Hankyoreh
[Column] Nuclear disaster: a bitter pill for humankind
By Kim Sun-woo, poet and novelist
Posted on : Mar.22,2011
My first response to news of the Japanese earthquake was fear and horror. This was followed by pity and distress. There was an old woman who, the moment she was rescued from the scene of the disaster, said, “I’m sorry, I have caused you trouble.” Those words struck against my heart, which had been blocked with such an intense fear, and it was at that point that my tears began to flow. I saw my image reflected back in that old woman. Composure, consideration for others, kindness - all at once she awakened me to all the things I wanted to learn.
It seems that what makes a person cry is another person. In good times and bad, people cry and laugh through people. As individuals who come into this world with nothing and leave with nothing, the greatest asset we could be said to possess is our capacity for love, compassion, and sympathy. I believe this may be the most unyielding strength that has allowed human history to continue on this planet even amid a never-ending stream of disasters both natural and made by humans.
Now we need to take another step forward from this disaster. However unpleasant an experience this enormous disaster has been for all of humankind, I believe now that it could also serve as truly good medicine, depending where we go united in this pain, and how. The time has come for us to put a powerful check on a world environment and human avarice that take us closer to crisis every day. The pain Japan is enduring right now may be the cross that prompts an awakening in humankind. An earthquake, a tsunami, and then a nuclear disaster. This is something that could happen anywhere on Earth. Had it happened in South Korea, we would have suffered even greater devastation, given how ridiculously underprepared we are.
I recall the words of Franz Alt, the ecological economist who asked, “Does there need to be another major nuclear accident for us to change our atomic energy policy?”
Today, in the 21st century, we find ourselves in the midst of tremendous environmental catastrophes, racing toward the crisis of codestruction. Within this troubling ecological crisis, there are places on this planet where people are living next to potential atomic bombs. Yet because they are cheap and convenient right now, we go on about “developing nuclear energy that is absolutely safe no matter what happens,” even going so far as to attach the deceptive descriptor of “green energy.”
It was Japan, in the early spring of 2011, that stripped away all of this fanciful myth amid tremendous suffering. As the scales fell away from our eyes, discussions toward the halting of nuclear development began to ferment in every corner of the world. In point of fact, these discussions should have taken place a long time ago, and nuclear development should have long ago disappeared from the face of the Earth.
Essentially, Fukushima happened because we failed to take any lesson from Chernobyl. If we cannot learn anything from the situation today in Japan, a country that created and fostered the myth of “the world’s best nuclear power plant safety,” where will the next catastrophe strike? Will there be any future left for humankind afterward?
Embarrassingly, the Korean government, amid all of this, has been focused on loudly proclaiming that there is no problem with any of the country’s nuclear power plants and that they are utterly safe. It has announced its intent to spur on the exportation of constructing more nuclear power plants. All around us we see an ignorance that fails to grasp any of the inner meaning for the future in this disaster.
The reason people all of the world are eager to help Japan right now is probably because they sense that the catastrophe is not Japan’s alone. We must turn it into an important turning point. The decision is ours: codestruction or coexistence. One also gets the sense that amid the order of the universe, there are some tormented individuals who are pondering how to awaken an ignorant humankind suffering the profound illness of technology worship and digging its own grave.
It is not about Korea helping Japan, but about humankind helping humankind, and about helping our future selves and other children. One thing exists because of the presence of another - if the latter is annihilated, so too is the former. We are neighbors living right up against one another, linked together on the pale blue dot that is the Earth. We must show our strength. I can see the pure face of hope that comes after a great sadness. Do not forget. Together we can.
The views presented in this column are the writer’s own, and do not necessarily reflect those of The Hankyoreh.
Showing posts with label Global Energy War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Global Energy War. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Text Fwd: The Libyan War of 2011 and Crisis in Yemen
DMZ Hawai'i
The Libyan War of 2011 and Crisis in Yemen
March 21, 2011 by Kyle Kajihiro
After obtaining a United Nations Security Council resolution establishing a “no fly zone” and authorizing “all necessary measures” to stop Libyaʻs military assault on rebel forces, the U.S. and European began their attack on Libya. The AP wrote:
The U.S. claimed initial success two days into an assault on Libya that included some of the heaviest firepower in the American arsenal — long-range bombers designed for the Cold War — but American officials on Sunday said it was too early to define the international military campaign’s end game.
The New York Times reported:
American and European forces began a broad campaign of strikes against the government of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi on Saturday, unleashing warplanes and missiles in a military intervention on a scale not seen in the Arab world since the Iraq war.
The mission to impose a United Nations-sanctioned no-fly zone and keep Colonel Qaddafi from using air power against beleaguered rebel forces was portrayed by Pentagon and NATO officials as under French and British leadership.
But the Pentagon said that American forces were mounting an initial campaign to knock out Libya’s air defense systems, firing volley after volley of Tomahawk missiles from nearby ships against missile, radar and communications centers around Tripoli, the capital, and the western cities of Misurata and Surt.
And while the Pentagon is reporting that the initial missile and bombardment campaign was successful, the U.S. strategy is unclear. Another AP articlereports that the western campaign in Libya could last “a while”:
The U.S. military, for now at the lead of the international campaign, is trying to walk a fine line over the end game of the assault. It is avoiding for now any appearance that it aims to take out Gadhafi or help the rebels oust him, instead limiting its stated goals to protecting civilians.
Britain also is treading carefully. Foreign Secretary William Hague refused Monday to say if Gadhafi would or could be assassinated, insisting he would not “get drawn into details about what or whom may be targeted.”
“I’m not going to speculate on the targets,” Hague said in a heated interview with BBC radio. “That depends on the circumstances at the time.”
So, the legal and moral justification for the military intervention is “humanitarian”, to protect civilians. But the real objective is regime change. As Global Research reports, the Security Council resolution was not unanimous; Russia, China, Germany, Brazil and India abstained from the vote. A Russian commentator also remarked that the “humanitarian” bombing of Yugoslavia was the precedent for the latest U.S. attack on Libya and that Libya was the fourth country in twelve years to be directly attacked by the west. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin criticized the UN Security Council resolution authorizing military attacks against Libya:
“The Security Council resolution is deficient and flawed; it allows everything and is reminiscent of a medieval call for a crusade,” Putin told workers at a ballistic missile factory in the Urals region. “It effectively allows intervention in a sovereign state.”
Analysis from Stratfor suggests that while the immediate objective is regime change, the long term strategy in Libya is unclear:
The Libyan war has now begun. It pits a coalition of European powers plus the United States, a handful of Arab states and rebels in Libya against the Libyan government. The long-term goal, unspoken but well understood, is regime change — displacing the government of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi and replacing it with a new regime built around the rebels.
The mission is clearer than the strategy, and that strategy can’t be figured out from the first moves. The strategy might be the imposition of a no-fly zone, the imposition of a no-fly zone and attacks against Libya’s command-and-control centers, or these two plus direct ground attacks on Gadhafi’s forces. These could also be combined with an invasion and occupation of Libya.
The question, therefore, is not the mission but the strategy to be pursued. How far is the coalition, or at least some of its members, prepared to go to effect regime change and manage the consequences following regime change? How many resources are they prepared to provide and how long are they prepared to fight? It should be remembered that in Iraq and Afghanistan the occupation became the heart of the war, and regime change was merely the opening act. It is possible that the coalition partners haven’t decided on the strategy yet, or may not be in agreement. Let’s therefore consider the first phases of the war, regardless of how far they are prepared to go in pursuit of the mission.
Read more: The Libyan War of 2011 STRATFOR
Rick Rozoff points out in Global Research that the war on Libya is NATOʻs first direct African conflict as well as the first war for the newly created U.S. African Command (AFRICOM). He also points out that the humanitarian war justification for the attack on Libya has not been applied consistently the current wave of protest in the Arab world:
The slaying of unarmed civilian protesters in Yemen and Bahrain has not evoked a comparable outcry and has not produced analogous military actions from Western military powers.
Meanwhile the crisis in Yemen is heating up with government troops firing on and killing 46 protesters and a top military commander defecting to the side of the protesters. Stratfor writes:
A crisis in Yemen is rapidly escalating. A standoff centered on the presidential palace is taking place between security forces in the capital city of Sanaa while embattled President Ali Abdullah Saleh continues to resist stepping down, claiming that the “majority of Yemeni people” support him. While a Western-led military intervention in Libya is dominating the headlines, the crisis in Yemen and its implications for Persian Gulf stability is of greater strategic consequence. Saudi Arabia is already facing the threat of an Iranian destabilization campaign in eastern Arabia and has deployed forces to Bahrain in an effort to prevent Shiite unrest from spreading. With a second front now threatening the Saudi underbelly, the situation in Yemen is becoming one that the Saudis can no longer leave on the backburner.
The turning point in Yemen occurred March 18 after Friday prayers, when tens of thousands of protesters in the streets calling for Saleh’s ouster came under a heavy crackdown that reportedly left some 46 people dead and hundreds wounded. It is unclear whether the shootings were ordered by Saleh himself, orchestrated by a member of the Yemeni defense establishment to facilitate Saleh’s political exit or simply provoked by tensions in the streets, but it does not really matter. Scores of defections from the ruling party, the prominent Hashid tribe in the north and military old guard followed the March 18 events, both putting Saleh at risk of being removed in a coup and putting the already deeply fractious country at risk of a civil war.
