Archive for July 6, 2017

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries

President Trump in Poland

July 6, 2017

President Trump in Poland, Power Line, Paul Mirengoff, July 6, 2017

President Trump’s visit to Poland — a great U.S. ally and a nation with strong personal links to ours — has become the latest pretext for Trump bashing by the U.S. media. The Washington Post (paper edition) tells us, darkly, that Trump “shares ideological affinities” with Poland’s right-wing ruling party. In particular, he shares its aversion to immigration by Muslims and its combative relationship with the press.

The Post also suggests that the visit is a slap in the face of European allies, especially Germany, who are estranged to some degree from the current Polish government. In addition, it tells us that Trump picked Poland because the ruling party will be able to bus in cheering crowds from rural areas. The folks in Warsaw are too sophisticated to like Trump, the Post assures its readers.

Thus, Trump’s visit to Poland serves as a perfect confluence of anti-Trump talking points. He’s a right-winger; he’s anti-Muslim; he’s anti-free press, he’s against the European alliance; he depends on rubes for support; he’s an egomaniac in search of adoring crowds.

But one key anti-Trump talking point cannot be enlisted — the bogus Trump-Putin collaboration theme. As the Post gets around to acknowledging, grudgingly, very late in its story:

Poland also remains a strategically critical European nation that is particularly sensitive to the threat of rising Russian power. Despite Trump’s efforts to pursue warmer relations with Putin, the Polish government expressed optimism that Trump remains committed to the security of Central and Eastern Europe.

“It’s important that the president will be there and he will hopefully confirm again the U.S. commitment to NATO and to our cooperation,” said Piotr Wilczek, Poland’s ambassador to the United States. “For us, his visit to Poland before meeting with President Putin sends a very strong message.”. . .

“Poles were really afraid that it would be President Trump having a very successful summit with President Putin and sitting at the table together with Putin and making divisions or [establishing] a new order for this part of the world — that was a real threat here,” said Michal Kobosko, director of the Atlantic Council’s Warsaw office. “This has not materialized yet, so Poles are looking with some optimism toward Trump.

(Emphasis added)

Actually, the opposite seems to be materializing. In the speech President Trump delivered today in Poland, he reaffirmed the bond between the United States and its European allies, calling their pact as “strong as ever.”

In fact, he expressly affirmed his commitment to Article 5, the collective security provision of the NATO treaty. Trump stated: “The United States has demonstrated not merely with words, but with its actions, that we stand firmly behind Article 5, the mutual defense commitment.”

These are the magic words, the absence from which in some Trump speeches has given the mainstream media fits. Yet, its presence in this speech doesn’t get a mention until the back half of the Post’s story.

In addition, Trump rebuked Russia:

We urge Russia to cease its destabilizing activities in the Ukraine and elsewhere and its support for hostile regimes, including Syria and Iran, and instead join the community of responsible nations in our fight against common enemies and defense of civilization itself.

This too isn’t mentioned until relatively late in the Post’s report. By then, the Post has complained about the speech’s “dark nationalism,” the supposed Trump rift with Germany, and even his unwillingness to say with certainty that Russia interfered in the 2016 election.

The “darkness” of Trump’s speech is actually its virtue. Trump stated:

The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive. Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost? Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders? Do we have the desire and the courage to preserve our civilization in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it?

If Trump’s critics were serious about countering Russia and defending Europe, they would be asking the same questions (with the possible exception of the one about immigration, at least as applied to the U.S.). The left can’t have it both ways. It can’t be the case both that no one is out to subvert or destroy our civilization and that we must maintain our commitment to defending Europe, while obsessing over the Russian threat.

And after the Poland visit, it can’t be the case that Trump is under the sway of Putin. It’s still early in his presidency, but so far Trump is, I think, the hardest-line U.S. president on Russia/the Soviet Union since Ronald Reagan.

President Obama was the least hard-line.

