A week after Robert Mugabe told the US and EU to “go to hell” at his sister’s funeral – a comment that prompted Western diplomats to stage a walk-out – the Zimbabwean President struck a more conciliatory note in a speech on Monday.

“We seek friendship not enmity, togetherness not apartness,” he told thousands of people gathered to celebrate National Heroes’ Day.

He inspected a guard of honour, and stood to attention as cannons boomed and jet fighters flew overhead.

Mugabe did insist however that the EU and the US were still in the wrong, and that they want to continue to make Zimbabweans suffer by maintaining their targeted sanctions against Zimbabwe, including travel bans and asset freezes.

The president said he was appealing to the EU to think again.

Zimbabwe has been under Western sanctions since 2002, because of human rights abuses and alleged election rigging. Around 200 people, many of them opposition supporters, were killed in 2008.

Read more here.

Three Lebanese soldiers were killed Tuesday as Lebanese and Israeli Armies exchanged fire close to the Blue Line, security officials said.

The incident erupted in the southern village of Adaysseh, where Lebanese Army soldiers fired warning shots at a nearby Israeli patrol, who were attempting to cut down a tree on the Lebanese side of the technical fence. The patrol responded with rocket salvos. The situation quickly escalated with an Israeli helicopter gunship firing at a Lebanese Army armored vehicle.

Witness and Army officials confirmed that three soldiers had died, in addition to several civilian casualties. Lebanon’s Al-Manar television reported that a high-ranking Israeli official was killed.

“The Israelis fired four rockets that fell near a Lebanese army position in the village of Adaysseh and the Lebanese army fired back,” a security official in the area told AFP, adding that two houses were damaged by the rockets.

A Lebanese army spokesperson said the clashes erupted after Israeli soldiers attempted to uproot a tree on the Lebanese side of the fenced border.

After many words and vitriolic exchanges, Silvio Berlusconi has reached a conclusion. Gianfranco Fini is out; he has been officially ejected from Berlusconi’s People of Freedom (PDL) party, reports Corriere della Sera.

The historic break between the two founders of the PDL was formalized by a document read yesterday by the Premier in which he ejected from the party three members: Italo Bocchino, Carmelo Briguglio and Fabio Granata. “We’ve no longer confidence in Fini, who has created a real opposition in line with the left. We can’t go on as a divided party,” said Silvio Berlusconi during a press conference. “We tried every way to mend relations with Fini but it was useless. I don’t want to accept his way of criticizing our government any longer.”

However, according to the Premier  “the government is still strong and safe.” But the questions remains: what’s the future for the government and will it be able to withstand the opposition in Parliament?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Fini ally warns Berlusconi as confidence votes loom (reuters.com)
• Berlusconi ousts ally, says govt stable (sfgate.com)
• Berlusconi ousts long-time ally, vows his government will carry on (foxnews.com)

After 18 years of investigations, we’re closer to the truth about the massacre of Via d’Amelio of July 19^th 1992, in which  anti-mafia judge Paolo Borsellino and 5 men from his escort were killed in an explosion. “An incredible and heavy truth that the political world couldn’t withstand,” were the words spoken before the Anti-Mafia Commission by the prosecutors of Caltanissetta Sergio Lari and Nico Gozzo who have reopened the investigation on the assassination of Judge Paolo Borsellino.

“The judiciary,” said Gozzo, “will be able to hold the truths that are emerging on the massacres. The state also will be able to support them. I don’t know, however, if the same will make policy.”

“It’s a crucial moment,” said Lari, “two years have elapsed from the first declarations of Gaspare Spatuzza. From the evidence we acquired it appears that it was not only the Mafia who wanted the massacre in via D’Amelio.” In other words, a contract between the Italian state and the mafia, Lari reiterated, proved that there were “people who despite having the duty of loyalty to the institutions betrayed these principles.”

