Canada closes Iranian embassy, suspends diplomatic ties

 

Source: Russia Today

http://rt.com/news/canada-suspends-ties-iran-635/

Closing ranks with the US and Israel, Canada has denounced Iran as the biggest threat to global security and said it will expel all of the Islamic Republic’s diplomats from its territory by September 12th.

"Canada views the government of Iran as the most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today," Foreign Minister John Baird said in a statement.

"Under the circumstances, Canada can no longer maintain a diplomatic presence in Iran … Diplomatic relations between Canada and Iran have been suspended," he added.

The Foreign Minister also blasted Iran for its support of Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, as well as Tehran's controversial nuclear program. The fact that the Canadian government is a staunch ally of Israel has also played a part in the decision to cut ties with Iran.

“The Iranian regime is providing increasing military assistance to the Assad regime; it refuses to comply with UN resolutions pertaining to its nuclear program; it routinely threatens the existence of Israel and engages in racist anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide," Baird’s statement claimed.

This statement by the Canadian FM was made during the APEC Summit currently underway in Vladivostok. And political analyst and the director of the Center for Research on Globalization Michel Chossudovsky told RT that it's no coinicidence such a platform was chosen for announcing the move – which, Chossudovsky believes, wasn't really made by Canada at all.

"This decision wasn’t taken in Ottawa, it was taken in Washington," Chossudovsky told RT.

He added that this form of diplomatic pressure may be just the first step of many more to come.

"All acts of mediations and diplomacy and peace-building are being scrapped in favor of a possible military strike on Iran".

Relations with Iran have been strained since former Canadian ambassador, Ken Taylor, helped rescue six Americans from Iran during the hostage crisis in 1980. Ties between the two states took and even bigger hit in 2003, after a freelance photographer with dual Canadian-Iranian citizenship died in custody after being arrested while taking photographs outside a Tehran prison. Following that incident Iran recalled its ambassador. The Islamic Republic also ordered Canada's ambassador to leave the country after trying unsuccessfully to come to an agreement on an exchange of ambassadors for some time.

Canada is certainly not the first country to cut ties with Tehran. The United States hasn't had an embassy in Iran since the 1980 hostage crisis. Britain also recalled its entire diplomatic staff in 2011, following a major attack on its embassy which it claims was sanctioned by the country's ruling elite. After the attack, Britain expelled Iranian diplomats from the UK.

Read More

Israel’s Ethnic Cleansing: Jerusalem to be “Arab Free” by 2015

By: Maath Musleh

Original Source: Alakhbar

http://english.al-akhbar.com/

 

Source: Global Research

http://www.globalresearch.ca/israels-ethnic-cleansing-jerusalem-to-be-arab-free-by-2015/

A Palestinian demonstrator lies next to his national flag to block a road during a protest against the confiscation of Palestinian land to expand Jewish settlements in the West Bank village of Nabi Saleh near Ramallah on 31 August 2012. (Photo: AFP – Abbas Momani)

The Israeli Government is racing against time in a bid to put the finishing touches on its plan to annex and Judaize East Jerusalem. Palestinians represent roughly 58 per cent of the residents of East Jerusalem today. The Israeli plans in place aim to decrease the percentage of Palestinians in East Jerusalem to about 10 percent.

Israel has been determined to force irreversible facts on ground since day one of the occupation. On 10 June 1967, the Israeli government demolished the Moroccan quarter next to the Western Wall to make a public space for Jewish worshipers, destroying 135 historic residential buildings.

In 1980, Israel officially declared the annexation of East Jerusalem by passing the Jerusalem Law in the Knesset, declaring all Jerusalem, West and East, as the united capital of Israel. The United Nations Security Council condemned this declaration in its resolution 478. This disapproval did not stop Israel from freely pursuing its goals.

The Israeli government has confiscated about 86 percent of the Palestinian land in East Jerusalem since the occupation.

The mastermind behind the Israeli plans for Jerusalem is former-mayor Teddy Kollek. The strategy he devised consists of two parts: seizing the land and driving out the Palestinians.The Israeli government seized the lands of East Jerusalem through creating the Law of Absentees, the building of settlements and the Apartheid wall. Demographic changes were also influenced by the increase of Jewish settlers in East Jerusalem. The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) estimated267,643 settlers in East Jerusalem living in 26 settlements end-of-2011.

As Israel annexed East Jerusalem, the state laws applied to the city. The Israeli government used the Absentees Property Law to seize vast areas of Palestinian land. This law had been passed in 1950 in a bid to legalize the acquisition of the lands of the Palestinian refugees expelled in 1947 and 1948.