Categories: Trump and European Union, Trump and Russia, Trump in Poland, Washington Post
Tags: , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Nigel Farage Will Not Stand for UKIP’s Leadership

July 6, 2017

Nigel Farage Will Not Stand for UKIP’s Leadership, PJ Media, Michael Van Der Galien, July 6, 2017

General Election 2017. Former Ukip leader Nigel Farage has a pint in a pub in South Thanet while on the general election campaign trail. Picture date: Saturday June 3, 2017. See PA ELECTION stories. Photo credit should read: Victoria Jones/PA Wire URN:31555123

Farage’s main problem is that UKIP is run by an elected National Executive Committee (NEC). This body is, sadly, occupied by rank amateurs. They’re passionate and enthusiastic, but they have no idea how to run campaigns, play the media, or raise money. As the leader, Farage felt that this governing body of the party was holding him back. “Time and again I was outvoted on important decisions and could not take the party in the direction I wanted,” he writes.

********************************

For well over a decade, Nigel Farage was the face of Britain’s eurosceptic movement and, as such, of the entire eurosceptic movement in Europe. Although he failed to win a seat for himself in the British Parliament, he did guide UKIP to great election victories in elections for the European Parliament. And, of course, he was vital in a) bringing about a referendum on Brexit and b) making sure the Leave campaign won.

Last year, Farage stepped down as UKIP’s leader. His absence caused a leadership struggle in the party. In the end, it was UKIP MEP Paul Nuttall who was selected to lead UKIP heading into the British elections. The results were a disaster: the party was wiped out.

As a result, Nuttall resigned. Candidates to succeed him have until the end of July to throw their hat in the ring.

Many people have been lobbying Farage to come back. I know I have. There are few politicians — if any — in Britain with his charisma and leadership abilities. Sure, the man has also failed on numerous occasions, but overall, UKIP couldn’t possibly wish for a better leader. Sadly, Farage has announced that he’s not interested in the job:

While many have been lobbying me and urging me to come back, I have decided that this would not be the right thing to do and I will not be standing. While I remain a strong supporter of the party and think there is a real chance in two years that Ukip may be more relevant than ever, the party itself needs serious reforms.

Farage’s main problem is that UKIP is run by an elected National Executive Committee (NEC). This body is, sadly, occupied by rank amateurs. They’re passionate and enthusiastic, but they have no idea how to run campaigns, play the media, or raise money. As the leader, Farage felt that this governing body of the party was holding him back. “Time and again I was outvoted on important decisions and could not take the party in the direction I wanted,” he writes. He concludes:

The thought of going back to a job I may not be allowed to do, if, again, I’m held back by totally unqualified people is not something I’m prepared to contemplate. I hope the new leader takes on the battle for major constitutional change or the party will return to being an amateur shambles.

Although political watchers can sympathize with Farage, he leaves behind a party that’s in shambles and that desperately needs a leader — a leader like Farage. Sadly, if the man himself doesn’t step up to the plate, there’s nobody with his gravitas to replace him. Nuttall tried but failed. His successor will undoubtedly suffer the same fate. There’s nobody else in UKIP with Farage’s political acumen and charisma.

And that means that the end of UKIP as a political player is in sight, which would be a terrible loss not only for Britain itself but also for the rest of Europe, which desperately needs eurosceptic parties — parties that put Brussels’ feet to the fire and warn the citizenry about the secret power grabs of the European elites.

Categories: British elections, British leaders, British Parliament, Nigel Farage, UKIP
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

In France, do not dare to criticize Islam

July 6, 2017

In France, do not dare to criticize Islam, Israel National News, Giulio Meotti, July 6, 2017

France, the country where the debate on Islam and integration has been more intensive, is the first target of the Islamic enemies of freedom. If France is now silent, the debate on Islam will be “resolved” all across Europe.

**************************

The controversy began with his intervention in September 2016 on the broadcast “C à vous”. Éric Zemmour was then immediately sued at the 17th Criminal Court of the Paris Court. He must respond to the alleged offense of “incitement to discrimination and hatred against people of Muslim faith”. The lawsuit is promoted by the EuroPalestine Association.

Zemmour is in trouble for a few sentences, such as the ones describing Muslims as those who “have to choose between Islam and France”, saying that “Jihad is a religious duty”, that “Muslims consider jihadists as good Muslims” and that “moderate Islam does not exist”. Ideas. Ideas are debatable in a European pluralist democracy proud of the free circulation of ideas, as well as goods and people. But these ideas are becoming forbidden in France.