Meanwhile, the Board considered it appropriate to apply the secret contents of the hearing today: the scenarios outlined by the magistrates contain elements that investigations are deepening.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Sicilians mark Borsellino death (bbc.co.uk)

Richard Sennett is a renowned American sociologist who happens to be a leftist and the heir of a number of militant Communists. In 1936, his father went to Spain to fight the Francoist insurgents against the almost Communist Republic. Recently, Professor Sennett gave an Italian Communist paper an extended interview at the London School of Economics. The core was: the international crisis will worsen soon because the ‘financial capitalism’ which started it is as unwinnable as the medieval Black Death. When asked what would he do to fight modern day’s Black Death, Sennett answered “I would nationalize the whole banking sector.”

Now, nobody can doubt an LSE academic’s capacity to obey at least some logic. It’s therefore clear: Sennett implies that a true revolution would be necessary so that a strong government is able to nationalize the whole financial sector. Who will ever launch said revolution, after so many centuries of unsuccessful tries at the hegemony of money? Better, one and half centuries after Marx’s Manifesto and almost a century after the apparent victory of Lenin’s revolution?

Nowadays, when the typical compensation of a fair-size corporation is 500 times the one of a salaried person, and when in special cases said compensation can be many thousand times the one of the lowest-paid, the prospect of any serious mitigation of such iniquities are chimerical. Is all hope chimerical?

My answer- the calls to revolution, even to reasonable changes, come from the totally wrong persons. They come from the usual leftist intellectuals, politicians, journalists, film directors and actors. History has taken almost any credibility away from this sort of people. When they speak or write, they may look or sound right. They may even be right. But most people, i.e. entire societies or masses, do not set value on them.

So, a completely different race or breed of humans is needed so that a new tiding or faith is announced. Modern history forbids that a better conception of associated existence may be called socialism. A new name must be found. Let’s temporarily call it semisocialism.

A true anthropological mutation is mandatory so that a different social ideal is conceived, a mutation away from the traditional leftist-progressive type. The missionary of a better faith than capitalism will not be the professional and the ambitious; but the Idealist, the Operator of Good. Aiming at a less-capitalist society,  we must look at different purveyors of models, ideas, ends and means. If we don’t do this, we’ll die the victims of hypercapitalism. Leftists are on the payroll of conservation. A surgeon for the poor, a compassionate nurse, yes. Smart lawyers, committed literati, shrewd congressmen, no.

Image via Wikipedia

In the decade before Pearl Harbor the political process of the Rising Sun was dominated both by the competition for influence of the great ‘zaibatsu’, the giant business conglomerates, and by the infighting among activist military groups. Most  men in the armed forces were demanding wars, especially against China, so that Japan, Asia’s most dynamic player, would acquire territories and resources. In 1931, the high command of the Japanese divisions in Manchuria acted on his own and conquered most of the Manchu region, belonging to China.

When, on May 15 1932, a group of officers killed the prime minister who had not approved the conquest, it became clear that the military were now dominant, that the upper echelons of the civil service supported the insubordinate officers, that the parliamentary parties had lost whatever clout they had slowly acquired. From that moment to the catastrophic end of the war against the United States, the military (not only generals, also forceful lieutenants who were willing to use their weapons against political adversaries) did control the government. A few additional killings confirmed the trend.

Today, some observers love to explain the unusual vulnerability of the Japanese cabinets with the aggressiveness of the press, the modern successor to the officer corps. Not many days ago prime minister Yukio Hatoyama resigned, eight months after an historic victory over the Liberals. Hatoyama’s Democratic party was expected to change the erratic ways of the national politics. Now Hatoyama is just another head of government who was ousted from office by press attacks. Exactly as several of his disgraced peers, he has been the target of allegations of financial misdeeds -accepting money from business people or groups. However, Hatoyama confessed an additional fault: he had won the general elections, in part, on the promise of getting back the air base of Okinawa from the US; he was unable to win the American assent. So, Hatoyama accepted the charge of having obtained votes on an empty promise. Possibly ethics still matters.

A number of observers conclude that Japan’s political scene is unduly perturbed by emotions on scandals. They argue, in particular, that corruption is so common in rich nations that the latter don’t usually topple presidents and ministers because of allegations concerning money. The Japanese opinion, they add, takes scandals too seriously. Top politicians should be judged on their management, not on their moral behaviours.