Read more: Yemen in Crisis: A Special Report STRATFOR
The U.S. has conducted secret military operations in Yemen to hunt Al-Qaeda in Yemen. Last year it was reported Yemenʻs President Saleh and General David Petraeus, Commander of the US Central Command held closed door meetings during which arrangements were made for the U.S. to establish a military base on the Yemeni island of Socotra.
The Libyan War of 2011 and Crisis in Yemen
March 21, 2011 by Kyle Kajihiro
After obtaining a United Nations Security Council resolution establishing a “no fly zone” and authorizing “all necessary measures” to stop Libyaʻs military assault on rebel forces, the U.S. and European began their attack on Libya. The AP wrote:
The U.S. claimed initial success two days into an assault on Libya that included some of the heaviest firepower in the American arsenal — long-range bombers designed for the Cold War — but American officials on Sunday said it was too early to define the international military campaign’s end game.
The New York Times reported:
American and European forces began a broad campaign of strikes against the government of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi on Saturday, unleashing warplanes and missiles in a military intervention on a scale not seen in the Arab world since the Iraq war.
The mission to impose a United Nations-sanctioned no-fly zone and keep Colonel Qaddafi from using air power against beleaguered rebel forces was portrayed by Pentagon and NATO officials as under French and British leadership.
But the Pentagon said that American forces were mounting an initial campaign to knock out Libya’s air defense systems, firing volley after volley of Tomahawk missiles from nearby ships against missile, radar and communications centers around Tripoli, the capital, and the western cities of Misurata and Surt.
And while the Pentagon is reporting that the initial missile and bombardment campaign was successful, the U.S. strategy is unclear. Another AP articlereports that the western campaign in Libya could last “a while”:
The U.S. military, for now at the lead of the international campaign, is trying to walk a fine line over the end game of the assault. It is avoiding for now any appearance that it aims to take out Gadhafi or help the rebels oust him, instead limiting its stated goals to protecting civilians.
Britain also is treading carefully. Foreign Secretary William Hague refused Monday to say if Gadhafi would or could be assassinated, insisting he would not “get drawn into details about what or whom may be targeted.”
“I’m not going to speculate on the targets,” Hague said in a heated interview with BBC radio. “That depends on the circumstances at the time.”
So, the legal and moral justification for the military intervention is “humanitarian”, to protect civilians. But the real objective is regime change. As Global Research reports, the Security Council resolution was not unanimous; Russia, China, Germany, Brazil and India abstained from the vote. A Russian commentator also remarked that the “humanitarian” bombing of Yugoslavia was the precedent for the latest U.S. attack on Libya and that Libya was the fourth country in twelve years to be directly attacked by the west. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin criticized the UN Security Council resolution authorizing military attacks against Libya:
“The Security Council resolution is deficient and flawed; it allows everything and is reminiscent of a medieval call for a crusade,” Putin told workers at a ballistic missile factory in the Urals region. “It effectively allows intervention in a sovereign state.”
Analysis from Stratfor suggests that while the immediate objective is regime change, the long term strategy in Libya is unclear:
The Libyan war has now begun. It pits a coalition of European powers plus the United States, a handful of Arab states and rebels in Libya against the Libyan government. The long-term goal, unspoken but well understood, is regime change — displacing the government of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi and replacing it with a new regime built around the rebels.
The mission is clearer than the strategy, and that strategy can’t be figured out from the first moves. The strategy might be the imposition of a no-fly zone, the imposition of a no-fly zone and attacks against Libya’s command-and-control centers, or these two plus direct ground attacks on Gadhafi’s forces. These could also be combined with an invasion and occupation of Libya.
The question, therefore, is not the mission but the strategy to be pursued. How far is the coalition, or at least some of its members, prepared to go to effect regime change and manage the consequences following regime change? How many resources are they prepared to provide and how long are they prepared to fight? It should be remembered that in Iraq and Afghanistan the occupation became the heart of the war, and regime change was merely the opening act. It is possible that the coalition partners haven’t decided on the strategy yet, or may not be in agreement. Let’s therefore consider the first phases of the war, regardless of how far they are prepared to go in pursuit of the mission.
Read more: The Libyan War of 2011 STRATFOR
Rick Rozoff points out in Global Research that the war on Libya is NATOʻs first direct African conflict as well as the first war for the newly created U.S. African Command (AFRICOM). He also points out that the humanitarian war justification for the attack on Libya has not been applied consistently the current wave of protest in the Arab world:
The slaying of unarmed civilian protesters in Yemen and Bahrain has not evoked a comparable outcry and has not produced analogous military actions from Western military powers.
Meanwhile the crisis in Yemen is heating up with government troops firing on and killing 46 protesters and a top military commander defecting to the side of the protesters. Stratfor writes:
A crisis in Yemen is rapidly escalating. A standoff centered on the presidential palace is taking place between security forces in the capital city of Sanaa while embattled President Ali Abdullah Saleh continues to resist stepping down, claiming that the “majority of Yemeni people” support him. While a Western-led military intervention in Libya is dominating the headlines, the crisis in Yemen and its implications for Persian Gulf stability is of greater strategic consequence. Saudi Arabia is already facing the threat of an Iranian destabilization campaign in eastern Arabia and has deployed forces to Bahrain in an effort to prevent Shiite unrest from spreading. With a second front now threatening the Saudi underbelly, the situation in Yemen is becoming one that the Saudis can no longer leave on the backburner.
The turning point in Yemen occurred March 18 after Friday prayers, when tens of thousands of protesters in the streets calling for Saleh’s ouster came under a heavy crackdown that reportedly left some 46 people dead and hundreds wounded. It is unclear whether the shootings were ordered by Saleh himself, orchestrated by a member of the Yemeni defense establishment to facilitate Saleh’s political exit or simply provoked by tensions in the streets, but it does not really matter. Scores of defections from the ruling party, the prominent Hashid tribe in the north and military old guard followed the March 18 events, both putting Saleh at risk of being removed in a coup and putting the already deeply fractious country at risk of a civil war.
Read more: Yemen in Crisis: A Special Report STRATFOR
The U.S. has conducted secret military operations in Yemen to hunt Al-Qaeda in Yemen. Last year it was reported Yemenʻs President Saleh and General David Petraeus, Commander of the US Central Command held closed door meetings during which arrangements were made for the U.S. to establish a military base on the Yemeni island of Socotra.
Text Fwd: STOP THE U.S. WAR AGAINST LIBYA and BAHRAIN
See also Global Research
International Action Center
STOP THE U.S. WAR AGAINST LIBYA
March 19, 2011
On March 17, 2011, Washington showed its true intentions by pushing through a U.N. Security Council resolution that amounts to a declaration of war on the government and people of Libya.
A U.S. attack is the worst possible thing that could happen to the people of Libya. It also puts the unfolding Arab revolutions, which have inspired people across North Africa and Western Asia, in the gravest danger.
The resolution goes beyond a no-fly zone. It includes language saying U.N. member states could "take all necessary measures" ... "by halting attacks by air, land and sea forces under the control of the Gadhafi regime."(CNN.com, Mar 17)
The new resolution not only calls for attacks on Libyan aircraft and air defenses, but authorizes the strafing and bombing of ground forces as well. The U.S. and French governments immediately announced that they were ready to go. Britain and Italy are aiding. In essence the former colonial powers have begun an armed attack on the Libyan government and its people, backing one side of a civil war.
No matter how one feels about Libya today and the role of the Gadhafi government; regardless of how one evaluates the Libyan opposition, a U.S.-led war or intervention in Libya is a disaster for the Libyan people, and for peace and progress around the world.
The U.S. and its allies are repeating over and over the lie that they are trying to "prevent attacks on civilians" and are acting from humanitarian motives. But nobody should be fooled. Consider these “humanitarians” and how they react to Bahrain.
The U.S. Fifth Fleet is based in Bahrain, which is an absolute monarchy. Its people have been valiantly trying to change their government for weeks. They had some initial success. The king responded with deadly repression and later with hints at reform.
On March 14, however, the day after Secretary of Defense Gates visited Bahrain, supposedly to urge "restraint", the Bahraini government commenced a brutal crackdown, backed up by Saudi Arabian troops. Helicopters, tear gas, rubber bullets, and live ammunition were used, killing and injuring many people. Nearly all of Bahrain's security forces are foreign mercenaries.
Unlike the Libyan rebels, the Bahraini people have absolutely no arms. But there has been no talk of a no-fly zone over Bahrain, let alone attacks on the murderous Bahraini and Saudi armies.
This is because the real motivation for the U.S. and its allies in both Bahrain and Libya, and indeed the whole region, is to control the OIL! It is Washington’s main strategic interest and a primary financial interest for U.S. big business.
This is true even though the U.S. is not directly dependent on imported oil from Libya. Oil is a worldwide commodity, and any country which imports oil must deal with a world market, no matter from which individual country or countries they import the oil.
Of even more importance to the U.S. and Europeans is who controls the flow of oil. A military presence or a reliable puppet in Libya would give Washington --and to a lesser extent the European imperialists -- control of the oil spigot to Europe and also establish a military presence in North Africa from which to influence or prevent the development of the revolutions, especially in Egypt and Tunisia.
