domingo, 31 de julio de 2011

BREAKING NEWS
(From 10. 7. 2011 to 15. 7. 2011)

Circumstances made that the ‘Grand Opening’ of the BOLIVARIAN CENTER OF STRATEGIC DOCUMENTATION AND ANALYSIS fell on the Bastille Day, on the French National Day which is celebrated on July 14th of each year.  It commemorates the 1790 Fête de la Fédération, held on the first anniversary of the storming of the Bastille on July! 4th, 1789. 

It is a day of both popular festivities and patriotic fever, with public balls and gorgeous fireworks on the eve of the largest military parade in Europe, as troops march from the Arc de Triomphe, at the top of the Champs Elysées, to the Place de la Concorde, passing by the French government and its special guests.

The stones of the Arc de Triomphe are engraved with the names of the victories and of the great military commanders of the French Armies of the Revolution and Napoleonic Wars, one of these names uniting the histories of both France and Venezuela in their most glorious era: that of general Miranda.

Today however a cloud of blood and tears darkens the reflection of the summer sun on the golden letters which traditionally glitter on the flags of the French regiments: ‘Honneur et Patrie’.  The reason is the death in Afghanistan of five French soldiers, fallen for interests foreign to those of France, on fields which cannot be called ‘of Honor´, indeed under US supreme command and within a US conduct of war, for US strategic objectives only.

They fell on the 13th, just a day after President N. Sarkozy, wearing a bullet proof jacket, visited French troops in Afghanistan, announcing that he would keep a French military presence there, however reduced by a quarter, which means, by a thousand servicemen and women.

On the same day, Nicolas Sarkozy’s friend, George W. Bush, was the target of Human Rights Watch, who asked for a criminal enquiry against the former US president ; a disgrace which, hopefully, will be shared by the President of the French Republic for the war crimes committed in Libya, on the Ivory Coast and other places, as well as for the death of French servicemen, fallen as cheap mercenaries for US interests.
 


13.7.2011 / 5 French soldiers were killed, 4 other seriously injured by a suicide-attack in the district of Kapisa, in eastern Afghanistan.

Left to right : Caporal-Chef Sébastien VERMEILLE (SIRPA Terre), Adjudant Emmanuel TECHER (17e RGP), Adjudant Laurent MARSOL, Lieutenant Thomas GAUVIN (1er RCP). The fifth soldier’s family objected the publishing of his picture.

tbijscaled

Human Rights Watch calls for investigation of Bush for torture

July 14th, 2011 | by Bureau Reporter |


It is imperative to launch criminal investigations into former US president Bush due to ”overwhelming evidence of torture by the Bush administration,” a Human Rights Watch report has said.
According to the campaign group, its 107-page study entitled ”Getting Away with Torture: The Bush Administration and Mistreatment of Detainees,” includes “substantial information” on the ordering of practices such as waterboarding, secret CIA prisons, and rendition of detainees to countries where they were tortured.
Human Rights Watch says its findings warrant the criminal investigations not only of Bush, but also his senior administration officials, including former Vice President Dick Cheney, Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and CIA Director George Tenet.
The group said by not conducting a thorough investigation, President Obama had failed to meet US obligations under the Convention against Torture.
They added: “If the US government does not pursue credible criminal investigations, other countries should prosecute US officials involved in crimes against detainees in accordance with international law.”

Other Human Rights Watch report:

Libyan rebels abused civilians: Human Rights Watch


Territory north of the Nafusa Mountains is currently an active sector of the front line
The campaign group, Human Rights Watch, has accused rebels in Libya of looting, arson and the abuse of civilians.
Observers from the New York-based group say they have witnessed some incidents themselves, and have interviewed witnesses to others in territory recently seized by rebels.
A rebel spokesman talking to reporters in Brussels has denied the allegations.
Accusations of abuse by both sides have circulated since the rebellion against Col Muammar Gaddafi began in February.
The latest allegations focus on four towns seized by rebels in the west of the country in the last month: al-Awaniya, Rayayinah, Zawiyat al-Bagul and al-Qawalish.
"The rebel conduct was disturbing," said Fred Abrahams, a special adviser to Human Rights Watch (HRW).
"We documented fairly widespread looting of homes and shops, the burning of some homes of suspected Gaddafi supporters and - most disturbingly - the vandalisation of three medical clinics [and] local small hospitals, including the theft of some of the medical equipment."
He said the Libyan government had committed more serious crimes, but that did not excuse the behaviour of the rebels.
"Our aim is to hold all combatants, all militaries - whether they're organised and states and governments or rebels groups - to the same standards, and it's very much also a warning shot across the bow, because of these other areas they are approaching. We're deeply worried about how they might behave and treat civilians in those areas."
A senior rebel leader has rejected the Human Rights Watch claims.
"This is not the case in the liberated areas," rebel spokesman Mahmoud Jibril told reporters in Brussels.
In the latest development from this sector of the frontline, rebel fighters have said they have retaken al-Qawalish, a village about 100km (60 miles) south of Tripoli.
The BBC's Paul Wood: "The rebel frontline is collapsing"
Earlier, forces loyal to Col Gaddafi seized control after the rebels took to their vehicles and fled without a fight, reversing weeks of steady advances, BBC World Affairs editor John Simpson reports.
Our correspondent says this shows how feeble the rebel forces can be.
Even though they are only an hour's drive from Tripoli, Wednesday's fighting will presumably encourage Col Gaddafi to keep up his resistance for a while longer, he adds.
The retreat came after rebel spies reported a build-up of military vehicles in Garyan, the last major pro-Gaddafi military base before the capital.
But by the evening, the rebels had staged a successful counterattack, spokesman Abdurahman Alzintani told Reuters news agency.

 

The Bureau Recommends: ‘Secret CIA prisons in Somalia’

July 13th, 2011 | by Bureau Reporter | Published in All Stories, Bureau Recommends  |  1 Comment
The CIA is conducting extra-judicial interrogations at secret prisons in Somalia, an investigation by The Nation magazine reports.
Suspected Islamic militants are seized from parts of east Africa and taken to underground cells in Somalia’s capital, Mogadishu, where they are held without charge and interrogated by the CIA and Somali agents who are in their pay, the US weekly reports.
The article says: “Former prisoners described the cells as windowless and the air thick, moist and disgusting. Prisoners, they said, are not allowed outside.
“Some have been detained for a year or more. According to one former prisoner, inmates who had been there for long periods would pace around constantly, while others leaned against walls rocking.”
The Nation reports that the prisons are part of an “expanding counterterrorism programme in Somalia” which includes a training intended to develop an indigenous force to combat Islamic militants in the region.
The article comes just weeks after the Bureau reported that seven people were killed in the first confirmed hostile US drone attack in Somalia.
A follow-up story by CNN featured an unnamed CIA official who said detainees were held by Somali forces and the CIA only supported interrogations in recent months.
“He described the number of times the CIA was present as ‘very small,’ adding that he would only say it was ‘one or two times’,” CNN reports.

