This video was produced by the Resist NATO Coalition of which United National Antiwar Coalition (UNAC) is a member.
We will be organizing protests and an alternative summit in June in The Hague when NATO meets there.
NATO has been weakened by its defeat in the Ukrainian War and the recent US policies. Now is a good time to hit NATO hard.
The video includes UNAC leaders Rhonda Ramiro and Pippa Bartolotti.
For more information: https://www.ilps.us/resistnato
Bruce Gagnon joined me in discussing the pro-Palestinian protests that the Trump administration has criminalized on street corners, social media, and university campuses where students and faculty are being “expelled.”
Of course, the discussion led to the US/West direct war against Russia in Ukraine, and a discussion about Trump’s fake “peace initiative” with Putin, with whom he is now “angry and pissed off,” as he blames Putin for not wanting peace. It is becoming clearer every day that Trump is a blowhard, and the furthest thing from a “peace president” he could be, with the exception of Barack Obomba, though he’s still got plenty of time to pass him as the president who likes to kill.
The NYT’s article was no bombshell.
"In reality, the West has been waging war on Russia for years now.
That means that two things are true: "The West has almost started World War III. And the reason it has not – not yet, at least – is Moscow’s unusual restraint, which, believe it or not, has actually saved the world.
Here’s a thought experiment: Imagine the US fighting Canada and Mexico (and maybe Greenland) and learning that Russian officers are crucial in firing devastating mass-casualty strikes at its troops. What do you think would happen? Exactly. And that it has not happened during the Ukraine War is due to Moscow being the adult in the room. This should make you think.” (From RT.com)
From there Bruce raised a most important question: “what if Trump is being used to destroy the USA and the collective West?” To some of us, it seems clear that Trump is advancing the goals of Klaus Schwab and the WEF, and the UN Agenda 2030…the “Great Reset,” reducing the population of the planet to a “Golden Billion,” making those who survive post human, technocratic serfs.
The only hope seems to be the BRICS countries, with Russia in the lead, that are working to create a new world order that would replace the colonial, hegemonic order of the West that has existed for hundreds of years.
The only question that remains is, will those crazed, some say evil, hegemonic, murderous monsters, realizing they have lost this epic battle for the future order and control of the world, take the whole world down with them in a nuclear Armageddon.
Russia, being the only adult in the room, is the only one that has averted this extinction event. [don't forget China]
As Bruce proclaimed, “we must all get out there and resist, because it is about the next generation’s, our children’s and grandchildren’s future.”
South Koreans in favor of President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment celebrated after the country's Constitutional Court decided on April 4 to remove him from office.
Yoon attempted to impose martial law on the nation but was defeated by the massive protest movement that resulted in response to his illegal actions.
Washington was believed to have been involved in Yoon trying to bring martial law to clamp down on the people.
By Manlio Dinucci (Grandangolo on Byoblu TV, Italy)
President Macron convened some 30 ‘willing’ governments in Paris with the official aim of ‘building a solid peace for Ukraine and Europe.’ This was in fact not a peace summit but a war summit.
Before the summit Macron phoned Trump. He then held a press conference with Zelensky, declaring that ‘Russia shows a willingness to continue aggression’. During the summit, Macron said that "Moscow is pretending to negotiate" and that is why sanctions will be maintained, a decision that all participants agreed on.
Macron then announced the creation of a "reassurance force" to be "deployed in strategic locations in Ukraine in the event of peace," and that France and Britain would send a team to Ukraine to train Kiev's future army.
Italian President Meloni reaffirmed "continued support for Ukraine in the Euro-Atlantic context, including on the basis of a model that can be partly modeled on Article 5 of the Washington Treaty". Since this states that if a NATO member is attacked, all other members must intervene in its defence, this means that Ukraine is de facto considered a member of NATO.
The Russian Foreign Ministry warns that 'the deployment of NATO countries' troops in Ukraine risks provoking a direct military confrontation between Russia and NATO'.
All this hinders and effectively nullifies the agreement between the Presidents of the US and Russia to ensure safe navigation in the Black Sea, so that both Russia and Ukraine can export grain, fertilizer and other products by sea.
The US and Russia, despite having reached such an agreement, remain distant on other important issues. While the US would like to take control of all Ukrainian nuclear facilities, including the Zaporozhye NPP now under Russian control, Moscow says it will never hand over the NPP to Ukraine or any other country. The Zaporozhye nuclear power plant is therefore at risk of being hit again by Ukrainian forces, putting the whole of Europe at risk.
In the Middle East, the US and Russia pursue diametrically opposed goals. The US, in synergy with Israel, is strengthening its military presence in the region and attacking Yemen with the aim of striking Iran, while Russia is implementing a strategic cooperation agreement with Iran.