In an interview with Al-Akhbar, Ziad Hammouri, director of the Jerusalem Center for Social & Economic Rights (JCSER) said: “The Israeli government has confiscated about 86 percent of the Palestinian land in East Jerusalem since the occupation.” The mass confiscations limited the expansion of the Palestinian neighborhoods and villages in Jerusalem.

The Apartheid Wall was built in a way to annex empty land to Jerusalem. In some cases, inhibited areas were annexed, claiming the land while rejecting the citizens. Al-Walajeh, a village south of Jerusalem, is an example. The Israeli government annexed vast areas of land in Walajeh and the houses on it. Currently, many Palestinians are living in their own houses “illegally” [according to Israeli laws] in the annexed areas. The same happened in areas in Anata and Beit Jala.

Jan de Jong, a geo-strategic planner at the Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs (PASSIA), said in an interview: “The Israeli government is working on drastically enlarging the settlements in Jerusalem.”

“The ring [Apartheid Wall] around Jerusalem is basically completed. You will be surprised to see how far the plans have already advanced…The old Oslo map might be changed,” added Jan de Jong.

Demographic Control

The tens of thousands of Palestinians whose residency will be revoked will be considered Absentees according to the Israeli law. Subsequently, all the properties they own in Jerusalem will be confiscated by the state.

According to PASSIA research, the Palestinian population in East Jerusalem decreased by 18.8 percent within the first weeks of the occupation. Within two years of the occupation, the percentage of Palestinians in East Jerusalem dropped from 100 percent to only 67.2 percent. In 2011 it dropped to only 58 percent (382,041 Palestinians).After the annexation of East Jerusalem, Jerusalemites were given a blue Jerusalem ID based on the Entry into Israel Law. This law was passed in the Knesset in 1952. It regulates the granting of a residency to non-Israeli citizens.

“The mere idea of granting us the blue ID based on this law, as if we are new-comers, means they were prepared to reduce the Palestinian population in Jerusalem at any time,” said Hammouri. According to the law, residency could be revoked in three cases: spending more than seven years abroad, acquiring residency in another country or getting a foreign citizenship.

Between 1967 and 2011, the Israeli government revoked the residency of 14,561 Palestinians in East Jerusalem, according to latest JCSER statistics. A UN High Commissioner for Human Rights report estimatedthat in 2010, 10,000 Palestinian children in East Jerusalem were unregistered because only one parent is a permanent resident.

Yakir Segev, who holds the East Jerusalem portfolio in the Jerusalem municipality, declared at Hebrew University in January 2010 that the Palestinian neighborhoods behind the separation wall were no longer part of Jerusalem.

In December 2011, Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barakat announcedthat the municipality would soon classify 70,000 citizens of Jerusalem as non-residents, referring to Palestinians living behind the wall. He added that these areas will be under the West Bank civil administration.

“This is a dangerous declaration,” said Hammouri. “It means that Palestinians in these areas will be subjected to the military law.”

Today, 290,000 Palestinians have the Jerusalem ID. According to Hammouri, between 100 thousand to 120 thousand of those live behind the wall.

“The municipality’s future plans will most probably include getting rid of highly-dense Palestinian neighborhoods in Jerusalem that are currently within the wall,” he added. “This plan will include Essawiyeh, Sur Baher, Im Tuba and Anata.”

The tens of thousands of Palestinians whose residency will be revoked will be considered Absentees according to the Israeli law. Subsequently, all the properties they own in Jerusalem will be confiscated by the state.

In 1995, The Israeli government introduced the concept of “Center of Life,” circumventing the Entry into Israel Law. “The Center of Life concept means that you are required to prove continuous residency in Jerusalem for at least two years,” said Hammouri. “The concept is vague. The government can define it in any way it wants.”

Through building the Apartheid wall, the Israeli government has already managed to get rid of many densely populated Palestinian villages and neighborhoods such as Abu Deis, Shuafat, Qalandia and others. Nonetheless, they remain under the jurisdiction of the Israeli municipality of Jerusalem. In these neighborhoods, there is an estimated 100,000 Palestinians who still hold the blue Jerusalem residency ID.

Palestinian residents of the neighborhoods that are just behind the wall spend most of their day in the City [inside the wall]. They come for work or education.

“Because at the end of the day they sleep at home behind the wall, their ‘center of life’ is not considered Jerusalem,” said Hammouri.

In the near future, politically active Palestinians in Jerusalem will be expelled under the Loyalty Law, it is one of the most ridiculous laws. They want us to be loyal to our occupiers.

