“The work is done, but how no one can see; 'Tis this that makes the power not cease to be” - Lao Tzu
As we all know, the controversial Iran deal has been the mantra of the moment; however, there are three other topics worthy of note:
PM Cameron's Speech against Radical & Violent Islamism
“If you say violence in London isn't justified, but suicide bombs in Israel are – then you are part of the problem” - David Cameron
“Many of their commercial models are built around monitoring platforms for personal data, packaging it up and selling it on to third parties (..) When it comes to do what's right for their business, they are happy to engineer technologies to track our likes and dislike. (…) But when it comes to doing what's right in the fight against terrorism, we too often hear that it's all too difficult...I'm sorry, I just don't buy it.” - idem
There can't be any doubt over the veracity of these two statements. If you condemn terrorism in the West or in Africa, for instance, you cannot condone it either in Israel or in America – doing so is supporting, defending and justifying terrorism, period. And if one (of any ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation and political ideology) supports, defends and justifies terror, in any shape or form, then he/she must suffer the legal consequences.
As we have concluded before, Islamic (and any other kind of) terrorism is supported by Missionary, Political and Violent Activism; meaning that the radicalisation of people starts in mosques, cultural centres and the social media, for instance. This being said, social media companies need to cooperate in countering terrorist activities; but if they insist on not doing it, then the proper legal instruments should be used on them for endangering the free world, plus aiding and abetting terrorist acts.
PM Cameron, I believe you want to fight proper and successfully but, sir, if you still have the need to say you are “tackling Islamist extremism – not Islam the religion” it's because the people you need to assist you, in the fight against extremism, do not understand that difference; and if they don't...your efforts are futile. If they are futile, you may need to play your cards differently.
The Primaries for the 2016 US Elections
This year's Republican primaries are much more dynamic than the previous ones, I must admit; however, I look at the Republican Party's candidates and I still don't feel that intoxication, but let's see how it will all go after a couple more debates.
This year's Democrat primaries look stale; what's going on? I look at the Democrat Party's candidates and I wonder how the American electorate will react to either a confessed socialist (whose confession has put the DNC's chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, in hot water) or to a candidate with such a problematic political luggage that if her adversaries play their cards right, she might come out of the process with a highly damaged image.
For foreigners, it should be interesting to watch next year's elections in America and, I'm certain, many of them are already working towards their preferred outcomes – isn't it interesting how the fate of national elections risk being in the hands of international players? Quite a threat to the sovereignty of the people (Selah).
Turkey Joins US-led Coalition to attack Kurds
President Erdogan, after having refused to join the US-led anti-ISIS coalition, has finally decided to join the fight against the Islamic State; or so it seems.
Ever since the Turkish incursion has started, we have noticed two things: Turkey is targeting the Kurds more than IS (though, a fortnight ago, Turkish officials stated the country would start striking the group soon); and Pres. Erdogan announced that Russia is withdrawing its support from Bashar al-Assad. These occurrences should make the US wonder whether President Erdogan is working for or against American interests (though the removal of Patriot Missiles from Turkey says everything).
By focusing its military campaign on the Kurds, Erdogan is actually strengthening the Islamic State, because the Kurds have been the most effective weapon against ISIS militancy. Since it is not in the West's interests to put boots on the ground, it has to rely on the Kurds and the Iraqis to do that job for them. But if Turkey deviates the focus of the Kurdish front (to help defend their Kurdish brothers against the Turks), IS will have more space of manoeuvre – which is exactly the opposite of the declared Western goals.
So what's Turkey doing? If we concatenate the reality on the ground (i.e. Erdogan attacking the Kurds to prevent a future united Kurdish State from taking form) and the documents found last May that show Turkey has been supporting ISIS; we have a situation where President Erdogan may have used the US operation to legitimise its efforts to keep supporting IS on a different scale. To pursue that plan, Mr Erdogan may furthermore be searching for the impeachment of President al-Assad's authority, by spreading rumours of Russian support withdrawal, in order to further weaken the Syrian Army's standing (through demoralisation of the troops).
There is a curious detail, however: Turkey knows that Russia has no interest whatsoever in upsetting Iran (Bashar al-Assad's sponsor) since Moscow wants Tehran to be a member of its Gas Cartel (to inflate natural gas prices, giving thus a much needed boost to the Russian economy; while at the same time managing the EU's leverage – that also needs Iran to decrease its dependence on Russian gas, a status that limits any European reaction to Russia's demonstrations of power politics). A closer look at Turkey, therefore, is urgent...
“When the work is done, and one's name is becoming distinguished, to withdraw into obscurity is the way of Heaven” - Lao Tzu