Possibly said observers have a point. But the opposite may be true -that a large enough section of the Japanese society do not accept unethical actions as a normal feature of public life. Once upon a time Japanese samurai took their life for not serving well enough their feudal masters, so violating their code of honor. How can we assert that the disgust at the venality of party politicians is excessive, when such venality is the malignant evil of most political systems of the world? Perhaps we should imitate Japan in not forgiving robber politicians.

Of course only one method is available to delete career politicians -putting an end to a representative democracy which perpetuates the prone-to-corruption professionals of politics.

When initial reports appeared in the media that a new bill had been introduced that would alter the way the state regulates education, the arts and social services, many people refused to believe that it would actually be passed. But when deputies actually passed the bill, hope still remained that President Dmitry Medvedev would not sign it. But the law has been passed and signed.

The document is a death sentence for universal access to education and health care. By introducing a per capita financing structure, the law makes it financially impossible for rural and small-town schools, hospitals and clinics to continue functioning. Those that do continue operating will be forced to lower the quality of their work. This is because under the new law, the more students a teacher instructs and the more patients a doctor treats, the greater the funding their host institutions will receive from the state. In addition, schools, hospitals, museums and universities that currently receive insufficient state funding to cover their operating expenses will go bankrupt and close.

The new federal law represents a conscious attempt to destroy the progress Russia had achieved in the educational, social services and cultural spheres over the course of the 20th century. The same people who speak so passionately about modernizing Russia have made a decision that turns the country back to the 19th century — and I do not mean the 19th century of Western Europe, but of Russia, where villages and many small towns didn’t have schools or hospitals.

Behind the attempt to destroy free and universal education and health care, there is a certain philosophy that views social services as being no different from commercial services offered on the free market. The fact that not everyone will be able to afford social services does not worry the authors of this law. Education and health care should become the privileges of a chosen few, just like the migalki, or flashing blue lights, placed on the top of cars, issued to a select group of influential bureaucrats and businesspeople, allowing them to close off streets at will and violate traffic rules with absolute impunity. The Russian authorities are busy creating and developing a national elite, and the tens of millions of ordinary citizens not belonging to that elite are of little interest to them.

Meanwhile, there is mounting evidence of resistance from society. Demonstrations protesting the new law have been staged in many cities. Until recently, teachers and doctors — both are government employees — were considered loyal supporters of the ruling party. They were instrumental in turning out the vote for United Russia, and they promoted its policies to their students and patients. They did this not so much out of conviction as out of necessity. State employees are in a vulnerable position and know better than to bite the hand that feeds them.

But now the authorities are taking a gamble. They are attempting to free themselves from the responsibility of funding social services and at the same time retain the loyalty of those most affected by the decision. What will happen if this little trick doesn’t go over well? Even if officials are able to prevent state employees from staging protests, it would be unrealistic to count on their continued support.

And if the authorities manage to actually put this law into practice it will be a dangerous mistake that could lead to a social explosion. But if the law is stopped, it will be a rare victory for the people over the government.

Visit The Moscow Times here.

An anonymous “how to” of terrorism techniques is circulating in Germany’s far-left scene, much to the consternation of authorities. As well as tips on making bombs, the “Anarchist Cookbook”-knockoff reveals how to outfox the police, saw down power poles and stop trains.

Back in the 1970s, no self-respecting left-wing militant was without a copy of “The Anarchist Cookbook,” a compendium of recipes for concocting home-made explosives and other strategies for taking on The Man. Now a newly penned manual of urban guerrilla warfare is causing concern among Germany’s security authorities.

According to sources in security circles, an 80-page pamphlet entitled “Prisma” (”prism”) has recently been circulating in the far-left scene. The anonymous publication includes tips for carrying out terrorist attacks and acts of sabotage, and includes instructions for constructing various kinds of bombs with time fuses and special grappling hooks which can be used to stop trains. The book also describes techniques for sawing down power poles and has several chapters devoted to investigative methods used by the police, describing in detail how urban guerrillas can cover their tracks and shake off tails.

