日々の感想

2019年09月21日

愛知トリエンナーレ

津田大介・あいちトリエンナーレに「愛」も「知」もなかった①
https://jigensha.info/2019/08/30/tsuda-1/

津田大介・あいちトリエンナーレに「愛」も「知」もなかった②
https://jigensha.info/2019/09/20/tsuda-2/

「あいトレ炎上」との報に接した時の津田監督について（実行委員会委員長である）岡本氏はこう明かした。

「驚くべき言葉を言われてびっくりした。津田さんは、これだけの騒ぎになってトレンドになって全国ニュースに流れている。議論を喚起する（不自由展の）目的はある程度達した、として私たちに伝えた。私たちは表現者と鑑賞者の交流を作ることを目指してきました。話題になったから目的を達したと言われた時はメモをとる手も震えるほどショックだった。そして津田さんがフェイスブックで“ みんな表現の自由の話をしている。こんなことは初めてだ。映画の中にいるみたい ”と言ったこともショックでした」

2019年09月21日

サウジ石油施設爆破事件その後

政治

政治

記事1：表題の内容。中国とロシアの影響力について言及。目新しい指摘ではないが、それをマクロンが言ったという点がニュース。

記事2：No deal Brexitのあと、いろんな国と貿易関係を再構築しなければならないイギリスの足下を見透かし、中国がイギリスに対し、南シナ海で米国に同調した警戒活動するのを止めろと恫喝。EUを出たイギリスは、米中の間を右往左往するコウモリになるしかない。

President Macron's Amazing Admission
by Tyler Durden
Mon, 09/16/2019 - 03:30
Authored by The Saker,
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/president-macrons-amazing-admission

I don’t know whether the supposedly Chinese curse really comes from China, but whether it does or not, we most certainly are cursed with living in some truly interesting times: Iran won the first phase of the “tanker battle” against the AngloZionists, Putin offered to sell Russian hypersonic missiles to Trump (Putin has been trolling western leaders a lot lately) while Alexander Lukashenko took the extreme measure of completely shutting down the border between the Ukraine and Belarus due to the huge influx of weapons and nationalist extremists from the Ukraine. As he put it himself “if weapons fall into the hands of ordinary people and especially nationalist-minded people, wait for terrorism“. He is quite right, of course. Still, there is a sweet irony here, or call it karma if you prefer, but for the Ukronazis who promised their people a visa-free entrance into the EU (for tourism only, and if you have money to spend, but still…), and yet 5 years into that obscene experiment of creating a rabidly russophobic Ukraine and 100 days (or so) into Zelenskii’s presidency, we have the Ukraine’s closest and most supportive neighbor forced to totally shut down its border due to the truly phenomenal toxicity of the Ukrainian society! But, then again, the Ukraine is such a basket-case that we can count on “most interesting” things (in the sense of the Chinese curse, of course) happening there too.

[Sidebar: interestingly, one of the people the Ukrainians gave up in this exchange was Vladimir Tsemakh, a native of the Donbass who was kidnapped by the Ukie SBU in Novorussia (our noble “Europeans” did not object to such methods!) and declared the “star witness” against Russia in the MH-17 (pseudo-)investigation. Even more pathetic is that the Dutch apparently fully endorsed this load of crapola. Finally, and just for a good laugh, check out how the infamous’ Bellincat presented Tsemakh. And then, suddenly, everybody seem to “forget” that “star witness” and now the Ukies have sent him to Russia. Amazing how fast stuff gets lost in the collective western memory hole…]

Right now there seems to be a tug of war taking place between the more mentally sane elements of the Zelenskii administration and the various nationalist extremists in the SBU, deathsquads and even regular armed forces. Thus we see these apparently contradictory developments taking place: on on hand, the Ukraine finally agreed to a prisoner swap with Russia (a painful one for Russia as Russia mostly traded real criminals, including a least two bona fide Ukie terrorist, against what are mostly civilian hostages, but Putin decided – correctly I think – that freeing Russian nationalists from Ukie jails was more important in this case) while on the other hand, the Ukronazi armed forces increased their shelling, even with 152mm howitzers which fire 50kg high explosive fragmentation shells, against the Donbass. Whatever may be the case, this prisoner swap, no matter how one-sided and unfair, is a positive development which might mark the beginning of a pragmatic and less ideological attitude in Kiev.

Some very cautious beginnings of a little hint of optimism might be in order following that exchange, but the big stuff seems to be scheduled for the meeting of the Normandy Group (NG), probably in France. So far, the Russians have made it very clear that they will not meet just for the hell of meeting, and that the only circumstance in which the Russians will agree to a NG meeting would be if it has good chances of yielding meaningful results which, translated from Russian diplomatic language simply means “if/when Kiev stops stonewalling and sabotaging everything”. Specifically, the Russians are demanding that Zelenskii commit in writing to the so-called “Steinmeier formula” and that the Ukrainian forces withdraw from the line of contact. Will that happen? Maybe. We shall soon find out.

But the single most amazing event of the past couple of weeks was the absolutely astonishing speech French President Emmanuel Macron made in front of an assembly of ambassadors. I could not find the full speech translated into English (I may have missed it somewhere), so I will post the crucial excerpts in French and translate them myself. If I find a full, official, translation I will post it under this column ASAP. For the time being, this is the link to the full speech transcript in French:

https://www.elysee.fr/emmanuel-macron/2019/08/27/discours-du-president-de-la-republique-a-la-conference-des-ambassadeurs-1

Let’s immediately begin with some of the most incredible excerpts, emphasis added by me: (sorry for the long quote but, truly, each word counts!)

L’ordre international est bousculé de manière inédite mais surtout avec, si je puis dire, un grand bouleversement qui se fait sans doute pour la première fois dans notre histoire à peu près dans tous les domaines, avec une magnitude profondément historique. C’est d’abord une transformation, une recomposition géopolitique et stratégique. Nous sommes sans doute en train de vivre la fin de l’hégémonie occidentale sur le monde. Nous nous étions habitués à un ordre international qui depuis le 18ème siècle reposait sur une hégémonie occidentale, vraisemblablement française au 18ème siècle, par l’inspiration des Lumières ; sans doute britannique au 19ème grâce à la révolution industrielle et raisonnablement américaine au 20ème grâce aux 2 grands conflits et à la domination économique et politique de cette puissance. Les choses changent. Et elles sont profondément bousculées par les erreurs des Occidentaux dans certaines crises, par les choix aussi américains depuis plusieurs années et qui n’ont pas commencé avec cette administration mais qui conduisent à revisiter certaines implications dans des conflits au Proche et Moyen-Orient et ailleurs, et à repenser une stratégie profonde, diplomatique et militaire, et parfois des éléments de solidarité dont nous pensions qu’ils étaient des intangibles pour l’éternité même si nous avions constitué ensemble dans des moments géopolitiques qui pourtant aujourd’hui ont changé. Et puis c’est aussi l’émergence de nouvelles puissances dont nous avons sans doute longtemps sous-estimé l’impact. La Chine au premier rang mais également la stratégie russe menée, il faut bien le dire, depuis quelques années avec plus de succès. J’y reviendrai. L’Inde qui émerge, ces nouvelles économies qui deviennent aussi des puissances pas seulement économiques mais politiques et qui se pensent comme certains ont pu l’écrire, comme de véritables États civilisations et qui viennent non seulement bousculer notre ordre international, qui viennent peser dans l’ordre économique mais qui viennent aussi repenser l’ordre politique et l’imaginaire politique qui va avec, avec beaucoup de force et beaucoup plus d’inspiration que nous n’en avons. Regardons l’Inde, la Russie et la Chine. Elles ont une inspiration politique beaucoup plus forte que les Européens aujourd’hui. Elles pensent le monde avec une vraie logique, une vraie philosophie, un imaginaire que nous avons un peu perdu

Here is my informal translation of these words:

The international order is being shaken in an unprecedented manner, above all with, if I may say so, by the great upheaval that is undoubtedly taking place for the first time in our history, in almost every field and with a profoundly historic magnitude. The first thing we observe is a major transformation, a geopolitical and strategic re-composition. We are undoubtedly experiencing the end of Western hegemony over the world. We were accustomed to an international order which, since the 18th century, rested on a Western hegemony, mostly French in the 18th century, by the inspiration of the Enlightenment; then mostly British in the 19th century thanks to the Industrial Revolution and, finally, mostly American in the 20th century thanks to the 2 great conflicts and the economic and political domination of this power. Things change. And they are now deeply shaken by the mistakes of Westerners in certain crises, by the choices that have been made by Americans for several years which did not start with this administration, but which lead to revisiting certain implications in conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere, and to rethinking a deep, diplomatic and military strategy, and sometimes elements of solidarity that we thought were intangible for eternity, even if we had constituted together in geopolitical moments that have changed. And then there is the emergence of new powers whose impact we have probably underestimated for a long time. China is at the forefront, but also the Russian strategy, which has, it must be said, been pursued more successfully in recent years. I will come back to that. India that is emerging, these new economies that are also becoming powers not only economic but political and that think themselves, as some have written, as real “civilizational states” which now come not only to shake up our international order but who also come to weigh in on the economic order and to rethink the political order and the political imagination that goes with it, with much dynamism and much more inspiration than we have. Look at India, Russia and China. They have a much stronger political inspiration than Europeans today. They think about our planet with a true logic, a true philosophy, an imagination that we’ve lost a little bit.