In East and South-East Asia, the US is deploying forces and armaments, including nuclear weapons, against China, Russia's ally with which it forms the BRICS backbone.
Defeated on Russian territory in Kursk regions, stopped in the border areas in Belgorod, the Ukrainian military does not stop provocations.
Another direction of a possible breakthrough across the border may be the Russian border Bryansk region.
Ukarine's US-NATO directed (armed, trained, funded) army also continues to violate the partial ceasefire with Russia that called for a suspension of attacks on energy facilities.
It's becoming quite clear that the British and French are now controlling Kiev's military operations since Trump has stepped a bit back.
The French and British goal of creating a 'Coalition of the Willing' seems to be floundering due to a growing split in Europe on keeping the proxy war in Ukraine going. The citizens of Europe are increasingly seeing the war for what it truly is - a vain attempt to break Russia into smaller pieces like the US-NATO did to Yugoslavia during the Bill Clinton administration.
Trumps peace negotiations with Russia have thus hit the wall.
Washington is ignoring Kiev’s violations of the US-mediated moratorium on attacks against energy infrastructure in the conflict with Russia, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said.
Last month, US President Donald Trump successfully urged Russian President Vladimir Putin to pause strikes on energy sites. Moscow agreed and held back.
While Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky publicly endorsed the moratorium, the Russian Defense Ministry has reported numerous attacks against Russian energy infrastructure since the agreement was announced on March 18.
Meanwhile, the German military has begun its first permanent deployment of troops on foreign soil since World War II. The 45th Armored Brigade is being positioned in Lithuania, near Russian ally Belarus, as Berlin prepares for a potential conflict in the coming years.
Many in Europe still dream of the day they can destroy Russia and take control of its vast resource base. For more than 500 years Europe has repeatedly invaded Russia with the hope of doing so.
Successive attempts by Sweden, England, France and Germany have failed to conquer Russia.
It's ever more crazy to attempt to do so during the current nuclear age.
Bruce
Interview with Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, conducted by Melinda Tuhus
Last week, President Bush announced his goal of sending Americans back to the moon by 2020 and then on to Mars. He promised only $1 billion in new funds for the project over the next five years, saying $11 billion in that period will come from a redeployment of money already allocated to NASA, the U.S. space agency. While some see this as a political move by Bush to sound Kennedy-esque as his campaign for re-election gears up, others foresee a scenario unfolding that could boost the fortunes of the controversial "Star Wars" anti-missile defense system, as the U.S. seeks to extend its superpower status into space.
Between The Lines' Melinda Tuhus spoke with Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. Gagnon has worked on space issues [since 1982] and was organizer of the Cancel Cassini Campaign, an effort to stop the launch of 72 pounds of plutonium into space onboard a satellite in 1997. Though ultimately unsuccessful, the campaign attracted worldwide attention and support.
Gagnon discusses the Bush administration's space proposal, how much it will likely cost, where the funds will come from and who stands to profit. He also lays out his hope for the world community to take space exploration in a different direction.
 |
| Elon Musk's favorite T-shirt |
Bruce Gagnon: I think it’s part of a long, long-time plan to begin to build the infrastructure to use space to control the earth and then ultimately to create a 50-year, 100-year plan to control the shipping lanes between the earth and planetary bodies. There’s a plan to actually mine the skies. They’ve discovered gold on the asteroids. On Mars, there’s magnesium and cobalt and uranium. That little rover driving around Mars today, it’s not looking for the origins of life like we’re told; they’re doing soil identification and they’re trying to identify what is where on that planet. There’s helium-3 on the moon. In fact, there’s a New York Times story where they say that it will replace fossil fuels when they are gone on the earth, and helium-3 will be used for fusion reactors. Coincidentally, the U.S. never signed the 1979 Moon Treaty that outlaws permanent bases on the moon, military bases, and most importantly, says that no country or corporation or individual can claim ownership of the moon. The U.S. didn’t sign that treaty because we’ve always intended to have military bases on the moon. I have a copy of a secret Army study from 1952 that says the U.S. has to control the moon. They long ago realized that whoever controls the moon actually will be able to control the pathway on and off the planet Earth - they call it the earth-moon gravity well; whoever is at the top of the well will control who can get on and off the planet. And a congressional study in 1989 entitled, Military Space Forces: the Next 50 Years, stated that with our bases on the moon, we would be able to 'hijack rival shipments upon return', so that if anyone else tried to mine the sky but they weren’t authorized, we would be able to take them out on the way back. It's high-tech piracy.
Between The Lines: Is the money, then, going to come in the future, because it seems like a very modest proposal right now.