Thus, Zemmour was sentenced of incitement to hatred and a fine of 5,000 euros. 8,000 spectators lodged a complaint at the State Council for Audiovisual. It is not the first conviction that Zemmour suffers for his ideas about France and Islam. In 2014, in an interview with the Italian daily Il Corriere della Sera, he said that France’s estimated five million Muslims should be “deported”  to avoid “chaos and civil war”.

In 2007, Charlie Hebdo ended up in court. The French journalists were cleared of any charge, but the jihadists were ready to silence them forever (in three years, not a single cartoon on Mohammed and Islam has been published). In 2013, the magazine Valeurs Actuelles was sentenced for “discrimination” against Muslims for publishing the national symbol Marianne with a Muslim veil (two thousand euros fine). The following year was the turn of Renaud Camus, condemned to pay five thousand euros for “hate instigation” for his theory of “Great Substitution”.

Zemmour was dragged many times to court. A year ago, it was when he gave an interview at Causeur magazine: “I respect the people willing to die for what they believe”, Zemmour said of the Islamic terrorists.

When Zemmour was dragged for the first time to court by the anti-racist and Islamic organizations in 2011, thirty MPs formed the “Freedom of expression collective”: “With the excuse of racism, a journalist is forced to silence when he wants to give an opinion”, said the 28 signatories, who condemned “the tyrants of the doctrine of anti-racism. Voltaire is buried”. Zemmour is only the best known of French journalists and intellectuals dragged into court to respond to the new intellectual offense: “Islamophobia”. There is a list of impressive names, from Georges Bensoussan to Pascal Bruckner.

France, the country where the debate on Islam and integration has been more intensive, is the first target of the Islamic enemies of freedom. If France is now silent, the debate on Islam will be “resolved” all across Europe.

Categories: France, Freedom of speech, Freedom of the press, Islamisation of France
Tags: , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

A challenge to Erdogan

July 6, 2017

A challenge to Erdogan, Israel Hayom, Eldad Beck, July 6, 2017

As leaders of the world’s biggest economies, including Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, gather in Hamburg this weekend to discuss global issues, In Istanbul, the biggest protest march in modern Turkey’s history will conclude.

Intensifying the persecution of regime opponents, the Turkish president is turning his country into a perfect democtatorship, where the people are only allowed to vote in favor of what the leader desires and anyone who objects is thrown in prison and accused of terrorism. This reality has led the leader of Turkey’s main opposition party, the Republican People’s Party (CHP), to call for a so-called Justice March from the capital Ankara to Istanbul. Until the march, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, a bland politician who lacks charisma and strongly resembles Mahatma Gandhi, was unable to brand himself as a worthy opponent to Erdogan. But the 450 kilometers (280 miles) between Ankara and Istanbul have bestowed upon him an aura of an opponent capable of putting up a fight.

Holding a small sign bearing a one-word slogan — Adalet (“Justice”) — and followed by thousands of marchers (with hundreds more expected to join along the way on each day), the leader of the republican, pro-secular party is posing a major challenge to the “sultan of Ankara”: He is bringing the battle to Erdogan’s home court, the Turkish street, and showing him that his grip on the people is not absolute.

A few days from now, the regime will mark a year since it quashed an attempted military coup, which made it possible for Erdogan to hunt down en masse everyone who opposed him: the Islamist Gulen Movement, the Kurds, republicans, military officers, politicians, journalists, government functionaries, police and teachers. Under a “state of emergency” that is still in effect, sweeping arrests have been made, over 100,000 people have been fired, and according to numbers from Turkey’s Justice Ministry, nearly 50,000 investigations have been launched this past year against people and institutions suspected of offending the president. The Justice Ministry approved trials for almost 5,000 suspects. Over 1,000 were convicted for crimes that carry sentences of up to four years in prison.

Erdogan’s and his government’s hysterical response to the opposition’s Justice March suggests that even in the grand presidential palace in Ankara, they feel the ground shaking beneath their feet. Erdogan accused Kilicdaroglu of supporting terrorist organizations and involving himself in crime by opposing court orders — when in reality he had opposed rulings by the justice system that facilitated the incarceration of several associates of the opposition leader on the pretext of terrorism. “The platform represented by the CHP has crossed the line of political opposition. They have reached the point of working with terrorist organizations and with forces that encourage them to operate against our country,” Erdogan declared. In other words: treason.