Not only a demonization campaign against the Libyan leader, but every form of fraud and propaganda is being used to push for this intervention, including a supposed "vote" by the Arab League supporting the latest U.N. resolution. Left unsaid is the fact that only 11 of the 22 members of the League even attended the meeting, which was held behind closed doors. Two of these 11 attending members, Syria and Algeria, made clear that they were completely opposed to military intervention in Libya.
Meanwhile the corporate media has ignored a resolution by the African Union, representing 53 countries, which adamantly rejected a no-fly zone or other intervention.
The U. S. blocked any UN action, even a toothless resolution, during the massive Israeli bombardment of Gaza in 2008 and also during the Israeli bombing and attempted invasion of Lebanon in 2006.
It is important that peace-loving and progressive people around the world develop a consistent approach opposing ALL U.S. intervention. This is the only way to avoid becoming just an echo of the U.S. State Department and Pentagon.
U.S., French, British, Italian hands off Libya!
International Action Center
c/o Solidarity Center
55 W 17th St Suite 5C
New York, NY 10011
212-633-6646
iacenter@iacenter.org
www.iacenter.org
International Action Center
STOP THE U.S. WAR AGAINST LIBYA
March 19, 2011
On March 17, 2011, Washington showed its true intentions by pushing through a U.N. Security Council resolution that amounts to a declaration of war on the government and people of Libya.
A U.S. attack is the worst possible thing that could happen to the people of Libya. It also puts the unfolding Arab revolutions, which have inspired people across North Africa and Western Asia, in the gravest danger.
The resolution goes beyond a no-fly zone. It includes language saying U.N. member states could "take all necessary measures" ... "by halting attacks by air, land and sea forces under the control of the Gadhafi regime."(CNN.com, Mar 17)
The new resolution not only calls for attacks on Libyan aircraft and air defenses, but authorizes the strafing and bombing of ground forces as well. The U.S. and French governments immediately announced that they were ready to go. Britain and Italy are aiding. In essence the former colonial powers have begun an armed attack on the Libyan government and its people, backing one side of a civil war.
No matter how one feels about Libya today and the role of the Gadhafi government; regardless of how one evaluates the Libyan opposition, a U.S.-led war or intervention in Libya is a disaster for the Libyan people, and for peace and progress around the world.
The U.S. and its allies are repeating over and over the lie that they are trying to "prevent attacks on civilians" and are acting from humanitarian motives. But nobody should be fooled. Consider these “humanitarians” and how they react to Bahrain.
The U.S. Fifth Fleet is based in Bahrain, which is an absolute monarchy. Its people have been valiantly trying to change their government for weeks. They had some initial success. The king responded with deadly repression and later with hints at reform.
On March 14, however, the day after Secretary of Defense Gates visited Bahrain, supposedly to urge "restraint", the Bahraini government commenced a brutal crackdown, backed up by Saudi Arabian troops. Helicopters, tear gas, rubber bullets, and live ammunition were used, killing and injuring many people. Nearly all of Bahrain's security forces are foreign mercenaries.
Unlike the Libyan rebels, the Bahraini people have absolutely no arms. But there has been no talk of a no-fly zone over Bahrain, let alone attacks on the murderous Bahraini and Saudi armies.
This is because the real motivation for the U.S. and its allies in both Bahrain and Libya, and indeed the whole region, is to control the OIL! It is Washington’s main strategic interest and a primary financial interest for U.S. big business.
This is true even though the U.S. is not directly dependent on imported oil from Libya. Oil is a worldwide commodity, and any country which imports oil must deal with a world market, no matter from which individual country or countries they import the oil.
Of even more importance to the U.S. and Europeans is who controls the flow of oil. A military presence or a reliable puppet in Libya would give Washington --and to a lesser extent the European imperialists -- control of the oil spigot to Europe and also establish a military presence in North Africa from which to influence or prevent the development of the revolutions, especially in Egypt and Tunisia.
Not only a demonization campaign against the Libyan leader, but every form of fraud and propaganda is being used to push for this intervention, including a supposed "vote" by the Arab League supporting the latest U.N. resolution. Left unsaid is the fact that only 11 of the 22 members of the League even attended the meeting, which was held behind closed doors. Two of these 11 attending members, Syria and Algeria, made clear that they were completely opposed to military intervention in Libya.
Meanwhile the corporate media has ignored a resolution by the African Union, representing 53 countries, which adamantly rejected a no-fly zone or other intervention.
The U. S. blocked any UN action, even a toothless resolution, during the massive Israeli bombardment of Gaza in 2008 and also during the Israeli bombing and attempted invasion of Lebanon in 2006.
It is important that peace-loving and progressive people around the world develop a consistent approach opposing ALL U.S. intervention. This is the only way to avoid becoming just an echo of the U.S. State Department and Pentagon.
U.S., French, British, Italian hands off Libya!
International Action Center
c/o Solidarity Center
55 W 17th St Suite 5C
New York, NY 10011
212-633-6646
iacenter@iacenter.org
www.iacenter.org
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Text & Video Fwd: NATO WAR MOVES ONTO AFRICAN CONTINENT
Organizing Notes
Monday, March 21, 2011
NATO WAR MOVES ONTO AFRICAN CONTINENT
More war for control of oil. NATO is the military arm of the U.S. imperial effort to control access to oil around the globe on behalf of corporate globalization.
A few members of Congress are saying that Obama violated the constitution by not going to Congress for permission to attack Libya. The Arab League, who supported the "No Fly Zone," says this attack is beyond defending the skies and is an illegal intervention.
As Daniel Ellsberg said in Washington this past weekend - Obama might have once been a "constitutional scholar" but he no longer is. He is now an international law violater just like George W. Bush. They both work for the CIA.
Monday, March 21, 2011
NATO WAR MOVES ONTO AFRICAN CONTINENT
More war for control of oil. NATO is the military arm of the U.S. imperial effort to control access to oil around the globe on behalf of corporate globalization.
A few members of Congress are saying that Obama violated the constitution by not going to Congress for permission to attack Libya. The Arab League, who supported the "No Fly Zone," says this attack is beyond defending the skies and is an illegal intervention.
As Daniel Ellsberg said in Washington this past weekend - Obama might have once been a "constitutional scholar" but he no longer is. He is now an international law violater just like George W. Bush. They both work for the CIA.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Text Fwd: All Out War on Libya, Surge in the Price of Crude Oil...
Global Research
All Out War on Libya, Surge in the Price of Crude Oil...
"Humanitarian Wars are Good for Business".... Speculators Applaud....
by Michel Chossudovsky
March 16, 2011
PART III
The establishment of a no fly zone is on the drawing board of the Pentagon. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, supported by the Arab League and the Organization for African Unity (OUA) have labelled Libya as "An Unfriendly Nation".
The scenario envisaged by Washington is to involve Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states in aerial attacks directed against Libya.
They have also called on Saudi Arabia to supply opposition forces with weapons.
Reports confirm that NATO special forces and military advisers to the rebellion are on the ground in Eastern Libya.
The geopolitical and economic implications of a US-NATO led military intervention directed against Libya are far-reaching.
Libya is among the World's largest oil economies with approximately 3.5% of global oil reserves, more than twice those of the US.
A war on Libya would have an immediate impact on the price of crude oil. The latter has risen by 18 percent since the beginning of the insurrection in Libya.
It currently stands at $104.42 a barrel for April delivery on the New York Mercantile Exchange, its highest level since the financial crash of September 2008. Since August 2010, the price of crude oil has risen from 75.93 a barrel to 104.42 (March 2011), a hefty increase of 37.5 percent. (See Table below)
READ MORE
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Text Fwd: NOW IT GETS REAL COMPLICATED
Bruce Gagnon's Organizing Notes
Friday, March 18, 2011
NOW IT GETS REAL COMPLICATED
The U.N. has now given NATO the authority to begin bombing Libya. Don't think for a minute that this will be a short-term campaign. Expect NATO to ultimately say they must "put bases" into the North African country in order to bring stability and democracy. But don't be fooled by that. This is all about Libya's oil.
According to the Washington Post:
France said it was prepared to launch attacks within hours, and Britain also indicated that it was prepared to act quickly. Initial strikes are likely to target air defense systems and runways; it was unclear whether plans were also in motion to strike at tank columns and other government ground forces headed east.
U.S. officials said that it would probably take several days for a full operation to be undertaken and that President Obama had not yet approved the use of U.S. military assets. Obama has preferred to let other nations publicly lead the response to the Libyan crisis, and White House officials said he would not appear on camera Thursday night to speak about the U.N. vote.
At a Senate hearing Thursday, Undersecretary of State William J. Burns confronted sharply differing views about the Libyan crisis that crossed party lines. Some, led by Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), said the administration has been too cautious in its response. “Time is running out for the Libyan people,” Kerry said.
But Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), along with several Democrats, warned of the “risk that our involvement would escalate” and said the administration should “seek congressional debate on a declaration of war” against Libya before U.S. forces participate in any action.
Using NATO (which is a military tool of the U.S. empire) as cover it is likely that once Gaddafi is taken down from power in Libya a puppet government will be installed that will allow the U.S. and British oil corporations to take control of the black gold.
Eventually the people of Libya, who are demanding and deserve freedom, will discover that they have been betrayed by a NATO command that is more interested in oil profits than their hopes and dreams. At that point the real revolution will begin but by then NATO bases will likely have settled onto the dusty lands of North Africa.