Bruce Gagnon: The first thing they’re going to do is to close down the international space station and the shuttle program, and move that money in. But once they get the commitment from Congress that yes, we’re going to go forward with this, it’s institutionalized in the budget, then the real bucks are going to kick in. The estimates for the collective costs of these Mars missions and moon missions is about $750 billion over time [in 2004 dollars]. Well, this is a massive, massive flow of funds into the aerospace corporation coffers, at the same time, remember, that they’ve also come out with, about a year ago -- the Bush administration did -- the Nuclear Systems Initiative, a $3 billion, five-year program to develop Project Prometheus, the nuclear rocket with nuclear reactors for engines, and other nuclear technologies [which will soon be tested over our heads in Lower Earth Orbit]. Those little rovers that are driving around Mars today are powered with plutonium. They are talking about having nuclear powered mining colonies on the moon and Mars. So all these… increasing the number of launches with nuclear materials on rockets with ten percent failure rates is going to ensure that sooner or later there will be a nuclear accident at the time of launch.
There was an editorial in one of the industry publications called Space News [in 1999], and the title was 'Mars missions are affordable.' And Space News went on to say, 'Look, we know that this stuff is going to be expensive, but we have a solution to the funding problem. So what we’re now doing is sending our lobbyists to Washington secure those funds from the Entitlement programs and moving the money into these space projects'.
Now, what are these entitlement programs that Space News was talking about? Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and what’s left of the welfare program today. So after the taxpayers would have paid all the years of space tech research and development, in the hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars, when the day comes that they can actually turn profit mining the skies, in the future, what they’re going to do, and NASA has already said, they’re going to privatize everything, turn it over to the corporations who will make the money. And in fact there’s legislation pending in Congress to make all profits in space tax-exempt.
Between The Lines: Do you see any value in space travel, in space exploration done a certain way?
Bruce Gagnon: I’m not opposed to space exploration in general. I think we all have that curiosity about what’s out there, and I think it’s something that we as a planet, should over time, be expected that we’re going to want to pursue. But I think when it comes at the cost of our own life here on this planet, when it comes at the cost of our children’s education, our health care, and cleaning up our own planet -- these things should come first. And then when we do move off this planet, I think we really need to have a collective understanding on earth: What kind of seed will we carry with us when we go into the heavens? Will it be this bad seed of war and greed and environmental degradation, or will it be a different kind of seed, a more positive seed? And I think right now is the time to debate this question globally. And that’s the work of our organization, to create a global consciousness and a global constituency, around this question: What kind of seed should our space program carry?
Will inflation increase as companies importing goods increase domestic prices to recover the tariff impacts?
Does the government want to drive the US and global economy downward?
Americans are now panicking as car prices are rising - up to $6,000 for some new cars.
China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi, during his 3 day visit to Moscow: “The US itself is sick but is forcing others to get treatment,” Wang said, emphasizing that Trump’s trade wars will “cause serious damage not only to the global market and trade order but the US’s reputation” as well. “‘America First’ cannot be achieved by American bullying, especially to the detriment of the interests of other countries,” he said.
Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov: “We recognize the responsibility of Moscow and Beijing to maintain close coordination in the international arena. The majority of countries perceive this as perhaps the most significant stabilizing factor during these challenging times in global politics”.
 |
| Graphic created by Elizabeth Olbert - please share widely |
|
Since the beginning of the war, Israel has plunged into an unprecedented crisis on all fronts—economic, social, psychological, military and political. While mainstream media attempts to conceal the truth, the numbers paint a starkly different picture of a state that once claimed to be invincible.
This report will reveal the most critical indicators of Israel’s decline, based on the latest data as of March 21, 2025.
1. Unprecedented Economic Losses
Israel is facing a catastrophic economic collapse, the worst since its founding in 1948.
• Military losses: $34 billion.
• Total economic losses: $67 billion.
• Budget deficit: $40 billion (the largest in Israel’s history).
• 60,000 companies shut down, resulting in massive job losses.
• Tourism sector declined by 70%, causing a $5 billion loss.
• Construction sector lost $4 billion, with over 70 construction firms ceasing operations.
These numbers indicate that Israel is on the verge of an economic meltdown, which could cripple its ability to sustain the war effort.
2. Forced Displacement of Israelis
Due to the ongoing war and fear of resistance retaliation, 143,000 Israelis have fled their homes, particularly from settlements near Gaza and the northern border. Even after temporary ceasefires, many are too afraid to return, fearing another escalation.
This situation is not just an internal displacement crisis—it has triggered a mass exodus of Israelis out of the country, significantly impacting Israel’s demographic balance.
• 900,000 Israelis suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)—a record-breaking figure.
• One-third of Israelis are struggling with depression or other mental health disorders.
• Alcohol consumption has risen by 25%, indicating a surge in substance abuse.
• Sleeping pill sales skyrocketed by 180%, meaning Israelis can no longer sleep without medical aid.