In areas far from the wall [within the borders of the municipality of Jerusalem], Palestinians carrying Jerusalem IDs pay full taxes and receive medical and national insurance from the Israeli government. Governmental transactions are processed in special offices designated by the municipality inside a check point’s complex.In early 2011, the municipality of Jerusalem stopped requiring some residents of these areas to pay Arnona tax. Paying the Arnona tax is pre-condition to prove that their center of life is in Jerusalem. “These special governmental offices designated at check points are tricky,” said Hammouri. “The government uses them to collect data on Palestinians living behind the wall and subsequently revoking their residency under what their Center of Life concept.”

In early 2012, the Israeli government introduced a new magnetic card that replaces the current blue IDs. Currently, acquiring the card is optional. In two years time it will become obligatory for all Israeli citizens and Jerusalem residents.

This magnetic card contains biometric information, tax records, movement [between Jerusalem and the West Bank], records and other information. Hammouri expects that in the near future Jerusalemites will be required to apply for permits in order to enter the West Bank. “They will declare all checkpoints as international crossing points,” said Hammouri.

Starting November 2011, Jerusalemites were permitted to carry their Jerusalem IDs abroad. Palestinians from East Jerusalem are required to deposit their IDs in Allenby Bridge before they leave the country. Hammouri predicts that Jerusalemites living abroad will not be granted the new magnetic card and the blue IDs they carry will be no more than a useless piece of paper.

The Ghost of Jerusalem

The emptying of Jerusalem from its residents is happening in a “soft” manner. The Israeli government does not physically expel Palestinians; the revoking of residency is happening in stages. As time progresses, thousands of Jerusalemites will be banned from entering the city.

In 2010, the Israeli government set a precedent by ordering the expulsion of four Hamas Members of the Palestinian Legislative Council. The expulsion orders were based solely on their political activities. This comes under the Loyalty Law that will soon be effective on a wider scale.

Hamas MP Mohammed Abu Teir warned in 2010 that the expulsion order he received was the first in a series of orders that will see the expulsion of 315 politically active Palestinians in Jerusalem.

“In the near future, politically active Palestinians in Jerusalem will be expelled under the Loyalty Law,” said Hammouri. “It is one of the most ridiculous laws. They want us to be loyal to our occupiers.”

Palestinians are being “domesticated,” lulled into accepting the Israeli reality for years to come.

“Meanwhile, you will dream and live a fantasy that you are a Jerusalemite with an ID,” said Mahdi Abdel Hadi, head and founder of PASSIA. “But it will have no value because you are not part of the Israeli system.”In efforts to pursue their plans undisturbed, the Israeli government is “drugging” Palestinians. The restrictions on entering Jerusalem during this Ramadan were eased in an unprecedented way since the eruption of the Second Intifada in 2000. Ma’an News Agency reported that the Israeli government granted around 150,000 Palestinians permits to enter Jerusalem in Eid al-Fitr. Even employees of Palestinian security forces, who were previously banned from getting permits, were granted permits. Palestinians who had a security ban in their files were granted permits despite the security ban.

“Israelis are enjoying 100 percent security in the West Bank and Jerusalem,” said Mahdi. Palestinians are being “domesticated,” lulled into accepting the Israeli reality for years to come. Currently, the Israeli government is testing the waters of the Palestinians reaction. We are in the experimental phase of the Israeli plans for Jerusalem.

The Israeli infrastructure was built on the determination never to withdraw from East Jerusalem. In 2011, Israel finished building the light train in Jerusalem. The track of the light train connects settlements in East Jerusalem to the center of West Jerusalem. The main highway that connects Jerusalem to Tel Aviv, “Road 1”, crosses portions of lands occupied in 1967 [Latrun Area].

The Guardian published in March 2009 an EU report that says: “Israeli ‘facts on the ground’ – including new settlements, construction of the barrier, discriminatory housing policies, house demolitions, restrictive permit regime and continued closure of Palestinian institutions – increase Jewish Israeli presence in East Jerusalem, weaken the Palestinian community in the city, impede Palestinian urban development and separate East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank.”
The 2010 statistics of the Israeli National Insurance Institute says that 78 percent of Palestinians in Jerusalem are below the poverty line. Today, there are 20,000 standing demolition orders for Palestinian houses and installations in East Jerusalem.

At this rate, within two years there will be a minimal Palestinian presence in Jerusalem. Palestinian negotiators will be faced with new facts on ground that make it impossible to reach an acceptable agreement on the status of Jerusalem. The Israeli government continues to stall to buy time to finish its plans, while the international community plays along and their only actions are ink on paper.

 

Read More

Moscow to react to US Asian missile defense

Source: Russia Today

http://rt.com/politics/missile-defense-asia-concerns-577/

Russia has expressed its concern over American plans to deploy a new missile defense shield in Southeast Asia.