The Bureau Recommends: ‘Secret CIA prisons in Somalia’

July 13th, 2011 | by Bureau Reporter | Published in All Stories, Bureau Recommends  |  1 Comment
The CIA is conducting extra-judicial interrogations at secret prisons in Somalia, an investigation by The Nation magazine reports.
Suspected Islamic militants are seized from parts of east Africa and taken to underground cells in Somalia’s capital, Mogadishu, where they are held without charge and interrogated by the CIA and Somali agents who are in their pay, the US weekly reports.
The article says: “Former prisoners described the cells as windowless and the air thick, moist and disgusting. Prisoners, they said, are not allowed outside.
“Some have been detained for a year or more. According to one former prisoner, inmates who had been there for long periods would pace around constantly, while others leaned against walls rocking.”
The Nation reports that the prisons are part of an “expanding counterterrorism programme in Somalia” which includes a training intended to develop an indigenous force to combat Islamic militants in the region.
The article comes just weeks after the Bureau reported that seven people were killed in the first confirmed hostile US drone attack in Somalia.
Obviously, the executers are Somalis, those who pay and order them are CIA agents.
A follow-up story by CNN featured an unnamed CIA official who said detainees were held by Somali forces and the CIA only supported interrogations in recent months.
“He described the number of times the CIA was present as ‘very small,’ adding that he would only say it was ‘one or two times’,” CNN reports.


Two weeks ago,

tbijscaled

Gave following reports about SOMALIA :

Somalia targeted in US ‘drone war’

June 30th, 2011 | by Chris Woods |

US Special Forces can call on Navy assets in the region. Photo, US Department of Defense
A military drone operated by elite US Special Forces has targeted al Qaeda-linked militants in Somalia, killing several people. The attack marks the first confirmed hostile use of drones in the east African country.
Bureau research suggests unmanned surveillance craft have been used over Somalia for some time as part of a broader military campaign. In October 2009 a US drone was reportedly shot down over the south of the country. On previous occasions the US has allegedly flown combat missions against Somali targets from a base in eastern Ethiopia.
According to the Washington Post a drone has struck at two leaders of the al-Shabab militant group, declared a terrorist organisation by the US and others. The 23 June attack in Kismayo, southern Somalia – originally reported as a helicopter strike – also killed ‘many’ foreign fighters.
The unnamed leaders are said to have ‘direct ties’ to US-born militant cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. Now based in Yemen, Awlaki has been linked to that country’s al Qaeda movement and to a number of terrorist plots against the US and its allies.
Recent US military actions in Somalia*
January 7 2007 – US gunship attacks militant convoy killing 10
January 22 2007 – Reported JSOC airstrike against militants
June 1 2007 – US cruise missile strike kills up to 10 alleged militants, including reportedly from Eritrea, Yemen, UK, Sweden and US
March 3 2008 - Cruise missile attack from US ships. Six die, though not apparent target.
May 2008 – US naval-launched cruise missiles kill Aden Hashi Ayro, head of Al Shabab
September 14 2009 - US Special Forces launch helicopter raid into Somalia, killing Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan, wanted in connection with Mombassa attacks
October 19 2009 – US drone reported shot down over southern Somalia
April 6 2011 – Airstrike kills an al-Shabab commander
June 23 2011 – Drone strike kills “many”, wounds two al-Shabab leaders
* The Bureau’s analysis is based on credible reports. However, given the covert nature of US operations this should be viewed as a partial list.
JSOC campaign extends to Somalia
As in Yemen, US military operations against al-Shabab and other militant groups in Somalia are carried out by the Joint Special Operations Command. JSOC is made up of ultra-elite, so-called Tier One Special Forces units that were also responsible for the recent killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan.
JSOC has its own helicopter and drone fleets. It also has access to US Navy assets in the region. Analysis by the Bureau shows that in recent years JSOC has employed cruise missiles, AC-130 gunships and helicopter assaults in Somalia against al-Qaeda linked targets.
In September 2009, for example, a helicopter-borne JSOC raid reportedly killed a senior militant. After a lull of 18 months JSOC activity appears again to be on the rise. In April an airstrike reportedly killed a local al-Shabab commander.
Last week’s strike is further indicator of a significant escalation in US actions in the region. The Bureau recently reported on a major surge in JSOC drone strikes against militants in Yemen. Somalia becomes the sixth recorded nation to be at the receiving end of US drone strikes – after Afghanistan, Yemen, Iraq, Pakistan and Libya.






Hezbollah Warns Israel against Attacks on Iran, Lebanon

The Lebanese Hezbollah Movement on Tuesday warned the Zionist regime of Israel against launching attacks on Iran or Lebanon, vowing that it would give Tel Aviv a crushing response if Israel commits such a big mistake.

(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) - The Lebanese Hezbollah Movement on Tuesday warned the Zionist regime of Israel against launching attacks on Iran or Lebanon, vowing that it would give Tel Aviv a crushing response if Israel commits such a big mistake.    

"The Zionist regime knows very well that if it decides to pose a threat to the Islamic Republic of Iran and embarks on committing such a grave mistake, it won't be able to escape (the retaliation of) the Lebanese Hezbollah," Hezbollah's envoy to Tehran Abdullah Safieddin said in a meeting here in Tehran on Tuesday.

With regard to Lebanon, Safieddin said, "We will definitely smash Israel if this occupying and corrupt regime wants to commit another mistake and wage another attack (on Lebanon)."

Meantime, Safieddin predicted an imminent end to the Zionist regime of Israel whether or not a new war erupts in the region.

Political observers believe that Israel's failure in its war on the Lebanese Hezbollah has discouraged the Zionist regime from waging an attack on Iran.

They believe that the Zionist regime of Israel has already tested its military power in its attack on Lebanon and Hezbollah, and it lacks the necessary power and courage to attack Iran.

Iran has warned that it would target Israel and its worldwide interests in case it comes under attack by the Tel Aviv.

Meantime, US military leaders have warned that strikes could be catastrophic to US national security interests and could engulf the Middle-East in a "cala
mitous" regional war.

July 13th, 2011 / Inde : Three deadly explosions rocked different locations in the Indian financial capital of Mumbai Wednesday evening. According to news reports, at least 21 people died and 141 more were injured in the three near simultaneous blasts, which struck the busy commercial areas of Dadar, Opera House and Zaveri Bazaar.