• In the Israeli army, 21 suicides were recorded in 2024—and the real number is likely much higher than reported. Soldiers keep refusing to go back to the front lines.
These statistics show that morale inside Israel is at an all-time low, directly affecting military preparedness and internal stability.
4. The Reverse Jewish Exodus
Israel today is the mass emigration of Jews from the country, with:
• 82,700 Jews leaving Israel in 2024, the highest emigration rate in decades.
• In contrast, 70,000 Jews moved to Israel in 2002 from abroad. Today, the trend has completely reversed—Israel is witnessing a mass exodus rather than an influx.
This shift reflects a growing loss of faith in Israel’s future as a secure and stable state, which threatens its long-term viability.
5. Political and Moral Collapse
Israel is not just facing a military and economic crisis—it is also undergoing a severe political and diplomatic collapse:
• Its global image has been completely destroyed, as the world now recognizes its occupation and crimes against humanity.
• Many countries are distancing themselves diplomatically from Israel, with international condemnation rising.
• The illusion of a “democratic and peaceful Israel” has crumbled, revealing its true face as an apartheid state.
These developments leave Israel weaker than ever on the global stage, increasingly isolated, and struggling to maintain international support.
6. Internal Revolt and Elite Divisions
One of the least reported but most significant crises in Israel today is the internal revolt within its elite circles:
• High-ranking officials, including a former Mossad chief and a former police commissioner, have openly turned against the government.
• Families of Israeli prisoners and captives have set up permanent protest camps outside the Ministry of Justice, demanding an end to the war.
• There is deep political division among Israeli leaders on how to handle the war, risking a potential collapse of the government itself.
This proves that Israel is not only losing externally—it is also imploding from within.
Conclusion:
Are we witnessing the beginning of Israel’s end?
Israel today is not the same Israel the world knew a few years ago. Its economy is crumbling, its society is psychologically shattered, emigration is skyrocketing, its politics are in chaos, and internal dissent is growing.
These indicators all point to a critical turning point, leaving many to ask: Are we witnessing the beginning of the end of the Zionist project?
While the final answer remains uncertain, one thing is clear—Israel is no longer invincible, and the resistance continues to drain it toward inevitable collapse.
Judge Napolitano interviews 40 year roving journalist Pepe Escobar from Sanaa, Yemen.
Includes video of Pepe’s address to 1 million Yemenis – mind-boggling does not even begin to describe it.
Pepe explains that the US-UK-Israel-Saudi Arabia have been bombing civilians for years.
It’s hard to remember life before smartphones and tablets, and with WI-FI and 4G the internet is everywhere. Technology is embedded in our work and play, and has become the essential part of our lives. But as this 60 Minutes report discovers, you can have too much of a good thing.
“Internet Addiction Disorder” is now a genuine psychological illness. It’s ruining lives and even changing the way our brains process information.
Worse still, experts are seeing dangerous signs in toddlers.
 | |
|
It's been a hectic past few days.
On Thursday we held our weekly Palestine solidarity vigil at noon in Brunswick for an hour. Then on Friday MB and I drove north to the Blue Hill library where I spoke to 37 people in an event organized by Dud Hendrick.
I covered most of the top issues of our time - the destruction of our 'democracy' as the ruling oligarchs from both parties clamp down on us; Palestine; Ukraine; planned war with China; space tech; empire collapse; BRICS+; and the rise of the Global South (thank goodness).
We stayed the night with Dud and his wife Jean and got up early Saturday morning and drove thru light snow back south to Bath for the 11:30 am Lenten Vigil at the Navy shipyard for an hour. Several workers in their big pick-up trucks drove into the wet puddles of melting snow spraying some of us quite well.
After a return home to Brunswick (and a quick change into dry clothes) MB and I headed to nearby Topsham for a 1:30 pm protest - another of our monthly vigils that we move around the state. Many folks decided not to come due to the snow that dumped various amounts of the white fluff depending on where you live across Maine.
Our next statewide Palestine solidarity protest will be held on Saturday, April 12 at 1:30 pm in Ellsworth at the busy intersection of Maine & High Streets.
Today we are going to watch the Academy Award winning film about Palestine called No Other Land, a documentary about Palestinians fighting to protect their homes from demolition by Israel's military. It's playing at our alternative theater here in Brunswick.
 |
| Basel Adra, Rachel Szor, Hamdan Ballal and Yuval Abraham pose with the Oscar for Best Documentary Feature Film for No Other Land |
We all agree that the cars zooming by us are honking and waving more than usual. It is urgent that we each do our best to keep the heat on the so-called 'political leaders' across the planet to demand an end to this mass slaughter in Palestine.
Genocide is not acceptable - ever!
Bruce
They did it to Native Americans, to Palestinians like my family in 1948, and now Trump wants to do it again in Gaza.