"The continuing growth of the US potential in what we call the Far East – the Asia-Pacific region – does not go unnoticed in Russia," Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said at a nonproliferation conference in Moscow. “We are closely following what is happening between the USA and its allies in Asia.”

According to the diplomat, “important events” are unfolding in the region and “a lot has already been achieved,” cites Interfax.

Moscow’s concerns about the situation arise from the technology involved, as well as the “geography and the US capability to deploy these assets in different locations.”

It is important that Washington eases these concerns. Otherwise, “there is a set of measures worked out by the Russian leadership,” Ryabkov noted.

Earlier, it was reported that Washington was planning to expand its missile defense in Asia in response to threats from North Korea and to counter China’s growing missile capabilities.

The buildup could include an early-warning radar system on a southern Japanese island and possibly another one in Southeast Asia. These two new radars would supplement the one already installed in Aomori Prefecture in northern Japan in 2006.

The US global missile defense shield – in particular its European sector – has long been a stumbling block in the relations between Moscow and Washington. Russia worries that the planned system may pose a threat to its national security. The US has so far refused to provide legally-binding guarantees that the European missile defense assets would not be targeted against Russia.

“The US missile defense system – is surely one of the key issues on today’s agenda because it involves Russia’s vital interests,” President Vladimir Putin said in an interview with RT.

The differences on the issue can only be solved if both sides accept as an axiom that they are “reliable partners and allies for each other.” That would mean the parties “jointly do missile threat assessments and control this defense system together,” Putin said.

The president stressed that Russia had done what it could and offered to work on the system together. However, the American partners are “refusing to go along.” Moscow is set to continue the dialogue on the matter, he stressed.

“But naturally, as our American partners proceed with developing their own missile defense we shall have to think of how we can defend ourselves and preserve the strategic balance,” Putin added.

In November last year, then-President Dmitry Medvedev said Russia could place offensive weaponry on its borders with Europe as one possible measure against the deployment of American elements of missile defense shield in the region.

Read More

After disastrous US job report, QE3 expected next week

 

US jobs growth slows sharply. QE3 coming next week

Source: Russia Today

http://rt.com/usa/news/qe3-jobs-employment-labor-610/

The percentage of able-bodied Americans searching for jobs has hit a 30-year-low, and Wall Street now expects the US Federal Reserve to announce a new round of quantitative easing as early as next week.

The US Labor Department released their workforce statistics for August 2012 on Friday, and the figures are far from what economists had expected.

The Labor Department announced this week that while the unemployment rate last month dropped slightly to 8.1 percent, July’s figure was revised to show that fewer jobs, in fact, were added that month. For August, the US economy added 96,000 new jobs, a substantially smaller figure than predicted. The median statistic that Bloomberg found after surveying nearly 100 economists came to 130,000 new jobs.

Additionally, the participation rate — the labor force as a percent of the population as a whole — charted at 63.5 percent, the lowest figure the country has seen since September 1981.

House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner was quick to come down on the Obama White House over the latest news, releasing a statement on Friday that attacks US President Barack Obama and his “failed promises to get our economy moving again.”

"Wages are stagnant, gas prices and health care costs are up, our national debt has surpassed $16 trillion and millions of Americans remain out of work or underemployed,” Speaker Boehner said, only hours after President Obama accepted the Democratic Party’s nomination to run for reelection.

“I’m very concerned about those of us who are unemployed and where are we going to find stable employment,” would-be worker Kimberly Hackler of White, Georgia tells Bloomberg. Hackler says she has been looking for work since November, applying for close to 200 positions in the last year but coming up empty handed after each try.

“I don’t see the economy improving anytime soon. I am concerned it could get worse,” Hackler says.

Some economists expect the same outcome, in fact, and predict that the Federal Reserve may now finally step up to the plate. According to them, now is the perfect time for the US central bank to start third round of quantitative easing, or QE3, to address America’s economic woes.

In a statement made early Friday, Goldman Sachs tells reporters that they expect the Fed to announce plans for QE3 during an already scheduled meeting next week among the Federal Open Market Committee, more than a year ahead of when they had originally anticipated the maneuver.

“With today’s August employment report showing a nonfarm payroll gain of 96,000 and an unemployment rate of 8.1% because of a drop in the participation rate, we expect a return to unsterilized and probably open-ended asset purchases at the September 12-13 FOMC meeting,” the bankers write.

“We now anticipate that the FOMC will announce a return to unsterilized asset purchases (QE3), mainly agency mortgage-backed securities but potentially including Treasury securities, at its September 12-13 FOMC meeting. We previously forecasted QE3 in December or early 2013. We continue to expect a lengthening of the FOMC’s forward guidance for the first hike in the funds rate from “late 2014” to mid-2015 or beyond,” Goldman adds.