I am reminded of the words of Thomas Barnett, who during the Bush II administration was described as Donald Rumsfeld's "strategy guy", speaking to an auditorium full of high-level military brass and CIA operatives and saying, "In 20 years we will be fighting in Africa for their oil."
It appears that Barnett's prophecy is running ahead of schedule.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Text Fwd: "Operation Libya" and the Battle for Oil: Redrawing the Map of Africa
Global Research
"Operation Libya" and the Battle for Oil: Redrawing the Map of Africa
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
March 9, 2011
Part II
See Part I Insurrection and Military Intervention: The US NATO Attempted Coup d'Etat in Libya?
The geopolitical and economic implications of a US-NATO led military intervention directed against Libya are far-reaching.
Libya is among the World's largest oil economies with approximately 3.5% of global oil reserves, more than twice those of the US.
"Operation Libya" is part of the broader military agenda in the Middle East and Central Asia which consists in gaining control and corporate ownership over more than sixty percent of the world's reserves of oil and natural gas, including oil and gas pipeline routes.
"Muslim countries including Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Nigeria, Algeria, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, possess between 66.2 and 75.9 percent of total oil reserves, depending on the source and methodology of the estimate." (See Michel Chossudovsky, The "Demonization" of Muslims and the Battle for Oil, Global Research, January 4, 2007) .
With 46.5 billion barrels of proven reserves, (10 times those of Egypt), Libya is the largest oil economy in the African continent followed by Nigeria and Algeria (Oil and Gas Journal). In contrast, US proven oil reserves are of the order of 20.6 billion barrels (December 2008) according to the Energy Information Administration. U.S. Crude Oil, Natural Gas, and Natural Gas Liquids Reserves)
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Text Fwd: Sara Flounders: Libya and Imperialism
Global Research
Libya and Imperialism
By Sara Flounders
February 24, 2011
workers.org
Of all the struggles going on in North Africa and the Middle East right now, the most difficult to unravel is the one in Libya.
What is the character of the opposition to the Gadhafi regime, which reportedly now controls the eastern city of Benghazi?
Is it just coincidence that the rebellion started in Benghazi, which is north of Libya’s richest oil fields as well as close to most of its oil and gas pipelines, refineries and its LNG port? Is there a plan to partition the country?
What is the risk of imperialist military intervention, which poses the gravest danger for the people of the entire region?
Libya is not like Egypt. Its leader, Moammar al-Gadhafi, has not been an imperialist puppet like Hosni Mubarak. For many years, Gadhafi was allied to countries and movements fighting imperialism. On taking power in 1969 through a military coup, he nationalized Libya’s oil and used much of that money to develop the Libyan economy. Conditions of life improved dramatically for the people.
For that, the imperialists were determined to grind Libya down. The U.S. actually launched air strikes on Tripoli and Benghazi in 1986 that killed 60 people, including Gadhafi’s infant daughter – which is rarely mentioned by the corporate media. Devastating sanctions were imposed by both the U.S. and the U.N. to wreck the Libyan economy.
After the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003 and leveled much of Baghdad with a bombing campaign that the Pentagon exultantly called “shock and awe,” Gadhafi tried to ward off further threatened aggression on Libya by making big political and economic concessions to the imperialists. He opened the economy to foreign banks and corporations; he agreed to IMF demands for “structural adjustment,” privatizing many state-owned enterprises and cutting state subsidies on necessities like food and fuel.
The Libyan people are suffering from the same high prices and unemployment that underlie the rebellions elsewhere and that flow from the worldwide capitalist economic crisis.
There can be no doubt that the struggle sweeping the Arab world for political freedom and economic justice has also struck a chord in Libya. There can be no doubt that discontent with the Gadhafi regime is motivating a significant section of the population.
However, it is important for progressives to know that many of the people being promoted in the West as leaders of the opposition are long-time agents of imperialism. The BBC on Feb. 22 showed footage of crowds in Benghazi pulling down the green flag of the republic and replacing it with the flag of the overthrown monarch King Idris – who had been a puppet of U.S. and British imperialism.
The Western media are basing a great deal of their reporting on supposed facts provided by the exile group National Front for the Salvation of Libya, which was trained and financed by the U.S. CIA. Google the front’s name plus CIA and you will find hundreds of references.
The Wall Street Journal in a Feb. 23 editorial wrote that “The U.S. and Europe should help Libyans overthrow the Gadhafi regime.” There is no talk in the board rooms or the corridors of Washington about intervening to help the people of Kuwait or Saudi Arabia or Bahrain overthrow their dictatorial rulers. Even with all the lip service being paid to the mass struggles rocking the region right now, that would be unthinkable. As for Egypt and Tunisia, the imperialists are pulling every string they can to get the masses off the streets.
There was no talk of U.S. intervention to help the Palestinian people of Gaza when thousands died from being blockaded, bombed and invaded by Israel. Just the opposite. The U.S. intervened to prevent condemnation of the Zionist settler state.
Imperialism’s interest in Libya is not hard to find. Bloomberg.com wrote on Feb. 22 that while Libya is Africa’s third-largest producer of oil, it has the continent’s largest proven reserves – 44.3 billion barrels. It is a country with a relatively small population but the potential to produce huge profits for the giant oil companies. That’s how the super-rich look at it, and that’s what underlies their professed concern for the people’s democratic rights in Libya.
Getting concessions out of Gadhafi is not enough for the imperialist oil barons. They want a government that they can own outright, lock, stock and barrel. They have never forgiven Gadhafi for overthrowing the monarchy and nationalizing the oil. Fidel Castro of Cuba in his column “Reflections” takes note of imperialism’s hunger for oil and warns that the U.S. is laying the basis for military intervention in Libya.
In the U.S., some forces are trying to mobilize a street-level campaign promoting such U.S. intervention. We should oppose this outright and remind any well-intentioned people of the millions killed and displaced by U.S. intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Progressive people are in sympathy with what they see as a popular movement in Libya. We can help such a movement most by supporting its just demands while rejecting imperialist intervention, in whatever form it may take. It is the people of Libya who must decide their future.
Libya and Imperialism
By Sara Flounders
February 24, 2011
workers.org
Of all the struggles going on in North Africa and the Middle East right now, the most difficult to unravel is the one in Libya.
What is the character of the opposition to the Gadhafi regime, which reportedly now controls the eastern city of Benghazi?
Is it just coincidence that the rebellion started in Benghazi, which is north of Libya’s richest oil fields as well as close to most of its oil and gas pipelines, refineries and its LNG port? Is there a plan to partition the country?
What is the risk of imperialist military intervention, which poses the gravest danger for the people of the entire region?
Libya is not like Egypt. Its leader, Moammar al-Gadhafi, has not been an imperialist puppet like Hosni Mubarak. For many years, Gadhafi was allied to countries and movements fighting imperialism. On taking power in 1969 through a military coup, he nationalized Libya’s oil and used much of that money to develop the Libyan economy. Conditions of life improved dramatically for the people.
For that, the imperialists were determined to grind Libya down. The U.S. actually launched air strikes on Tripoli and Benghazi in 1986 that killed 60 people, including Gadhafi’s infant daughter – which is rarely mentioned by the corporate media. Devastating sanctions were imposed by both the U.S. and the U.N. to wreck the Libyan economy.
After the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003 and leveled much of Baghdad with a bombing campaign that the Pentagon exultantly called “shock and awe,” Gadhafi tried to ward off further threatened aggression on Libya by making big political and economic concessions to the imperialists. He opened the economy to foreign banks and corporations; he agreed to IMF demands for “structural adjustment,” privatizing many state-owned enterprises and cutting state subsidies on necessities like food and fuel.
The Libyan people are suffering from the same high prices and unemployment that underlie the rebellions elsewhere and that flow from the worldwide capitalist economic crisis.
There can be no doubt that the struggle sweeping the Arab world for political freedom and economic justice has also struck a chord in Libya. There can be no doubt that discontent with the Gadhafi regime is motivating a significant section of the population.
However, it is important for progressives to know that many of the people being promoted in the West as leaders of the opposition are long-time agents of imperialism. The BBC on Feb. 22 showed footage of crowds in Benghazi pulling down the green flag of the republic and replacing it with the flag of the overthrown monarch King Idris – who had been a puppet of U.S. and British imperialism.
The Western media are basing a great deal of their reporting on supposed facts provided by the exile group National Front for the Salvation of Libya, which was trained and financed by the U.S. CIA. Google the front’s name plus CIA and you will find hundreds of references.
The Wall Street Journal in a Feb. 23 editorial wrote that “The U.S. and Europe should help Libyans overthrow the Gadhafi regime.” There is no talk in the board rooms or the corridors of Washington about intervening to help the people of Kuwait or Saudi Arabia or Bahrain overthrow their dictatorial rulers. Even with all the lip service being paid to the mass struggles rocking the region right now, that would be unthinkable. As for Egypt and Tunisia, the imperialists are pulling every string they can to get the masses off the streets.
There was no talk of U.S. intervention to help the Palestinian people of Gaza when thousands died from being blockaded, bombed and invaded by Israel. Just the opposite. The U.S. intervened to prevent condemnation of the Zionist settler state.
Imperialism’s interest in Libya is not hard to find. Bloomberg.com wrote on Feb. 22 that while Libya is Africa’s third-largest producer of oil, it has the continent’s largest proven reserves – 44.3 billion barrels. It is a country with a relatively small population but the potential to produce huge profits for the giant oil companies. That’s how the super-rich look at it, and that’s what underlies their professed concern for the people’s democratic rights in Libya.