It's called 'forcible transfer,' and it kills something much greater than any individual life.
Support uncivilized's work through Patreon: 
/ uncivilizedmedia
Video: Tala Kaddoura
Executive Producer: Salem Barahmeh
 |
| Koreans fill the roads outside to Gyeongbok Palace in Seoul on Saturday, March 15, 2025, to call for the Constitutional Court to expel President Yoon Suk-yeol from office at a rally organized by Bisang Action for Yoon Out and Social Reform. Kim Tae-hyeong/Hankyoreh. |
By K. J. Noh, Popular Resistance
Morse Tan, a high-ranking former US State Dept. official, recently let the cat out of the bag on the US ruling elite position on South Korea’s Martial Law. He declared that “Yoon declared Martial Law to preserve South Korea’s Democracy“. Having previously labeled South Korea a model democracy, this is a No-Scotsman-move taken to absurdity.
Now Tan is not a current US government official, but he is an indicator of what the US national security state is thinking, in particular, what its neocon wing is thinking. Tan also recently claimed that “the impeachment against Yoon is an insurrection” led by opposition party leader Lee Jae Myung “who wants to turn the country over to the Chinese communists”.
As absurd and conspiratorial as these allegations sound, these are actually finely-tuned and well-honed Washington-CPAC talking points about Chinese threats and interference in Korea, and they are echoed endlessly, if histrionically by US flag-waving foot soldiers at South Korean protests and on YouTube. These anti-China messages were also repeated in German State TV ARD’s documentary “Staatskrise im Schatten von China und Nordkorea” (State Crisis in the Shadow of China and North Korea), released to its German public television website on Feb 25. The documentary claimed that China had hacked South Korea’s legislative election to put the opposition DP party into power, which is now taking orders from North Korea and China to impeach Yoon. There is clearly a highly convergent and disciplined campaign of anti-China propaganda around the impeachment. ARD has removed its documentary, but the damage has clearly been done.
It’s impossible not to highlight the absurdity of Tan’s statement–“Yoon declared martial law (i.e. military dictatorship) to preserve democracy”. And, as a foreign national, Tan is breaking South Korean law by directly participating in domestic Korean politics. But the free reign he is given, and the lack of disavowal or reprimand from the State Department–if only for his own safety–is very revealing.
Tan’s position in the state department was Ambassador at Large. These are powerful, Viceroy-type postings: they represent US policy and US interests on a (grand) strategic level. Consider other Ambassadors-at-Large: Averell Harriman, Henry Cabot Lodge, Paul Nitze, Paul Bremer III, StrobeTalbott, Robert Gallucci. These are not individuals given to improvising and airing idiosyncratic personal opinions. As a former state Viceroy, with the enduring prestige and power of state connections, the platforms that Tan has been given to expound his views signal that he is expressing the direction of official doctrine, reflected both in Tan’s public statements, state media talking points, and the coordinated erasure of counter viewpoints.
Strategic Unambiguity: What the US wants
US policy on South Korea’s dictatorship/martial law is analogous to its policy on Taiwan: Strategic “ambiguity” in language, concrete support and escalation in actions. The “ambiguity” serves to pretextually mask war preparations against China. Of course, there is nothing ambiguous about the strategy, other than the desire for a fig leaf of plausible deniability.
What the US wants from Korea is that which is strategically most advantageous for the US: a right-wing Korean client regime to do the bidding of the US: escalate and prepare for war with China. This is a war that it has been envisioning since the early 2000’s and which was institutionalized by Obama’s “Pivot to Asia”. In fact, the reason Yoon was selected, elected, and lionized as South Korea’s president is because he was a walking neocon fulfillment list for this war.
As these war preparations accelerate and intensify, a South Korean military dictatorship with the US in control of the South Korean military is the easiest and most advantageous configuration to enact these plans. The US will settle for a client-plutocratic democratic state, but dictatorship has actually been the historical norm since South Korea was created by the US. Given the tight timelines involved, it is also possible for this configuration to be instituted again: this project of war is urgent and time-bound–US natsec heavyweights have calendared 2025 and 2027 (“the Minihan” & “Davidson windows”) as the propitious date range to trigger war with China.
Easy-peasy political proxy
South Korea offers two key strategic advantages. First, geographically and historically, Korea has always been the on ramp and bridgehead for invasion into China. War with China has always started from the Korean peninsula or Taiwan island, usually as interlinked pairs. Second, South Korea has the world’s 3rd largest standing army–including reservists, 3.6 Million troops–, larger than the militaries of China and Russia combined. The US gets operational control over these troops immediately if there is war. War with China is thus most compatible and convenient with a South Korean dictatorship.