A spokesman for Turkey’s ruling party accused Kilicdaroglu and his party of trying to use the Justice March to drag Turkey into chaos in the service of “foreign interests” that are working against Erdogan and his government. That is: People are still trying to oust Erdogan, and such circumstances justify increased persecution of his opponents. But turning up the dial on the incitement against the opposition could nudge supporters of the president to commit violence against the marchers and opposition leaders. The marchers have already encountered the fury of the masses.

The Justice March is scheduled to conclude at the gate to the prison where a parliamentary delegate from the CHP, Enis Berberoglu, is incarcerated for giving the media information on Turkish intelligence agencies giving aid to terrorist groups in Syria. Berberoglu, a former journalist, was sentenced to 25 years behind bars for “revealing state secrets.” But the Justice March won’t really end so long as Erdogan continues to terrorize Turkey.

Will the opposition now take advantage Kilicdaroglu’s momentum and unite? Will it become possible to change the political atmosphere in Turkey? If Turkey wants to protect itself, it doesn’t need a military coup, it needs a popular one. Erdogan has done everything he can to prevent that from happening, even at the cost of military, political and foreign conflicts.

Categories: Erdogan, Turkey - protest march, Turkey and Europe, Turkey and human rights, Turkish democracy
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: 2 Comments

Germany’s Quest for ‘Liberal’ Islam

July 6, 2017

Germany’s Quest for ‘Liberal’ Islam, Gatestone Institute, Vijeta Uniyal, July 6, 2017

(Please see also, President Trump’s Remarks to the People of Poland. — DM)

Recently, after dragging its feet for years, the Central Council of Muslims in Germany had agreed to call a march against Islamist terror. The Muslim organization boasted 10,000 registered participants for the “Not with us — Muslims and friends against violence and terror” rally, scheduled for June 17 in Cologne. On the much awaited day, only a few hundred people turned up, many of them ordinary Germans flanked by a huge media entourage. “Many Turkish weddings are larger than this demonstration,” wrote Robin Alexander, columnist in Die Welt.

Merkel and Germany’s establishment have their ground game covered ahead of the election, and know full well where their political interests lie. The question is, do the German voters know where their best interests lie?

**********************************

However, the media-driven PR campaign backfired as the news of the opening of the Berlin ‘liberal mosque’ reached Muslim communities in Germany and abroad. The liberal utopian dream quickly turned into an Islamist nightmare.

Why do Muslim organizations in Germany fail to mobilize within their communities and denounce Islamist terrorism? Because, if there really is a belief that “international terrorism should not be depicted as a problem belonging to Muslims alone” this view seems to indicate that, in general, Muslims do not see it as their problem.

The newly unveiled ‘liberal mosque’ in Berlin was supposed to showcase a ‘gentler’ Islam. An Islam that could be reformed and modernized while it emerges as the dominant demographic force in Europe. German public broadcaster Deutsche Welle touted the opening of the mosque as a “world event in the heart of Berlin.”

“Everyone is welcome at Berlin’s Ibn Rushd-Goethe Mosque,” Deutsche Welle wrote, announcing the grand opening last month. “Women and men shall pray together and preach together at the mosque, while the Koran is to be interpreted ‘historically and critically.'”

German reporters and press photographers, eager to give glowing coverage, thronged to witness the mosque’s opening on July 16 and easily outnumbered the handful of Muslim worshipers. Deutsche Welle reported: “fervent enthusiasm in the media and political realm.”

“For me there is no contradiction in being a Muslim and a feminist at the same time,” Seyran Ates, the mosque’s female imam told the German reporters.

“With Islam against Islamism,” wrote Germany’s leading weekly Der Spiegel. “Society in general will lionize [Imam Ates] as the long-awaited voice of Muslims that speaks clearly against Islamist terror,” prophesied another German weekly, Die Zeit.

The Washington Post, not to be outdone by German newspapers, hailed the mosque’s female founder Ates for “staging a feminist revolution of the Muslim faith.”