This was the most murderous attack since the 60 hours siege of ten heavily armed gunmen which caused the death of 166 people in November 2008, including Rabbi Gavriel and Rivka Holtzberg and four of their guests at the Chabad House.
"It is a new attack on the heart of India", commented Prithviraj Chavan, governor of the State of Maharashtra, having Mumbay as a capitale, commentant, "a challenge to the sovereignty of India".
So far, Indian leaders seem to observe a wise moderate stance, although accusing, as expected, ‘islamic terrorists’. 
July 10th.2011 / Afganistan. Leon Panetta, the former CIA director now the boss of the Pentagon, visited US troops and their local afghan Lackeys.
Documents ASSOCIATED PRESS


US Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta greets members of the helicopter medivac crew attached to the 115th Combat Support Hospital while making an unannounced visit to Camp Dwyer,  Sunday July 10th, 2011, in southern Afghanistan.  Panetta visited troops in southern Afghanistan as part of his first trip to the country since taking up his post and ahead of a withdrawal of some US forces.

US Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta, left. and senior members of the Afghan Army watch demonstrations of mine and IED detection and clearing during an unannounced visit by the Secretary to Camp Dwyer, Sunday July 10, 2011, in southern Afghanistan.


US Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta, right,  has a brief chat with his US Generals Anthony Rock, left, and Lloyd Austin, late Sunday July 10, 2011, during an unannounced visit by the U.S. Secretary to Camp Dwyer, Sunday July 10, 2011, in southern Afghanistan. (AP Photo/Paul J. Richards, Pool)
Credit: ASSOCIATED PRESS

July 10.2011 / France, after Russia and China, called for putting an immediate end to the strategy of air-bombings against Libya. The French MOD Gérard Longuet declared that the time had come to both loyalists and rebels to « sit at a same table and find a compromise », admitting that there was « no solution by use of force ».  The day before, the general staff of NATO had pretended that its air-force had performed a new surgical strike on a libyan missile-battery near Tawurgha, in the south of Misrata, but the people of that village denied any military presence in the targeted area, as it was lately. It is now NATO’s turn to be the target… of criticism. For instance, by the attendants of a press-conference, especially by journalists of Jane’s Defense Weekly.



July 12.2011  / The absolute majority of the French Parliament ‘authorized’ the prolongation of the French intervention in Libya.  None of the deputies questioned about the real aims or about the preparation of the war.  On the next day, the District attorney of the Supreme Court of Libya, Mohammed Zikri al-Mahjoubi, announced that over 1 100 civilians had been killed and 4500 injured since march 19.


July 11. 2011 /  Stray bullets from a US Army firing range hit civilian buildings in the southern German town of Grafenwöhr during shooting practice.  This small german town in Bavaria lies close to a famous area of army training.  In particular, the famous Spanish “Division Azul” was drilled there in 1941.  Since 1945, the training ground is used by the US Army, sometimes causing mayhem amongst the population. Both the US military and German police say they are investigating why the 12.7-millimeter rounds, fired from a four-wheel-drive vehicle, hit buildings outside the training ground.  The machine-gun shots hit three buildings inside the training ground, and a vocational school, a house, and a garage some five kilometers from the training range.  Ten years ago, a shell struck a German elementary school near the training grounds, where troops were training before heading to Afghanistan.

July 14..2011 / The US MOD admitted that a foreign power had hijacked some 24.000 classified files, through a cyber-intrusion.
July 13.2011 /  According to the Iranian news agency Farsnews and to the daily newspaper As-Safir, the US and French ambassadors Robert Ford and Eric Chevalier had an illegal trip to the city of Hama, in order to support rebel forces there. The former seized the opportunity to transfer to Hama bugging and spying devices. This adventure provoked popular protest demonstrations at their embassies in Damascus. Numerous spying devices have been discovered by Syrian security forces all over the country, mostly on the balconies of houses facing official buildings.
July 12.2008 / Pakistan. 22 ‘rebels’ were killed by 4 missiles launched in two attacks by drones of the CIA, one on the city of Birmel, in southern Waziristan, the other on the city of Miranshah at the Afghan border in northern Waziristand. One day before, a bomb attack killed 5 attendants of a political meeting. More details to come.
July 14.2011 /  13 Turkish soldiers and 7 Kurdish rebels died in a combat which was qualified as the most violent for three years. A day before, a commando of Al Qaeda was captured in Turkey : it was poised to perform bomb attacks against embassies, especially the US embassy.
July 14.2011 / Simultaneously a wave of terrorism stroke Algeria. 2 servicemen were killed, 6 other injured in two different attacks near Boumerdès. Algerian troops killed 2 and captured 7 suspects of terrorism near the border with Mali, a country which the AQMI uses as a sanctuary.
July 14 .2011 / In Nigeria, where the Boko Haram sect is in full swing, 8 policemen were ambushed and killed. More details to come.
July 11.2011 /  William DALEY, general secretary of the White House, announced that the  US administration would cut by 40% its military aids to Pakistan, arguing that Islamabad had denied entry visas to 120 US military instructors and criticizing its lack of anti-terrorist cooperation.
July 12.2011 /  Ahmed Wali Karzaï, a brother of President Hamid Karzai, was murdered by a body-guard named Sardar Mohammed. Some information described the latter as a CIA man or as a Taliban… Where is the .difference?  The victim, acting as a president of the Assembly of Kandahar, is known as a ‘drug prince’. More details to come.

Date: 2011/07/13
source: IRNA

Iran refutes US defense chief's allegation

Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi has dismissed the recent allegations by the US secretary of defense against the Islamic Republic.

(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) - Vahidi made the remarks at the closing ceremony of the first Strategic Navy Conference in the Iranian capital Tehran on Tuesday.
The new US defense chief Leon Panetta, who is on an official visit to Iraq, claimed on Monday that Washington is "very concerned about Iran and the weapons they're providing to extremists in Iraq."
The Iranian commander said that the US hegemony in the region has come to an end, and such remarks indicate Washington's political defeat.
Vahidi went on to say that the United States tries to sow discord among the countries of the region, but such attempts are doomed to failure due to their wrong interpretation of the regional events.
Earlier in the day, Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast described the accusations as a "big lie".
Mehmanparast said that Washington was making desperate efforts to find a way to extend its stay in the region "since the Americans are facing a widespread wave of opposition by the Iraqi people, government and [political] parties, and they must leave Iraq by the end of 2011 and Afghanistan by the end of 2014."
On Monday, Iran's Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi also rejected Panetta's allegations.
"The international community and world public opinion are well aware that Iran as a responsible country has always behaved in a way [that has seen] its duties carried out well," Salehi said.

