Wednesday, 30 October 2019

Brexit: General Election and what afterwards?

Brexit: General Election and what afterwards?

December 13 is the day but what will be the political landscape then? There are all kinds of assumptions but what will be the real picture? After the events of the last three years, nothing is guaranteed.

Whether we are dealing with national politics or geopolitics, the outcome is uncertain.  Both main political parties have been fractured by a more than three-years-struggle and this is not just about internal politics. The whole country has been affected and this includes the Supreme Court. Disappointment has been replaced with cynical attitudes. 

The first question to ask is: what will be the turnout in this General Election? The weather is the least of all concerns. Electoral margins will be an issue and the political platforms of candidates standing will be another issue because of divided allegiances that could alter the outcome of the General Election.

What was the thinking behind the votes of Members of Parliament that perfectly knew that a General Election could mean the loss of their seats? What was the thinking behind the votes of Members of Parliament that not necessarily agree with the political agendas of their own political parties? What was the thinking behind the votes of Members of Parliament for whom the chances of returning to the House of Commons are remote? Yesterday, the last interventions of Members of Parliament like Anna Soubry and Michael Gapes show the level of dispair after the realization that their political futures could effectively be coming to and. At the last minute, 10 out of 21 Conservative MPs that lost the whip were returned to the fold.

This General Election is being fought inside and outside political parties.
 
    

Tuesday, 29 October 2019

Brexit: Isolated as the only political party not supporting a General Election, Labour will vote for General Election

Brexit: Isolated as the only political party not supporting a General Election, Labour will vote for General Election

Finally, today, the House of Commons will debate about a General Election and vote for a General Election, ending years of uncertainty and rising tensions inside the Houses of Parliament and on the streets of Britain.

No milkshakes this time. No verbal abuse nor threats. Just ballots and Democracy as it should have been for the very beginning.

We awair with expectation today's debates in the House of Commons. 


Brexit: Parliament is playing a very dangerous game, an expensive game

Brexit: Parliament is playing a very dangerous game, an expensive game

When Anna Soubry rose in the House of Commons the game was self-evident. Why not a General Election? For the same reasons that the Labour Party doesn't want a General Election. Plagued by internal conflicts and divisions, scandals, it remains to be seen if the Labour Party is not actually the big loser in the skirmishes linked to Brexit.

Jeremy Corbyn knows that this could well be the end of his political career. After all that is happening in the Labour Party, losing a General Election means goodbye to the Leadership of the Labour Party and a reshuffle that will be the end of the road for John McDonnell and others that will be blamed for the context in which many Labour MPs left to become Independents and even joined the Liberal Democrats. For some Labour MPs, all the threats will mean very little either because their majorities look unassailable or simply because after decades in politics they are heading for retirement. For other Labour MPs, the risk of their careers being ended by a General Election is very real and therefore they will drag their feet for as long as it is possible to do so. Other Labour MPs see the defeat of the Labour Party and in particular of Jeremy Corbyn as the best opportunity they have to rebuild the Labour Party. Losing an election would be for them a price worth paying 

For the Liberal Democrats, it is the kind of opportunity that they have been looking for for a vary long time. They jumped at the chance of being in government and this is why they were eager to join the Conservative Party in a coalition under the Leadership of David Cameron. In fact, some Labour MPs asked the Liberal Democrats today if they were willing to join the Conservatives in a coalition if the outcome of a General Election is once again a hung Parliament. There is the suspicion that this is exactly what the Leadership of the Liberal Democrats is looking for as several of them - including its present Leader - were in government with the Conservatives. The main difficulty is that the present Liberal Democratic Party was joined by Labour MPs and Conservative MPs and they would be in a very awkward situation.

For those like Chuka Umunna, former Labour MP for Streatham, to leave the Labour Party was a jump into the unknown. Then came the option of joining another political grouping with former Labour MPs and former Conservative MPs called Change UK. But after a dramatic failure in the European Parliament Elections, Chuka Umunna instinctively knew that the only alternative was to join the Liberal Democrats to stand a chance to try to save his political career. In a General Election, he wouldn't stand in Streatham and therefore he would be standing in the City. He secured his position as Liberal Democrat Speaker on Economic Affairs but, would he be willing to be part of a coalition with the Conservatives? For Conservatives who left the Conservative Party and joined the Liberal Democratic Party to see themselves as part of a coalition with the Conservatives would be a paradox and a very uncomfortable position to be in.