Joseph Trevisani, chief market strategist at Worldwide Markets in, New Jersey, says to Reuters, "This weak employment report, in jobs, wages, hours worked and participation is probably the last piece the Fed needs before launching another round of quantitative easing next week.”

Last month, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told an audience at his annual Jackson Hole address, "The stagnation of the labor market in particular is a grave concern not only because of the enormous suffering and waste of human talent it entails, but also because persistently high levels of unemployment will wreak structural damage on our economy that could last for many years.” The Fed has been thought to be preparing a round of quantitative easing for the last year amid dire employment levels, but the Labor Department’s latest news may have finally pushed them over the edge.

Read More

Quebec premier announces resignation after electoral defeat

Quebec's outgoing Premier Jean Charest

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/09/07/260220/quebec-premier-announces-resignation/

Jean Charest has announced his resignation as the head of Quebec's ruling Liberal Party and consequently the province’s premier, a day after the party suffered a humiliating defeat in the provincial elections.

Charest, who has been the premier of the majority French-speaking province for nine years, said on Wednesday that he had decided to leave politics in the coming days after consulting with his family.

"The decision was unanimous. I will leave my post as leader of the Liberal Party of Quebec in a few days, once a new government is formed," he told reporters at a news conference at the National Assembly in Quebec City.

Charest said he was stepping down without regrets. “I'm going home now. I thank you for the privilege that you gave me to enable me to be your premier."

On Tuesday, the 54-year-old lost his seat to Pauline Marois of the Parti Quebecois (PQ), who will become the province's first woman premier.

The PQ formed a minority government by winning 54 of the provincial legislature’s 125 seats. With 50 seats, the Liberal Party was relegated to the opposition.

The liberals started losing popularity after proposing a university tuition fee hike, which sparked months of massive street protests across the province.

The newly-elected prime minister has promised to revoke the controversial tuition hike.

During the electoral campaigns, Marois also promised that if elected, she would call for a referendum on the separation of Quebec from Canada.

Read More

Dempsey Backs Away from Obama’s Threat to Intervene in Syria

 

By: John Glaser

http://antiwar.com/

Source: Global Research

http://www.globalresearch.ca/dempsey-backs-away-from-obamas-threat-to-intervene-in-syria/

The top general of America’s military last week backed away from President Obama’s threats to intervene militarily in Syria against the Assad regime, warning that the worst-case scenario would be some kind of failed state in the embattled country.

Chairman of the Joint Chief’s of Staff General Martin Dempsey stressed while on a trip to London that direct military action in Syria, even simply no-fly zones, might be beyond the US and NATO’s capabilities and counter to their interests.

Last week President Obama warned that his “calculation” to refrain from direct military intervention in Syria “could change” if Syria’s chemical or biological weapons begin “moving around or being utilized,” describing the WMD issue as a “red line” that would prompt direct military action, like setting up safe zones, no-fly zones, or worse.

But Dempsey explained it wouldn’t be that easy. He said frequent comparison of the Syrian situation with that in Libya, where a “no-fly zone” was imposed following a United Nations resolution, is at best a source of “amusement.”

General Dempsey warned that possible safe zones for refugees were not being considered for inside Syria, cautioning that imposing them could open the path to a breakout of war.

“If you chose to establish [a safe zone/no-fly zone] you would assume the responsibility for protecting it. If you are tasked to protect it you have to look at those who might seek to attack it or to influence it and that could take you, depending on weapons systems, it could take you to a limited no-fly zone it could take you to the point of having to interdict air and ballistic missile systems,” he said.

As far as forcibly ousting the Assad regime, Dempsey said, such a move would be far too destabilizing. He said a failed state in Syria would be the worst-case scenario and warned against allowing armed extreme jihadists and rebels with ties to al-Qaeda to increase their influence and expand control in a post-Assad Syria.

 

Read More

America’s Takeover of the United Nations

By: Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

Source: Global Research

http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-takeover-of-the-united-nations/

The calls at the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit in Tehran for reforming the United Nations and democratizing the Security Council were not exactly new. These calls for UN reform were embodied by the conference’s dictum of “lasting peace through joint global governance.” These demands have been made over and over again by various countries and groups throughout the years.

Nor was everyone present at the NAM gala in Tehran a friend of Iran or open to the Iranian proposals for reforming the United Nations. The visibly shaken Jeffrey Feltman, who was uncomfortably sitting with Iranian officials in Tehran alongside his new boss Ban Ki-moon, can testify to all this. Feltman is a clear symbol of how contaminated the United Nations has become by the imperialist interests of Washington.