 

 

FROM  THE  ITALIAN  REVIEW  OF  GEOPOLITICS


EURASIA

 

Italy has already lost its Libyan war

Italy-Libya :::: Daniele Scalea :::: 27 march, 2011
After celebrating its 150 years of unity on the quiet, the Italian Government chose to add a very particular touch to the festivities: a war in Libya. An almost nostalgic conflict: Libya had been conquered by Giolitti in 1911, “pacified” by Mussolini right after the war, and it was the main Italian front during the Second World War. This time though, the reasons are much different.
Let’s set the record straight: only a gullible person might think that the current attack on Libya by some NATO member countries could actually be motivated by “humanitarian” concerns. Of course, Gaddafi is a merciless dictator with his enemies, but he’s not any fiercer than most of the dictators in other Arab countries, some of whom have been already overthrown (Ben Ali and Mubarak), while others are still governing and are stoking the flames of war (the autocrats of the Arab Peninsula).
According to the former Libyan deputy ambassador to the United Nations, there’s a “genocide” in the making; this statement is a blatant exaggeration. It’s possible, or even more probable, that Gaddafi repressed the first demonstrations against him (like it has been done by all the other Arab rulers), but the idea of his resorting to air assault (!) to clear peaceful demonstrations is incredible enough to almost make unnecessary the disclaimer put out by the Russian army (who monitored the events by their spy satellites).
It didn’t take long before peaceful protests turned into an armed rebellion, and at that point it became impossible to still talk about “repression of protests”. Even if, for a few more days, western journalists continued to define as “peaceful protesters” the men who were taking control of cities and entire regions, while showing them armed with rifles, artillery and tanks (obtained from army divisions and perhaps from foreign sponsors as well).
Barack Obama on 19 March 2011: “Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries … The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.”
Since then, Gaddafi has surely had recourse to planes against the rebels, though the numerous journalists have been unable to document any attacks against civilians. Same story for the allegations of “mass graves”, based on a single picture portraying four or five open tombs in an identifiable cemetery of Tripoli, which was immediately shelved due to its scarce credibility.
The civil war unfolding between the rebels and the Tripoli government was – as far as we know – not very fierce, since the daily victims could be counted on the fingers of one or two hands, and it was drawing to an end. The problem is that, in the eyes of some Atlanticist nations, “the wrong side” was winning. History – in Krajina, in Kosovo, even in Iraq – has taught us that external military interventions usually cause more victims than the ones attributed to the actual or alleged “massacres” that they pretend to stop. For instance, in Krajina NATO’s “humanitarian” bombing enabled Croatia to expel a quarter of million of Serbs: one of the most successful “ethnic cleansing” operations ever made in Europe, or at least in the last decades.

Therefore, the real reasons for the intervention are strategic and geopolitical: humanitarianism is just a pretext. On this site, it is possible to glean the real reasons motivating France, the US and Great Britain. Reasons that, after all, are easy to guess. Here, we will dwell on the choices made by the Italian Government.
Let’s start from the beginning. Before the riots erupted, Italy enjoyed a privileged relationship with Libya. First of all, Italy is Tripoli’s largest trading partner, constituting the main market for Libyan exports and the first exporter to Libya. Italy buys almost 40% of Libya’s exports (its second main buyer, Germany, gets only 10%) while selling to Libya 18,9% of its total imports (the second main seller, China, provides not much more than 10%). Libya’s trade dependence on Italy is strong, but this relationship represents an even greater strategic value for Rome than for Tripoli.
Libya owns the biggest oil reserves (good quality oil) on the whole African continent and is geographically close to Italy, therefore it is naturally Italy’s main, or one of the main, energy supplier. Italian state company ENI extracts from Libya 15% of its total oil production; through the Greenstream pipeline in 2010 Italy received 9,4 billion cubic meters of Libyan gas. ENI’s contracts in Libya are still valid for 30-40 years, and despite Italian behaviour, which we are about to analyze, Tripoli confirmed them on March 17th through the voice of oil minister Shukri Ghanem. Currently Libya grants all contracts for infrastructure building to Italian companies, assuring billions of orders that impact positively on Italy’s employment market. Lastly Libya, which is a relatively rich country thanks to its energy exports (it has the highest per-capita income in Africa), invests in Italy most of its “petrodollars”: currently it is involved in business transactions with ENI, FIAT, Unicredit, Finmeccanica and other companies. A fundamental contribution of capitals in a trend characterized by a lack of liquidity, after the financial crisis of 2008.
All this makes of Libya, from our point of view, a unique case among the oil producers of the Mediterranean and the Near East. Almost all, in fact, have privileged economic ties with the U.S. and the U.K., with French or Asian energy companies.
On 2nd March, 2009 the Treaty on Friendship, Partnership and Cooperation between Italy and Libya initially signed by PM Berlusconi and Col. Gheddafi on August 30th, 2008 was finally enforced. In June, the Libyan leader was invited for his first official state visit to Italy.
The Italian-Libyan relationship was sealed in 2009 with the Friendship, Partnership and Cooperation Treaty, signed by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi but resulting from negotiations conducted by former governments, including leftist governments. This treaty – besides reinforcing the cooperation in a numerous areas – bound the Parts to reciprocal obligations. Among these, we can name:
- the mutual respect of «sovereign equality, and all the rights inherent therein including, in particular, the right to freedom and political independence» and the right for both of the Parts to «choose and freely develop its own political, social, economic and cultural system» (art. 2);
- the agreement «to not resort to threat or the use of strength against the territorial integrity or the political independence of the other Part» (art. 3);
- the abstention from «any form of intrusion, direct or indirect, in the national or foreign affairs that fall within the other Part’s jurisdiction» (art. 4.1);
- the assurance that Italy «won’t use, nor authorize the use of its territory in any hostile action against Libya» and vice versa (art. 4.2);
- the agreement to peacefully resolve the disputes between the two countries (art. 5).
So Italy arrived at the outbreak of the Libyan crisis as an ally of Tripoli, tied to Libya by the clauses – written down in black and white – of a treaty, stipulated not a hundred years ago but in 2009, and not from a former government but from the incumbent one.
The Italian attitude, during the last weeks, has been uncertain and embarrassing. At the beginning Berlusconi stated that he didn’t want to “disturb” colonel Gaddafi (February 19th), while his Foreign minister Frattini was haunted by the spectre of an “Islamic emirate in Benghazi” (February 21st). Very soon, though, the riots seemed to overcome the authority of the Jamahiriya and the Italian attitude changed: Frattini inaugurated the hike-up of the alleged victims, announcing 1000 bodies (February 23rd) while Human Rights Watch was still counting a few hundreds; Minister of Defence La Russa (we don’t know by what specific area of expertise) announced the suspension of the Italian-Libyan Friendship Treaty, a totally arbitrary and illegal measure (February 27th). Gaddafi reversed the situation though, moving to reconquer the territory that had fallen in rebel hands. As Gaddafi’s troops advanced, the Italian warmongering seemed to subside: minister Maroni invited the US “to cool down” (March 6th). But the United Nations Security Council resolution of March 17th, starting the Atlanticist attacks on Libya, caused an abrupt change in Italian diplomacy: the government immediately authorized the use of its bases and planes to bomb the former “friend” and “partner”.
It’s only too evident that in this event the Italian government displayed a very irresolute attitude; if anything, it manifested a pronounced inclination to waver depending on the evolution of events, trying time and again to bet on the probable winner. Just like in other recent foreign policy occasions, the Prime Minister appeared absent, letting his ministers dictate, or at least communicate the Italian position to the nation. The ambivalence displeased both the Libyan government, which expected a friendly position from Rome, and the Cyrenaican rebels, who received concrete support from France and the UK but surely not from Italy.
In the end, the Friendship Treaty, sealed only two years ago, has been trashed and Berlusconi gets ready, even if just under the aegis of the United Nations, to begin its war against Libya.
Whatever will be the outcome of this conflict, Italy has already lost its Libyan campaign. Italian leaders celebrated the 150 years of unity with a glaring about-face towards Libya: a tragicomic new edition of the tragedy of September 8, 1943. This time it won’t be Italy, but its former “friend” Libya’s turn to descend into a long and painful civil war, which could have been ended in a few days without external intrusions.
It’s just not honour and reputation that are at peril though. The contracts and oil supplies – regardless of how the conflict will end – will probably shift, most of them if not all, from Italian hands to other countries. In case Gaddafi wins they will end up with the Chinese or the Indians; if the insurgents win they will go to the French and the British; on the other hand if the Libyan civil war persists there won’t be much to pick up. Except for waves of immigrants and destabilizing influences for the whole region.
Translated by Giuliano Luiu, revised by Voltaire Network
* Daniele Scalea, editor for “Eurasia” and scientific secretary of IsAG [an Italian institute of geopolitics], author of La sfida totale (Rome 2010). He is co-author, along with Pietro Longo, of a forthcoming book concerning the Arab riots.


