When the Europeans embarked on their conquest of the world, to colonise
the world, the rule of the game was that might was right. They went
about with their gunboats and cannons to rob, loot, rape and seize
countries occupied by the natives they claimed to be savages, and they
were given God’s power and blessing to take their lands and everything,
including their lives.
The European practically seized every corner of the earth regardless of
the objections and protests of their owners. Being newly industrialized
countries, with new technologies and weapons, they just ran down the
natives as sub humans. The natives have no rights to their land and
possessions. The Europeans were there to take them away and to rule
them.
There is a new kind of colonialism raising its ugly heads in the South
China Sea. The difference, the colonialists were new nations that were
once colonized, new states given independence by their former colonial
masters. Now they are out to seize islands in the South China Sea. They
did not know that these islands were there since time immemorial. They
just knew, as they did not have the skills and technology to discover
the existence and where about of these islands till they were given
independence and starting to acquire some wealth and technology to
discover the existence of such islands. They did not know that the
islands were claimed by China centuries ago, centuries before they
became independent nations of today.
Their ignorance of history, of the ownership of the islands are good
enough reasons to claim these islands as theirs, and like the Europeans,
totally ignored the rights of their owners. They are claiming their
rights based on a new law set by a new organizations called UNCLOS. They
demanded that the new laws take precedent over historical rights of
ownership.
Another big difference is that the new countries were not the invincible
Europeans running roughshod over the poorly equipped and armed natives.
These little countries are trying to seize the islands of China, a
super power with enough power to colonise them if needed to. What an
irony? Little countries trying to colonise the territories of a bigger
nation and power and think they could get away with it. Even the mighty
Europeans had to return most of their colonized land except those that
owned by smaller and weaker countries that they could over powered.
Would this new colonization of China’s islands in the South China Sea ended in the favour of the new little colonial powers?
7/16/2016
7/15/2016
Taiwan – The first victim of the Hague kangaroo court
The Taiwan
govt thought by being a good boy, stayed out of the fray while the Americans
and Japanese conspired with some Asean states to wrestle Chinese islands and
the interest of Taiwan would be protected. Afterall Taiwan is being courted by
both the Americans and Japanese and is considered to be one of them. Surely
they will not do anything to harm the interest of Taiwan in the South China
Sea. Taiwan also owned several islands there with the biggest Taiping Island
or Itu Aba, big enough to have an
airfield and home to a few hundred Taiwanese.
What the
Taiwanese did not bargain for and could not believe their collaborator friends
would do them in, is the ruling that the Taiping Island is a reef. What a joke
and what a shocking awakening. The Taiwanese have been sacrificed as a
dispensable pawn. In the minds of the Americans and Japanese, Taiwan would
return to China some day and it is better to cut Taiwan off the deal, that the
Taiping Island pronounced by the kangaroo court is a reef and would not be
entitled to a 200nm EEZ.
Now what are
the Taiwanese going to do? Pay a visit to Washington to beg for a new ruling?
Forget it, it is a done deal. Taiwan is enemy in the long run and its interests
in the South China Sea would not be worthy to be protected. Protecting
Taiwanese interests in the Taiping Island is as good as protecting China’s
interests. The Americans and the Japanese have it all worked out. Taiwanese is useful only in the short term to
be used to pressure China but nothing more.
Thank you
for being a good boy. Taiping Island is
a reef. Want to buy more mediocre American weapons to shoot at China? Taiwan
would not be allowed to be turned into a Trojan Horse to undermine the
strategic interests of the USA and Japan in the South China Sea. Period.
The kangaroo court rules in favour of the Philippines
The rulings of the
Permanent Court of Arbitration came as expected. The rulings were as good as a
done deal from the day the case was filed by the Philippines with the
connivance of the Americans and the Japanese as the President of the PCA. What
can China or Taiwan expect from the rulings of a kangaroo court that
predetermined and prejudged the case, decided who are the judges, what they
want to judge, how they want to judge and how they want to interpret the laws
to achieve what they want to achieve? Does anyone in his right mind really
believe that this was a fair trial based on legal principles?