Now let’s unpack these key statements one by one:
1) “ great upheaval that is undoubtedly taking place for the first time in our history in almost every field and with a profoundly historic magnitude”

Here Macron sets the stage for some truly momentous observations: what will be discussed next is not only a major event, but one without precedent in history (whether French or European). Furthermore, what will be discussed next, affects “almost every field” and with huge historical implications.

2) “We are undoubtedly experiencing the end of Western hegemony over the world”

When I read that, my first and rather infantile reaction was to exclaim “really?! No kiddin’?! Who would have thought!?” After all, some of us have been saying that for a long, long while, but never-mind that. What is important is that even a Rothschild-puppet like Macron had to finally speak these words. Oh sure, he probably felt as happy as the Captain of the Titanic when he had to (finally!) order a general evacuation of this putatively unsinkable ship, but nonetheless – he did do it. From now on, the notion of the end of the western hegemony on the planet is no more relegated to what the leaders of the Empire and their propaganda machine like to call “fringe extremists” and has now fully entered the (supposedly) “respectable” and “mainstream” public discourse. This is a huge victory for all of us who have been saying the same things for years already.

3) “by the mistakes of Westerners in certain crises, by the choices that have been made by Americans for several years”

Here, again, I feel like engaging in some petty self-congratulation and want to say “I told you that too!”, but that would really be infantile, would it not? But yeah, while the internal contradictions of western materialism in general, and of AngloZionist Capitalism specifically, have been catching up with the Western World and while an eventual catastrophic crisis was inevitable, it also sure is true that western leaders mostly did it to themselves; at the very least, they dramatically accelerated these processes. In this context, I would single out the following politicians for a nomination to a medal for exceptional service in the destruction of the western hegemony over our long-suffering planet: Donald Trump and Barak Obama, of course, but also François Hollande and Emmanuel Macron (yes, he too even if he now changes his tune!), Angela Merkel, of course, and then last but not least, every single British Prime Minister since Margaret Thatcher (maybe with special commendation for Teresa May). Who knows, maybe they were all KGB/GRU/SVR agents after all? (just kiddin’!)

4) “ the emergence of new powers whose impact we have probably underestimated for a long time. China is at the forefront, but also the Russian strategy, which has, it must be said, been pursued more successfully in recent years”

Next, it’s not only China. Russia too is a major competitor, and a very successful one at that, hence the admission that in spite of all the efforts of the AngloZionist elites not only did the Empire not succeed in breaking Russia, but Russia has been very successful in defeating the western efforts. To those interested, I highly recommend this article by Jon Hellevig on the true state of the Russian economy. Finally, in military terms, Russia has achieved more than parity. In fact, I would argue that at least in terms of quality the Russian armed forces are ahead in several crucial technologies (hypersonic missiles, air defenses, electronic warfare etc.) even while she still lags behind in other technologies (mostly truly obsolete things like aircraft carriers). But most crucial is the political victory of Russia: five years after the Euromaidan and the liberation of Crimea from the Nazi yoke, the USA is far more isolated than Russia. It’s comical, really!

5) “real “civilizational states” which now come not only to shake up our international order”

I have been speaking about a unique, and very distinct, “Russian civilizational realm” in many of my writings and I am quite happy to see Macron using almost the same words. Of course, Macron did not only mean Russia here, but also India and China. Still, and although the Russian nation is much younger than the one of China or, even more so India, 1000 years of Russian civilization does deserve to be listed next to these two other giants of world history. And what is absolutely certain is that China and India could never build the new international order they want without Russia, at least for the foreseeable future. In spite of all the very real progress made recently by the Chinese armed forces (and, to a lesser degree, also the Indian ones), Russia still remains a much stronger military power than China. What Russia, China and India are, is that they are all former empires which have given up on imperialism and who know only aspire to be powerful, but nevertheless “normal” nations. Just by their size and geography, these are “un-invadable” countries who all present a distinct model of development and who want a multi-polar international order which would allow them to safely achieve their goals. In other words, Macron understands that the future international order will be dictated by China, Russia and India and not by any combination of western powers. Quite an admission indeed!

6) “ Look at India, Russia and China. They have a much stronger political inspiration than Europeans today. They think about our planet with a true logic, a true philosophy, an imagination that we’ve lost a little bit.”

This is the “core BRICS” challenge to the Empire: China and Russia have already established what the Chinese call a “Comprehensive Strategic Partnership of Coordination for the New Era”. If they can now extend this kind of informal but extremely profound partnership (I think of it as “symbiotic”) to India next, then the BRICS will have a formidable future (especially after the Brazilian people give the boot to Bolsonaro and his US patrons). Should that fail and should India chose to remain outside this unique relationship, then the SCO will become the main game in town. And yes, Macron is spot on: China and, especially, Russia have a fundamentally different worldview and, unlike the western one, theirs does have “much stronger political” goals (Macron used the word “aspirations”), “a real philosophy and imagination” which the West has lost, and not just a “little bit” but, I would argue, completely. But one way or the other, and for the first time in 1000 years, the future of our planet will not be decided anywhere in the West, not in Europe (old or “new”), but in Asia, primarily by the Russian-Chinese alliance. As I explained here, the AngloZionist Empire is probably the last one in history, definitely the last western one.

Now we should not be naïve here, Macron did not suddenly find religion, grow a conscience or suddenly become an expert on international relations. There is, of course, a cynical reason why he is changing his tune. In fact, there are several such reasons.

First, it appears that the on and off bromance between Macron and Trump is over.

Second, all of Europe is in free fall socially, economically and, of course, politically. And with a total nutcase in power in London dealing with Brexit and with Angela Merkel’s apparently never-ending political agony, it is only logical for a French head of state to try to step in.

Furthermore, while I have always said that Russia is not part of Europe culturally and spiritually, Russia is very much part of Europe geographically, economically and politically and there is simply no way for any imaginable alliance of European states to save Europe from its current predicament without Russian help. Like it or not, that is a fact, irrespective of whether politician or commentator X, Y or Z realizes this or not. Macron probably figured out that the so-called “East Europeans” are nothing but cheap prostitutes doing whatever Uncle Shmuel wants them to do, Germany is collapsing under the weight of Merkel’s “brilliant” immigration policy while the UK under BoJo is busy trying to self-destruct at least as fast as the USA under Trump. Macron is right. If united, Russia and France could build a much safer Europe than the one we see slowly and painfully dying before our eyes today. But he is also wrong if he thinks that Russia can be “re-invited” back into the AngloZionist sphere of influence. In that context, Putin’s reply to the question of whether Russia was willing to return to the G8 is very telling: first he said that if the G7 wants to come back to Russia, Putin would welcome that, but then he also added that the G7/8 is useless without, yes, you guessed it, China and India.

It will be interesting to see if the current G7 will ever agree to mutate into a new G10 which would make Russia, China and India the most powerful block (or voting group) of this new forum. I personally doubt it very much, but then they are becoming desperate and Macron’s words seem to be indicating that this option is at least being discussed behind closed doors. Frankly, considering how quickly the G7 is becoming utterly irrelevant, I expect it to be gradually phased out and replaced by the (objectively much more relevant) G20.

Finally, there are Trump’s efforts into getting Russia back into the G8 which are very transparently linked to the current trade war and geostrategic competition between the US and China. The offer is useless to Russia, just like the return to PACE, but Russia does not want to needlessly offend anybody and that is why Putin did not publicly rebuff Trump or directly refuse to come to Miami: instead, he approved of the general concept, but offered a better way to go about it. Typical Putin.

Conclusion: Macron reads the writing on the wall

Whatever his political motives to say what he said, Macron is no idiot and neither are his advisors. Neither is this a “one off” thing. The French meant every word Macron spoke and they are putting everybody on notice (including the Ukrainians, the US, the EU and the Russians, of course). In fact, Macron has already invited Putin to participate in a Normandy Format meeting in Paris in the very near future. If that meeting eventually does take place, this will mean that the organizers gave Putin guarantees that this will not just be the usual kaffeeklatsch and that some serious results will finally be obtained. That, in turn, means that somebody – probably the French – will have the unpleasant task of telling the Ukrainians that the party is over and that they now need to get their act together and start implementing the Minsk Agreements, something which Zelenskii might or might not try to do, but which the real gun-toting Ukronazis will never accept. Thus, if the West is really serious about forcing Kiev to abide by the Mink Agreements, then the West has to finally give-up its self-defeating russophobic hysteria and substantially change their tone about the Ukraine. To invite Putin to Paris just to tell him again that Russia (which is not even a party to the Minsk Agreements) “must do more” makes zero sense. Therefore, all the other parties will have to come to terms with reality before inviting Putin. Apparently, this might be happening in Paris. As for Trump, he just offered to mediate (if asked to do so) between Russia and the Ukraine.