There is very strong circumstantial evidence that the US knew beforehand about Yoon’s Martial Law declaration, due to the length and intricacy of the preparation and the aggressive military nature of the operation-which would have required coordination and communication with US forces in Korea. At the very least, they would have been aware. And regardless, they would have benefited, geostrategically.
Sworn testimony shows that Yoon’s gambit was to trigger war with North Korea (through drone attacks, missile attacks, shelling, false flag assassinations of opposition) to justify declaring Martial Law. Only poor execution, North Korean forbearance, and rapid citizen mobilization prevented the seamless rollout of this military coup. Evidence has come out that Yoon was preparing repeated coups. Historically, all military coups on the southern peninsula have been green lighted by the US.
On that point, Morse Tan is the Nancy Pelosi of Korea: he functions like a Track II US envoy–cheerleading for a right wing South Korean military coup, with just the slightest hint of plausible deniability.
Note the dead radio silence out of Washington throughout this whole process: silence during the Martial Law declaration, silence after the rejection of Martial Law, silence after the impeachment, and silence throughout. Not a word of critique or condemnation. Note also the deafening hush of the mainstream corporate media.
Meanwhile, the fissures in SK society are approaching civil war.
Institutional Civil War, Governmental chaos
There is already intergovernmental war: on March 22nd the CIO (Corruption Investigation Office, similar to the US Inspector General) raided the Prosecutor’s Office (similar to the Attorney General) for corruption, just days after the Prosecutor’s Office raided the CIO for evidence of warrant shopping on Yoon’s impeachment. This would be like the Inspector General raiding the Attorney General after the Attorney General raided the Inspector General.
Yoon has been released from custody on a technicality (“counting hours, not days”) despite being indicted for insurrection. His co-conspirators are still incarcerated, but the ringleader is free, highlighting the absurdity of the ruling. The prosecutor’s office, ostensibly committed to prosecuting Yoon, did not even bother to file an appeal. The prosecutor’s office is considered to be Yoon’s private army–Yoon was the former prosecutor general of Korea, and he promised to create a “Republic of Prosecutors”. That much he has been successful on.
The Return of the Zombie
Han Duck Soo, the impeached South Korean Prime minister (and former acting president) has just had his impeachment reversed yesterday, and is now acting president again.
The constitutional court found that Han had violated the constitution (by refusing to appoint already approved justices to the Constitutional Court to rule on the impeachment issue) but they reinstated him anyway. Never mind the irony that the court could have lacked standing to try his case if he had been successful in disabling the court. Han had also been tasked with appointing an independent counsel to investigate Yoon (to avoid the conflicts of interest that have appeared with the prosecutor’s office), but he had declined, leading to the current debacle of suspect loyalties and suspicious/delayed/tampered/sabotaged legal processes. One Constitutional Court justice claimed that the current political chaos was directly related to Han’s malfeasance and non-cooperation in these matters and found for impeachment–but she was a tiny minority of one in the ruling.
The Constitutional Court’s ruling on Han Duck Soo was already problematic in that it was out of sequence. The fact that they ruled first before Yoon’s case, and ruled against impeachment is an ominous signal. Two other high officials, Kim Seong-hun, and Lee Kwang-woo (of the presidential security service), indicted for impeding Yoon’s arrest, have recently also had their arrest warrants rejected. These are powerful figures who are now at large, with huge axes to grind. The trends are not in favor of impartial justice or peaceful resolution.
Washington’s Dirty Hand
The delayed impeachment ruling of Yoon itself is widely thought to be due to Washington’s pressure: it has been one month since the testimony was completed, but still there has been no ruling. This is abnormally long for what is an open-and-shut case: there is no doubt that Yoon declared Martial Law (he is on television declaring it!), and there is no doubt that he used extra-constitutional means–military force–to implement it and to try to prevent its rescission. But it’s widely considered that the ruling is delayed so that Lee Jae Myung’s appeal ruling (due on 3/26) will be decided before the Constitutional court’s ruling on Yoon is made public.
This is because Lee Jae Myung, the opposition DP party chair, would be the leading candidate for president if the impeachment of Yoon triggers a snap election (in 60 days). He is currently 20+ points ahead of any other potential candidate by polling. The presidency would be his to take under normal circumstances.
However, if Lee’s guilt is sustained by the appellate court, he would be stripped of all political rights for a decade, and the opposition DP would lose its strongest candidate. Washington does not want Lee Jae Myung as president, because it’s understood that he would balance with China against the US, and de-escalate the coming war on China. Hence the delay. Opposition party representative Park Sun-won has verified that the US is exerting pressure through diplomatic channels to align the impeachment date as close to Lee Jae Myung’s sentencing as possible.
On the Brink of Explosion
South Korea is now a tinderbox on the brink.