China must behave like a super power and stop being
bullied by farcical institutions pretending to be world bodies and have power
over countries without respecting their national sovereignty and territorial
integrity. It is good that the PCA rulings came to expose the hypocrisy of what
it is instead of what it was supposed to be.
Yes, D Day is here forChina .
This day would change the course of history and how the world would be going
forward. The moment has come for China to take its place as a super power in
the world stage and rebuild a New World Order that is fair to all countries big
and small.
No international body
shall be given so much power and authority to decide on the issue of
sovereignty of any country without the consent of that country. This carnal principle cannot be violated at
the peril of small states. Only a kangaroo court would have the arrogance to
rule on sovereignty issues and declare that its decision is final and binding.
When an international institution has abused its authority and power, it loses
its right of existence, the very reason for its creation. China and Taiwan and
other sovereign states that feared being bulldozed by such arbitrary rulings
against their national interests without their consent, should walk out and
quit the organization. China should rally its allies like Russia, North Korea,
Iran and the central Asian states to leave the UNCLOS and close the door behind
them. Let UNCLOS and the Permanent Court of Arbitration continue with their
mischief, to rule against other hapless small countries.
With China and Russia joining
the USA
as non members of UNCLOS, the organization will become a meaningless lame duck.
There is now no reason or benefits for China and its allies to be a member of
an organization that has undone the goodwill and respect that it deserved, as a
neutral, fair and just international body.
China should leave
these theatrical rulings behind and move on. The immediate task is to
strengthen its military deployments in its islands, reinforce the weapons
system in anticipation of a military assault by an American led joint military
force.
The PCA rulings would
also be an opportunity for China
to see through the façade of hypocrisy of some Asean states, to know who they
really are. Some Asean states would be compelled by these rulings and by the
Americans to make a stand. China
too should take a clear stand, to review all its agreements with the Americans
done under the policy of appeasement, believing that the Americans would
reciprocate goodwill with generosity. The truth is that the Americans have
never been sincere in wanting to work and cooperate with China and have
been treating China
as their arch foe.
This is a wake up call
for China, to identify friends or foes. China should no longer deceive
itself that appeasing the Americans, trying to work with the Americans would be
appreciated. It is a moment to be firm and resolute, to take a stand against
this international conspiracy to violate China ’s sovereignty and to contain China from
expanding and developing its own islands in the South
China Sea .
China must close ranks
with its allies, especially with Russia, North Korea and Iran and the central
Asia and African nation states. There is clear and present danger and unity is
strength. The Americans and their allies have declared war on China . The days
of trying to sleep with the devil are over. The devil will never change its
evil ways.
The kangaroo court’s
decision is the clearest sign of what’s more to come and China either stands
and fights or would lose everything it has built for the last 40 years. The
smaller states and those fence sitters would be watching how China stood up to
this international bullying. Any weakness shown by China would only drive them quickly
to the camps of the Americans. China
must pick up the gauntlet and stare at the enemies with the nerve of steel,
that it is not going to be pushed over.
Yes, D Day is here for
7/14/2016
What is the Permanent Court of Arbitration?
By Chua Chin Leng (chinadaily.com.cn) 2016-07-14 16:04
Wikipedia has this to say about the PCA.‘The PCA is not a “court" in the conventional understanding of that term but an administrative organization with the object of having permanent and readily available means to serve as the registry for purposes of international arbitration and other related procedures, including commissions of enquiry and conciliation. The judges or arbitrators that hear cases are officially called "Members" of the Court.The public at large is usually more familiar with the International Court of Justice than with the Permanent Court of Arbitration, partly because of the closed nature of cases handled by the PCA and also the small number of cases dealt with between 1946 and 1990. Sometimes even the decision itself is kept confidential at the request of the parties.’