It shall be extremely interesting to see if this Normandy Format meeting does actually take place and what role, if any, Trump and the USA will play behind the scenes. We shall then know if Macron’s epiphany was just a one-time fluke or not.

* * *

PS: the latest rumor from the Ukraine: Zelenskii supporters are saying that Poroshenko is preparing a coup against Zelenskii and that he is preparing a special force of Ukronazi deathsquads to execute that coup. Dunno about a real coup, but they have already blocked the Rada. Never a dull moment indeed… :-)

China Slaps Britain: You Can’t Afford Hostility
Finian Cunningham
September 13, 2019
© Photo: Public domain

China gave Britain a stern warning this week that any naval maneuvers conducted with the US near its declared territories in the South China Sea will be met with a military response.

Beijing rapped London further, telling it to dump its “colonial attitude” with regard to Hong Kong. However, the ultimate leverage, was the caustic reminder to Britain that if it wants to trade with China in the future, then it better mind its manners.

Given the deepening turmoil over Brexit and the uncertain economic prospects once Britain quits the European Union, the British government is going to need every trading opportunity around the world it can muster. Keeping on good terms with China, the globe’s second-biggest national economy, will therefore be crucial for Britain’s post-Brexit survival.

Since taking office in July, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has been quick to talk up a future golden era of bilateral trade relations with Beijing. He has expressed an interest in China’s Belt and Road Initiative for global trade, and he has even dared to ruffle US President Donald Trump by calling for an end to the tariffs and trade war with Beijing, thus implying the White House’s hardball policy is wrongheaded.

But here’s the tricky balancing act facing Britain. In trying to ingratiate itself with both Washington and Beijing for future trade deals, London is caught in an awkward contradiction. To do Washington’s bidding, Britain will be obliged to join forces for fomenting aggression against China.

China this week preempted that development by telling Britain in no uncertain terms that it can’t afford to antagonize Beijing without foregoing future trade and investment. In short, London has to make a decision: does it want war, or peace and prosperity with China?

The rebuke from Beijing followed a visit to London last week by US Secretary of State Mike Esper. During a major set-piece speech, Esper called on Britain and other European states to focus on confronting China and Russia, whom he accused of posing as aggressors.

“It is increasingly clear that Russia and China want to disrupt the international order by gaining a veto over other nations’ economic, diplomatic, and security decisions,” Esper said, seemingly unaware of the absurd hypocrisy of his words.

There have also been suggestions that Britain’s warships will be joining with US forces in so-called “freedom of navigation” patrols in the South China Sea. The recently launched super aircraft carrier, Queen Elizabeth, is designed to be capable of hosting up to 70 US F-35 fighter jets. The temptation for London will be to join Esper’s rallying call because of the need to pander to Washington for future trade favors.

China’s ambassador to Britain, Liu Xiaoming, told media that if Britain embarks on such missions anywhere near islands claimed as Chinese territory, especially if the British are seen to be liaising with the Americans, then it will be viewed as “hostile”. The diplomat said such a development will be met with a military response.

He warned London not do America’s “dirty work” and rebuffed claims about “freedom of navigation” concerns as a cynical pretext for provocation.

Ambassador Liu said: “The South China Sea is a vast ocean, it is three million square kilometers wide. We have no objection to people sailing around there but do not enter Chinese territorial waters within twelve nautical miles. If you don’t do that, there shouldn’t be a problem. The South China Sea is wide enough to have free navigation of shipping.”

Major General Su Guanghui, the Chinese defense attaché in London, said that his country will continue to take a combative stance in what it considers to be incursions into its territories: “If the US and UK join hands in a challenge or violated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China, that would be hostile action.”

Last year, Britain sent a warship HMS Albion near Chinese-claimed territory in the South China Sea, which led to a naval confrontation and break down in bilateral relations. That maneuver was under the watch of former Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson who habitually used bellicose rhetoric describing China (and Russia) as global threats.

China’s ambassador to Britain categorically stated that there can be no repeat of this British naval conduct near Chinese-claimed territory. Don’t even think about it, was the tone.

Nevertheless, the diplomat said that China wants to develop cooperative relations with Britain to boost trade and investment. He said that Britain would lose out massively from new telecoms infrastructure development if a proposed partnership with Chinese telecoms giant Huawei is jettisoned – under American pressure.

Thus, Britain has a simple choice really. It can either continue to serve as a henchman for Washington by offending China’s sovereign rights, or London can wise up and ditch its pretensions of colonial-era gunboat diplomacy. That means treating Beijing with the basic respect consistent with international norms.

It seems the days of British subterfuge and aggression on behalf of Uncle Sam are over. It’s totally unacceptable for such presumed privilege to wield aggression with impunity. And it is especially unviable when post-Brexit Britain is shaping up to be scuttling around the globe with a begging bowl for trade deals.
Finian Cunningham
September 13, 2019 | Security
China Slaps Britain: You Can’t Afford Hostility

China gave Britain a stern warning this week that any naval maneuvers conducted with the US near its declared territories in the South China Sea will be met with a military response.

Beijing rapped London further, telling it to dump its “colonial attitude” with regard to Hong Kong. However, the ultimate leverage, was the caustic reminder to Britain that if it wants to trade with China in the future, then it better mind its manners.

Given the deepening turmoil over Brexit and the uncertain economic prospects once Britain quits the European Union, the British government is going to need every trading opportunity around the world it can muster. Keeping on good terms with China, the globe’s second-biggest national economy, will therefore be crucial for Britain’s post-Brexit survival.

Since taking office in July, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has been quick to talk up a future golden era of bilateral trade relations with Beijing. He has expressed an interest in China’s Belt and Road Initiative for global trade, and he has even dared to ruffle US President Donald Trump by calling for an end to the tariffs and trade war with Beijing, thus implying the White House’s hardball policy is wrongheaded.

But here’s the tricky balancing act facing Britain. In trying to ingratiate itself with both Washington and Beijing for future trade deals, London is caught in an awkward contradiction. To do Washington’s bidding, Britain will be obliged to join forces for fomenting aggression against China.

China this week preempted that development by telling Britain in no uncertain terms that it can’t afford to antagonize Beijing without foregoing future trade and investment. In short, London has to make a decision: does it want war, or peace and prosperity with China?

The rebuke from Beijing followed a visit to London last week by US Secretary of State Mike Esper. During a major set-piece speech, Esper called on Britain and other European states to focus on confronting China and Russia, whom he accused of posing as aggressors.

“It is increasingly clear that Russia and China want to disrupt the international order by gaining a veto over other nations’ economic, diplomatic, and security decisions,” Esper said, seemingly unaware of the absurd hypocrisy of his words.

There have also been suggestions that Britain’s warships will be joining with US forces in so-called “freedom of navigation” patrols in the South China Sea. The recently launched super aircraft carrier, Queen Elizabeth, is designed to be capable of hosting up to 70 US F-35 fighter jets. The temptation for London will be to join Esper’s rallying call because of the need to pander to Washington for future trade favors.

China’s ambassador to Britain, Liu Xiaoming, told media that if Britain embarks on such missions anywhere near islands claimed as Chinese territory, especially if the British are seen to be liaising with the Americans, then it will be viewed as “hostile”. The diplomat said such a development will be met with a military response.

He warned London not do America’s “dirty work” and rebuffed claims about “freedom of navigation” concerns as a cynical pretext for provocation.

Ambassador Liu said: “The South China Sea is a vast ocean, it is three million square kilometers wide. We have no objection to people sailing around there but do not enter Chinese territorial waters within twelve nautical miles. If you don’t do that, there shouldn’t be a problem. The South China Sea is wide enough to have free navigation of shipping.”

Major General Su Guanghui, the Chinese defense attaché in London, said that his country will continue to take a combative stance in what it considers to be incursions into its territories: “If the US and UK join hands in a challenge or violated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China, that would be hostile action.”

Last year, Britain sent a warship HMS Albion near Chinese-claimed territory in the South China Sea, which led to a naval confrontation and break down in bilateral relations. That maneuver was under the watch of former Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson who habitually used bellicose rhetoric describing China (and Russia) as global threats.

China’s ambassador to Britain categorically stated that there can be no repeat of this British naval conduct near Chinese-claimed territory. Don’t even think about it, was the tone.

Nevertheless, the diplomat said that China wants to develop cooperative relations with Britain to boost trade and investment. He said that Britain would lose out massively from new telecoms infrastructure development if a proposed partnership with Chinese telecoms giant Huawei is jettisoned – under American pressure.

Thus, Britain has a simple choice really. It can either continue to serve as a henchman for Washington by offending China’s sovereign rights, or London can wise up and ditch its pretensions of colonial-era gunboat diplomacy. That means treating Beijing with the basic respect consistent with international norms.

