RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/a-china-india-border-clash-as-beijing-aims-for-regional-hegemony/

Surrounded on all sides by foes, Xi Jinping faces mounting obstacles to his goal of ‘national rejuvenation.’

As China reopens its economy after months of lockdowns, the country’s leadership has initiated a broad offensive to expand its influence at home and abroad. A new Hong Kong security law that attemps to stamp out dissent in the autonomous region sparked another round of anti-Mainland protests. Meanwhile, China has scaled up military exercises in the Yellow Sea, which will extend into the South China Sea this summer. Now a standoff between forces on the Sino–Indian border has opened a new front in Beijing’s offensive. This latest development in a decades-old dispute between the world’s two most populous countries underscores the myriad obstacles that Chinese president Xi Jinping faces in his goal of “national rejuvenation.”

Over the past month, China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has reportedly moved at least 5,000 troops to the “Line of Actual Control,” which demarcates the border between China and India. The mobilization of troops to the Galwan River valley, on the westernmost border between the two countries, led to a clash on May 5, when Chinese and Indian forces engaged in fisticuffs and stone-throwing. In keeping with Sino–Indian border protocols, both sides were unarmed, but the skirmish — and another in the Naku La region near Tibet on May 12 — left several troops injured.

http://www.settimananews.it/politica/italy-and-its-productive-or-parasitic-new-left-thinking/

Perhaps there is a broader and deeper theoretical design behind the daily havoc caused by the ruling coalition in Italy, made up of the M5S (Five Star Movement) and the PD (Democratic Party): the effort to rebuild a new left.

In fact, with the end of the Cold War, the idea of an overall change to the production system that would abolish capitalism disappeared. From here, the drive of Western social-democratic groups that had asked for and obtained a part of redistribution of income also gradually slowed down.

In the past, on the one hand, the social-democratic groups had freed “the proletarian masses” from the lure of the communist sirens. On the other, they increased the standard of living of the middle class, which had become the backbone of the West.

The end of the communist alternative also weakened the pressure on Western business classes to redistribute wealth. The social divide has deepened, and the search for continuous uninterrupted economic growth is the only task entrusted to politicians. Once growth stops, the temporary social pact between voters and a political leader is broken, and other politicians are voted in.

These are the themes dear to a neo-Marxist like Thomas Piketty but also to the Church and to the great religions that almost institutionally care about the poor masses.

Perhaps this is the opinion of PD guru Goffredo Bettini, who is also fascinated by and a scholar of the experience of the neo-populist party of Thaksin Shinawatra in Thailand. Clinging to the populism of the M5S, strengthening it in the PD, and transforming it into popular thought can be an interesting strategic idea. It would seek to embolden and expand an endangered middle class.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/26/world/asia/taliban-afghanistan-war.html

The Taliban stand on the brink of realizing their most fervent desire: U.S. troops leaving Afghanistan. They have given up little of their extremist ideology to do it.

ALINGAR, Afghanistan – Under the shade of a mulberry tree, near grave sites dotted with Taliban flags, a top insurgent military leader in eastern Afghanistan acknowledged that the group had suffered devastating losses from American strikes and government operations over the past decade.

But those losses have changed little on the ground: The Taliban keep replacing their dead and wounded and delivering brutal violence.

“We see this fight as worship,” said Mawlawi Mohammed Qais, the head of the Taliban’s military commission in Laghman Province, as dozens of his fighters waited nearby on a hillside. “So if a brother is killed, the second brother won’t disappoint God’s wish – he’ll step into the brother’s shoes.”

It was March, and the Taliban had just signed a peace deal with the United States that now puts the movement on the brink of realizing its most fervent desire – the complete exit of American troops from Afghanistan.

They have outlasted a superpower through nearly 19 years of grinding war. And dozens of interviews with Taliban officials and fighters in three countries, as well as with Afghan and Western officials, illuminated the melding of old and new approaches and generations that helped them do it.

After 2001, the Taliban reorganized as a decentralized network of fighters and low-level commanders empowered to recruit and find resources locally while the senior leadership remained sheltered in neighboring Pakistan.

The insurgency came to embrace a system of terrorism planning and attacks that kept the Afghan government under withering pressure, and to expand an illicit funding engine built on crime and drugs despite its roots in austere Islamic ideology.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16064/iran-knockout-punch

There are five actions the Trump administration must take: (1) extending the UN arms embargo on Iran; (2) snapping back economic sanctions on Iran (they were originally loosened as part of the JCPOA); (3) shutting down the smuggling and trafficking networks of Hezbollah in the Americas; (4) stopping the Chinese-Iranian oil and gas pipeline developments through Pakistan; and (5) interdicting if possible Iranian tankers filled with gasoline and headed for Venezuela.

