegi mountain. All of them stone testimonies. Georgia was part of the Soviet Union for 70 years – until 9 April 1991, when the people voted for independence in a referendum.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

Hiking in the Caucasus

The most diverse landscapes and climate zones are concentrated in the most compact area; from the mountain villages of the Caucasus to the beaches of the Black Sea. Almost half of Georgia is covered with forest. Two thirds of the country is mountainous, with several 5,000 meter (16,404 ft) peaks. Numerous nature reserves and national parks make Georgia a worthwhile destination for hikers.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

A remote UNESCO World Heritage Site

2,200 meters above sea level, in the Great Caucasus, lies Ushguli – “Courageous Heart”; a community of four villages with roots dating back to the 16th century BC. Ushguli is considered to be the highest situated permanently inhabited place in Europe. Since 1996, the villages with their characteristic fortified towers have been UNESCO World Heritage Sites.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

Vardzia – city in the rock

Up to 50,000 people lived in the cave town of Vardzia. It lies in the south of Georgia. It was built in the 12th century as a fortress to defend against Turks and Persians. It was carved by hand with simple tools into a 500 meter high rock face, seven storeys above each other. There were bakeries, stables, a treasury and a church.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

The old capital of Kutaisi

160 kilometers from the Black Sea coast lies the old capital of Georgia, Kutaisi. It was the residence of the Georgian kings from the 10th century until 1122. Many are buried here. Churches, monasteries, palace ruins and the well-preserved medieval townscape make this city worth a visit. Today it is the economic and cultural center of West Georgia.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

Coastal town of Batumi

The Black Sea coast. The climate is mild Mediterranean. The port city of Batumi, the third largest city in Georgia, beckons you to take a stroll along the beach. The promenade is flanked by art objects. It is not the only contrast. Between the derelict residential buildings, huge malls and luxury residential buildings are being built. A well-known real estate mogul has invested here: Donald Trump.

Georgia – a holiday destination between the Caucasus and the Black Sea

Hospitality & traditions

More than twenty different ethnic groups live in Georgia, including Azerbaijanis, Armenians, Arameans, Jews and Greeks. They brought their traditions and customs with them. And the Georgians? They love their own traditions and do not miss a single festival to wear their traditional costumes. They celebrate passionately – with traditional music and dances. Folk festivals are always a spectacle.

Author: Anne Termèche (sbc)

document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function (event) { if (DWDE.dsgvo.isStoringCookiesOkay()) { facebookTracking(); } }); function facebookTracking() { !function (f, b, e, v, n, t, s) { if (f.fbq) return; n = f.fbq = function () { n.callMethod ? n.callMethod.apply(n, arguments) : n.queue.push(arguments) }; if (!f._fbq) f._fbq = n; n.push = n; n.loaded = !0; n.version = '2.0'; n.queue = []; t = b.createElement(e); t.async = !0; t.src = v; s = b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(t, s) }(window, document, 'script', 'https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '157204581336210'); fbq('track', 'ViewContent'); } Source link

The post Georgian presidential front-runner aims at multilateralism to thaw frozen conflicts | Europe| News and current affairs from around the continent | DW appeared first on Today News Stories.

from WordPress https://ift.tt/2RnjPjY via IFTTT