It seems the days of British subterfuge and aggression on behalf of Uncle Sam are over. It’s totally unacceptable for such presumed privilege to wield aggression with impunity. And it is especially unviable when post-Brexit Britain is shaping up to be scuttling around the globe with a begging bowl for trade deals.

© 2010 - 2019 | Strategic Culture Foundation | Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture online journal www.strategic-culture.org.
The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.

China gave Britain a stern warning this week that any naval maneuvers conducted with the US near its declared territories in the South China Sea will be met with a military response.

Beijing rapped London further, telling it to dump its “colonial attitude” with regard to Hong Kong. However, the ultimate leverage, was the caustic reminder to Britain that if it wants to trade with China in the future, then it better mind its manners.

Given the deepening turmoil over Brexit and the uncertain economic prospects once Britain quits the European Union, the British government is going to need every trading opportunity around the world it can muster. Keeping on good terms with China, the globe’s second-biggest national economy, will therefore be crucial for Britain’s post-Brexit survival.

Since taking office in July, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has been quick to talk up a future golden era of bilateral trade relations with Beijing. He has expressed an interest in China’s Belt and Road Initiative for global trade, and he has even dared to ruffle US President Donald Trump by calling for an end to the tariffs and trade war with Beijing, thus implying the White House’s hardball policy is wrongheaded.

But here’s the tricky balancing act facing Britain. In trying to ingratiate itself with both Washington and Beijing for future trade deals, London is caught in an awkward contradiction. To do Washington’s bidding, Britain will be obliged to join forces for fomenting aggression against China.

China this week preempted that development by telling Britain in no uncertain terms that it can’t afford to antagonize Beijing without foregoing future trade and investment. In short, London has to make a decision: does it want war, or peace and prosperity with China?

The rebuke from Beijing followed a visit to London last week by US Secretary of State Mike Esper. During a major set-piece speech, Esper called on Britain and other European states to focus on confronting China and Russia, whom he accused of posing as aggressors.

“It is increasingly clear that Russia and China want to disrupt the international order by gaining a veto over other nations’ economic, diplomatic, and security decisions,” Esper said, seemingly unaware of the absurd hypocrisy of his words.

There have also been suggestions that Britain’s warships will be joining with US forces in so-called “freedom of navigation” patrols in the South China Sea. The recently launched super aircraft carrier, Queen Elizabeth, is designed to be capable of hosting up to 70 US F-35 fighter jets. The temptation for London will be to join Esper’s rallying call because of the need to pander to Washington for future trade favors.

China’s ambassador to Britain, Liu Xiaoming, told media that if Britain embarks on such missions anywhere near islands claimed as Chinese territory, especially if the British are seen to be liaising with the Americans, then it will be viewed as “hostile”. The diplomat said such a development will be met with a military response.

He warned London not do America’s “dirty work” and rebuffed claims about “freedom of navigation” concerns as a cynical pretext for provocation.

Ambassador Liu said: “The South China Sea is a vast ocean, it is three million square kilometers wide. We have no objection to people sailing around there but do not enter Chinese territorial waters within twelve nautical miles. If you don’t do that, there shouldn’t be a problem. The South China Sea is wide enough to have free navigation of shipping.”

Major General Su Guanghui, the Chinese defense attaché in London, said that his country will continue to take a combative stance in what it considers to be incursions into its territories: “If the US and UK join hands in a challenge or violated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China, that would be hostile action.”

Last year, Britain sent a warship HMS Albion near Chinese-claimed territory in the South China Sea, which led to a naval confrontation and break down in bilateral relations. That maneuver was under the watch of former Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson who habitually used bellicose rhetoric describing China (and Russia) as global threats.

China’s ambassador to Britain categorically stated that there can be no repeat of this British naval conduct near Chinese-claimed territory. Don’t even think about it, was the tone.

Nevertheless, the diplomat said that China wants to develop cooperative relations with Britain to boost trade and investment. He said that Britain would lose out massively from new telecoms infrastructure development if a proposed partnership with Chinese telecoms giant Huawei is jettisoned – under American pressure.

Thus, Britain has a simple choice really. It can either continue to serve as a henchman for Washington by offending China’s sovereign rights, or London can wise up and ditch its pretensions of colonial-era gunboat diplomacy. That means treating Beijing with the basic respect consistent with international norms.

It seems the days of British subterfuge and aggression on behalf of Uncle Sam are over. It’s totally unacceptable for such presumed privilege to wield aggression with impunity. And it is especially unviable when post-Brexit Britain is shaping up to be scuttling around the globe with a begging bowl for trade deals.

2019年09月17日

米司法省、ＪＰモルガンのトレーダーらを訴追－貴金属市場で不正操作

経済

司法省は、本来マフィアを取り締まることを想定した法律を適用しているとのこと。

DOJ Accuses JPMorgan's Precious Metals Trading Desk Of Being A Criminal Enterprise
by Tyler Durden
Mon, 09/16/2019 - 13:52
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/three-jpmorgan-traders-charged-massive-gold-market-manipulation-fraud

米司法省、ＪＰモルガンのトレーダーらを訴追－貴金属市場で不正操作
9/16(月) 22:20配信
Bloomberg
https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190916-40047057-bloom_st-bus_all

（ブルームバーグ）：米司法省は貴金属先物取引の市場を操作したとして、米銀ＪＰモルガン・チェースの貴金属担当現役トレーダー２人、元トレーダー１人を訴追した。

司法省は３人が「貴金属先物取引の市場で大規模かつ複数年にわたる操作」に関与し、他の市場参加者を欺いたと主張。事情に詳しい関係者によると、３人のうちの１人はＪＰモルガンのグローバル貴金属担当デスク責任者を務めていたマイケル・ノバク氏で、同氏は先月から休暇に入っている。

司法省によると、市場操作は８年間に及び、違法なトレーディングは数千件に上る。

今回の司法省の発表文で銀行名は記されていないが、この件に関連する他の文書から訴追されたのがＪＰモルガン行員であることは明らかだ。残り２人のトレーダーはグレッグ・スミス氏とクリストファー・ジョーダン氏。

米捜査当局は見せ板を使った商品市場の操作について調べを進め、ＪＰモルガン行員に対する容疑を固めた。ＪＰモルガンのほかにも複数の金融機関が関与したとされ、司法省はこれまでにドイツ銀行やＵＢＳグループなどに勤務していたトレーダーら16人を訴追。このうち７人が罪を認め、１人は裁判で有罪となり、別の１人は無罪となった。

2019年09月16日

タンザニアで「独島は韓国の領土」記念コイン発行

政治

韓国の独島外交は連戦連勝！これは賞賛に値する。

タンザニアみたいな途上国では、米英仏の大学を出ていて英仏語をしゃべれるというだけで、特に専門的な訓練を受けていない人が外交官に任命されるから、個人レベルでも役所レベルでも何の知識を有しておらず、韓国の接待攻勢に取り込まれてしまうのだろう。外国人でも国家の中枢部門にフリーアクセスなんでしょ、きっと。

そんなことより、これを受けて日本外務省がいかに何もしないかに、私たち国民は注目しましょう。

（2019/09/18追記）
現地の日本大使館がタンザニア政府に確認したところ、そのような話はないという返答があったとのこと。そうであるならば、それで結構です。

私のほうでタンザニア中銀のサイトにアクセスしてみたが、世界のネットワークのかなり下にぶる下がっているらしく、トップページが開かない（回線が狭いため、私が発した信号が相手まで伝わらない）。どえらい国。中銀サイトにてきちんとした紙幣くらい確認したかったが、それすらかなわない。

開けることができた英字新聞を見たら、独島記念コインの記事はみつからなかったが、別の記事が目に入った。

韓国の統一教会が首都ダルエスサラームで集団結婚式を開いたが、評判が悪いとのこと。集まった人たちは、入場料を払えば、その33倍のお金をもらえると聞いたから集まっただけという。記者が主催者に確認したところ、入場料の33倍のお金を集まった全員に配るはずがないだろう（そんなことを言うはずがないだろう）という返答。

要は、統一教会がタンザニアでも大きなスタジアムを満員にできるほど勢力拡張したのですという証拠写真を撮りたいが為に、見え透いた嘘で人々を集めたということ。

韓国人はどこへ行っても韓国人なのである。サウジの英字紙にも、韓国の会社に納品したが入金されず困っているという相談が掲載されたことがある。この低質韓国人の、よりによって245人を除く密入国者に対し、日本政府が特別永住ビザを発給することが社会正義なのかどうか、国民的議論を盛り上げるべきだろう。

（2019/09/19記事追加）下記参照

タンザニアで「独島は韓国の領土」記念コイン発行
9/16(月) 14:56配信
中央日報日本語版
https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190916-00000044-cnippou-kr