Getting concessions out of Gadhafi is not enough for the imperialist oil barons. They want a government that they can own outright, lock, stock and barrel. They have never forgiven Gadhafi for overthrowing the monarchy and nationalizing the oil. Fidel Castro of Cuba in his column “Reflections” takes note of imperialism’s hunger for oil and warns that the U.S. is laying the basis for military intervention in Libya.
In the U.S., some forces are trying to mobilize a street-level campaign promoting such U.S. intervention. We should oppose this outright and remind any well-intentioned people of the millions killed and displaced by U.S. intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Progressive people are in sympathy with what they see as a popular movement in Libya. We can help such a movement most by supporting its just demands while rejecting imperialist intervention, in whatever form it may take. It is the people of Libya who must decide their future.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Video Fwd: Sudanese Guests
Bruce Gagnon's Organizing Notes
Saturday, February 05, 2011
SUDANESE GUESTS
M'y latest public access TV show where I interviewed two leaders from Maine's Sudanese community.'
(* Bruce Gagnon interviews Sudanese community leaders Edward Laboke and Dominic Suru. Harpswell (Maine) Community TV, Feb. 2011: See the link)
Saturday, February 05, 2011
SUDANESE GUESTS
M'y latest public access TV show where I interviewed two leaders from Maine's Sudanese community.'
(* Bruce Gagnon interviews Sudanese community leaders Edward Laboke and Dominic Suru. Harpswell (Maine) Community TV, Feb. 2011: See the link)
Monday, January 10, 2011
Text Fwd: [Rick Rozoff] Militarization Of Energy Policy: U.S. AFRICOM And Gulf Of Guinea
Rick Rozoff blog
Stop NATO
January 8, 2011
Militarization Of Energy Policy: U.S. Africa Command And Gulf Of Guinea
Rick Rozoff
At the beginning of the century, while the United States was still embroiled in military interventions in the Balkans and had launched what would become the longest war in its history in Afghanistan with the invasion of Iraq to follow, it was also laying the groundwork for subordinating the African continent to a new military command.
With 4.5 percent of the world's population, the U.S. accounts for approximately 30 percent of crude oil consumption. Although the world's third largest producer of crude, it imports over 60 percent of what it consumes (12.4 of 20.7 million barrels it uses daily). A decade ago 15 percent of those imports came from the Gulf of Guinea region on Africa's Atlantic Ocean coast, mainly from Nigeria, and it is projected that the proportion will increase to 25 percent in the next four years.
The National Energy Policy Report issued by the Office of Vice President Richard Cheney on May 16, 2001 stated: "West Africa is expected to be one of the fastest-growing sources of oil and gas for the American market. African oil tends to be of high quality and low in sulfur...giving it a growing market share for refining centers on the East Coast of the U.S."
The following year, the Washington, D.C.-based African Oil Policy Initiative Group conducted a symposium entitled “African Oil: A Priority for U. S. National Security and African Development,” with the participation of American legislators, policy advisers, the private sector and representatives of the State Department and Defense Department, at which Congressman William Jefferson said:
"African oil should be treated as a priority for U.S. national security post 9-11. I think that...post 9-11 it's occurred to all of us that our traditional sources of oil are not as secure as we thought they were."
As is customary in regards to American foreign policy objectives, the Pentagon was charged with taking responsibility. It immediately went to work on undertaking three initiatives to implement U.S. energy strategy in the Gulf of Guinea: U.S. Africa Command, the first overseas military command inaugurated since 1983. The U.S. Navy's Africa Partnership Station as what has developed into the major component of the Global Fleet Station, linked with worldwide maritime operations like the 1,000-ship navy and the Proliferation Security Initiative and piloted in the area of responsibility of U.S. Southern Command and the U.S. Fourth Fleet reactivated in 2008: The Caribbean Sea and Central and South America. The NATO Response Force designed for rapid multi-service (army, air force, navy and marine) deployments outside of the bloc's North American-European area of responsibility.
In recent weeks Ghana joined the ranks of African oil producers, pumping crude oil for the first time from an offshore field in the Gulf of Guinea.
"The Jubilee oil field, discovered three years ago, holds an estimated 1.8 billion barrels of oil, and will begin producing around 55,000 barrels per day in the coming weeks. Oil production is expected, however, to rise to about 120,000 barrels over the next six months, making the country Africa's seventh largest oil producer." [1]
The Ghanaian oil exploitation is run by a consortium led by Tullow Oil plc, which is based in London and has 85 contracts in 22 countries.
READ MORE
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Video & Text Fwd: OIL DIVISION INSIDE SUDAN
Bruce Gagnon's Organizing Notes
Wednesday, January 05, 2011
OIL DIVISION INSIDE SUDAN
On January 9, 2011 the people of Southern Sudan will decide by referendum whether or not to separate from Sudan and form a new, independent nation.
Sudan's North and South have already fought 37 years of civil war that devastated the country and took the lives of 2.5 million Sudanese.
Differences of race, tribe and religion, as well as exploitation of the South's natural resources and unequal development are all major grievances driving Southerners to choose separation from their Northern brothers.
However the Sudanese are also deeply linked by culture, blood and geography, whether they acknowledge it or not.
Filmmaker May Ying Welsh journeyed down the Nile to try and understand the tensions that exist - not only between North and South - but also between the peoples of what may soon be Africa's newest country.
Watch as the Nile current sweeps a nation toward its destiny.
Wednesday, January 05, 2011
OIL DIVISION INSIDE SUDAN
On January 9, 2011 the people of Southern Sudan will decide by referendum whether or not to separate from Sudan and form a new, independent nation.
Sudan's North and South have already fought 37 years of civil war that devastated the country and took the lives of 2.5 million Sudanese.
Differences of race, tribe and religion, as well as exploitation of the South's natural resources and unequal development are all major grievances driving Southerners to choose separation from their Northern brothers.
However the Sudanese are also deeply linked by culture, blood and geography, whether they acknowledge it or not.
Filmmaker May Ying Welsh journeyed down the Nile to try and understand the tensions that exist - not only between North and South - but also between the peoples of what may soon be Africa's newest country.
Watch as the Nile current sweeps a nation toward its destiny.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Video Fwd: CONTROLLING AFRICA FOR RESOURCE EXTRACTION 에너지 추출을 위한 에너지 통제
Bruce Gagnon's Organizing Notes blog
Thursday, December 09, 2010
CONTROLLING AFRICA FOR RESOURCE EXTRACTION
'One of the major sticking points in the upcoming referendum on south Sudan's secession from the north is the future of Abeyi, an oil-rich border region which both sides want to control.
Solving the dispute temporarily, a deal has been made to postpone the decision over who controls the nation's oil wealth.
We don't hear enough about how control of resources, like oil, is behind much of the conflict in Africa.
Maine is a major resettlement state for African war refugees and I will never forget listening to one man during a panel discussion a couple years ago say that the weapons that are used to kill so many innocent people on the African continent are not made there. They are supplied by the major powers who have created instability in the region in order to take control of the abundant resources on the African continent.
The Pentagon's creation of the Africa Command (AfriCom) is but one key example of how the U.S. is moving to expand its military control over the continent so that the corporations can control the extraction of resources.
The people? They are just in the way of making big money.'
Thursday, December 09, 2010
CONTROLLING AFRICA FOR RESOURCE EXTRACTION
'One of the major sticking points in the upcoming referendum on south Sudan's secession from the north is the future of Abeyi, an oil-rich border region which both sides want to control.
Solving the dispute temporarily, a deal has been made to postpone the decision over who controls the nation's oil wealth.
We don't hear enough about how control of resources, like oil, is behind much of the conflict in Africa.
Maine is a major resettlement state for African war refugees and I will never forget listening to one man during a panel discussion a couple years ago say that the weapons that are used to kill so many innocent people on the African continent are not made there. They are supplied by the major powers who have created instability in the region in order to take control of the abundant resources on the African continent.
The Pentagon's creation of the Africa Command (AfriCom) is but one key example of how the U.S. is moving to expand its military control over the continent so that the corporations can control the extraction of resources.
The people? They are just in the way of making big money.'
Video Fwd: WE WANT PUBLIC TRANSIT 우리는 대중 교통을 원한다
Bruce Gagnon's Organizing Notes
Thursday, December 09, 2010
WE WANT PUBLIC TRANSIT
'We need to build rail systems connecting every corner of the nation. These public transit systems could be built inside the converted factories that now make weapons for endless war.
We must demand that our government develop these technologies to help solve for climate change (while admittedly these would not be perfect solutions at least they would be a start) and in doing so we know that we get more jobs by building rail.
The UMass-Amherst economics department study of $1 billion spent on weapons production reveals that 8,555 jobs are created, but if that same amount of $$$$ was spent on public transit we'd get 19,795 jobs per billion $$$$.
Which would you rather have?
Help make it happen. Move your lips and make words come out of your mouth that sound like this - we want public transit.'
* Image source: UMass-Amherst economics department study
Thursday, December 09, 2010
WE WANT PUBLIC TRANSIT
'We need to build rail systems connecting every corner of the nation. These public transit systems could be built inside the converted factories that now make weapons for endless war.
We must demand that our government develop these technologies to help solve for climate change (while admittedly these would not be perfect solutions at least they would be a start) and in doing so we know that we get more jobs by building rail.