The embargo on Iran selling or importing high-technology military equipment, especially ballistic missile technology, must also be one of the administration’s highest priorities. Particularly worrisome is that Russia and China want to sell equipment to Iran that, when combined with Iran’s indigenous missile capability, would greatly accelerate Tehran’s ICBM development program.

The US administration has let it be known that it could still sanction any entity selling Iran advanced weapons, especially ballistic missile technology.

Iranian tankers laden with gasoline are now traveling to Venezuela. The US Navy could easily capture those tankers still at sea. There is ample precedent. Both the US and Great Britain have legally seized Iranian ships bringing missiles to terrorists in Yemen. With a similar action, the US could both deny funds for Iran’s terrorist and nuclear activities and energy desperately needed by the oppressive Maduro regime in Venezuela.

In 2015, the United States, France, Great Britain, Germany, Russia and China signed an agreement that was named the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or the JCPOA. The agreement (which Iran serially violates) ostensibly curtailed Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons — for a short time — in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions against Iran.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/05/ayatollah-khamenei-and-unhinged-mind-religious-ari-lieberman/

This past Friday, Israelis of all backgrounds and political persuasions celebrated Jerusalem Day, which commemorates Israel’s liberation of the eastern part of the city during the Six Day War of 1967. While Israelis were celebrating and reflecting on their admirable achievements, it was an entirely different affair in the Islamic Republic of Iran where Iranian authorities organized and orchestrated anti-Israel demonstrations in commemoration of Quds Day. The hateful rallies came with all the expected banalities including the requisite burning of Israeli and American flags and effigies.

The demonstrations were accompanied by the usual over-the-top rhetoric by Iran’s so-called Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who likened Zionism to a “virus,” and Israel to a “cancerous tumor,” that must be destroyed and whose destruction is imminent. In a twitter rant, the mercurial supreme mullah leader called for a “final solution” to Israel’s existence, invoking Nazi-like genocidal language and promised that “Palestine [would] be free.”

This sort of bombast is to be expected from Iran’s virulently anti-Semitic leadership. This isn’t the first time that Khamenei referred to Israel as a “cancerous tumor,” and the employment of Nazi-like verbiage is unsurprising given that the mullah leadership frequently indulges overt Holocaust denial and sponsors Holocaust denial exhibits.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/coronavirus-pandemic-hungary-prime-minister-viktor-orban-not-a-dictator/

Worries about Hungarian authoritarianism prove overblown, but are they hiding the real danger?

One wonders if it will be recorded in the history books that from March 30th to June 20th Hungary lived as the shortest dictatorship in European history, before voluntarily extinguishing itself. An odd act for a dictatorship. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán of Hungary had used the coronavirus to make himself dictator for life, it was said. But I guess he only had it in him to be dictator for life for less than three months.

Our most important experts on democracy and Eastern Europe knew that Viktor Orbán had really done it this time. Yasmeen Serhan, writing in The Atlantic this April, declared: “There is a line between using emergency powers and outright authoritarianism—one that Hungary has undoubtedly crossed.”

“The brazenness of Orbán’s power grab is without any parallel in recent European history,” wrote Dalibor Rohac in the Washington Post, predicting confidently that absent a “strong pushback from Brussels and Washington — which are both understandably preoccupied by more urgent matters — Hungary is bound to emerge from the current crisis as a full-fledged dictatorship.”

It was on March 30th that the Hungarian Parliament approved a state-of-emergency law to deal with coronavirus that gave power to Viktor Orbán’s government to pass laws by decree, and instituted severe-looking restrictions on the dissemination of fake news. Several European countries had already passed enabling acts of this sort — France has seemed to go in and out of such states of emergency regularly in the last decade. That the emergency powers were a feature of Hungary’s existing constitution, limited by that constitution not to touch fundamental rights and subject to a parliamentary check, troubled none of these analysts.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16063/poll-support-for-china

A soon to be released international survey finds that when the COVID-19 virus finally burns itself out its biggest victim may be the very country that launched the pandemic —China.

Bluster, bullying, and propaganda launched by China’s leadership to subdue international criticism of their handling of COVID-19 is only stoking the anger among nations as diverse as the U.K., Germany and India, according to data revealed during a comprehensive poll conducted by the firm McLaughlin & Associates.