タンザニアの中央銀行が「独島（ドクト、日本名・竹島）は韓国の領土」と記された記念コインを発行し、話題になっている。

１５日、ＫＢＳ（韓国放送公社）によると、タンザニア中央銀行は７月に東島・西島が刻まれた純銀製の記念コインを発行した。コインの表には英語で「韓国の領土」というフレーズと韓半島（朝鮮半島）の地図を刻印し、裏面にはタンザニアの国章の模様と共に額面３０００シリング（約１４０円）と表記されている。タンザニアで法定通貨として認めるという意味だ。タンザニア中央銀行が発行した独島記念コインは、現在国内外で販売されている。

タンザニア中央銀行は収益事業の一環として独島記念コインを発行したものとみられる。海外の一部の中央銀行は多くの場合、様々なテーマの記念コインを発行して収益化するというのがメディアの説明だ。２００５年にはウガンダ、２００４年には北朝鮮で８種類の独島記念コインが発行されたことがある。

タンザニア中央銀行が独島記念コインを発行したというニュースが伝えられると、韓日のネットユーザーは立場の違いを見せている。

韓国では「タンザニアの中央銀行にありがたいと思う」という反応と共に韓国銀行を叱咤する声も出ている。「韓国銀行が独島記念コインを発行すべきなのでは」というものだ。これまで韓国銀行は「外交的感受性」などを理由に独島記念コインを発行していない。しかし、２０１４年と２０１５年の国会国政監査で問題が議論されるほど、先送りし続けるわけにはいかないという主張も出ている。貨幣専門コレクターのイ・サンヒョン氏はＫＢＳとのインタビューで「韓国より早く日本が独島記念コインを発行した場合、先取り効果が懸念される」と指摘した。

逆に日本のネットユーザーは「タンザニアに抗議すべきだ」と主張している。日本ネットユーザーはＳＮＳでタンザニアの独島記念コイン発行関連記事を共有し、「日本政府は何をしているのか」と反発している。一部は「今やタンザニアにも無視されるのか」、「タンザニアに抗議せよ」と日本政府の積極的な動きを求めている。

「竹島は韓国領」記念コイン発行は「事実ではない」　菅長官、韓国報道を否定
9/17(火) 12:19配信
産経新聞
https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190917-00000529-san-pol

　アフリカ・タンザニアの中央銀行が竹島（島根県隠岐の島町）は「韓国の領土」と明記した記念コインを発行したとの韓国の報道があり、菅義偉（すがよしひで）官房長官は１７日午前の記者会見で、そうした記念コイン発行はなかったと報道内容を否定した。「在タンザニア日本大使館が直ちに同国外務省に事実関係を確認したところ、『中央銀行を含め、タンザニア政府としてそのような記念コインを発行した事実はない』との回答があった」と明かした。

　その上で「今後とも竹島は歴史的事実に照らしても、国際法上も明らかにわが国固有の領土であるとの一貫した立場に基づいて適切に対応していきたい」と強調した。

実はヨーロッパ製!? 疑惑の韓国「タンザニア独島硬貨」を徹底調査
9/19(木) 20:21配信
FNN.jpプライムオンライン
https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190919-00010013-fnnprimev-kr

韓国の公共放送「韓国の領土“独島記念硬貨”タンザニアが発行」

「なんでタンザニア？」という言葉が頭に浮かんだ。
9月16日、韓国の公共放送KBSが下記のニュースを報じた。

「独島が『韓国の領土』と表記された硬貨がタンザニアで今年7月に発行され、韓国の国内外で販売されている」

韓国が独島として不法占拠している島根県の竹島について、遠いアフリカのタンザニアが『DOKDO』『THE LAND OF KOREA』という英文が記された硬貨を発行したというのだ。額面は3000シリング（日本円で約140円）。タンザニアに行けば、実際に使用できる硬貨との触れ込みだ。

韓国KBSの報道では貨幣収集家の男性がインタビューで「韓国も独島硬貨を積極的に検討すべきだ」と力説する。この脈絡から判断するに『タンザニアも韓国領だと認めた独島を、より国際社会に知らせる手段として韓国も独島硬貨を導入しよう』ということを伝えたいのだろう。

ただ何か怪しい。そもそもなぜタンザニアが竹島を韓国領だと記した硬貨を発行したのだろうか。その経緯については報道では全く触れていないのだ。
菅官房長官は完全否定「発行した事実はない」

菅官房長官は放送翌日（9月17日）の会見で報道について言及した。

「在タンザニアの日本大使館から直ちにタンザニア外務省に事実関係を確認したところ、先方からは、中央銀行含めタンザニア政府としてそのような記念コインを発行した事実はない。このように回答がありました。」

菅官房長官はKBSの報道を完全否定したのだ。ますます怪しさを増す「タンザニア独島硬貨」…。その“正体”を暴くため、私たちは、まず韓国国内で独島硬貨を販売しているソウルのコインショップに向かった。

独島硬貨を製作したのは「ヨーロッパの会社」

韓国・ソウルの繁華街にあるビルの一室にその店はある。独島硬貨はすでに売り切れていたが、サンプルとして1つだけ保管されていて、実物を見る事が出来た。

手に取ってみて驚いた。大きい。そして重い。サイズは手のひらにギリギリ納まる直径65ミリ、重さ155.5g。純度99.9%の銀製で、表面には竹島が正確かつ立体的に再現されている。「韓国領」と刻まれた岩が置かれている場所には、ご丁寧にクリスタルが輝く。裏側には「TANZANIA」「3000SHILLING」の文字と紋章が描かれている。価格は49万5000ウォン、日本円で約4万5000円と高額だ。

コインショップの担当者はカメラ撮影NGという条件付きで取材に応じてくれた。

「私たちの会社はあくまでも硬貨を販売するだけ。独島硬貨を製作したのはヨーロッパの硬貨製造会社だ」

「タンザニア独島硬貨」は、何とアフリカではなくヨーロッパで作られたという。担当者は2018年11月、この「ヨーロッパの会社」から、こんなことを持ちかけられたというのだ。

「米朝首脳会談、南北首脳会談が開催された。文在寅大統領も白頭山（ペクトゥサン・中朝境界の山）に行った（2018年9月）。金正恩委員長が漢拏山（ハルラサン・韓国の最高峰の山）に来るという話もある。その2つの山に加えて独島の硬貨も作るのだが、韓国で販売しないか？」

コインショップ側はこの提案に乗り、全発行数777枚のうち250枚余りを引き受け、韓国で販売したという。ただ、このヨーロッパの会社自体が独島硬貨を企画したのか、それとも別の誰かから発注を受けたのかは知らないと話す。

どうやら真相のカギを握るのは「ヨーロッパの会社」のようだ。その会社の情報を何とか引き出そうとしたが、結局国名すら教えてくれなかった。

会社の所在地は「リヒテンシュタイン」だった

その後の私たちの調査の結果、「ヨーロッパの会社」はオーストリアとスイスの間に位置する「リヒテンシュタイン」にある硬貨製造会社であることが分かった。

早速、独島硬貨の真相を聞くため、コンタクトを試みた。担当者は会議中ということで、直接話すことはできなかったが、1通のメールが送られてきた。

「（独島硬貨は）タンザニア銀行によって正式に認可された硬貨です。現在、タンザニア銀行とこの件について調査しており、調査後にプレスリリースを出します」

独島硬貨はタンザニアの中央銀行であるタンザニア銀行によって「正式に認可を受け」製造したものだと主張している。

コインに詳しい関係者によると、コレクター向けの記念硬貨を製造する会社はヨーロッパを中心に複数ある。これらの会社はタンザニア、パラオ、クック諸島などから硬貨発行の認可を受け、自社企画や外部からの発注を受けて記念硬貨を作るのだ。一方、認可を出す国は、認可料や国の広報を目的にしているという。

調べてみると、サンリオの人気キャラクター、キティちゃんの記念硬貨がクック諸島の硬貨として何種類も製造されていて、こうした記念硬貨がそれほど珍しいものではない事が分かった。
タンザニア銀行が“驚きの発表”

最後にタンザニア銀行にコンタクトを試みた。なかなか電話がつながらないため、問い合わせのメールを送り返信を待っていたところ、突如、9月18日付で以下の発表文を公表した。

「ソーシャルメディアで、2019年7月にタンザニア銀行が表側に独島を、裏側にタンザニアの紋章を描いた記念硬貨を発行したという噂が流れていますが、これは悪意のある噂で、根拠のないものであるということをはっきりさせて頂きたく存じます。また、そのような硬貨を造る会社とも一切契約していません」

なんと「悪意のある噂」との表現で、独島硬貨には一切関わっていないと断言したのだ。タンザニア銀行が認可を出したとするリヒテンシュタインの硬貨製造会社の主張とはまるで正反対だ。

タンザニア銀行の発表が正しいなら、「タンザニアが独島硬貨を発行した」との韓国KBSの報道は明らかな誤報と言わざるを得ない。結局、誰のどんな意図によって独島硬貨が製作されたのかは明らかになっていないが、少なくともタンザニアが竹島を韓国領だと認めたという事実はなさそうだ。