Berlin public prosecutors have already launched an investigation into the pamphlet, which is circulating mainly in the far-left scene in Hamburg, Berlin and the state of Lower Saxony. German security agencies are concerned that the manual could further increase the — already high — propensity of young radicals to carry out violent attacks. The document encourages extremists to commit crimes “with a hitherto unknown level of meticulousness and professionalism,” says Hans-Werner Wargel, head of the Lower Saxony branch of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, Germany’s domestic intelligence service.

Read more here.

In order to escape bankruptcy, the Socialist governments of Greece, Spain and Portugal have announced harsh measures that will curtail mass salaries and pensions. In a way, they had to do this. The complementary measure required by logic, justice and political sense should be raising taxes on middle and high incomes, so that upper classes would suffer sacrifices equal to those of the lower paid. To a 10% cut on an income of, say, 1,000 euro per month, the cut on 100,000 euro per month should be around 70%, so the pain of the rich resembles the one of the poor. But it’s for sure: none of the above Socialist governments will so punish the rich. Why?

The answer is free market laws do not permit it. Unemployment would soar. The fall of investments and flight of funds would be followed by economic collapse. Higher taxes would discourage bright talents. And so forth. So the Socialist governments will face the emergency in the same way as the conservative ones in Berlin, London and Washington. The defence of modest salaries will protect the extreme bonuses and golden handshakes of Wall Street-like environments.

Such an umpteenth victory of hypercapitalism-cum-consumerism is clearly undeserved. In present circumstances it will unescapably happen. But sooner or later Western societies will have to stop, then turn back the conquests of excess capitalism.

Traditional leftism will not do. In the West true Socialism is a thing of the past. The thing of the future will probably be the further bending of middle of the road liberalism toward a Semisocialist, non-leftist approach which will convince the common people who today elect Cameron, Merkel, Berlusconi and Obama, or do not bother to vote. Such approach must accept some elements of a no-growth philosophy, and even the turning back of economic progress.

Unemployment will be acceptable when less affluent societies will guarantee the vital minimum to the deserving unemployed. The resources to do this will be abundantly found by slashing military, diplomatic and prestige spending; when the flight of investment capitals shall be encouraged rather than ineffectively forbidden -provided their owners and their families and associated are permanently exiled and their comfortable residences expropriated; when the suspension of codes and laws will permit the prompt, severe punishment in labor camps of corrupt politicians; when civil servants will be randomly decimated, i.e. fired one in ten, so the loyal ones will not be tempted to become disloyal, and the convicted felons will see their properties confiscated even when nominally owned by relatives and friends. The cleverness of their lawyers shall be made void. Last but not least, the huge costs of parliamentary democracy will be minimized through the cancellation of electoral representation.

A Semisocialist context will certainly know less affluence. But going back to simpler life will produce happiness. Rampant capitalism has already proved unable to assure opulence forever.

As if she didn’t have enough on her plate, Chancellor Angela Merkel must now find a replacement for German President Horst Köhler, who resigned in a huff on Monday. If she fails to organize a smooth succession, fresh questions will be raised about her own leadership.

Germany’s political establishment, shaken by the sudden resignation of President Horst Köhler on Monday, is rife with speculation about the possible impact on Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government as it emerged that she had warned him that quitting could plunge the country into a deep crisis.

Köhler, 67, who had started his second term last year in the largely ceremonial post, resigned in reaction to fierce criticism from the media and opposition politicians after he had linked German military deployments to the defense of the country’s economic interests in a radio interview last week.

Köhler gave Merkel only two hours’ notice before announcing his resignation and she said in her own Monday remarks that she had tried in vain to dissuade him. SPIEGEL ONLINE learned that she had warned him that resigning could trigger a crisis and shake the public’s faith in the presidency and in the institutions of state.

Köhler’s departure could not come at a worse time for Merkel, whose conservative Christian Democrats have slumped to 30 percent support, their lowest level in four years, according to a Forsa opinion poll published on Tuesday. The survey was conducted between May 25 and 28, before Köhler quit.

Read more here.

Related articles by Zemanta

• German President Horst Köhler Resigns Unexpectedly (wallstreetpit.com)
• Candor Costs Germany’s President His Post (mydd.com)
• German President Köhler Resigns (nytimes.com)