In what can only be described as one-way multiculturalism, a Protestant church in Berlin’s Moabit district had vacated its prayer hall to make way for this new mosque.

Prayers at the opening of the Ibn-Rushd-Goethe Mosque in Berlin, Germany on June 16, 2017. Seyran Ates, the mosque’s female imam, is pictured in the second row, wearing a white robe. (Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

However, the media-driven PR campaign backfired, as the news of the opening of the Berlin ‘liberal mosque’ reached Muslim communities in Germany and abroad. The liberal utopian dream quickly turned into an Islamist nightmare. Islamic fanatics from near and far started flooding the Berlin mosque with death threats. Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the foremost authority on Sunni Islam, issued a fatwa forbidding the ‘liberal mosque.’

The British newspaper The Guardian reported:

[The mosque’s Imam Ates] said she had received “300 emails per day encouraging me to carry on”, including from as far away as Australia and Algeria, but also “3,000 emails a day full of hate”, some of them including death threats.

Egypt’s Dar al-Ifta al-Masriyyah, a state-run Islamic institution assigned to issue religious edicts, issued a statement on Monday declaring that the Ibn Rushd-Goethe mosque’s practice of men and women praying side by side was incompatible with Islam, while the legal department of Egypt’s al-Azhar university reacted to news from Berlin with a fatwa on the foundation of liberal mosques per se.

After countless death threats, the newspapers reached out to Aiman Mazyek, head of the Central Council of Muslims. He shrugged his shoulders and said there were 2100 mosques in Germany and he “doesn’t need to comment on each and every one of them.” As the Berlin-based newspaper Der Tagesspiegel reported this week, the ‘liberal’
Mosque’s Iman was finally granted “around-the-clock heightened police protection.”

Within days, this was the second establishment-backed project devised to spruce up the image of Islam in Germany, to go up in flames.

Recently, after dragging its feet for years, the Central Council of Muslims in Germany had agreed to call a march against Islamist terror. The Muslim organization boasted 10,000 registered participants for the “Not with us — Muslims and friends against violence and terror” rally, scheduled for June 17 in Cologne. On the much awaited day, only a few hundred people turned up, many of them ordinary Germans flanked by a huge media entourage. “Many Turkish weddings are larger than this demonstration,” wrote Robin Alexander, columnist in Die Welt.

Germany’s largest Islamic organization, the Turkish-Islamic Union for Religious Affairs, DITIB, decided to skip the anti-terror demonstration. DITIB stated that Muslims fasting in Ramadan cannot be expected to “march and demonstrate for hours.” DITIB controls about 900 mosques in Germany and has 800,000 members.

The German daily, Die Welt, reported on DITIB General Secretary Bekir Alboga’s stated reason behind their withdrawal from the anti-terror march:

“We Muslims are striving to feel the spirituality of the special month that gives us power for the rest of the year.” Through the daily Quran recitation, fasting and helping the needy — in addition to the physical exertion from such a demonstration — political initiatives such as the planned anti-terrorism march are minimized during Ramadan.

“Had we been informed early enough about the rally and its date we would have suggested planning it for after the Ramadan and roping in other Muslim — and also non-Muslim organizations — because international terrorism should not be depicted as a problem belonging to Muslims alone.”

DITIB evidently did not want to divert fasting Muslims away from their spiritual pursuits, but it had no problem using its mosques and preachers to spy in Germany on behalf of Turkey’s Erdogan regime. In January, DITIB officials admitted that their preachers acted as informants for the Turkish regime.

This is not the first time in Germany that Muslim leaders thwarted an “anti-terror march”. The so-called “vigil of Muslims” at Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate, after the Islamist terror attack on the Paris offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in January 2015, was also apparently a disappointment. As it turned out, the “vigil” was not even “Muslim”. It had been financed and stage-managed from the chancellery of Angela Merkel. As Die Welt revealed:

“That time, too, painfully few Muslims turned out. It later emerged that that Muslim organizations only called the vigil after the initiative of a staffer from Chancellor’s office and gentle pressure from the Minister of Interior. The expenses of the ‘Muslim vigil’ were borne by the Christian Democratic and Social Democratic Parties.”