They may not embrace the White House on any given issue but when it comes to China, a large and significant number of those polled in this global COVID-19 survey would now support economic sanctions, confronting China’s strategy to achieve global dominance by controlling worldwide access to technology, pharmaceuticals, manufacturing, and more.

What can only be described as a diplomatic earthquake is the emerging political fault line along China’s southern border with India.

The McLaughlin poll found that a majority of voters in the world’s largest democracy, some 54%, believe China hid key COVID-19 details, resulting in more damage by the pandemic, and 78% believe China knowingly kept data from the international community.

And it gets worse for Beijing. As many as 85% of Indian voters believe China should be held accountable with 88% approving of an investigation of not just China but the World Health Organization (WHO) regarding what did they know and when did they know it.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/coronavirus-pandemic-china-united-states-west-must-end-dangerous-dependence-on-beijing/

As the pandemic has made clear, the U.S., and the West as a whole, cannot continue to depend on an authoritarian rival state for strategically important goods.

 I t is not necessary to agree with all of President Donald Trump’s foreign policies in order to agree with one of his foreign policies. His approach to China is a case in point.

Since it emerged late last year, the coronavirus has brought into sharp focus the outlines of the international system and amplified long-standing tensions between Washington and Beijing. Many of Trump’s critics have identified him as part of the problem, arguing that an “America first” foreign policy — which was written into the official National Security Strategy that his administration published in 2017 — at best undermines international cooperation in the fight against the coronavirus and at worse obstructs it. A divided West, the argument goes, is ceding global leadership to China.

Yet the pandemic has highlighted something that Trump’s National Security Strategy identified three years ago. Instead of becoming a “responsible stakeholder” in the international system — a term coined by Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick in 2005 to describe the role that the Bush administration hoped China would play following its 2001 entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) — China has instead “expanded its power at the expense of others.”

https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/25/beijing-effectively-ends-hong-kongs-historic-freedoms/

If the United States doesn’t follow through to revoke Hong Kong’s special treatment, Beijing may be emboldened to take aggressive actions against Taiwan.

May 22, 2020 will go down in history as an important milestone. On this day, Beijing announced it will impose a new national security law on Hong Kong, which will effectively end the “One Country, Two Systems” era.

Beijing made the move at this week’s “Two Sessions,” annual legislative meetings of two organizations: the National People’s Congress (NPC) and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC). In the past, more than 5,000 delegates, representing the elites in China, from Communist Party members to business executives to movie stars, played their part in this annual political theater. They have no real legislative power, merely rubber stamping whatever the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) presents with 100 percent approval.

In truth, the Two Sessions serve as fig leaves that barely cover the regime’s dictatorial nature. Still, analysts pay a great deal of attention to these meetings because the CCP has historically used them to unveil important national policies, such as the annual economic target and budget, and any leadership changes.

Since 1998, the “Two Sessions” have been usually held in the first week of March. This year the meetings were delayed due to the coronavirus outbreak. They have drawn even more international attention this year to what Beijing plans to do with Hong Kong.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16057/france-free-speech

Private companies will now be obliged to act as thought police on behalf of the French state or face heavy fines.

“Under the pretext of fighting ‘hateful’ content on the Internet, it [the Avia law] is setting up a system of censorship that is as effective as it is dangerous… ‘hate’ is the pretext systematically used by those who want to silence dissenting opinions…. A democracy worthy of its name should accept freedom of expression.” — Guillaume Roquette, editorial director of Le Figaro Magazine, May 22, 2020.

“What is hate? You have the right not to love… you have the right to love, you have the right to hate. It’s a feeling… It cannot be judicialized, legislated.” — Éric Zemmour, CNews, May 13, 2020.

Asking private companies — or the government — to act as thought police does not belong in a state that claims to follow a democratic rule of law. Unfortunately, the question is not whether France will be the last European country to introduce such censorship laws, but what other countries are next in line.

On May 13, the French parliament adopted a law that requires online platforms such as Facebook, Google, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram and Snapchat[1] to remove reported “hateful content” within 24 hours and “terrorist content” within one hour. Failure to do so could result in exorbitant fines of up to €1.25 million or 4% of the platform’s global revenue in cases of repeated failure to remove the content.

The scope of online content deemed “hateful” under what is known as the “Avia law” (after the lawmaker who proposed it) is, as is common in European hate speech laws, very broadly demarcated and includes “incitement to hatred, or discriminatory insult, on the grounds of race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or disability”.

The French law was directly inspired by Germany’s controversial NetzDG law, adopted in in October 2017, and it is explicitly mentioned in the introduction to the Avia law.