One million protestors hit the streets over the weekend, demanding the Constitutional court deliver its verdict immediately. Some of these protestors had been previously protesting in the snow for weeks, demanding justice. From the right, there has been open aggression by right wing counter-impeachment protesters, paid up or pumped up with “anti-communist” fervor by religious leaders and the ruling party, repeating ARD and CPAC tropes on “Chinese communist intervention”. These shock troops have destroyed and rampaged through Seoul’s Western District Courthouse, assaulted opposition party politicians, as well as attacked Chinese tourists as “spies”. The right have openly spoken of reconstituting the North West Youth league–the genocidal red-baiting death squads of the Korean war.
And so, it seems the American flag-waving beatings will continue until the anti-communist morale improves in the country. Regardless of the rulings to come, South Korea’s destiny is precarious: more potential turbulence, more violence, even potential civil war. Certainly more twists and turns. If the constitutional court acquits Yoon, there will be mass popular protests in the millions: Yoon will be incapable of ruling and is likely to declare Martial Law again, if only to save his bacon (he is facing insurrection charges). Recent news has revealed that Yoon had plans to declare Martial Law multiple times.
On the other hand, if the constitutional court successfully impeaches Yoon, the ruling party and its followers will pull out all the stops: street violence and a Maidan-type insurrection by the right wing cannot be ruled out. The quiet acquiescence of the right as was the case after the Park Geun Hye impeachment is unlikely, given the heated propaganda allegations and the polarized ideology.
So, South Korea is facing risky outcomes either way. The forces acting on this small country are immense. Whether Koreans get a clear diamond or spontaneous combustion from the immense pressure remains to be seen.
There is a tiny, narrow path that would relieve pressure and facilitate a more peaceful outcome. If the US removes its finger from the scale in South Korean affairs–and disavows the US-flag-waving right that it is stoking and supporting–a single word of reprimand would deflate the South Korean right wing like a sharp pin to a blow up doll.
But that would take a geostrategic shift–a downshifting and downsizing dreams of US Hegemony, and a turn towards peace and win-win.
Is the US capable of this? Or will it continue its dangerous ways? The fate of the peninsula–and possibly the planet–lies in the balance.
Far from being a tragedy for Africa, the demise of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) at the hands of President Donald Trump's administration should be cause for celebration, argues Arikana Chihombori-Quao, the former ambassador of the African Union to the US.
Chihombori-Quao tells host Steve Clemons that USAID doesn’t have much to show for its decades of education and healthcare projects in Africa and often destabilised countries under the guise of environmental, human rights or social justice agendas.
And if the US is not interested in Africa, African leaders shouldn’t beg for better relations, she said. “It takes two to tango,” the former diplomat said.
Winner of the Best Documentary Critics Choice Award as well as the Grand Jury Prize and Audience Award at the Sundance Film Festival, SUMMER OF SOUL (...OR, WHEN THE REVOLUTION COULD NOT BE TELEVISED) is an exhilarating experience.
In his acclaimed debut as a filmmaker, Ahmir "Questlove" Thompson presents this powerful and transporting documentary that's part music film and part historical record, created around an epic event that celebrated Black history, culture and fashion.
Over the course of six weeks in the summer of 1969, just one hundred miles south of Woodstock, The Harlem Cultural Festival was filmed in Mount Morris Park (now called Marcus Garvey Park). The footage was largely forgotten – until now.
SUMMER OF SOUL shines a light on the importance of history to our spiritual well-being and stands as a testament to the healing power of music during times of unrest, both past and present. The film includes concert performances by music legends Stevie Wonder, Nina Simone, Sly & the Family Stone, Gladys Knight and the Pips, Mahalia Jackson, B.B. King, The 5th Dimension and more.
Trump and Putin begin addressing cumulated geo-strategic debris… amidst Trump’s ultimatum to Iran
By Alastair Crooke
The phone call on 18 March between Presidents Trump and Putin has happened. It was a success, insofar as it allowed both sides to label the result as ‘positive’. And it did not lead to a breakdown (by virtue of the smallest of concessions from Putin – an energy infrastructure truce) – something easily it could have done (i.e. devolve into impasse – with Trump excoriating Putin, as he has done to Zelensky), given the fantastical and unrealistic expectations being woven in the West that this would be the ‘decider meeting’ for a final division of Ukraine.
It may have been a success too, insofar as it has laid the groundwork for the absent homework, now to be handled by two teams of experts on the detailed mechanics of the ceasefire. It was always a puzzle why this had not been earlier tackled by the U.S. team in Riyadh (lack of experience?). It was, after all, because the ceasefire was treated as a self-creating entity, by virtue of an American signature, that western expectations took flight in the belief that details did not matter; All that remained to do – in this (flawed) estimation – was to ‘divvy out the cake’.