The manipulation of the United Nations for imperialist interests, however, goes back a long way. From its inception, the United Nations was meant to facilitate the global influence of the US after the Second World War. The idea of the United Nations, which gets its name from the military coalition (called the United Nations) of the Allied countries that was formed against Germany and the Axis countries, was based on an agreement drafted by the US and the UK during the Second World War. This agreement, the Atlantic Charter, was written out while the US was officially neutral, but secretly supported the British war effort against Germany and its Axis allies by sending supplies to Britain through Canada. The US would later use the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in Hawaii as a justification for entering the war and getting the other Allies to accept the Anglo-American Atlantic Charter during the war and then at the San Francisco Conference in 1945.

The United Nations Security Council

The membership of the UN grew from fifty-one to a hundred and fifty-nine members between 1945 and 1985, with most of the new member countries being former colonies. The UN was used as a tool to control most these former Western European and American colonies of the Third World. At first the US and its post-war allies maintained their domination over the newly formed UN and the former colonies through their numbers and then through a Western Bloc monopoly over the structures of the United Nations. Hereto this monopoly includes control over the agencies and permanent veto-wielding chairs of the fifteen-member Security Council of the United Nations.

The Security Council above all has been used by the US as a means of protecting its interests. The purpose of the Security Council veto is to reject any international resolutions and consensuses against the national interests (or more precisely the interests of the ruling elites) of the US and the other major post-World War II powers. Except for the rival Soviet Union, the US originally controlled or heavily influenced the other three permanent veto-wielding members of the UN Security Council. Britain and the US were essentially confederated and had integrated in 1941 with one another through the Anglo-American Atlantic Charter. France, as a declining power like the UK, was heavily dependent on the United States. The Chinese seat was also originally held by the Kuomintang (Chinese Nationalist Party) which was a US client.

US General Albert C. Wedemeyer was the chief of staff to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, the leader of Kuomintang-ruled China before Kai-shek fled to Taiwan after the Communist Party of China took over the mainland. The US even envisioned a role for the Kuomintang in governing the former French colonies of Indo-China. Only in 1971 would Washington lose control over the Chinese seat at the UN Security Council when the People’s Republic of China was recognized as the legitimate representative of the Chinese people by the majority of the UN General Assembly and therefore handed over Taiwan’s permanent seat at the UN Security Council.

While the Soviet Union originally made the most vetoes at the UN Security Council, the situation began to change towards the second half of the Cold War and in the post-Cold War era when the US began to take the lead in making vetoes. Ironically, the US and its allies are saying that the international system is failing now due to the double vetoes of China and Russia preventing foreign intervention in Syria. No similar complaints have been made about the numerous vetoes cast by Washington in support of Israel.

Eventually the UN Security Council went beyond the function of protecting US interests after the collapse of the Soviet Union. It became a tool for projecting US interests globally as Washington began to push for unipolar post-Cold War hegemony. The Chinese and Russian double vetoes signal an end to both Pax Americana and the use of the UN Security Council to project US power.

The Secretariat of the United Nations

Besides the United Nations Security Council, the Secretariat of the United Nations has been predominately under the control of the US and its allies. At first this took place because the US and the Western Bloc had numerical superiority at the United Nations. Thus, the first two secretaries-general of the UN were from the Western European kingdoms of Norway, and Sweden. Prior to this Baron Hubert Gladwyn from the United Kingdom was the acting secretary-general of the UN. Swedish diplomat Dag Hammarskjold would visibly serve US and Western Bloc interests to the point that the Soviets and others would demand he be removed from the UN Secretariat.

As the Western Bloc began to lose its numerical advantage, control over the Secretariat would be maintained through the Security Council. The UN Security Council does this by filtering all the candidates for the top UN post in the Secretariat. Secretaries-general of the UN are appointed by the UN General Assembly based on the recommendation of the UN Security Council. Thus, the US and other permanent members of the Security Council have vetoes that can eliminate any candidates that would be hostile to their interests.

Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev’s condemnations about the Secretariat of the United Nations, which helped remove nationalist leaders from power across Africa and the Third World, have a resonating truth to them. After a long streak of secretaries-general that were predominately favorable to the Western Bloc, the Non-Aligned Movement would push a NAM candidate into the UN Secretariat. The NAM’s position is the basis for the elevation of Egyptian diplomat Boutros Boutros-Ghali’s to the post of UN secretary-general in 1992.

Bourtos-Ghali was the closest thing to the last independent secretary-general of the United Nations. The world, however, rapidly changed since the end of the Cold War and Washington expected a far greater degree of subservience from the Secretariat of the UN. After the Cold War UN secretaries-general were expected to act as loyal US stewards. This would start with the Ghanaian UN career bureaucrat Kofi Annan.

