CrossTalk: Cold War 2.0?

StopImperialism.org
Eric Draitser
March 31, 2014

How do the West and Russia interpret the results of the Cold War? Is NATO at the heart of the so-called "New Cold War"? Does NATO refuse the partnership with Russia? And are Russia and the West doomed to be adversaries? CrossTalking with Geoffrey Hosking, Eric Draitser and Wolfgang Richter.

The Financial Elite and the Global Land Grab

New Eastern Outlook
Eric Draitser 
March 24, 2014

The global financial crisis, which began in 2008, has significantly altered the way many speculators and financial institutions invest. Rather than taking huge risks with dodgy derivatives like credit default swaps and mortgage-backed securities, both of which have proven to be particularly volatile, many speculators have instead begun to invest in the most tangible asset of all: land. By doing so, financial institutions, and many governments, have engaged in “land grabbing” – a process by which large amounts of capital are invested in the purchase of land for large-scale agricultural production, while the farmers who have worked the land for generations are displaced and/or become renters on land that was once their own.

 

This worrying trend is part of a global shift, a consolidation of land and resources in ever fewer hands, while the mass of workers and peasants are made dependent on corporations and governments. Spurred on by the financial crisis and the exponential growth of food and commodity speculation, financiers and their investment institutions (hedge funds, big banks, sovereign wealth funds, etc.) are gobbling up the most fertile land around the world, leading many to wonder what the future of food production and land distribution will look like.

 

It should be further noted that this trend is not only affecting the poor of the Global South, but also the independent farmers of the so called “developed world.” As such, landgrabbing has become a global phenomenon, one that must be addressed by farmers and working people internationally, with broad-based coalitions and organizations mobilizing resistance and educating the people. Only comprehensive solutions to such a global problem can possibly hope to protect the land, and all of us who depend on it.

 

Financiers Shall Inherit The Earth? 

 

It has become increasingly clear that speculators, and the financial elite more broadly, have been making a concerted effort in recent years to acquire as much fertile as possible, intending to use it as a major revenue source against the backdrop of global economic crisis. A recent Oakland Institute study noted:

 

An estimated 500 million acres…was reported bought or leased across the developing world between 2000 and 2011, often at the expense of local food security and land rights. When the price of food spiked in 2008, pushing the number of hungry people in the world to over one billion, the interests of investors spiked as well, and within a year foreign land deals in the developing world rose by a staggering 200 percent. Today, enthusiasm for agriculture borders on speculative mania. Drive by everything from rising food prices to growing demand for biofuel, the financial sector is taking an interest in farmland as never before.

 

At the most basic level, such staggering numbers indicates the degree to which financiers have turned to land speculation as merely the latest in a string of “bubbles” – an investment that they feel can turn a massive profit in a short amount of time. Again, it is critical to note the unmistakable connection between their interest in land, and the speculation in food commodities on the global market.

 Continue reading at New Eastern Outlook...

Solving the crisis in Ukraine

Stop Imperialism

Eric Draitser 

March 22, 2014 

Ukraine has become a geopolitical and strategic battleground upon which the West (US-EU-NATO) and Russia are struggling for influence. But, underlying this conflict is the need to develop a viable solution, one that would address both the short term and long-term needs of the Ukrainian people and both Russia and the West. The deep political divisions within Ukraine, exacerbated in recent months with the ouster of the Yanukovich government, will require careful diplomacy and mediation in order to be resolved. Additionally, the economic crisis afflicting the country – a crisis which dates back to well before the February coup – will equally require a multi-faceted and inclusive solution that benefits all interested parties. Naturally, achieving these high-minded goals will not be easy; however, they are necessary in order to chart a course toward a prosperous and stable future for Ukraine. 

(Read entire article)

Debating Ukraine on “Breaking the Set”

Stop Imperialism
Eric Draitser
March 19, 2014

Eric Draitser of StopImperialism.org appears on “Breaking the Set” to debate recent developments in Ukraine and Crimea. He debunks the attempts by some to whitewash the nature of the coup in Kiev and the illegal government. Draitser explains some of the geopolitical motivations behind the crisis, pointing out the recent history that has lead to the current situation.  He also examines the possible next steps.

Assessing the Costs and Benefits of “Punishing Russia”

New Eastern Outlook
Eric Draitser
March 19, 2014

With the referendum on Crimean independence and possible reunification with Russia now taking place, the US and its European allies have threatened punitive actions to punish Moscow. These measures include the denial of visas, freezing of assets, even possibly commencing economic sanctions against Russia and Russian interests. Such escalation of tensions would undoubtedly have negative, potentially disastrous, effects on the European and global economy, not to mention the all-important political and diplomatic ties between West and East.