タンザニア銀行の発表について、再びリヒテンシュタインの硬貨製造会社に取材を申し入れているが、現時点で回答は届いていない。（9月19日時点）

疑惑の「独島硬貨」を報道してしまう韓国メディア

日韓関係はいわゆる徴用工問題や慰安婦問題などで悪化の一途をたどっている。日本が韓国を輸出管理上の最優遇対象国から除外した措置への対抗として、8月31日には韓国の国会議員6人が竹島に上陸した。韓国側の挑発によって関係悪化に拍車がかかっていて、韓国メディアによる日本批判はもはや日常の光景となった。

こうした“日本たたき”の流れの中で、公共放送ですら正体の知れない「タンザニア独島硬貨」に飛びつき報道してしまうというのが、現在の韓国内の実状と言えるだろう。

なおタンザニア銀行の発表を受けて韓国KBSにもコメントを求めているが、いまのところ返答はない（9月19日時点）

2019年09月16日

米高官　サウジ油田爆撃は西北西から来た・・・イスラエルですね（笑）

政治

その油田の西北西にあるのはイスラエルですよ。関連記事

（2019/09/19追記）
現場とイスラエルの間に、米軍が不法占拠しているシリア領al-Tanfアッタンフがあった。ここが発射地点かもしれない。

US Officials Claim Yemen Not Behind Saudi Aramco Attack, Houthis Reveal 'Intel Operation' - Reports
02:39 16.09.2019(updated 03:48 16.09.2019) Get short URL
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201909161076810647-us-officials-claim-yemen-not-behind-saudi-aramco-attack-houthis-reveal-intel-operation---reports/

Two Saudi Aramco plants - in Abqaiq and Khurais - were attacked by drones in the early hours of Saturday, leading to massive fires and a suspension of the production of 5.7 million barrels of crude oil per day. The armed Houthi political opposition faction in Yemen earlier claimed responsibility for the attacks.

According to senior US officials cited by Reuters, the scope and precision of the attacks came from a west-northwest direction, suggesting that the launch was not made by the Houthis.

"There's no doubt that Iran is responsible for this. No matter how you slice it, there's no escaping it. There's no other candidate. Evidence points in no other direction than that Iran was responsible for this", officials now claim, cited by Reuters.

US officials note satellite images showing 19 purported impacts on the oil facilities, Reuters said, adding that the officials alleged that they have additional but as yet unrevealed evidence they will offer in the next few days that will prove their claim that the Houthis claims of responsibility are not credible, according to the media report.

Photos released by Trump administration show extent of weekend attack on Saudi oil industry. US officials say evidence now pointing towards cruise missile attacks from Iraq or Iran, not drone strikes from Houthis in Yemen. But no official assessments yet from DC or Riyadh. pic.twitter.com/0HDz4DFXnH
— Dion Nissenbaum (@DionNissenbaum) September 15, 2019

US officials, cited by Reuters, so far decline to say from where the attack was launched. "There are two options, and we have our opinion on which it was", US officials said, adding the Iraqi government declared that they were not behind the launches, Reuters reported.

According to Reuters, citing US officials, Washington is working with Saudi officials who allege that cruise missiles were used in the attacks on the Saudi Aramco oil facilities.

Over 17 devices were deployed, the US officials claimed, adding that not all of the devices reached their targets and some were recovered north of their intended destination, according to Reuters.

"The Houthi have never struck this far afield in the past because we don’t think that they have that capability. And the Houthis have never struck in this precise and coordinated fashion before", the US officials said, cited by Reuters.

CNN earlier reported, citing a spokesman for Yemen's Houthi faction, Brig. Gen. Yahya Saree, that the Houthis had attacked Saudi Aramco's largest oil facilities by planning "an accurate intelligence operation and advance monitoring and cooperation of honorable people inside the kingdom".

US State Secretary Mike Pompeo earlier alleged that Iran had been implicated in the attacks. Tehran has called these allegations false.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Sunday that the United States will not stop the war in Yemen - the region's poorest nation - by blaming Iran for everything.

The armed conflict in Yemen between government forces led by the exiled President Abdrabuh Mansour Hadi and the Houthis has been ongoing since 2015. The United Nations has repeatedly called the conflict in Yemen the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, with an estimated 24 million people - more than 80 percent of the country’s population - currently in need of aid.

2019年09月15日

プーチンがネタンヤフに激おこ　シリア空爆

政治

イスラエル首相のロシア訪問は失敗という評価。

少し前に、イスラエルがシリア領内を繰り返し空爆していたが、プーチンがイスラエルに対し、これ以上継続するならば、イスラエル機を容赦なく撃ち落とすぞと警告したら、空爆が止んだ。

Russia prevents Israeli airstrikes in Syria
Israeli sources called Netanyahu's quick Russian visit – to try and convince Putin to ignore Israel's attacks in Syria – "a failure."
By YASSER OKBI/MAARIV
September 14, 2019 09:45
https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Russia-prevents-Israeli-airstrikes-in-Syria-601618

The controversy between Israel and Russia regarding airstrikes of Iranian targets in Syria and Iraq continues, despite the meeting Between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Russian President Vladimir Putin. This was reported on Friday by Independent Arabia.

According to the report, Moscow has prevented three Israeli air strikes on three Syrian outposts recently, and even threatened that any jets attempting such a thing would be shot down, either by Russian jets or by the S-400 anti-aircraft missiles. The source cited in the report claims a similar situation has happened twice – and that during August, Moscow stopped an air strike on a Syrian outpost in Qasioun, where a S-300 missile battery is placed.
Moreover, it was claimed that another air strike was planned for a week later on a Syrian outpost in the Qunaitra area and a third one on a sensitive area in Latakia. This development is what pushed Netanyahu to have his quick visit in Russia to try and convince Putin to ignore Israel's attacks in Syria. According to the Russian source, Putin let Netanyahu know that his country will not allow any damage to be done to the Syrian regime's army, or any of the weapons being given to it, because giving such a permission would be seen as giving Israel leniency – something that contradicts Russia's goal of assisting the Syrian regime.

The British-Arabic news outlet reported that Netanyahu tried to present a positive message of the cooperation between the two countries and even tried to use it for his election campaign, but it didn't work. Israeli sources who have spoken with the newspaper called the meeting "a failure." They claimed that everything regarding the air strikes in Iraq and Syria, since they were in the public eye, embarrassed the Russians terribly in the eyes of their allies in the area – Syria, Iran and the militias that support them.

The Russian source said: "Putin has expressed his dissatisfaction from Israel's latest actions in Lebanon," and even emphasized to Netanyahu that he "rejects the aggression towards Lebanon's sovereignty," something which had never been heard from him. Putin further stated that someone is cheating him in regards to Syria and Lebanon, and that he will not let it go without a response. According to him, Netanyahu was warned not to strike such targets in the future.

The news website added that more Israeli sources have said similar things on the subject and that the visit was meant to reduce the severity of the controversy between the countries into a tactical one, rather than an ideological one.

Translated by Jerusalem Post staff.

2019年09月15日

「在日の居心地を良くするために日韓関係を良好に保つ」は間違った思考　排除すべき

在日政治

日韓関係が在日のステータスに不利益変更も含め影響を与えるのは当然の帰結であり、同情の余地なし。

「在日の居心地を良くするために日韓関係を良好に保つ」は、順序をはき違えた間違った思考であり、徹底的に排除しなければならない。国家レベルの問題と個人レベルの問題を混同している。

韓国政府が、対日広報活動予算を3倍に増やしたが、そのカネを受け取った記者、出版社が多いらしくて、下記引用に類似した記事が次々と配信されている。どうせ韓国政府がやらせている政治プロパガンダなのだから、生粋の日本人は無視するのが正解。政治環境が変わっても保護すべき在日は、徴用された245人だけ。

「私は在日3世」スピーチが話題…日韓問題に堀潤「小さい主語で語る癖を」
9/14(土) 19:40配信
TOKYO MX
https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190914-00010000-tokyomxv-soci

TOKYO MX（地上波9ch）朝のニュース生番組「モーニングCROSS」（毎週月～金曜7:00～）。9月9日（月）の放送では、「日韓関係」の報道の在り方などについて意見を交わしました。

◆「この国で安全に生きていけるように」

日本と韓国の政治的対立が深まるなか、日韓友好を呼びかける集会「日韓連帯アクション0907」が7日（土）に渋谷と大阪・なんばで開かれ、「差別や憎悪よりも友好を」と聴衆に訴えました。

渋谷の集会では、在日コリアン3世だと名乗る女性が「私は日本生まれ、日本育ちで、日本の学校に通ったので韓国語は喋れません。なので、『韓国に帰れ！』と言われても帰れません。私は殺されても構いません。でも、私より若い世代、未成年、これから生まれてくる子どもが、この国で安全に生きていけるようにしてください」とスピーチし、切実な胸の内を明かしました。