But before we can assume that Labour MPs and Conservative MPs who joined the Liberal Democrats would be re-elected but this time as Liberal Democrat MPs, we need to look at what is happening right now. The European Union suggested that they would agree to an extension - that they called a flexible extension - to allow the UK to finalize all legislative processses including the approval of the Withdrawal Agreement agreed with Prime Minister Boris Johnson but the agreement for a flexible extension comes with conditions attached and they are waiting for the House of Commons to make a decision that the House of Commons is not willing to make. The House of Commons hasn't approved the Deal, the House of Commons doesn't want a second Referendum and the House of Commons doesn't want a General Election. What would then be the point of granting an extension - or even a flexible extension? 

Will the EU deny the United Kingdom an extension at the last minute because the House of Commons cannot agree the way forward? It has been reported that tomorrow, a new motion will be put forward that would make possible to have a General Election despite the Fixed Term Parliament Act that requires a two-third majority of all 650 seats of the House of Commons including the seats that have not been occupied by Sinn Fein/IRA. The Speaker and other officials despite being MPs don't vote. For this reason, in order to have the required number of votes - according to the Fixed Term Parliament Act - a vast number of Labour MPs would have to support the motion. Tomorrow, would be decision time in the House of Commons. Would this be the end of the stalemate?



 




Saturday, 26 October 2019

Now it is Chile's turn. Political Parties without leaders and political classes disconnected from the Chilean people


Now it is Chile's turn. Political Parties without leaders and political classes disconnected from the Chilean people

When the political classes are isolated from those they are supposed to represent, people die and this is exactly what is happening in Chile where the building of the Chilean Congress had to be evacuated as protests spread and the government struggles to contain a situation generated by economic hardship.

When the European Common Market was created generating protectionism and subsides, Latin America suffered as a mainly agricultural region and exporter of agricultural products. It can be said without a shadow of a doubt that the progression towards the creation of the European Community and later the European Union only made a bad situation worse. 

The dictatorships of the 1970s and 1980s were the direct consequence of European tariffs and subsidies. Latin America debt grew exponentially and this led to even greater indebtedness not just with private institutions but also with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank that imposed recessionary recipes that meant cuts of investments in infra-structure, health, education and many other fundamental areas.

Latin American economies never recovered. Drug production, drug trafficking and and political instability were the direct results of the degradation of national economies. Against all odds, economies like the Chilean economy managed to succeed and figure amongst the most prosperous economies of Latin America. But it didn't last.

Most Chileans earn between £437 and £592 a month, struggling to pay for basic needs and things have become intolerable leading to present demonstrations that have led to curfews and state of emergency in 12 of 16 major cities in Chile, with more than 19 deaths, more than 500 people injured and more than 2000 people arrested.

Getting Britain out of EU, would allow Britain to become involved in many markets around the world, many of which are part of the developing world, helping many democratic countries across the world and Chile is one of them.  



Friday, 25 October 2019

Anti-Terrorism or Dirty Political Games

Anti-Terrorism or Dirty Political Games

If in the United Kingdom Anti-Terror Legislation is used for political purposes, Britain will face a nightmare of major proportions. With the arrival of Tony Blair as British Prime Minister in 1997, things went from bad to worse. Anti-Terror Legislation was adopted primarily to go against Muslim communities in the United Kingdom.

With a bill introduced by the then Secretary Jacqui Smith, the door was open for detention without trial, suspension of Habeas Corpus and anonimity to cover up the activities of British Security Services in party political activities and criminal activities in the United Kingdom.

Many questions were raised about the actions of Russian oligarchs that left Russian Federation and former republics of the Soviet Union with vast amounts of money that they had stolen from Russia and republics of the former Soviet Union.

Britain welcome them and explanation was they were the good guys runnning away from bad fallen Soviet Union. They transfered money to the pockets of their British hosts and came with a network of contacts that could be useful for intelligence organizations including the CIA and British Security Services.

With money and contacs they brought more corruption to the United Kingdom as if existing corruption in the United Kingdom was not enough and wars between oligarchs started to be fought in the United Kingdom. 

One of those oligarchs was Boris Berezovsky that soon became a star. He had been second pair of hands of Boris Yeltsin and he had with him Alexander Litvinenko - a former KGB agent that had gone rogue. They were both up to their ears supporting Islamic terrorists in Chechnya and used their support for Islamic terrorists as revenge when they feel from grace and were forced to run away. 