On Saturday March 15^th, the day before this historic referendum in Crimea, the Washington Post, famously regarded as a principal mouthpiece of the US political establishment, published a strongly worded Op-Ed piece collectively written by the Editorial Board entitled US, EU must stay the course on Russian sanctions over Ukraine. The article laid out a number of punitive actions that the West should, according to the authors, use to punish Russia, including targeted sanctions against prominent Russians in Putin’s inner circle.

 

Specifically, the authors suggest the denial of visas and freezing of assets of such key Russian figures as Igor Sechin (Chairman of Rosneft), Vladimir Yakunin (President of Russian Railways), and Alexei Miller (Chairman of Gazprom). Such measures must, according to the authors, be combined with “punishment” of Russia diplomatically including exclusion from the G8 and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Were the US and EU to follow through with these and other sanctions, they would undoubtedly open the door for an effective Russian response – a response that would have dire consequences for the already fragile economic situation in Europe and the US.

 

 Sanctions and Russia’s Counter-Moves

 

There are many both in the West and Russia who believe that the suggestion of punitive actions from the US and EU are merely empty threats. However, it is critical to examine just how Moscow might respond to such provocative measures, as sanctions would undoubtedly be seen as a very serious escalation. Moreover, it is essential to consider how the Russian response would impact the entire world.

 

First and foremost is the fact that Russia holds the key to Europe’s energy future. With Russia providing more than one third of Europe’s gas imports, any sanctions could immediately lead Russia to scale back, or even more drastically, cut off the gas to Europe. This would create innumerable problems for Europe, particularly for the export-dependent economy of Germany, which is unquestionably the economic powerhouse on the continent. With German technology, luxury cars, and the like no longer being produced in the required numbers, the economy would, almost overnight, come to a screeching halt. Moreover, future German energy security would be threatened, as the primary lifeline for the country is the Russian Nord Stream pipeline, which brings Russian gas across the Baltic and into northern Germany.

 

Additionally, such a scenario would create a tremendous amount of political discord within the EU as countries traditionally friendly with Russia, such as Italy, also heavily reliant on Russian energy, become ever more disenchanted with the belligerent policies of Brussels vis-à-vis Russia and Ukraine. With turmoil already in high gear in Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece and many other economically devastated countries in Southern Europe, it is unlikely that the political will to go along with a suicidal sanctions regime will remain.

 

Russia also has a tremendous financial weapon that could be unleashed against the US and EU: their dollar holdings. With the Russian government, not to mention private Russian holdings, retaining a tremendous amount of US dollars, they could easily choose to transfer or dump their dollars and create a veritable panic on Wall St and in Washington. In fact, this scenario may have already taken place on a small scale.

Continue reading at New Eastern Outlook...

Crimea: Democracy Is Not Democracy…Unless Obama Says It Is…

New Eastern Oulook

Eric Draitser 

March 18, 2014

As Crimea prepares to vote on Saturday March 16^th in a crucial referendum on its future, the rhetoric coming from the West and its propaganda machine has hit a new and ridiculous low. Not only has US President Barack Obama and his administration done everything to undermine democracy in Ukraine, they have now resorted to the most naked forms of hypocrisy in an attempt to delegitimize the democratic process.

 

On Thursday March 6^th President Obama spoke at the White House on the referendum and the issue of Crimea. In his prepared remarks, Obama stated categorically that the United States would not recognize the results of the Crimean referendum. He argued that the it would violate both the “Ukrainian Constitution and international law.” Obama kept the comedy coming when he noted that, “In 2014 we are well beyond the days when borders can be redrawn over the heads of democratic leaders.” As with all statements made by the US government, and the President specifically, this must be contextualized and deconstructed in order to be effectively critiqued.

 

First and foremost is the question of democracy and, more specifically, how exactly Washington is choosing to define this gravely abused word. In referring to the so-called “interim government” in Kiev, headed by Yatsenyuk and his associates, as “democratic leaders”, Obama demonstrates either a complete lack of understanding of the word democracy, or as I think is more likely, an utter contempt for democratic principles. By referring to an unelected entity that has seized political power in Kiev by force, and through collaboration with Nazi elements, as “democratic leaders,” Obama exposes himself and his administration to be cynical opportunists whose interests rest not in democracy but in a geopolitical agenda guided solely by strategic interests.

 

Naturally, the references to the Ukrainian Constitution and international law are also deeply disingenuous. Obama, and the US imperial system more generally, speak of international law purely when it suits their interests, eschewing it completely when it does not. This fact has been illustrated quite clearly with Washington’s wars of aggression throughout that last two decades, including the illegal wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, not to mention the habitual violations of international law in Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan and around the world.

 

The most significant point here is that the US recognizes democracy and international law only when it suits their interests. Moreover, US hypocrisy regarding democracy becomes self evident if one examines the recent historical precedents of Kosovo and South Sudan. In both these cases, precisely the same individuals who today cry about international law and argue against the democratic right of Crimea to determine its own future, were then eloquently and unabashedly in favor of precisely the same sort “democratic aspirations.”

Continue reading at New Eastern Outlook...