Until the mechanics of a ceasefire – which must be comprehensive since ceasefires almost always break down – there was little to discuss on that topic on Tuesday. Predictably, then, discussion (reportedly) seemed to have turned to other issues: mainly economic ones and Iran, underlining again that the negotiation process between the U.S. and Russia does not boil down to just Ukraine.
So, how to move to ceasefire implementation? Simple. Begin to unravel the ‘cats cradle’ of impedimenta blocking normalised relations. Putin, plucking out just one strand to this problem, observed that:
“Sanctions [alone] are neither temporary nor targeted measures. They constitute [rather], a mechanism of systemic, strategic pressure against our nation. Our competitors perpetually seek to constrain Russia and diminish its economic and technological capacities … they churn out these packages incessantly”.
There is thus much cumulated geo-strategic debris to be addressed, and corrected, dating back many years, before a Big Picture normalisation can start in earnest.
What is apparent is that whilst Trump seems to be in a tearing hurry, Putin, by contrast, is not. And he will not be rushed. His own constituency will not countenance a hastily fudged accord with the U.S. that later implodes amidst recriminations of deceit – and of Moscow again having been fooled by the West. Russian blood is invested in this strategic normalisation process. It needs to work.
What is behind Trump’s evident hurry? Is it the need for breakneck speed on the domestic front to push ahead, before the cumulated forces of the opposition in the U.S. (plus their brethren in Europe) have the time to re-group and to torpedo normalisation with Russia?
Or does Trump fear that a long gap before ceasefire implementation will enable opposition forces to push for the recommencement of arms supplies and intelligence sharing – as the Russian military steamroller continues its advance? Is the fear, as Steve Bannon has warned, that by rearming Ukraine, Trump effectively will ‘own’ the war, and shoulder the blame for a massive western and NATO defeat?
Or, perhaps Trump anticipates that Kiev might unexpectedly cascade into a systemic collapse (as occurred to the Karzai government in Afghanistan). Trump is acutely aware of the political disaster that befell Biden from the images of Afghans clinging to the tyres of departing U.S. transport planes (à la Vietnam), as the U.S. evacuated the country.
Yet again, it might be something different. I learned from my time facilitating ceasefires in Palestine/Israel that it is not possible to make a ceasefire in one place (say Bethlehem), whilst Israeli forces were concurrently setting Nablus or Jenin ablaze. The emotional contagion and anger from one conflict cannot be contained to one locality; it would overflow to the other. It was tried. The one contaminated the implied sincere intentions behind the other.
Is the reason for the Trump haste mainly that he suspects his unconstrained support for Israel eventually will lead him to embrace major war in the Middle East? The world of today (thanks to the internet) is much smaller than before: Is it possible to be a ‘peacemaker’ and a ‘war-maker’ simultaneously – and have the first taken seriously?
War preparations for Iran are so closely restricted, that even contracting companies involved in war planning are prohibited from even mentioning unclassified portions, notes Klippenstein:
“While a range of military options are often provided to presidents in an attempt on the part of the Pentagon to steer the President to the one favoured by the Pentagon, Trump already has shown his proclivity to select the most provocative option”.
“Equally, Trump’s green light for the Israeli air-strikes on Gaza, killing hundreds, [last] Monday, but ostensibly targetted on the Hamas leadership can be seen as consonant with the pattern of taking the belligerent option”.
Following his successful assassination of Iran’s top general Qassim Suleimani in 2020, Trump seems to have taken the lesson that aggressive action is relatively cost-free, Klippenstein notes.
As Waltz noted in his press interview:
“The difference is these [Yemen attacks] were not pinpricks, back and forth, what ultimately proved to be feckless attacks. This was an overwhelming response that actually targeted multiple Houthi leaders and took them out”.
Klippenstein cautions that, “2024 may be behind us but its lessons aren’t. Israel’s assassination of top Hezbollah officials in Lebanon was largely perceived by Washington to be a resounding success with few downsides. Trump likely took back the same message, leading to his strike on [the] Houthi leadership this week”.
If western observers are seeing all of what’s going on as some repeat of Biden’s tit-for-tat or limited attacks by Israel on Iran’s early warning and air defences, they may be misunderstanding what’s going on behind the scenes. What Trump might now do, which is right out of the Israeli playbook, would be to attack Iran’s command and control, including Iran’s leadership.
This – very certainly – would have a profound effect on Trump’s relations with Russia – and China. It would eviscerate any sense in Moscow and Beijing that Trump is agreement capable. What price then his ‘peacemaker’ ‘Big Picture’ reset were he, in the wake of wars in Lebanon, Syria and Yemen, to start a war with Iran? Does Trump see Iran through some disturbed optic – that in destroying Iran, he is bringing about peace through strength?
~ Alastair Crooke is a former British diplomat, founder and director of the Beirut-based Conflicts Forum.