Boris Berezovky was in his element in Britain. He had money, a network that included former Soviet republics, and was a useful pawn for the CIA and British intelligence services. He was very much a celebrity that relied on the support of a firm of lawyers that could get British visas for his friends that were on the run. Britain became a magnet for every crook that wanted to avoid the courts.

Because he was a key piece on the chessboard and due to his support to the enemies of the Russian Federation, Russian authorities asked Britain to send him back. Russia chosen legal means to trying and take him back to face the courts and Britain protected him because of his apparent usefulness. 

But his lieutenant Alexander Litvinenko was his Achilles Heel. He knew too much about the businesses of Boris Berezovky and in the end this led to his demise at the hands of British agents that in an effort to protect the major asset - Boris Berezovky - didn't hesitate in eliminating a loose end.

In 2001, Britain got involved in Afghanistan, a major opium producer. There were enormous amounts of money to be made. The public explanation was the fight against AlQaeda and Taliban. The true reason was the drugs trade coming from Afghanistan. American soldiers, British soldiers and soldiers of another nationalists were sent to die in Afghanistan and the world was told that they had conquered Afghanistan when in reality they barely controlled some areas including areas of Kabul. Most of the country remained in the hands of tribal leaders and Taliban. No surprise then that the conflict has lasted more than 18 years.

As long as there is money to be made in the opium trade, they will try and keep some kind of military presence in Afghanistan even if doing so means putting the lives of British soldiers in danger. The rising incidence of drug addiction affecting Western troops tells you the real story and USA has not escaped the realities of the drug trade linked to Afghanistan. The use of opioids in the USA has become widespread and endemic.

But going back to the story linked to maffia boss Boris Berezovky, the way to make the British position untenable was to denounce the businesses that Boris Berezovsky was involved in and part of his business activities included supporting Chechen rebels allied to AlQaeda and Taliban while British troops were fighting and dying in Afghanistan. 

Russian agents approached Alexander Litvinenko. The idea was to persuade Alexander Litvinenko to cooperate to be able to expose Boris Berezovsky and by extension expose British authorities that supported him. The quick to prevent a scandal and protect Boris Berezovsky was for British agents to kill Alexander Litvinenko. The method used by British authorities was radioactive substances that supposedly could only be produced in a military laboratory. Well, Britain has such kind of laboratory and stores the said radioactive substances. The British Establishment quickly blamed Russian agents for the demise of Alexander Litvinenko and convinced the mass media - that it takes very little to convince because of long standing anti-Russian prejudices - that it could ony have been done by Russian agents. Since the days of the Cold War, blaming Russia has been a British sport.

With Alexander Litvinenko out of the way, the British Establishment thought the problem had been satisfactorily solved. This wouldn't last. The business activities of Boris Berezovky were obviously not limited to the United Kingdom. He had links in Latin America were there were records of his "business activities". In time, in his wars with other Russian oligarchs, Boris Beresovky got embroiled in a legal battle with Roman Abramovich - a real celebrity and more so for his acquisition of Chelsea Football Club. Roman Abramovich defeated Boris Berezovsky in British courts and at this point in time Boris Berezovky had become much more of a liability than an asset. British agents conveniently "suicided" Boris Berezovsky conveniently get rid of loose ends. 

With Boris Berezovsky out of the way, the attention turned to Roman Abramovich and the next move of the British Establishment was obvious and foreseeable: they refused to renew Roman Abramovich's British visa. 

Going back to the main subject, the legislation introduced under a Labour government by the then Home Office Secretary Jacqui Smith has been steadily enhanced and now is being used not only to target Muslim communities in the United Kingdom but also as a political tool against those the British Establishment doesn't like. 

During the trials against Alison Chabloz and Jez Turner there were attempts by Prosecutors to use anti-Terrorism legislation in cases that had nothing to do with terrorism. They have tried to use anti-Terror Legislation against Tommy Robinson. Others, less fortunate, have got long sentences because of alleged terrorist offenses.

Police forces and especially S015 are now openly using anti-Terror Legislation for political persecution against individuas that have nothing to do with terrorism. In this particular situation, againts those who are see as too close to the Russian Federation.

As a fabricated dodgy dossier was used to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq, there are fabricated cases for political reasons. When governments use anti-Terrorism legislation to deal with political opponents they cross a red line and the courts become kangaroo courts very much like the courts of a totalitarian state and this is happening in Britain today.



