The UMass-Amherst economics department study of $1 billion spent on weapons production reveals that 8,555 jobs are created, but if that same amount of $$$$ was spent on public transit we'd get 19,795 jobs per billion $$$$.
Which would you rather have?
Help make it happen. Move your lips and make words come out of your mouth that sound like this - we want public transit.'
* Image source: UMass-Amherst economics department studyTuesday, November 23, 2010
Video Fwd: [Organizing Notes] VALUABLE DIRT & ROCKS [기업의 이윤을 위해 지구와 우주의] 값나가는 흙과 바위 캐기
Bruce Gagnon blog
Monday, November 22, 2010
VALUABLE DIRT & ROCKS
'Scientists say that we will need six planets to supply the growing population on Earth all the resources we consume. Thus one reason that the Space Command is developing the capability to control who in the future will have the ability to get on and off the Earth as the corporations move to "mine the sky".;
Monday, November 22, 2010
VALUABLE DIRT & ROCKS
'Scientists say that we will need six planets to supply the growing population on Earth all the resources we consume. Thus one reason that the Space Command is developing the capability to control who in the future will have the ability to get on and off the Earth as the corporations move to "mine the sky".;
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Text Fwd: S. Korea bids to sell warships to Brazil 남한, 브라질에 무기팔러 입찰
Korea Times
11-18-2010
S. Korea bids to sell warships to Brazil
Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering, a leading ship builder in Korea, submitted a proposal for a $4 trillion warship procurement contract in Brazil, a military source said Thursday.
Brazil, which is seeking to beef up its maritime defense of offshore oil deposits, plans to purchase 11 naval ships ― five destroyers, five frigates and a support ship ― the source said.
“The Brazilian navy has been considering purchasing 11 warships in the form of a government-to-government project since June,” the source said. “Specific details for the bid have yet to be publicized.”
The project will take shape after the new Brazilian government is inaugurated in January, he added.
Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is set to leave office at the end of this year and President-elect Dilma Rousseff is scheduled to take office on Jan. 1.
Italy, France and some European nations are expected to make rival bids for the Brazilian contract, according to the source.
The 4,500-ton KDX-II destroyer would be a favorite for the Brazilian warship project. Korea’s Navy has six KDX-II destroyers one of which is operating in waters off Somalia on an anti-piracy mission.
The KDX-II is equipped with Harpoon ship-to-surface missiles, RAM Mk 31 ship-to-air guided missiles, a 30mm Goalkeeper system for engaging sea-skimming anti-ship missiles and several torpedoes.
The 150-meter-long, 17-meter-wide ship is able to sail at a top speed of 29 knots and carries two Lynx anti-submarine helicopters.
11-18-2010
S. Korea bids to sell warships to Brazil
Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering, a leading ship builder in Korea, submitted a proposal for a $4 trillion warship procurement contract in Brazil, a military source said Thursday.
Brazil, which is seeking to beef up its maritime defense of offshore oil deposits, plans to purchase 11 naval ships ― five destroyers, five frigates and a support ship ― the source said.
“The Brazilian navy has been considering purchasing 11 warships in the form of a government-to-government project since June,” the source said. “Specific details for the bid have yet to be publicized.”
The project will take shape after the new Brazilian government is inaugurated in January, he added.
Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is set to leave office at the end of this year and President-elect Dilma Rousseff is scheduled to take office on Jan. 1.
Italy, France and some European nations are expected to make rival bids for the Brazilian contract, according to the source.
The 4,500-ton KDX-II destroyer would be a favorite for the Brazilian warship project. Korea’s Navy has six KDX-II destroyers one of which is operating in waters off Somalia on an anti-piracy mission.
The KDX-II is equipped with Harpoon ship-to-surface missiles, RAM Mk 31 ship-to-air guided missiles, a 30mm Goalkeeper system for engaging sea-skimming anti-ship missiles and several torpedoes.
The 150-meter-long, 17-meter-wide ship is able to sail at a top speed of 29 knots and carries two Lynx anti-submarine helicopters.
Friday, November 19, 2010
Video Fwd:[Orgnizing Notes] ROCKET TRIKE RIDE REPOR 탐 위이스의 1인 세발 자전거 켐페인 리포트_미국 국민의 화석 연료 아닌 100% 재생 에너지 이용 및 산업 건설 운동
Bruce Gagnon's Organizing Notes브루스 개그논의' 조직화 노트'블로그
Thursday, November 18, 2010
ROCKET TRIKE RIDE REPORT
'Video report from Tom Weis who is riding his "rocket trike" across the country to Washington DC. Tom is spreading the word about a sustainable energy future and is featuring various positive actions that local communities are taking to build a new infrastructure not dependent on fossil fuels and cars.
Tom began the ride in Colorado and he is now in Ohio.
See his video blog here
You can sign his on-line petition here'
Thursday, November 18, 2010
ROCKET TRIKE RIDE REPORT
'Video report from Tom Weis who is riding his "rocket trike" across the country to Washington DC. Tom is spreading the word about a sustainable energy future and is featuring various positive actions that local communities are taking to build a new infrastructure not dependent on fossil fuels and cars.
Tom began the ride in Colorado and he is now in Ohio.
See his video blog here
You can sign his on-line petition here'
Friday, November 5, 2010
Text Fwd: [Hankyoreh Editorial] Opportunistic troop deployment [한겨레 논평] 기회적인 유나이티드 아랍 에미레이츠 군대 파병안
Hankyoreh
[Editorial] Opportunistic troop deployment
Posted on : Nov.4,2010 15:21 KST
Excerpt
However, this latest deployment is problematic first and foremost because it lacks a strong rationale that can be explained directly to the international community. According to the Lee government’s explanation, the military cooperation card likely contributed to South Korea’s earning the construction bid. But however beneficial it may be in terms of moneymaking, traveling from country to country without any concern for justification is something that a mercenary squad would do. In short, this deployment bears no connection with the mission of the Republic of Korea’s armed forces, nor has there been any social consensus formed that it is acceptable to hand such duties to the nation’s armed forces.
This deployment is also likely to have major side effects in light of the thorny political situation in the Middle East. One immediate result will be alarm from Iran, which is located just across the Persian Gulf from the UAE and has maintained a tense relationship with the country. If South Korean forces are positioned there, Iran’s military forces will be designated as a hypothetical enemy. Diplomatic relations between South Korea and Iran, already severely strained due to our participation in the U.S.-led sanctions against the country, are very likely to become even more uncomfortable. Nor is the attack on a South Korean oil pipeline in Yemen a few days ago a matter to be passed over lightly.
_________________________________________________________
Related blogs 관련 블로그
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Text Fwd: Seoul to dispatch troops to UAE
서울, 유나이티드 아랍 에미레이츠에 군대 파견 계획
Friday, November 5, 2010
Text Fwd: [Boris Volkhonsky] Yemen_ New Venue For U.S. Geopolitical Great Game
[보리스 볼콘스키] 예멘_ 미국의 큰 지리정치학적 게임의 새로운 장소
[Editorial] Opportunistic troop deployment
Posted on : Nov.4,2010 15:21 KST
Excerpt
However, this latest deployment is problematic first and foremost because it lacks a strong rationale that can be explained directly to the international community. According to the Lee government’s explanation, the military cooperation card likely contributed to South Korea’s earning the construction bid. But however beneficial it may be in terms of moneymaking, traveling from country to country without any concern for justification is something that a mercenary squad would do. In short, this deployment bears no connection with the mission of the Republic of Korea’s armed forces, nor has there been any social consensus formed that it is acceptable to hand such duties to the nation’s armed forces.
This deployment is also likely to have major side effects in light of the thorny political situation in the Middle East. One immediate result will be alarm from Iran, which is located just across the Persian Gulf from the UAE and has maintained a tense relationship with the country. If South Korean forces are positioned there, Iran’s military forces will be designated as a hypothetical enemy. Diplomatic relations between South Korea and Iran, already severely strained due to our participation in the U.S.-led sanctions against the country, are very likely to become even more uncomfortable. Nor is the attack on a South Korean oil pipeline in Yemen a few days ago a matter to be passed over lightly.
_________________________________________________________
Related blogs 관련 블로그
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Text Fwd: Seoul to dispatch troops to UAE
서울, 유나이티드 아랍 에미레이츠에 군대 파견 계획
Friday, November 5, 2010
Text Fwd: [Boris Volkhonsky] Yemen_ New Venue For U.S. Geopolitical Great Game
[보리스 볼콘스키] 예멘_ 미국의 큰 지리정치학적 게임의 새로운 장소
Text Fwd: [Boris Volkhonsky] Yemen_ New Venue For U.S. Geopolitical Great Game 예멘, 미국의 새로운 지리 정치학 큰 게임의 새로운 장소
* Image source: Global Research 
* Image & caption source: Voice of Russia
Yemeni engineering student Hanan al-Samawi (C), who was suspected over the thwarted cargo jet bomb plot, attends a rally in Sanaa University a day after releasing her, in Sanaa, Yemen, on 01 November 2010. Photo: EPA
________________________________________________________
Global Research, Nov. 2, 2010 or Voice of Russia, Nov. 1, 2010
Yemen: New Venue For U.S. Geopolitical Great Game
: Why Yemen? Is the West choosing a new target?
by Boris Volkhonsky
-[T]he timing for the attacks (or, attempted attacks, or, presumably attempted attacks) was chosen very carefully. The United States face the mid-term elections, and the Democratic administration is heading for a worst defeat in decades. If we look back at a not so distant past, we can remember that a highly resonant terrorist attack is probably the best way to raise the rating of the ruling administration.