To simplify, this is a private entity established to facilitate arbitration by member states on a willing buyer willing seller basis. It is quite like a commercial establishment, any member state can come to seek help to arbitrate their disputes. It is not a court! It is not a world body like the UN or sanctioned by the UN. Its jurisdiction and ruling are as good as the disputing parties want it to be. It has no authority and no legal status if a disputing party is not willing to subject itself to its arbitration. The closest example of such a court is the international court in Tanjong Pagar in Singapore, a convenient store for customers to avail themselves of its facilities.
I hope this is clear and no one should go on to believe that it is akin to the International Court of Justice, a UN organization. This South China Sea dispute that the PCA was hearing has no credibility and legal standing as the other party did not oblige or agree to the arbitration. What China said, that it is piece of waste paper is as good as it could be.
The Americans and its allies have tried to deceive the world that the PCA’s rulings on the Philippines submission are binding and legal. This is hogwash. How could it be when it is not a court of law? How could it be when it is a tribunal for willing parties to seek arbitration when there is an unwilling party (China) that refused to participate and did not even make any representation on the case?
Having established the basis and nature of the PCA, it would be interesting if the Philippines would to file another case to claim the state of Sabah as part of the Philippines. And it is expected that Malaysia would object and would decline to participate in such a trial settlement. But given the support of the Americans, the PCA could go ahead to appoint a panel of judges without the consent of Malaysia and come out with a judgment in favor of the Philippines. And the PCA could then declare that its ‘judgment’ is final and binding on Malaysia.
Would Malaysia agree to the judgment, would it be legal and binding on Malaysia? Many similar cases and judgments could be brought to and decided by the PCA which the Americans would like the world to believe is a world body with the authority to impose its judgment on unwilling nation states and expect them to abide by it.
The most dangerous implications arising from this precedent, if it can be called a precedent, would be on countries agreeing to the Trans Pacific Pact (TPP) that the Americans are proposing. The members of this TPP would come under the jurisdiction of the PCA for obvious reasons and they have no rights to be excluded from its judgment, and its decision would be final and binding.
This could be a test case and a precedent that the Americans are trying to set to impose on the members of the TPP with the PCA doing its bidding like in this South China Sea case. Can members of the TPP and members of the PCA expect a fair hearing when they can be put on trial against their objections? Would any country be willing to be ruled by an organization like the PCA to determine the fate of their disputes, even their sovereignty without their consent?
The PCA cannot be seen to be an authority or a court to rule over nation states. It is a miscarriage of justice and an attempt to usurp the rights of a nation state in matters of the state and sovereignty if the PCA, a commercial organization, is deemed to have such authority.
Can a commercial tribunal rule over nation states and its judgment be binding against the objection of nation states?
The author is a political observer from Singapore.
PS. There have been many comments and discussions and opinions on this PCA rulings by all and sundry, including academics and the untrustworthy politicians. Even in a Channel News Asia programme the presenter was saying that the PCA was a UN backed arbitration court which is furthest from the truth.
In brief, the discussions and comments can be summarised like people arguing why 1 + 1 = 4 and not 3. To some it should be 3 and to others it should be 4. They forgot to go back to first base to question why 1 + 1 is 3 in the first place. This boils down to a lack of understanding of what this PCA is all about. It is like a private school or university, uncredited, unrated commercial setup unlike a govt or established and recognised public university. The private school would take in any candidate who is willing to pay the tuition fee and may even freely award first class honours to the highest bidder to increase its revenue.
The PCA has nothing to do with the UN or approved by the UN. It is NOT a court but a tribunal for willing parties to seek an arbitration ruling applicable and binding only to the consenting parties. How on earth would academics forget this critical distinction, and for politicians to call a non participating litigant to respect its ruling, that its ruling is binding? They totally forgot to dispute that fact that 1 +1 is not equal to 3 but 2. They start to argue from a wrong basis, that a private school has so much credibility that its degrees must be recognised at all cost.
Get my point?
USA cheats Third World countries of trillions of dollars through World Bank / IMF and other financial institutions it controls
John Perkins a former World Bank
economist reveals how USA through World Bank, IMF and other financial
institutions it controls cheat countries around the world of trillions
of dollars.