The USA, Turkey and the Crisis of the Western System

DiggThe USA, Turkey and the Crisis of the Western System

USA :::: Tiberio Graziani :::: 6.2.2011 :::
The unipolar system, which seems to have been filed by history, has entered a deep crisis together with the U.S. – led Western system. The economic and financial collapse and the loss of a reliable partner in the “geopolitical building” such as Turkey determined the end of the U.S. expansion. The U.S. are now on the crest of a very important decision: shelving the project of the world supremacy, and therefore sharing the political and economic choices with other global actors, or instead, insisting on the hegemonic plan, risking their very survival as a nation. The choice will be dictated by the relations that will be established in the short to medium term, among the pressure groups that influence the U.S. foreign policy and the evolution of the multipolar system.

The Turkish crack.
The consolidation of the multipolar context and the continuous expansion of the economic and geopolitical spheres of influence of some Eurasian and South American countries require the current U.S. administration to make an important choice. This is happening because Washington does not seem to be able to manage either the financial and economic crisis that hit the western system, that is to say its geopolitical centre, or the relations with the major Eurasian countries, Russia, India and China, for instance. To this situation, one should also add the difficulties the Pentagon daily has to deal with, such as the coordination of the enormous and expensive military deployment fielded from the first Gulf War. The weakness of the U.S. is reflected, in particular, in the misguided attempt by Obama and Clinton to patch some critical situations, such as the Near and Middle East. The important Turkish partner, once representing the interests of the West and of Tel Aviv, has taken unorthodox positions with respect to the position of Washington in the area which used to be of a fundamental importance in the past for the expansionist strategy of the U.S. in the Eurasian mass. This fact introduced an element of destabilization within the architecture planned by the U.S..
The Turkish crack recalls U.S. strategists of another bitter blow, that is to say the facts that happened in the late ‘70s with the loss of Iran as a pawn in the “great game” that at the time their predecessors led against the Soviet Union. Nowadays, in this different global context characterized by the multipolarity, the Turkish crack could be disastrous for American – centralized system at least for 5 reasons. The first reason is related to its military presence in the West, also known as NATO. For how long will this structure, led by Rasmussen, tolerate the eccentricity of one of its members who is so clearly anti – Israel and therefore anti – America? Is NATO able to balance the Turkish expectations in playing an important regional role, without annoying Israel? These are only two of the main questions that a new and adequate reformulation of the aims of the weak transatlantic institution should answer to, beyond the “historic turning point” reached in the recent summit in Lisbon (November 2010).
The second question is connected to the relations between Ankara and Brussels. The new Turkey of Erdogan is ready to join the European Union, but Downing Street (the strategic partner of the U.S.) and France impede this unification process thanks to the insignificant pretext of human rights, the ideological arsenal developed by the American think tank, which the West took as its, especially by Sarkozy. If the unification is denied to Turkey, the country will strengthen its cooperation with other markets, such as Russia, Iran, China, therefore directly enhancing the economic and productive area of the Eurasian mass.
The third area, partly connected to the second one, concerns the Mediterranean. Turkey, which is considered as the forth European peninsula, seems to attract more and more the economic interests of the coastal States, and those of southern Europe as well as North Africa’s. The South Stream project devised by Moscow plays in favor of strengthening the economic agreements between Turkey and the Mediterranean countries.
The fourth area concerns the relations between Turkey and the Central Asian republics. Turkey is a transit route to Central Area, which represents the space Washington aspires to dominate after the collapse of the U.S.S.R.. As long as Turkey was following carefully the direction of the U.S., Washington was pushing its pressure on the Central Asian republics (also known as the “Eurasian Balkans” , as defined by Brzezinski) in order to increase the endogenous tensions, mainly in the anti- Russia direction, but also in the anti- Eurasia one. Now that Ankara seems determined to increase its level of autonomy, the relations that it has with the central Asian republics are not well seen by Washington, although they are well balanced with those with Moscow. Hence, the recent demonization of Turkey made by the Western.
Finally, regarding the fifth question, it should be noticed that the positive relations that Ankara has with Moscow, Beijing, Tehran and major South America countries herald a change in the geopolitical plans of Turkey. This change goes clearly in the direction of strengthening of the new multipolar scenario.
Once upon a time there was the West.
In the situation outlined above, the U.S. – led Western system is very likely to implode. Its expansion to the east is now under braking, considering the more and more leadership of Moscow on the international scene and the disastrous campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq that the Pentagon and Washington cannot manage. In Africa, the competition with China is a crucial problem for the whole West. Since neither Washington nor Wall Street nor the Pentagon/NATO – despite the creation of the Africom – succeeded to provide an effective contrast to the Chinese growing power, it is reasonably predictable (and desirable for Europe as a whole) that some European countries, aware of their interests, will try to adapt to the change of the international scenario, enabling new relations with China and African countries, focusing on the bilateral cooperation.
In Japan, despite the failure of the Hatoyama government, which was pretty anti- the U.S., the critical reflection on the benefits that Tokyo would gain in the context of the U.S. – Japan relations established after 1945 continues to increase the distrust for Washington, undermining day after day the U.S. hegemony on the choices of Japan.
Indio Latin America is no longer a “hunting” and useful place for the U.S. incursions, as it used to be in the last century. Brasilia, Caracas, La Paz and in part, Buenos Aires, are increasing day by day their political autonomy. The agreements among these countries, together with those they begin to reach with Iran and Turkey are creating a new “anti – imperialist” cooperation, which is still under construction, and it could catalyze the anti – neoliberal instances in many countries around the globe. The attention the governments of Caracas, Brasilia and Buenos Aires are paying to their welfare state and the renewed strategy of the Russian government are setting a limit to the globalization, in its geopolitical meaning, that is to say the expansion of the U.S. at its highest level. This is more difficult if one also thinks of the social policies Teheran and Ankara are carrying on, also in respect of the particular conception of the Islamic society and economic relations.
The European countries have lost the stability that had enabled them to grow economically, since they started suffering in recent years the dismantling of their welfare states, because of the choice made by the oligarchy connected to the American interests and to the rules of the IMF. The effects the loss of a specific role of importance in the global economy weakens the current economic situation and the western periphery of the system in favor of the centre, which is controlled by the U.S.. This explains the collapse of the U.S. geopolitical construction, built after 1945. In the near future, if there is not anything that keeps Europe united, some European countries could choose the multipolar system.
The time for decisions has come.
The thrust of the U.S. seems to be over. From the geopolitical view, Washington finds itself at a crossroad: to set aside, at least temporarily, the bicentennial project of a global domination, or to insist on it by adopting new standards and methodologies.
In the first case, the U.S. would be forced to review its military and social system, and what is more important, to negotiate its position in the world with the former and new players. However, the acceptance of the multipolar system would mean a crisis in the entire military – industrial complex that is the basis of the political and economic power in the U.S.A.. The direct consequence of an imbalance at the top of the establishment would be the breakup of the giant sphere of influence that the U.S. has acquired over the past 65 years. The downsizing of the U.S. would mean the beginning of a new cycle of geopolitical stability which will be based not only on the free market model, but also on the real needs of the poles of the geopolitical aggregation.
In the second option, if the U.S. opts for the pursuit of the world supremacy, it will be forced to support a massive economy of “permanent war”. Under the sentence of Edward N.Luttwack launched in 1999, during the breakup of the Yugoslav Federation: “Give war a Chance”, the U.S. will have to apply the logic of the constructive chaos of the neocons, with the risk of provoking geopolitical asymmetric reactions in Asia, Africa and Indio Latin America. Whatever solution is chosen, the relation between the “required nation” and the rest of the world will not be the same anymore.