-Obama’s administration is looking at a new point of applying its attempts and initiatives. After the obvious failure in Iraq and Afghanistan, they may be looking at Yemen as a new venue of their geopolitical Great Game. The strategic importance of that country is hardly to be over-estimated. The power that controls Yemen, would control the most vital sea routes from Europe to Middle East, South and Southeast Asia.
-Of course, the clock of history cannot be reversed and turned backwards. But learning from the past seems to be very useful. And looking back at the 1980s, we may state that it was the US who, by supporting the mujahedeen forces in Afghanistan, created the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. Now, by violently fighting them in the Middle East, they are turning the whole Muslim world against themselves and their allies.
Last weeks attempted attacks – either at US-bound aircraft or some synagogues somewhere in the US, presumably in Chicago – remain the hottest topic in Western media.
The pure facts run as follows. Last Friday two packages containing explosives were found on cargo planes which initially flew from Sanaa, Yemen, with destination in the US. One package was found in Dubai, the other one in East Midlands Airport near Nottingham, England. Both packages – one carried by UPS, the other one by FedEx – were addressed to synagogues in Chicago. No one has yet claimed responsibility for the attempted attacks, but the security official were very quick in attributing the plot to the Yemeni section of Al-Qaeda.
The incident was followed by intense search of all cargo and passengers’ baggage in several US airports. Also, reports show that 26 more suspicious packages were detained in Yemen. On Saturday, Yemeni officials arrested a 22-year-old woman Hanan al-Samawi, a suspect in the plot. But later on Sunday, she was released on bail after it turned out that someone stole and used her identity card to plant the packages containing explosives.
Meanwhile, the panic has stricken the US and Western Europe. Most countries of the West upgraded the level of terrorist alert. Great Britain even declared a ban on any aircraft that started its flight in Yemen, to k\land on Britain’s territory.
The whole story needs some clarification.
First, why Yemen?
The fact is that the Yemeni authorities have a very poor control over their territory, and definitely have lesser desire to fight international terrorism than their Saudi neighbors. As a result, some notorious figures in the terrorist movement have found a safe haven in Yemen, especially after Afghanistan and Pakistan ceased to be such as a result of constant military activities.
Second, why now, and why Chicago?
Actually, the timing for the attacks (or, attempted attacks, or, presumably attempted attacks) was chosen very carefully. The United States face the mid-term elections, and the Democratic administration is heading for a worst defeat in decades. If we look back at a not so distant past, we can remember that a highly resonant terrorist attack is probably the best way to raise the rating of the ruling administration. And an attack uncovered before it was executed gives additional points to the authorities. So, whatever the real motives of the terrorists, the whole uncovered plot is designed to give Barack Obama and the Democrats a couple of points due to ‘voting out of compassion’. The fact that the explosives were addressed to synagogues in Chicago (Obama’s native town) speaks for itself.
Then, what follows next?
A most obvious answer would be that Obama’s administration is looking at a new point of applying its attempts and initiatives. After the obvious failure in Iraq and Afghanistan, they may be looking at Yemen as a new venue of their geopolitical Great Game. The strategic importance of that country is hardly to be over-estimated. The power that controls Yemen, would control the most vital sea routes from Europe to Middle East, South and Southeast Asia. At the moment, if anyone controls this vital region are the Somali pirates. For the US, taking hold of a territory there with prospects of building its military bases, would mean a return to the scene that, due to the failures of the recent one or two decades, seems at present lost.
But then, there is another and probably most crucial question. What means the US is ready to use against a force that from the very beginning was a pure US invention, i.e. Al-Qaeda?
READ MORE
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Text Fwd: Seoul to dispatch troops to UAE 서울, 유나이티드 아랍 에미레이츠에 군대 파견 계획
* Image source: Global Research. click HERE
* Image source: Japan Focus (click HERE)
Middle East states that have discussed bilateral nuclear cooperation agreements since 2008
* Image source: Japan Focus (click HERE)
___________________________________________________
11-03-2010 17:00
Seoul to dispatch troops to UAE
By Jung Sung-ki
Korea plans to dispatch about 130 troops to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) next year as part of efforts to establish closer defense ties with the Middle Eastern nation, the Ministry of National Defense said Wednesday.
The plan was discussed during a policy coordination meeting in Seoul, a ministry spokesman said. Defense Minister Kim Tae-young and ruling party lawmakers belonging to the National Assembly Defense Committee attended the session, he said.
The troop dispatch plan comes after Seoul won a landmark $20 billion contract last December to build four nuclear reactors in the UAE.
Before the contract was announced, Defense Minister Kim Tae-young flew to the Middle East country twice to support the contract and discuss bilateral defense issues.
Kim and his UAE counterpart reportedly signed a closed-door agreement on specific defense cooperation measures, including the dispatch of Korean troops.
UAE military leaders also asked for the troop dispatch when they visited Seoul earlier this year, the spokesman said.
The local contingent will help train UAE troops and protect Korean nationals there from any possible terror attack, he added.
“A motion for the troop deployment will be presented in the Assembly’s regular session,” he said. “Once approved, the deployment could be possible early next year.”
The UAE military is interested in Korea’s operational skills and training methods, such as the battlefield Military Integrated Laser Engagement System (MILES), harbor protection systems and pilot training.
The armed forces of the UAE, officially called the Union Defense Force, consist of 65,000 troops, and are headquartered in Abu Dhabi. It is a federal military force and is primarily responsible for the defense of all seven emirates.
Korea has 650,000 troops and is supported by 28,500 U.S. forces. The troops are being equipped with high-tech weapons under the Defense Reform 2020 modernization program.
An official at the Defense Acquisition Program Administration said a closer military relationship with the UAE could help exports of Korean weapons systems.
Seoul is seeking to boost its defense exports to nations in the Middle East and Africa.
Last year, the UAE selected Italy’s M-346 trainer jet as the preferred model for its trainer acquisition program.
But both sides have failed to finalize the deal, so there is a possibility that the UAE will reopen talks with officials over the sale of the T-50 Golden Eagle supersonic trainer.
Seoul is also trying to sell its K-9 self-propelled howitzer to the UAE.
gallantjung@koreatimes.co.kr
________________________________________________
See all the blogs on United Arab Emirates
Monday, December 28, 2009
Text Fwd: Korea, UAE Seek Closer Defense Ties
Monday, December 28, 2009
Text Fwd: Landmark nuclear power plant deal sounds energy alarm within South Korea
________________________________________________
Some excerpts from previous blogs
Friday, April 30, 2010
Text Fw: Propaganda about PAC-3 from Pro-MD organization
Excerpt
Last week MDAA had the honor to visit and interact with our nation's men and women in uniform at Fort Sill, Oklahoma; home of the U.S. Army Air Defense Artillery (ADA) School. This school teaches all current and soon to be deployed air defense soldiers who are stationed with the 13 Patriot battalions deployed in support of U.S. missile and air defense throughout the world; most prominently in the Middle East and East Asia. Fort Sill runs courses for Patriot operators and maintenance crews ranging in length from 8 to 30 weeks. The ADA school trains approximately 1,500 to 2,000 U.S. soldiers a year, as well as several hundred soldiers from Israel, Germany, Japan, South Korea,United Arab Emirates and other allied nations that have Patriot Air and Missile Defense Systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Text Fwd: S. Korea, Japan Can Build Nuclear Weapons Quickly
Excerpt
The 2008 report categorized South Korea, Taiwan and Japan as three "threshold nuclear states" that have the capability to develop nuclear weapons rapidly, should their political leaders decide to do so.
South Korea is recognized globally as a pioneer in the study of the "pyprocessing" method aimed at reprocessing spent fuel without extracting weapons-grade plutonium from it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Text fwd: [Exclusive] S. Korea to Transfer UAV, Missile Technologies to UAE
Excerpt
Korea promised to transfer technology for its unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), following its successful bid to build four nuclear reactors in the Middle East nation, a government source said Thursday.
EMPs can severely disrupt electronic equipment, which is susceptible to damage by transient power surges. An EMP attack is generated by a very short, intense energy pulse or high-altitude nuclear blast.
The agency plans to complete the development by 2014.