Kofi Annan: An Enabler of “Responsibility to Protect”

To his credit Annan is a shrewd diplomatic figure that knows how to sit on the fence, but he has cunningly served the US while appearing circumvent. Aside from the public reports about the involvement of Annan and his son Kojo in the UN’s Iraq oil-for-food scandal, the former secretary-general has a history of legitimizing US interventionism and the occupation of other UN members. Career US diplomat Richard Holbrooke, who was one of the central figures involved in the balkanization of Yugoslavia, praised Annan as one of the most supportive figures for Washington’s foreign policy in the Balkans. This is why Boutros Boutros-Ghali was pushed aside from the secretary-generalship of the UN by Washington’s veto to make way for Annan.

Annan did Washington’s bidding in the French-speaking Caribbean island-republic of Haiti. He followed the script of George W. Bush Jr. and the neo-cons to a tee in Haiti and legitimized the US-led coup involving Canada and France that removed Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. He would criminally give Washington the cover of the United Nations in the occupation of Haiti.

Kofi Annan was also instrumental in helping to put together the “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) doctrine with Canadian diplomats to justify foreign military intervention. Two years after the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq he would give his rubber stamp to R2P in 2005, which would merely become a reinvented term replacing NATO’s “humanitarian intervention.” Before Annan was appointed as the joint peace envoy of the Arab League and United Nations to resolve the Syria crisis he participated as a panelist in a discussion about R2P and interventionism on November 4, 2011. The event is important, because it gives an idea of where Annan stands.

The panel (Responsibility to Protect – 10 Years On: Reflections on its Past, Present and Future) was undeniably supportive of R2P and NATO. Annan’s comments were no exception. The former secretary-general and soon-to-be peace envoy told the audience that he held a sympathetic position towards military intervention by the US and NATO. He specifically told the audience that he supported NATO’s military intervention in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and he tacitly gave his support to a similar scenario in Syria. Two of the figures involved in the event, Allan Rock (president of the University of Ottawa and former Canadian ambassador to the UN) and Lloyd Axworthy (president of the University of Winnipeg and the former Canadian foreign minister), co-authored an article about R2P praising the war in Libya as a victory for R2P a week earlier in preparation for Annan’s arrival to Ottawa.

Ban Ki-moon: An Executioner of “Responsibility to Protect”

The South Korean diplomat Ban Ki-moon is even more of an Atlanticist steward than Annan. His record has been very abysmal. One of the first things he did in 2007 was to join the US in criticizing the nations of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva for “singling out Israel” for its human rights violations.

In 2008, Ban Ki-moon would secretly negotiate and sign a cooperation agreement with NATO. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov would express shock and the Kremlin would be angered by Ban Ki-moon’s conniving. R2P would be central to the cooperation agreement between NATO and the UN Secretariat. NATO’s “humanitarian intervention” was shifted to a worldwide level through the cover of potential military intervention under the banner of the UN.

Moreover, this tool of intervention could only be harnessed and authorized by the undemocratic UN Security Council and its veto-wielding members. In parallel the under secretary-general posts for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief were handed over to British career diplomats, one of which is Valerie Amos who has sinisterly tried to bypass the Syrian government in establishing ties with Syrian non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

In 2011, Ban Ki-moon took steps to personally lobby and pressure all the countries of the Mediterranean Sea to support Israel and prevent any humanitarian aid from reaching the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip by ship. Ban Ki-moon ignored Tel Aviv’s illegal military blockade of Gaza and its violation of international law. Instead in Orwellian terms he demanded for the enforcement of the illegal Israeli blockade, which he called the “legal channels of the Israeli government pertaining to the flow of goods and aid” to Gazans. In 2012, Ban Ki-moon also refused to meet the representatives of the families of Palestinian victims and captives inside Israel while he was visiting Gaza. Inversely, Ban Ki-moon made personal efforts to secure the release of the captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. As a result of Ban Ki-moon’s bias many Palestinians hurled shoes and stones at his UN convoy as it entered the Gaza Strip.

Every nuance in Ban Ki-moon’s voice and every line in his statements serve Washington’s interests. Before the secretary-general even left to Tehran for the NAM summit, his spokesman Farhan Haq told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) that his boss was going to Tehran as part of his responsibilities and that the visit “does not confer legitimacy” on his Iranian hosts. Giving political evaluations of this type about the legitimacy of any government is a breach of the mandate of a UN secretary-general, who is supposed to be a neutral figure and moderator representing all the members of the UN. Moreover, Ban Ki-moon would go out of his way to defend Israel at the NAM summit. His speech would also be coordinated with the politicized report of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which was meant to tarnish Tehran’s image during the NAM summit.