Tiberio Graziani, Director of “Eurasia – magazine of geopolitical studies” and the series “Quaderni di Geopolitica (Edizioni all’insegna del Veltro, Parma), is the President of the ISAG (Institute of Advance Studies in Geopolitics and Auxiliary Sciences). He is the co-founder of the IEMASVO (Institute of Advanced Studies for the Near and Middle East) and vice President for the years 2007-2008. He is usually invited as a speaker in the international conference World Public Forum – Dialogue of Civilizations. He taught for years at the University of Perugia and L’Aquila. He has taught courses for the ICE (Institute for Foreign Trade) in many countries, such as Uzbekistan, China, India, Libya and Argentina.

“The situation in Egypt is very complicated and confused”

:::: IRNA :::: 4.2. 2011 :::
Interviewed by IRNA (Press Agency of Iran) on the recent events in Egypt, Tiberio Graziani, Director of “Eurasia. Italian Journal of Geopolitics” and president of IsAG – Institute of High Studies in Geopolitics and Auxiliary Sciences, stated the following:

The situation in Egypt and the rest of North Africa is very complicated and confused, especially in Tunisia and Algeria.
From the geopolitical point of view, the current destabilization leads to two hypothetical and opposite perspectives.
One of them is the view carried by the mass media and Western analysts that see as possible a democratic solution in accordance with the dictates of the U.S. – based mentality of the West and therefore the evolution could be a laicist one, that is to say a non-Islamic people’s protest.
If this scenario were to come true, as of course Washington and Tel Aviv hope, the direct consequence would be a disastrous one for the entire Middle East, since there would be a militarization of the area in the interest of the U.S. (which is anchored on Camp Bondsteel, Africom, Centcom) until a further expansion of their “special regional partner”, Israel and a process of fragmentation of the region would start with the beginning of the partition of Sudan.
The economic, political and institutional weakening would oblige the successors of Mubarak to follow blindly the instruction from Washington, making therefore Egypt a vassal of the U.S.
The other option, which would be closer to the interests of the people and countries of the Near and Middle East, is the one that could be achieved if the emerging regional powers, Turkey of Erdoğan – Gül – Davutoğlu and the Islamic Republic of Iran, adopted an international role as reference to the ongoing protests. In this case, the influences that are external to the geopolitical unit, that is to say Mediterranean and the Middle East would be balanced and contained. ”
(Translated by Eleonora Ambrosi)



USA: Hegemony and Decline

USA :::: :::: 9.4. 2011
Issue 3/2010 of the review of Geopolitics “Eurasia”, entitled USA: HEGEMONY AND DECLINE, has been released. This 288-page volume contains 24 articles about the USA, a still-hegemonic power in decline, on the scene of the transition from unipolarism to the new multipolarist order. Here follows a list and a short synthesis of each article.



Tiberio Graziani, USA, Turkey and the crisis of the western system
After history put an end to the unipolar moment, the western system led by USA seems to have entered an irreversible crisis. The economic and financial downfall and the loss of a secure pillar of the western geopolitical scene like Turkey mark the end of the US driving force. The USA, today, have to take an epochal decision: either shelving the project of world supremacy, which means sharing decision-making regarding international politics and economics with other global actors, or insist on their supremacy plan and even risk their survival as nation. One or the other will be motivated by the relationships that will be built, on the middle and long term, between the lobbies which are conditioning American foreign policy and by the evolution of the multipolarist process.
T. Graziani is managing editor of “Eurasia”.