Some observers say, however, potential exports of the RQ-101 to either the UAE or Libya could cause a political or diplomatic row between South Korea and Israel given the ground-control station for the UAV was developed with technical assistance from Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![[URGENT PLEA: In Update] EMERGENCY in GANGJEONG Since AUG. 24, 2011](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQvpaNf6EePZVucu97_JphYsFS5IgumnSiA4YAmen1PZcim6vMmW7XjZ7J6nLh-Cu36mwBN5n1evrA3ey0vYMpwlAGsgnSFggv6a1w4Qx9BvvqOB0hy0BIcBkL2Exfs3zIxBsBuDGa1kzg/s227/jejusit.jpg)
![[Solidarity from Japan for the Jeju] 253 individuals and 16 groups/organizations](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivji7100kBkr0hzvqYfh4IBBilkZ6XgDIg89jOxS6kTssxsVKC6Wm-fZbKOEsiy3zcO-9gW6GHspD5R_2C9WsGx5S1Z5VPj_OVRF7H6dxdaT0S-2H1eqsDsYvIwOV26VscxTHnKmP5iZmh/s227/jeju_12_10j.jpg)
![[Translation] Korean organizations' statement: Immediately cancel the joint ROK-US drill Nov 26](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfKDMo-qyEjm5asUtHlREyJY_5Ou-2tyB8SH6aUxiViRbbKR-8W_rirFiGp5DYSoD_KaeNOPMWR0af0ZPUIbJKmR89ImDvADHsGAIqsJVBvJNBEIl5wLd3G_zhPDW3Z2SxsHXadOsXe8st/s227/1.jpg)
![HOT! [Hankyoreh Hani TV] Beneath the Surface: the investigation into the sinking of the Cheonan](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh80rL3Qv9GnfHSqbYMfivdqX5gZN-1O_VQj3A_Gk3yjWdybHwJCsprA3l6cEQB0cYCP2oNeaLo2ohLGIy0Uqqkv_fRkBevGJ2f-qkKD5eP1ZGsKeQ-r-jHUUb79WvucIN7hpEtXza4xXCL/s227/HaniTV+Cheonan.gif)
![[Translation]Statement against illegal inspection and unjust lay-off by the Kunsan USAFK!(Nov_2010)](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3JlQ-lreusCIJo5Yv2e3ZrRwrSMUE7UQxlrDVjmBehl0Pa24QZIAbZ5vUpgnnExbkKL9PdCwxVYSHWJkr_XK0FM4EhU3CMFhqfborVNu_p4v3bEFpNm3ia-aEHnvMMuEBI27aB7_BETuJ/s227/gunsan+protest.gif)
![[Translation] Korean organizations' statement against dispatching special force to the UAE on Nov.](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiU7TNhTDLLwZkKP0Z78JsCZKp6je-QSFll3_ThmLES_y_nPLXEzeakrsZXoNxhN5blopEhy6xGV2tneJrniPdTR-JvOQMmSLr_HhlucxFvbusxk4oKvvMO2laBOHSIkB9OOeOxrQlqCA0O/s227/antiwarpeace.jpg)
![[Translation] Stop, Joining MD!: South Korean activists' statement and writing on Oct. 25, 2010](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggGIHVei8j7LCJPJB5HIrspd942q436daNTquP-pFd45Cl70Ml_1JFiFDHgKu6FcoqNgFVKIFqjeuSPau2k_BwGHhx0cqFFL2-4ybZSTlmua0_AsERBtKYQa7jZk7uNj41LX6rj2vksHbo/s227/StopMD.jpg)
![[In Update] People First, NO G-20 (Nov. 6 to 12, Korea)](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZl8VTqeL7o2ndliGIE-sZFCikbTgfB9KCc3AtZvDaYijBBEhdfultMEOpyrCaD5gzpH8mqfWjU20KXMbSUl-5KM7yQeHU6z3BWV8tiOy4UKaCudz9VKWoi5x58xdC_gQpJTjkR5u7O9xf/s227/left21_G20.jpg)
![[International Petition] Stop US helipad plan in Okinawa to save great nature](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihgYmdb0N8ViPvTFC_5i-Psbt4eX_LnAUEOtZkUngv_pGvRyWag1r6W60NicLLyTgWq-sPT1hBxLY5SadEIVv5McfZQ5uIhe-W0VoflQNqojsYZjFW6AH-gB1jsmSDGnGuKIFk2UkvNbFG/s227/yanbaru_w.jpg)
![[Global Network] against the first launch of Quasi-Zenith Satellite, Japan, on Sept. 11, 2010](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2sYpfodDDMIA7qXwuda0DmKapxXFB479fDnn8RKy7QNZqz0VEvWucNd-DleZ37hWNXC-Z8QtaqtM37VuPwac5SgclJ9_khBBSWOedvm19MRXIP1j1kcWrK6EW5IFjQdEEY2h7E6xuyNvC/s227/Qzss-45-0_09.jpg)
![[In update] Some collections on the Koreans’ protests against the sanction & war on Iran](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_gnM5QlRx-4c/TJMvke6t8zI/AAAAAAAAFO4/tamQ8LUnOOA/S227/No+Sanction+on+Iran.jpg)
![[Three International Petitions] to End the Korean war and peace treaty(or peace resolution)](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlohLVYtpCg7iMsZhNYY4hBbhTi2dIheHMHWLDph9X2y78cjgZV1LeSfUJeu80elhJm70Q9E059q72lK-spSPvsRG4bPuCDIytltJB9IH3mWt9OG98HqhnTsPakwhvNeoCFUgF1xoxQ2EZ/s227/border.jpg)
![[Collection of Documents] No Base Learning and Solidarity Program_Korea(June 14 to 20, 2010)](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEix_HzjToh3nNGHBc-_5gasq-ykcaZ6GInLixILmZVyRJ5xoeHCxWOyYd9fSM7bmnuFsjSrYOGEPnQOwB1Dcyo-sN4Pw0cFPhUtKig_qlVnGL1Wi82ClvPqbEPWYhJiqdNF0DyzLIBETMB9/s227/No-Base-banner.jpg)
![Site Fwd:[John Hines] A U.S. Debate coach’s research trip on the Issues of Korea](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg8yRra0zNhKHN74Auqhd3Nx9tZ7BWCGflRJHGH4CfzBT_yjhZ8Nl9b3OZuLpYWJ2exsjmR0oVl-Qq_cf832p2VdmOZhUi-lCFzCNeDSyVtweX1lWZPC-RlHmDMLtilHwHjNFTenBiM4Fk4/s227/Jeju-Peace-Tour.jpg)
![[News Update] Struggle Against the Jeju Naval Base since Jan. 18, 2010](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKfSTRC5QKBBSFIq_m7QIqXdlbL4-gF5GJYn9Q-pN__k7sV7uxGDcLY5L8xmU7QuWuUhBT_GhG-URBPO80RT3AfWfDrWJr06h1hFuZC6ZBVKe4U6PS1Cd7Kr6olO8TYQtk13Drox7IS6ea/s226/scrum1.jpg)
![[Urgent] Please spread the Letter!: There was no Explosion! There was no Torpedo! (May 26, 2010)](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSd2yWZ3xGwnJQXB73z5FgXCqSosAoB9_33-GLYprOmLqjmvgSAQp1BYI7e4slK1FDxHRi9KK4um-OpDaj8QOkXwAScVAgvvq6-ehbDA-hbkr96wT9oHNNmWnBPv8GU4hoZp9X8F9AZBX4/s227/grounded.jpg)
![Text Fwd: [Stephen Gowans]The sinking of the Cheonan: Another Gulf of Tonkin incident](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_L6hB3RZ1MovTXHe0A8yn_RfgMALGR0kM6poBuGp809xwvHtB_-PGWtS_WpyPWatyd9lB2pPqL2gOLc4dTCEdJ9sMvxJWEdapl-mMLm7WHAsV-jVpgqarVh8XBtdz_0c-Vohdh3HtJahD/s227/lee-myung-bak.jpg)
![[Japan Focus]Politics in Command: The "International" Investigation into the Sinking of the Cheonan](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHmTo8v-uCJnabRhMdnBAkC9J3s5bb2JsDKiT5leJHwbK8IDJHxfJmqQ_C0Is_bPC6UGMf05CA0exF2y4r2x9RhFUHT0kjsKviaME_MZXKnq775UyYAdb7w2SAzE75XvBfHp1al2q6i3cf/s227/wen_jiabao_and_lee_myungbak.png)
![[Japan Focus] Who Sank the SK Warship Cheonan? A New Stage in the US-Korean War and US-China](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKSS5ULT5QBaMGYpXXqBMX9jtwLwMLuK469b6Ku72GTJYKUObzTANaPjZqvvpPzYMJgPF53sjhvhK3DVa88ipYlggsJageykXlkxY6s8TW05xcU-_vfhf-pACUoaWuFbT-fsU1qEhm_yIi/s227/buoy_map.gif)
![[Updated on 12/13/10] [Translation Project] Overseas Proofs on the Damages by the Military Bases](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikADE6JovUNspQyZUWVMTLAQg7yQNqXpVUbqZPk8f4uc_1723_xm1Cco6WAmstQXVPnaJAcb1mZA8Ny_3xONT_f5uh8MNLPnUhtqdGgy3HCtC1Vbbz4Q0ZY1Cssu-4cJEVNdrvznbS5UzO/s227/missile.jpg)
![[International Petition] Close the Bases in Okinawa](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNpQiHklwFbWVlFK7GDFXnBSOOSFEj3Il-We-N3uTDldKiidL2NGZs7X_LtTnatzTo_r8CexRkFe8NhfxYqmgp1knEEslROTfNjI5_mSb57cdbhPkftvanveYBaevAD9xuKDGoIxiTwoSb/s227/2.jpg)
![[In Update]Blog Collection: No Korean Troops in Afghanistan](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjEmCRXSNAG7_QBxKWbdksmxoWR4nyAovQTTdR1G2AuXh0jxtqNkI9OmYgYWRoLAJShvtBvE840QXuBWSVh3u3zMYqkNAFX6OWy3m5Nur4HM7uNK-pKT1ycyApJp-VLyhIFRRcoisYAh0E/s226/No-Troops-to--Afghanistan.jpg)