In regards to both Libya and Syria, Ban Ki-moon has followed the US and NATO script for R2P and regime change. When a major propaganda effort was launched against Syria following the Houla Massacre, Ban Ki-moon and other UN officials quickly followed the US line and condemned Damascus at a special session of the UN General Assembly in New York City. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s June 8 condemnation was made even though it was widely documented that anti-government forces were responsible for the murders in Houla.

The top UN official would say that every passing day was bringing “new additions to the grim catalogue of atrocities: assaults against civilians, brutal human rights violations, mass arrests, torture, execution-style killings of whole families” in Syria. He would conclude that the Syrian government had “lost all legitimacy” and had to step aside. Again this was another violation of the neutral position that the secretary-general of the UN is mandated to espouse.

Jeffrey Feltman: The Real Secretary-General of the United Nations?

Ban Ki-moon’s appointment of the hollow and comical US career diplomat Jeffrey Feltman as the UN under secretary-general for political affairs is just one of his latest moves that serve US interests. Feltman, a shameless careerist who has done whatever he could to promote himself, has been exclusively in the service of justifying the unjustifiable and pretending to be an expert on the Middle East. As a top US diplomat in the Middle East, unlike his counterparts from other countries he failed to master any of the local languages in the region. Moreover, he was complicit in the 2006 Israeli war on Lebanon and a US attaché to two foreign occupations.

Like Robert Gates, Feltman is a carryover to the Obama Administration from the Bush Jr. Administration. He was a special assistant to American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) heavyweight Martin Indyk in Israel and a representative in the US Consulate General in Jerusalem. Everything he knows about the Middle East is shaped and spoon-fed to him by the biased views of AIPAC. He was the representative of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Anglo-American occupied Iraq and later a central force for promoting sectarian hate and division in Lebanon as the US ambassador in Beirut before he was promoted to the job of US assistant-secretary of state responsible for the Middle East. The UN’s Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), a political circus that Washington has tried to use to indict and isolate first Syria and then later Hezbollah, is widely known to be his pet project.

Before Feltman even arrived in Tehran, one of the first things he did was to declare that Iran was sending weapons to Syria. This was immediately picked up by his friends (contacts) in the Israeli media who have favored him over the years as one of Israel’s most ardent supporters. Among others, the Israeli media also slyly tried to mention Feltman’s name as less as possible and instead attribute his statement to the entire United Nations as a means of hiding the bias source of the statements and giving his account further weight.

Feltman’s appointment by Ban Ki-moon shows just how much control Washington has over the UN Secretariat. His appointment as the individual responsible for “political affairs” says a lot about the political perspective that the UN Secretariat either has or will adopt. If Hillary Clinton had ordered US officials to spy on Ban Ki-moon as was reported in 2010, there should also be no doubt that Jeffery Feltman was monitoring Ban Ki-moon in Tehran for the US Department of State and that Feltman will brief Washington about the NAM summit. In essence Feltman was the informal representative of the US at the NAM summit. It is also a very legitimate question to ask whether Feltman or Ban Ki-moon is in charge of the UN Secretariat.

Iran had announced that it intended to propose a peace plan, with the support of Russia and China, to end the Syrian crisis on the sidelines of the NAM conference. America’s emissaries were at the summit too. The invitation of the Turks to the NAM summit and the presence of Feltman and the officials of the Arab countries that are part of the siege against Damascus, such as Qatar’s Emir Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani, are all very likely to have ties to negotiations over Syria. Same goes for the presence of Egypt’s Morsi. The US and its clients have realized that their plans in Syria have not gone through and this could secretly have brought them to the table in Tehran or elsewhere in the future.

A New Alternative to the UN is Needed

The “real” international community slapped the Obama Administration in the face from Tehran. The US and all the UN structures and agencies, including the IAEA, under Washington’s control were retorted when all of the NAM’s one hundred and twenty members unanimously supported the Iranian nuclear energy program and declared their opposition to the unilateral sanctions against Iran in their final communiqué. There is still, however, more that is needed. As long as the United Nations is not reformed these very same countries will be walking in the shadows of the US and its allies from NATOistan in the hallways of the United Nations.

The problems go beyond the Security Council. The Secretariat is also a part of the problem. Washington will turn to the UN Secretariat more and more as the Russians and Chinese begin to challenge the US and its allies at the Security Council.

The UN has become even more contaminated by Atlanticist projects to use it to legitimize and launch imperialist military campaigns to enforce a declining system of privilege and unjust global governance that Washington heads. The motivations behind the drafting and institutionalizing of R2P at the UN are aimed at helping to prevent this decline. This is why that either reform or an alternative to the United Nations is needed now more than ever.

 

Read More