Fabio Falchi, The mirror of knowledge. Giorgio Colli and Eurasianism
This essay aims to show, also through a short exposition of Giorgio Colli’s theoretical philosophy, not only that he has the merit, thanks to his talent of “pondering philologist”, to have caught the deep relation between mysticism and logic in the “Greek knowledge”, but above all that the way he is interpreting the thought of the “pre-Socratic” – an interpretation characterized by several and meaningful references to the Indian philosophy – is extremely important for the Eurasianism, if it’s true that “Eurasia” is in the first place a “spiritual concept”. In this perspective, it’s not important that Colli cannot be defined an “Eurasiatist” or the fact that probably he himself had refused to define himself this way. What matters is the path pointed out by his philosophical speech, so that it’s possible to leave behind obsolete and “incapacitating” dichotomies.
F. Falchi is a contributor to “Eurasia”.

Phil Kelly, Geopolitics of the United States
The scope of this essay is to identify the different and typical elements of the traditional US geopolitics. In its path is reflected on the most relevant spatial characteristics in order to delineate the traditional aspects of North American geopolitics, rather than focusing on current international affairs; in spite of this, it comes to conclusion with some observations about the present American and global geopolitics.
P. Kelly is teaching at the University of Emporia (Texas, USA) and member of the Scientific Committee of “Eurasia”.

Daniele Scalea, How an “empire” has risen (and how it will crumble soon)
Today’s United States, in origin, were an united group of colonies of a small underdeveloped island; nevertheless, in a few centuries, they have become the first and the only world superpower. In this essay are retraced the geopolitical and strategic reasons that led to the rise of the original thirteen colonies, to their independence and expansion in North America; the rise of the USA and their informal empire are analyzed and how the passage from isolationism to hegemonism, that was not ineluctable, is leading them to lose it.
D. Scalea is editor of “Eurasia”.

F. William Engdahl, The USA’s geopolitical position today
At the end of the first decade of the 21th century it’s time to locate the United States in the political, economic and above all geopolitical world context. It’s clear to every impartial observer that the emerging giant, proclaimed in 1941 by Henry Luce, “the Time-Life” publisher, as the dawn of the “American Century”, is today, in 2010, a nation and a power whose foundations themselves crumble. In this short essay are analyzed the particular nature of this disintegration and its implications.
F.W. Engdahl is associate director of “Global Research” and member of the Scientific Committee of “Eurasia”.

Fabio Mini, Projects and debts
The Americans are no more able to recognize their deficiencies and vulnerabilities: they act as if they still controlled the entire world, when in reality they have lost great part of their autonomy relating to multinationals which control the economy and to national or transnational bodies they are indebted to. To the debt financing must be added the political debts, acquired to nations which are not secure thanks to the US politics of force: Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Palestine, Somalia, Rwanda and even Europe. This essay explains how power is the destroying drug of the USA, and how the “New American Century” has come to an end before coming to life.
F. Mini is a retired Lieutenant General of the Italian Army, he led the KFOR and the NATO’s Command Allied Forces Southern Europe”.

Eleonora Peruccacci, The evolution of USA-Russia relationships after the downfall of the bipolar system
The idea – to which Keohane already drew attention – that power is now based on the influence of ideas, on using cleverly skills like persuasion and cooptation, on the ability to manipulate mass communication as well, rather than on the traditional attributes of military force and wealth, is useful for the analysis of this essay, in which it is tried to comprehend how, after the end of the bipolar system, the relationships between the two ex world superpowers, USA and Russia, developed and changed, going through the stages of 4 treaties on nuclear disarmament.
E. Peruccacci, MA in International Relations, contributes to “Eurasia”.

Spartaco Alfredo Puttini, China, the sea and the United States: the Sino-American naval antagonism
The development of a modern military fleet in the People’s Republic of China has given rise to serious concerns in Washington and adds an element of tension to their relations. On the horizon beckons the danger of a naval antagonism between the two giants that could represent one of the more serious and meaningful elements for the international order of the 21th century. In this essay is talked about the Chinese willingness to develop marine force, about the stages of the fleet modernization, about the importance that Sino-American naval antagonism can assume in the near future.
S.A. Puttini, MA in History.

Chiara Felli, A miracle for Obama’s “new beginning”
Israeli-American relations seem to be at a crossroads again: new negotiations in order to achieve the much desired peace in Near East hold the balance of power. In Washington, the atmosphere is tense, in contemplation of twelve months of negotiations the danger of a possible immediate bankruptcy outcome is reduced but concerns about the current state of the international comparison raise. Will the USA be finally able to play on their strong position as influential mediators? Does Israeli regional isolation risk worsening following the blind pursuit of nationalistic strategies? Are we really close to the “great compromise” and to the calm after a decade-long storm?
C. Felli, MA in International relations, contributes to “Eurasia”.

Francesco Brunello Zanitti, American Neoconservatism and Israeli Neo-revisionism: a comparison
The G.W Bush Jr. Presidency has been strongly influenced by a political movement, commonly known as Neoconservatism, which started at the beginning of the ‘60s and was already significant during the Ronald Reagan Presidency. The neoconservatives have inspired in particular the recent North American politics in the Near East. The last decade, concerning Israeli politics, has been characterized by the strengthening of the right-wing party, the Likud, which, since its origins, has been not prone to any form of compromise with the Arab world. This essay offers a comparison between American Neoconservatism and Israeli Neo-revisionism, identifying various similarities.
F.Brunello Zanitti, MA in History of society and contemporary culture.

Julien Mercille, The fight against drugs in Afghanistan: a critical interpretation
This article offers a critical interpretation of the “fight against drugs” waged by the United States in Afghanistan since 2001, in contrast to the conventional view proposed by some of the most representative authors. While the conventional interpretation takes for granted that the US are leading a fight in Afghanistan against drugs in order to reduce their consumption in the West and to weaken the Taliban, who are closely linked to narcotics traffic, in this article it’s argued that in fact there are few signs from Washington of a real and concrete struggle against drugs. The rhetoric of the fight against drugs is largely motivated by the need to justify military intervention in Afghanistan and the fight against insurgent groups opposing to American hegemony in the region, rather than by a genuine concern about drugs themselves.
J. Mercille is Professor at the National University of Ireland.

Matías Magnasco, Geopolitics of the United States in the Southern Cone
The South American region is nowadays a geostrategic scenario of great importance and will grow in importance in the future because of the race for raw materials (oil, gas and drinking-water) and the rise of Brazil as a regional and world power. South America must look with concern to US withdrawal from those difficult regions, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, and from those where Russia and China have virtually overcome their influence, because this reopens the possibility of looking back at their “backyard” and their “mare nostrum” ( the Caribbean Sea).
M. Magnasco is Director of the Argentine Centre of International Studies.

Jean-Claude Paye, The euro crisis and the transatlantic market
The offensive against the euro, implemented by the financial markets during the months of April and May 2010, is not simply an episode in the economic war between the two continents. It is indeed the symptom of a geopolitical change. The American initiative aimed to weaken the EU was led with the participation of European institutions themselves, that sacrificed euro in order to recover the Greek debt. This convergence confirms the choice of both protagonists which was already made to integrate the EU into a great future transatlantic market.
J.-C. Paye is a sociologist and essayist.