Why do Muslim organizations in Germany fail to mobilize within their communities and denounce Islamist terrorism? Because, if there really is a belief that “international terrorism should not be depicted as a problem belonging to Muslims alone” this view seems to indicate that, in general, Muslims do not see it as their problem.

The Turkish-Islamic organization DITIB would, it seems, prefer to see Christian, Hindu and Jewish organizations address the non-existent problem of terrorism within their communities, than to address the real issue of radicalization of youth within its own congregations or the recruitment by Islamists insides its mosques.

Do not, however, expect the German state to make the Muslim leadership responsible for its failings. The Merkel government continues to hand over millions of euros to DITIB despite what critics regard as behavior that is “unacceptable.”

These stage-managed campaigns to fix the image of Islam in Germany come at an interesting time. With less than three months until the German general election, Chancellor Merkel’s government, with her career at stake, is probably hesitant to take on Islamic organizations with ability to mobilize the “Muslim vote”. Last year’s state election in Berlin already saw such a mobilization.

The September election will effectively be a referendum on Merkel’s “open door” migrant policy. The media’s peddling the liberal, gentler Islam will definitely help ease the German voters’ anxiety, given the ongoing demographic transformation of the country in the wake of the continued mass-migration from Arab and Muslim countries.

Merkel and Germany’s establishment have their ground game covered ahead of the election, and know full well where their political interests lie. The question is, do the German voters know where their best interests lie?

Vijeta Uniyal, a journalist and news analyst, is based in Germany.

Categories: "Liberal mosque", German values, Germany, Islamic invasion, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation of Germany, Islamist clerics, Islamist mosques, Islamist threats, Islamofascism
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

President Trump’s Remarks to the People of Poland

July 6, 2017

President Trump’s Remarks to the People of Poland, VOA via YouTube, July 6, 2017

 

Categories: President Trump speech in Poland
Tags:

Comments: Be the first to comment

In sweeping speech, Trump calls out Russia for supporting ‘hostile regimes’

July 6, 2017

In sweeping speech, Trump calls out Russia for supporting ‘hostile regimes’, Washington Examiner, Sarah Westwood, July 6, 2017

(Please see also, Europe’s Migrant Crisis: Views from Central Europe.– DM)

President Trump applauded Poland’s commitment to secure borders, called out Russia for its activities in Ukraine and Syria and affirmed America’s collective defense commitment to NATO in a sweeping speech Thursday that set the tone for his visit to the G-20 summit this week.

“While we will always welcome new citizens who share our values and love our people, our borders will always be closed to terrorism and extremism of any kind,” Trump said before a large crowd in Warsaw’s historic Krasinski Square.

Unlike much of western Europe, Poland has resisted accepting large numbers of Middle Eastern refugees, and its right-wing ruling party has advocated for keeping Polish borders secure. Trump’s decision to visit Poland and deliver remarks about his worldview before moving on to Germany for the summit was widely viewed as a symbolic endorsement of Poland’s actions.

“This continent no longer confronts the specter of communism,” Trump said on Thursday. “There are dire threats to our security and to our way of life.You see what’s happening out there, they are threats. We will confront them. We will win.”

Trump pointed to the “steady creep of government bureacracy” as another threat facing Poland the U.S.

“The West became great not because of paperwork and regulations but because people were allowed to chase their dreams and pursue their destinies. Americans, Poles and nations of Europe value individual freedom and sovereignty,” Trump said. “We must work together to confront forces, whether they come from inside or out, from the South or the East, that threaten over time to undermine these values and to erase the bonds of culture, faith and tradition that make us who we are.”

“If left unchecked, these forces will undermine our courage, sap our spirit and weaken our will to defend ourselves and our societies,” the president added. “We put faith and family, not government and bureaucracy, at the center of our lives.”

Citing Poland’s historic mistrust of the Soviet Union, Trump went after Russia for its present-day conduct.

“We urge Russia to cease its destabilizing activities in Ukraine and elsewhere and its support for hostile regimes including Syria and Iran,” Trump said.

The president also voiced his support for NATO’s Article 5, the collective defense commitment Trump declined to endorse explicitly during his visit to a NATO summit in May.