John Perkins worked directly with the heads of the World Bank, IMF and other global financial institutions USA controls. He quit this job in 1980s because he felt it was morally and ethically wrong for him to play a part to help creating USA into a bloatedly rich world empire at the expense of the poor disadvantaged third world countries.
His job as an "Economic Hit Man" was to convince countries that are strategically important to USA to accept enormous loans for infrastructure development and to make sure that the lucrative projects were contracted to US corporations . He created economic projections for countries to accept billions of dollars in loans they surely couldn't afford. His conscience was pricked when he realised how these wicked American practices have directly resulted in terrorist attacks and animosity towards the United States.
Perkins defines economic hit men as "highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development
(US AID), and other foreign 'aid' organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources.
Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of
globalization."
Perkins' was hired as an economist for the international consulting firm of Chas. T. Main, Inc. (MAIN). He was told in confidential meetings with "special consultant" to the company Claudine Martin that he had
two primary objectives:
He was supposed to justify huge loans for countries. These loans would be for major engineering and construction projects, which were to be carried out by MAIN and other U.S. companies such as Bechtel,
Halliburton, Stone & Webster and Brown & Root.
He was supposed to help bankrupt the countries that received these loans after the U.S. companies involved had been paid. This would make sure that these countries would remain in debt to their creditors and would
then be easy targets when the U.S. needed favors such as military bases, UN votes and access to natural resources like oil.
Perkins' job was to produce economic growth projections that would make the case for a variety of major projects. If the U.S. decided to lend a country money, Perkins would compare the economic benefits of different
projects such as power plants or telecommunications systems. He would then produce reports that showed the economic growth the country would experience due to these projects. These economic growth projections
needed to be high enough to justify the loans. Otherwise, the loans would be denied.
The gross national product (GNP) was always the most important factor in these economic projections. The project expected to increase the GNP the most would be chosen. In the cases where there was only one project
under consideration, it needed to be shown that the project would greatly benefit the GNP. Luckily for the economic hit man, GNP figures can be quite deceptive. "For instance, the growth of GNP may result even when it
profits only one person, such as an individual who owns a utility company, while the majority of the population is burdened with debt."
All of these projects were meant to make huge profits for the contractors. The U.S. engineering and construction companies involved would be assured of great wealth. At the same time, a few wealthy families and
influential leaders in the receiving countries would become very happy and very rich thanks to these loans. The leaders of these countries would also have bolstered political power because they were credited with bringing
industrial parks, power plants and airports to their people.
The problem is that these countries simply cannot handle the debt of these loans and their poorest citizens are deprived of health, education and other social services for several decades as these countries struggle
economically to overcome their huge debts. Meanwhile, the huge American media conglomerates portray these projects as favors being provided by the United States. American citizens in general have no trouble believing
these messages, and in fact are led to perceive that these actions are unselfish acts of international goodwill.
Ultimately, due to the large debts, the U.S. is able to draw on these countries for political, economic and military favors whenever desired. And of course, the U.S. corporations involved with the expensive projects become
extremely wealthy.
The U.S. Government was clever in using economic hitman without directly implicating Washington. US empowered international corporations and mujltinatioinal organizations such as the World Bank and IMF. This allowed for US governments, corporations and multinational organizations to form mutually beneficial relationships . US intelligence agencies like CIA and FBI were able to use these relationships to their advantage.
Government organizations such as the National Security Agency (NSA) were now able to screen for potential economic hitmen (as they did with Perkins) and then have them hired by international corporations such as
MAIN.
"These economic hitmen would never be paid by the government; instead, they would draw their salaries from the private sector. As a result, their dirty work, if exposed, would be chalked up to corporate greed rather than
to government policy. In addition, the corporations that hired them, although paid by government agencies and their multinational banking counterparts (with taxpayer money), would be insulated from congressional
oversight and public scrutiny, shielded by a growing body of legal initiatives, including trademark, international trade, and Freedom of Information laws."