Ivan Marino, “Nabucco” versus “South Stream”
The US-backed Nabucco pipeline is a choice which sprang from political and economic reasons, and, in substance, aims to avoid the Russian territory and consequently to contrast the interests of Moscow; but the choice of “Nabucco” may be dangerous for the same energy safety of European Union. Italy’s choice of supporting the “South Stream” has a strategic and objective value. The essay evaluates the strategic importance of this option on the long-term in the dialogue between EU and Russia.
I. Marino coordinates the Observatory on the Constitutional Political System of the Russian Federation.

Fabrizio Di Ernesto, US and NATO bases in Europe
More than 60 years after the end of World War II, Europe struggles to regain its political and military autonomy. This is mainly due to the forced occupation set on by USA through NATO, the military alliance started in 1949 and that with the passing of time has become the real armed wing of the Pentagon. During the years of the Cold War Washington justified this presence with the need of defending its interests against possible attacks of the Red Army and of the Warsaw Pact. Now that this pretext is becoming ever more anachronistic, the White House continues to support the need for this forced militarization hiding behind the scarecrow represented by Islamic terrorism. This presence also leads to various problems, summarized in this essay.
F. Di Ernesto is a journalist and essayist.

Stefano Vernole, The strange story of the “International Money Orders”
According to some sources, during the first months of 1992 the U.S. government developed a sophisticated financial-economics operation, using US taxpayers’ funds, for secret aims. The money, nominally allocated for a “humanitarian” operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, would have been mainly used to finance Bill Clinton’s election campaign and to pay debts acquired by the Saudi financier Adnan Kashoggi to the procurement office of the JNA (Yugoslav People’s Army), but later it was put back in circulation to be used in the most various financial-economics operations.
S. Vernole is editor of “Eurasia”.

Tomislav Sunic, In Yaweh we trust: the “divine” US foreign policy
The North American aspiration to “guarantee the democracy in the world ” is above all originated by the biblical message. Whatever many European critics of US may say, US military interventions have never had as their sole purpose economic imperialism, rather the desire to spread the U.S. democracy all over the world. Anyone who dares to defy the US military, incurs the risk of being declared out of humankind, or at least of being branded as terrorist. Once someone is declared a terrorist or out of the human race, it’s possible to dispose of a person or of a nation at one’s pleasure. The ideological element in the history of US foreign policy is described in this essay, a revised version of a chapter, named after it, of the book Homo Americanus: Child of the Postmodern Age (2007).
T. Sunic was Croatian diplomat and University Professor in the USA.

Kees van der Pijl, Transatlantic ideology and neoliberal capitalism
In this essay we deal with three issues: the first concerns the origins of western ideology, an ideology marked by possessive individualism, free enterprise and intensive nature exploitation and that, with zeal of protestant missionary, claims universal validity for these principles. After that, we observe how neo-liberalism has emerged as the most radical western ideology and allowed capitalism to become a machine scam into which the world economy of the last thirty years has been drawn and that just now has suffered a setback. Finally, some lines of development are drawn, through which Ukraine, and perhaps Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and others, could break with the present strategy of slavish adaptation to the neoliberal economy, which has damaged them so much, and stop to absorb the western ideology so different from their traditions, to implement a common strategy that combines their unique experience with the form of a multinational State and with elements of planned economy, whose strengths and weaknesses they know better than anybody else.
K. van der Pijl is Professor at the University of Sussex.

Paolo Bargiacchi, Is international law really law? A critique to John Bolton’s negationism
In the US the (minority) idea that the international law does not exist and the (most common) one that customary international rules only bind States that accept them find a common root in the improper comparison between International context (and International law) and internal context (Internal law). This comparison, in turn, is direct consequence of the Austinian positivism, that, not catching the autonomy of the political and juridical international context compared to the domestic one, mistakenly uses logics, methodologies and categories of internal law to analyze the international law. An example of this modus procedendi comes from J. Bolton, who wonders if “Is There Really “Law” in International Affairs?” and concludes that “International law is not law”. In this essay a general-theoretical and empirical critique of his thesis is developed.
P. Bargiacchi is Professor at the University Kore of Enna.

Alessandro Lattanzio, US nuclear forces
U.S. strategic forces, that since 1990 are no longer the backbone of US Army, a role now appertaining to the force projection (aircraft carrier, airborne troops and marine divisions, tactical air force) have undergone a significant downsizing in quality and above all quantities. But this reduction has been sold successfully at the table of international negotiations about nuclear disarmament. With the recent ratification of the START II Treaty, US strategic forces are kept on 500 ICBMs single-warheads, 14 SSBNs each carrying 24 SLBMs, and finally 96 strategic bombers. The budget deficit, the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the priorities for other programs, including the so-called theatre ballistic missile (THAAD), and the US financial-economic crisis will probably stop the last modernization programs of the U.S. strategic arsenal.
A. Lattanzio is editor of “Eurasia”.
Claudio Mutti, Pietro Nenni against the Atlantic Pact
Interjecting into the parliamentary debate in accordance to the Italian democracy rules for enter the NATO, the secretary of the PSI (Italian Socialist Party) pointed put how the inclusion of Italy among the countries bordering the Atlantic was a violation of the basic elements of geography and history. He also contested the political justifications of this accession: partnering with the American superpower, Italy, which “compared to the US is like San Marino compared to Europe”, instead of securing her independence would have further reduced her sovereignty, already harshly limited by the international treaties imposed by the winners of the Second World War.
C. Mutti is editor of “Eurasia”.

Erika Morucci, 1991-2003: rehearsal of a superpower
In the twenty years since the first Gulf War to the present, different administrations came one after the other at the White House, giving different directions to American foreign policy. Apart from that, these were crucial years of a new historical course, that after the Cold War has opened up a reality whose facets were hidden for a long time and was fed by the iron curtain that divided the world. For the US widened its perspectives: they behaved as if they knew they can reach for primacy, pushing it to the manic search for global power. The multipolarity on the international scene has strongly emerged with the presence of other actors, including Russian, Chinese, European, and so the perspective is now to defend their lead and not lead the world.
E. Morucci, MA in International Relations.

Antonio Grego, Interview with Robert Pelo
Roberto Pelo is the director of the Moscow office of Italian Institute for Foreign Trade (ICE) and coordinator of the ICE office-network in Russia, Armenia, Belarus and Turkmenistan.
Antonio Grego, Interview with Livio Filippo Colasanto
Livio Filippo Colasanto is the first Director-General of RusEnergosbyt-Enel.