また、日本新聞労働組合連合は6日（金）、「“嫌韓”あおり報道はやめよう」と報道機関へ呼びかける声明を発表しています。

◆「韓国が好き」も大きく伝えるべき

MCの堀潤は、「事実に基づいた報道ならいざ知らず、一部の識者のオピニオン（主張や意見）や“本当に事実なの？”といったものが、ニュースの見出しに付けられ、それが流されていくのは、同じメディア人として心配ですよね？」と、キャスターでジャーナリストの岸田雪子さんに投げかけます。

岸田さんは同意しつつ、「人の心理として、誰かを攻撃することで“優越感”や“快感”を得る心象心理があると思う。そこにつけ込んで差別に結び付いてしまうと、犯罪にもなり得る」と警鐘を鳴らします。インターネットの普及に伴い、「そうした行為が非常に可視化されやすいし、広がりやすい」と特性を挙げ、「逆に『韓国が大好きだ』という声もたくさんあるので、そちら側の声も、もっと大きく伝えていく必要があるのでは」と主張します。

ファッションデザイナーの渋谷ザニーさんは、昨今のメディアについて、「『これが正しい』とコメンテーターやジャーナリストがそれぞれの姿勢で発信している。もちろん、メディアは売り上げや部数などに支えられている部分はあると思うが、それだけでは新しい時代、また過去を見つめ直すには、僕的には的確ではない行動に映ってしまう」と感想を口にします。

最後に、堀は「『韓国が』『日本が』『文在寅政権は……』『日本政府は……』といった主語ならいざ知らず、一緒くたに語ってはいけないと思うし、冷静に伝えていきたい。（国などではなく）小さい主語で語るような癖を、みんなでつけたいなと思うんですよね」と話していました。

2019年09月14日

サウジ石油施設へ無人機攻撃＝親イランのイエメン武装組織

政治

ふうん。サウジの大規模油田施設の周囲には計画的に複数の米軍基地が配置されており、ありとあらゆるレーダー、センサー、防御システムが24時間体制で稼働しているのに、どうやって攻撃できるのかね？

フーシー側が犯行声明を発表していることになっているものの、にわかに信じることができない。

サウジの石油施設を攻撃できるのは世界でただ一つ、米軍だけです。

（2019/09/15追記）
事件の前、9日（月）に、ロシア中銀が、2020年の原油価格は25ドルにまで下落し得るという見通しを発表していた。供給面では米国のシェール・オイルを中心に供給過剰が続くのに対し、需要面では米中対立の影響で世界経済が低迷するから。それで、高油価が続かないと国家経済が成り立たないサウジがどのように対応するか注目されていた。

OPEC総会を開いて正攻法で議論しても、加盟国にとっては減産＝歳入減少にしかならないから、なかなかまとまらない。

しかし、サウジ自身が施設を爆破するならば、話は違ってくる。特に今回のように生産量のきれいに半分をマーケットから消すことができればインパクトは大きく、油価はすぐ跳ね上がる。産油各国の歳入見通しは大幅変更。また市場から消えた油を穴埋めする代替供給源をどこに求めるかという議論も浮上するから、政治の議論も方向転換する。

爆破犯は、政治の流れを変えたい米国かもしれないし、サウジかもしれないし、近々実現するかもしれない米国・イラン直接交渉を何としても阻止したいイスラエルかもしれない。

サウジ石油施設へ無人機攻撃＝親イランのイエメン武装組織
9/14(土) 16:11配信
時事通信
https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190914-00000062-jij-m_est
（火災現場の動画）
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sz58GyPoY3o

　【カイロ時事】サウジアラビア国営通信によると、ペルシャ湾に近い東部アブカイクなどにある国営石油会社サウジアラムコの施設2カ所が14日未明（日本時間同日午前）、無人機による攻撃を受けた。

　サウジが内戦に軍事介入しているイエメンの反政府武装組織フーシ派が犯行を主張した。

　施設では火災が起きたが、既に鎮火されたという。フーシ派は系列メディアを通じ「サウジによる侵略と包囲が続く限り、今後も作戦を拡大させる」と警告した。

Russia Considers Possibility Of $25 Oil Next Year
By Julianne Geiger - Sep 09, 2019, 4:00 PM CDT
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Russia-Considers-Possibility-Of-25-Oil-Next-Year.html

Russia is considering the notion that oil prices may be as low as $25 per barrel in 2020, the country’s central bank said in its new forecast published on Monday, as cited by Reuters.

Russia’s Central Bank has forecast in its macroeconomic forecast that oil could possibly hit that low due to falling demand for oil and oil products worldwide, as well as from disappointed global economic growth.

The doom and gloom scenario was just one proposed by the bank. If that risk scenario actually materializes, Russia’s inflation could increase to 7% or 8% next year, on the back of falling gross domestic product to 1.5%– 2%.

Russia is perhaps uniquely positioned to withstand low oil prices, although $25 per barrel is pretty bleak.

One of the reasons why Russia is more impervious to low oil prices compared to its competition is that its currency weakens when oil prices fall. This provides some type of a cushion—at least to some extent—for its lower oil revenues. Russian oil companies can pay their expenses in this weaker ruble, but still rakes in US dollars for its oil exports. Further allowing it to withstand lower prices, are that Russia’s oil company’s taxes are designed to be less as oil prices fall.

So much so is Russia’s ability to adapt to lower oil prices, that it actually struggles with higher oil prices, which dent demand for its oil. Russia’s budget for 2019 was based on $40 oil. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia needs $80—some say even $85—per barrel.

In August, Russia said its 2019 budget breakeven was at a Urals price of $49.20—the lowest breakeven in more than a decade. This has Russia and Saudi Arabia—colleagues in the current production quotas designed to rebalance the market—at odds, and likely working toward perhaps different goals.

2019年09月13日

シリア戦は終わった　ロシア外相

政治

約8年半でした。各国の利害が、下の地図の状態で均衡が取れた。

この報道を、シリア国営通信は「シリア戦は終わった」の部分だけ削除して報道。ロシア的には終わったが、シリア的にはまだ続く。

日本政府、韓国軍訓練に抗議＝菅官房長官「受け入れられぬ」
8/25(日) 11:42配信
時事通信
https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190825-00000046-jij-pol

　外務省の金杉憲治アジア大洋州局長は25日、韓国海軍が島根県竹島（韓国名・独島）で軍事訓練を開始したことを受け、駐日韓国次席公使に電話で抗議し、訓練中止を求めた。

　
　金杉氏は「竹島は歴史的事実に照らしても、国際法上も明らかに日本固有の領土だ」と強調。「訓練は到底受け入れられず極めて遺憾だ」と伝えた。次席公使は韓国側の立場を述べた。

　ソウルでも日本大使館の実生泰介公使が韓国外務省に同様の抗議を行った。

　これに関し、菅義偉官房長官は25日、東京都内で記者団に「竹島がわが国固有の領土であることに照らして受け入れられない」と強調した。

「韓国は金正恩になめられている」トランプ氏がＧ７サミットで言及
8/26(月) 5:00配信
産経新聞
https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190826-00000513-san-pol

　先進７カ国（Ｇ７）首脳会議（サミット）初日の２４日夜（日本時間２５日午前）の外交安全保障に関する討議で、トランプ米大統領が韓国の文在寅（ムン・ジェイン）大統領を批判していたことがわかった。複数の政府関係者が明らかにした。米国の再三の要請にもかかわらず、日韓軍事情報包括保護協定（ＧＳＯＭＩＡ）を破棄したことや、いわゆる徴用工問題など、韓国の不誠実な対応が背景にあるとみられる。

　「韓国の態度はひどい。賢くない。彼らは金正恩（キム・ジョンウン）（朝鮮労働党委員長）になめられている」

　イラン情勢に関する議論が終わった直後、トランプ氏は突然、安倍晋三首相をみながら韓国を批判した。首相は韓国には一切言及せず、笑みを浮かべただけだったという。トランプ氏は「金氏は文氏を信用できないと言っている」とも述べた。

米牛肉関税下げ、貿易交渉署名へ　乳製品も、トウモロコシ追加輸入
8/26(月) 10:32配信
共同通信
https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190826-00000048-kyodonews-bus_all

　【ビアリッツ共同】日米両政府は25日、フランス南西部ビアリッツでの首脳会談後に開いた共同記者発表で、貿易交渉で大枠合意し、9月末の協定署名を目指す意向を示した。早ければ年内にも発効する。米側は日本に輸出する自国産の牛肉や乳製品など幅広い品目が関税撤廃や削減の対象となると説明した。米国が離脱した環太平洋連携協定（TPP）の水準が上限の見込みだが、合意内容を明らかにしていない点が多く、行方が焦点。国内農家には試練となる。

　米国産トウモロコシについては、民間企業が9月以降、輸入を前倒しし、飼料用約250万トンを追加輸入する見通し。年間輸入量の約3カ月分。

日米貿易協定、9月下旬署名へ＝農産物はTPP水準－首脳会談
8/26(月) 10:22配信
時事通信
https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190826-00000029-jij-pol