Southernglory1
Thursday,14th July, 2016
John Perkins worked directly with the heads of the World Bank, IMF and other global financial institutions USA controls. He quit this job in 1980s because he felt it was morally and ethically wrong for him to play a part to help creating USA into a bloatedly rich world empire at the expense of the poor disadvantaged third world countries.
His job as an "Economic Hit Man" was to convince countries that are strategically important to USA to accept enormous loans for infrastructure development and to make sure that the lucrative projects were contracted to US corporations . He created economic projections for countries to accept billions of dollars in loans they surely couldn't afford. His conscience was pricked when he realised how these wicked American practices have directly resulted in terrorist attacks and animosity towards the United States.
Perkins defines economic hit men as "highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development
(US AID), and other foreign 'aid' organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources.
Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of
globalization."
Perkins' was hired as an economist for the international consulting firm of Chas. T. Main, Inc. (MAIN). He was told in confidential meetings with "special consultant" to the company Claudine Martin that he had
two primary objectives:
He was supposed to justify huge loans for countries. These loans would be for major engineering and construction projects, which were to be carried out by MAIN and other U.S. companies such as Bechtel,
Halliburton, Stone & Webster and Brown & Root.
He was supposed to help bankrupt the countries that received these loans after the U.S. companies involved had been paid. This would make sure that these countries would remain in debt to their creditors and would
then be easy targets when the U.S. needed favors such as military bases, UN votes and access to natural resources like oil.
Perkins' job was to produce economic growth projections that would make the case for a variety of major projects. If the U.S. decided to lend a country money, Perkins would compare the economic benefits of different
projects such as power plants or telecommunications systems. He would then produce reports that showed the economic growth the country would experience due to these projects. These economic growth projections
needed to be high enough to justify the loans. Otherwise, the loans would be denied.
The gross national product (GNP) was always the most important factor in these economic projections. The project expected to increase the GNP the most would be chosen. In the cases where there was only one project
under consideration, it needed to be shown that the project would greatly benefit the GNP. Luckily for the economic hit man, GNP figures can be quite deceptive. "For instance, the growth of GNP may result even when it
profits only one person, such as an individual who owns a utility company, while the majority of the population is burdened with debt."
All of these projects were meant to make huge profits for the contractors. The U.S. engineering and construction companies involved would be assured of great wealth. At the same time, a few wealthy families and
influential leaders in the receiving countries would become very happy and very rich thanks to these loans. The leaders of these countries would also have bolstered political power because they were credited with bringing
industrial parks, power plants and airports to their people.
The problem is that these countries simply cannot handle the debt of these loans and their poorest citizens are deprived of health, education and other social services for several decades as these countries struggle
economically to overcome their huge debts. Meanwhile, the huge American media conglomerates portray these projects as favors being provided by the United States. American citizens in general have no trouble believing
these messages, and in fact are led to perceive that these actions are unselfish acts of international goodwill.
Ultimately, due to the large debts, the U.S. is able to draw on these countries for political, economic and military favors whenever desired. And of course, the U.S. corporations involved with the expensive projects become
extremely wealthy.
The U.S. Government was clever in using economic hitman without directly implicating Washington. US empowered international corporations and mujltinatioinal organizations such as the World Bank and IMF. This allowed for US governments, corporations and multinational organizations to form mutually beneficial relationships . US intelligence agencies like CIA and FBI were able to use these relationships to their advantage.
Government organizations such as the National Security Agency (NSA) were now able to screen for potential economic hitmen (as they did with Perkins) and then have them hired by international corporations such as
MAIN.
"These economic hitmen would never be paid by the government; instead, they would draw their salaries from the private sector. As a result, their dirty work, if exposed, would be chalked up to corporate greed rather than
to government policy. In addition, the corporations that hired them, although paid by government agencies and their multinational banking counterparts (with taxpayer money), would be insulated from congressional
oversight and public scrutiny, shielded by a growing body of legal initiatives, including trademark, international trade, and Freedom of Information laws."
Southernglory1
Thursday,14th July, 2016
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)