 

Thursday, 24 October 2019

Brexit: Jeremy Corbyn's only alternative to prevent the disintegration of the Labour Party is a Referendum

Brexit: Jeremy Corbyn's only alternative to prevent the disintegration of the Labour Party is a Referendum

Jeremy Corbyn has rejected a General Election three times while asking for a General Election more than 50 times. Why? It doesn't escape public attention the flow of Labour MPs leaving the Labour Party because of anti-Semitism, harassment and the risk of deselection. 

On the same day of the start of the Labour Party Conference in Brighton, there was an attempt to get rid of Labour's Deputy Leader Tom Watson. Later on, there were dramatic changes at Labour Central Office with Jeremy Corbyn's supporters being replaced with John McDonnell's supporters. Not only that. Just a few day, key members of the cabinet spoke for Remain while Jeremy Corbyn was nowhere to be seen.

He announced a three-line whip and 19 Labour MPs supported the Deal proposed by the Conservative government. Now, it is reported that faced with possibility of a motion for General Election on Monday, Jeremy Corbyn is asking Labour MPs not to support it. There deselection processes south of the border and north of the border. And the issue of anti-Semitism has not gone away. Some of his key MPs even joined the Liberal Democrats. 

Jeremy Corbyn and others like to talk about chaos in the Conservative Party but looking at what has been going on in the Labour Party I would say that they situation is a lot worse in the Labour Party.

The great benefitiaries are the Conservative Party as party for Leave and the Liberal Democrats as party for Remain. They are the only two parties that stand to be net winners in a General Election. The Labour Party performed badly in the European Elections and there is the danger that Labour could become the third party in a General Election.

Vince Cable spoke about the creation of a centrist political party. The fact that Conservative MPs and Labour MPs have joined the Liberal Democrats would be a step in what Vince Cable called a new alternative. The creation of a non-Marxist alternative in British politics could be the sign of things to come.

When you go down to local level, Labour grassroots have been turning against local authorities controlled by the Labour Party accussing them of being the drivers of gentrification and ethnic cleansing. The next stage would be a challenge to Labour hegemony at local authority level. If there is a General Election in December, what will happen in the London Election? Siobhan Benita - former independent Mayoral Candidate will be standing for the Liberal Democrats. Shaun Bailey will be standing for the Conservatives. Will Sadiq Khan survive? At constituency level, with processes of deselection of local MPs, the outcome for the Labour Party is less than certain.

  

Syria: Russia is building peace for all

Syria: Russia is building peace for all

While USA, Britain and others were bent on regime change in Syria, thus creating the mess that Syria became, Russia was involved - especially authorized by the Syrian government - to restore stability in Syria.

Even today, the British Parliament seems to be more worried about how close Russia and Turkey have become and there is even talk about raising the issue at the next NATO summit. They seem to forget that thanks to Russian mediation in Syria the feared massacres in Syria will not happen. Turkey will have the reassurances it needs that Kurds will not use Syria as a platform to attack Turkey. For the Syrian government, Russia provides the reassurances that Syria will recover control in areas that were occupied by foreign forces.

And what the mass media and many of the political establishments are worried about? They talk about loss of American influence. So what is more important: American influence with the loss of the lives of American soldiers who would be dying for nothing or the restoration of peace in Syria and by extension the potential to restore peace in the Middle East? If peace is restored in Syria, there won't be a platform for Islamic State to attack other countries and this means that everybody in Middle East and Asia Minor and outside the said areas will benefit. US withdrawal was a rational and benefitial measure for all, including those not involved in conflicts. The sooner political estability is restored, the sooner the fighting will stop for the benefit of all. 

Another factor that both some people in the USA and many in the Europe ignore is that Turkey has sufferent the brunt of instability in the Middle East and Asia Minor. Hundreds of thousands of refugees, running away from conflict, ended up in Turkey and this is causing serious problems in Turkey. So the sooner conflict ends, the sooner many if not all of those refugees will be able to return to Syria. What is more, when the conflict in Syria is over many of those who sought refuge in Europe and elsewhere will be able to return to Syria. This way, many difficult issues several European countries are struggling to deal with will be resolved.

So, once again, thanks to the Russian Federation, there is hope for peace in a very troubled part of the Middle East and there is hope of being able to deal with the problems of refugees and the problems massive flow of refugees can and do create.

But the positive influence of the Russian Federation doesn't end in Middle East, Asia Minor, Europe and the USA. The Russian Federation is building up cooperation with African countries and in turn will create a much better environment, an environment for peaceful and democratic developments.