　【ビアリッツ（仏南西部）時事】日米両政府は25日、新たな貿易協定締結交渉で基本合意した。

　9月下旬の協定書署名を目指す。日本は牛肉や豚肉など米国産農産物に対し、昨年末に発効した環太平洋連携協定（TPP）の水準まで市場開放する。ただ、米国が検討する日本車への追加関税回避の確約を得るには至らず、火種は残った。

　協定が署名されれば、国内では10月に想定される臨時国会で議論されるが、自動車問題が解決しないまま残れば、批判を浴びる可能性がある。

　安倍晋三首相とトランプ大統領が同日、仏ビアリッツで会談。基本合意を確認した上で、協定文書作成などの事務作業を急ぐよう指示した。

　基本合意では、日本の農産物市場開放は、TPPの水準を上限とした。TPPでは、牛肉関税は現行の38．5％から段階的に9％まで引き下げる。茂木敏充経済再生担当相は「米国がTPP加盟国に劣後しない状況を実現する」と説明した。米国は、工業品で譲歩し、幅広い品目で関税撤廃・削減に応じた。一方、日本が求めていた米国の自動車関税の撤廃は見送られた。

　安倍首相は首脳会談で、米国産飼料用トウモロコシについて、日本の民間企業による250万トン規模の購入計画を説明した。米中貿易摩擦の激化で、米国は穀物の対中輸出が厳しい状況。日本企業が一部を買い入れて支援する形だ。

　今後は、米国による日本車への追加関税を回避できるかどうかが焦点。米国は安全保障上の脅威として、25％とみられている上乗せ関税を検討している。貿易協定の交渉中は発動しないとしつつも、11月にも判断するとしていた。自動車業界にとって、米国は輸出額全体の3割以上を占める最大の輸出先。追加関税が適用されれば、国内経済や雇用への悪影響が避けられない。

　トランプ大統領は25日午後の会見で、日本車への関税について「日本の関税は変えない」と発言。これを受け、茂木氏は「追加関税は適用しないということだ」との認識を示した。ただ、「追加関税発動の判断は大統領の専権事項」（日本政府高官）とされる。トランプ氏がどのように最終決断するか、予断を許さない状況だ。

Mark Carney: dollar is too dominant and could be replaced by digital currency
Bank of England governor says stockpiling dollars has become a barrier to global trade
Phillip Inman
Fri 23 Aug 2019 20.01 BST
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/aug/23/mark-carney-dollar-dominant-replaced-digital-currency

The Bank of England governor, Mark Carney, has challenged the dollar’s position as the world’s reserve currency, arguing that it could be replaced by a global digital alternative to end a savings glut that resulted in 10 years of low inflation and ultra-low interest rates.

Likening the move to the end of sterling’s command of international money markets 100 years ago, Carney said the dollar had reached a level of dominance that meant it was a barrier to a sustainable recovery.

He said a new digital currency backed by a large group of nations would unlock dollar funds that governments currently hoard as an insurance policy in uncertain times.

Governments stockpile dollars to insure against swings in the US economy, which in recent times have intensified, leading to a significant rise in the cost of borrowing.

A digital currency “could dampen the domineering influence of the US dollar on global trade”, Carney said in a speech at the gathering of central bankers from around the world in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. “If the share of trade invoiced in [a digital currency] were to rise, shocks in the US would have less potent spillovers through exchange rates, and trade would become less synchronised across countries.

“The dollar’s influence on global financial conditions could similarly decline if a financial architecture developed around the new [digital currency] and it displaced the dollar’s dominance in credit markets. By reducing the influence of the US on the global financial cycle, this would help reduce the volatility of capital flows to emerging market economies.”

The Chinese currency, the renminbi, has been cited as an alternative to the dollar along with proposed digital currencies such as Facebook’s Libra. Carney said neither was in a position to take over from the dollar, but new technologies could allow for a global digital currency to challenge the US currency.

Digital currencies have attracted the attention of central banks in the past year as the prospect of mobile business and consumer transactions has become more popular.

Earlier this year the Bank of England welcomed Facebook’s Libra initiative, which was seen as a challenge to Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Bank officials said the initiative, which was backed by several banks, could be a useful addition to trading goods and services.

A succession of central banks have criticised Libra, however, saying it lacks the rules and regulations to be a reliable currency. The European commission opened an anti-trust investigation into Libra earlier this week, saying it feared the private digital currency could could unfairly disadvantage rivals and be open to abuse.

In what appeared to be a warmer response to Libra, Carney said: “Retail transactions are taking place increasingly online rather than on the high street, and through electronic payments over cash.

“The most high-profile of these has been Libra, a new payments infrastructure based on an international stablecoin fully backed by reserve assets in a basket of currencies including the US dollar, the euro and sterling. It could be exchanged between users on messaging platforms and with participating retailers.

“There are a host of fundamental issues that Libra must address, ranging from privacy to operational resilience. In addition, depending on its design, it could have substantial implications for both monetary and financial stability.”
Sign up to the daily Business Today email or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

Carney said the UK economy was suffering from several years of under-investment, mostly in response to the uncertainty surrounding Brexit. A further deterioration in GDP growth could force the Bank’s monetary policy committee to cut interest rates, he said. Carney would be minded to cut in the event of a downturn brought on by a no-deal departure from the EU.

2019年08月26日

シリア軍がイドリブ県南部ハーン・シャイフーンを奪還

政治

化学兵器使用疑惑について、OPCWが決められた手順に反し、出所不明の検査結果を基に作成した報告書で一頃騒がれた、北西部イドリブ県南部のハーン・シャイフーンを、シリア政府軍が奪還した。

以前の停戦協定では、トルコ軍が反政府ゲリラを統率する責任を負っていたが、ハーン・シャイフーンからの砲弾発射が止まないため、停戦合意違反を理由にロシア軍とシリア軍が合同作戦を実施し、トルコ政府軍とゲリラに撤退を迫った。

米露対立の軸で言えば米軍退却なのだが、都合の悪いニュースの報道にはだんまりを決め込むのであった。

Syrian Army to Advance to Idlib Province After Liberating Khan Sheikhoun
17:42 23.08.2019
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201908231076620347-syrian-army-to-advance-to-idlib-province-after-liberating-khan-sheikhoun-in-northern-hama/

DAMASCUS (Sputnik) - The General Staff of the Syrian Armed Forces announced on Friday the plans to advance further north after the liberation of the town of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib and a number of other settlements in the north of Hama province.

"After intensive strikes during the previous days and the complete encirclement of the terrorists completely in the north of Hama, our brave soldiers were able to liberate the following settlements: Khan Sheikhoun, Morek, Ltamenah, Tall as Sayyad, Latmeen, Kafr Zita, Lahaya and others,” a spokesman for the General Staff said in a statement aired by state-run Ikhbariya television.

"The advance continues at a rapid pace as the army intends to liberate the entire territory of Syria from the dirt of terrorists and their patrons," the statement said.

According to the statement, work is underway to clear the liberated settlements of mines and other explosive devices.

Earlier in the day, a military source said that the Syrian troops had gained control over the villages of Kafr Zita, Ltamenah, Latmeen, Tal Fas north of Hama.

Army General Command announces liberating khan Sheikhoun, a number of villages, towns and strategic hills in Hama and Idleb Countryside
23 August، 2019
https://sana.sy/en/?p=171716

Damascus, SANA- The General Command of the Army and Armed Forces announced liberating khan Sheikhoun city, towns of Morek, Latamina, M’aerkaba, and Lahaya Gharbiyah, Lahaya Sharqiyah, Kaab al-Faras, and a number of strategic hills in Hama northern countryside and Idleb southern countryside after inflicting heavy losses upon terrorists in personnel and arms.

In a statement on Friday, the General Command said with great determination and absolute confidence in victory, our armed forces operating in north Hama and south of Idleb continued advance , chasing down armed terrorist organizations, which were positioned in the area, inflicting heavy losses upon them in personnel and arms.

The General Command added that after intensive strikes over the past days on positions of terrorists in Hama northern countryside, our brave soldiers managed to clear the following towns and villages: khan Sheikhoun , Morek, Latamina, Talet al-Saiyad, al-Mistwd’at, Wadi al-Anz, Wadi al-Assal, Kafar Zita, Latmin, M’aerkaba ,and Lahaya Gharbiyah, Lahaya Sharqiyah, Tal Fas, Tal Latmin, Wadi Hasmin, Wadi Qasmin, and Kaab al-Faras.

The General Command indicated that the progress is underway and that made the armed terrorist groups lose their ability to stop our army’s heroes ,who are determined to clear all the Syrian territory from the terrorism and its supporters.

The statement added that the General Command of the Army and Armed Forces announce the areas and their surroundings free of armed terrorism , and confirms that the work is underway to clear all these villages and towns from IEDs, and dense minefields planted by terrorists when they were positioned there to enable the citizens to return their houses and farmlands as soon as possible.

<< 2019年09月
>>
日	月	火	水	木	金	土
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30