“My administration has demanded that all members of NATO finally meet their full and fair financial obligation,” Trump said, referring to his push for NATO allies to honor their commitments to spend at least 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense. “As a result of this insistence, billions of dollars more have begun to pour into NATO.

“To those who would criticize our tough stance, I would point out that the U.S. has demonstrated not merely with words, but with actions, that we stand firmly behind Article 5,” Trump said. “Words are easy, but actions are what matters.

“Europe must do more,” Trump added. “Europe must demonstrate that it believes in its future by investing its money to secure its future.”

Administration officials said the speech was intended to be “very philosphical.”

“The core theme of this speech is a defense of western civilization,” an official told reporters in Warsaw ahead of the speech. “But the basic question of the speech is, are we as a civilization confident enough in our own values to defend and preserve our civilization?”

Trump will head to the G-20 summit in Hamburg on Friday, where he will meet with a number of foreign leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Categories: Islamic invasion, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation of Europe, NATO, Russia, Trump in Poland
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Trump’s Warsaw Uprising

July 6, 2017

Trump’s Warsaw Uprising, PJ Media, Roger Kimball, July 6, 2017

President Donald Trump delivers a speech at Krasinski Square at the Royal Castle, Thursday, July 6, 2017, in Warsaw. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

If you want to know why Donald Trump will go down in history as a great president, listen to (or read, when it is available) his speech in Krasinski Square, Warsaw today.

Yes, there is a lot of the usual diplomatic persiflage: “Thank you, President Duda. Thank you, Poland.” But be an adult and distinguish the gem from the setting. While the anti-Trump press was busy running stories warning about “unease in Brussels” over Trump’s visit to Poland, Trump once again totally outflanked his critics.  Those who have ears, let them hear:

  1. The United States is absolutely committed to securing Poland’s access to alternative sources of energy.  Now, to whom do you think that was addressed?  What country would use access to oil and gas as political blackmail (do what we say or you can’t warm your homes, light your streets, run your factories)? Who would do such a thing?
  2. The United States is absolutely committed to its trans-Atlantic partnership. That partnership, said Trump in his aspirational mode, has never been stronger: suitably translated, that means that he wishes to assure that it will never be stronger.  It was a proffered hand.  Will the EU bureaucrats reach out and grasp it?
  3. Speaking of bureaucrats, Trump also—mirabile dictu—warned about “steady creep of government bureaucracy” that, left unchecked, saps a people’s will and makes the flourishing of individual initiative, the very marrow of freedom, impossible.  This was a direct kick against the administrative state: I like to see it. Darin the Swamp.
  4. Trump reaffirmed his absolute commitment to Article 5 of the NATO agreement — the bit that pledges members to “collective defense”: an attack on one member is an attack on all. He praised Poland for stepping up to meet its statutory financial commitment to NATO and urged other European countries to do the same. A strong NATO means a strong Europe.
  5. Trump reaffirmed his commitment to battle against “radical Islamic terrorism” and other forms of extremism and highlighted his call in Riyadh in May for Muslim countries to step up and help quash the violence of jihad.
  6. He noted other challenges faced by the West, including cyber-warfare and Russia’s “destabilizing activities” in Ukraine, Syria, and Iran.
  7. But the best part came about three-quarters of the way through.  After reminding his audience about the million people who gathered to hear John Paul II celebrate Mass in 1979, he asked: what did the people want? Answer: “We want God.” This led into the heart of Trump’s speech.  The prerequisite for the success of Western civilization is not material riches. Economic prosperity and military might on their own are not sufficient. The critical leaven is the confidence in core Western values: such things as free speech, the equality of women, respect for individual rights, the rule of law, the affirmation of faith and family.  Hence, the “fundamental question” facing Western nations today is whether the people continue to nurture the cultural self-confidence in those fundamental values. If they do, the West is unbeatable. If those values dissipate, the West is lost.  “As long as we know our history,” Trump said, “we will know how to build our future.” Trump spent a lot of time in his speech rehearsing Poland’s heroic resistance to Nazi atrocities in the Warsaw uprising and its equally heroic resistance to Soviet aggression during and after the war. Not since Ronald Reagan has an American president gone so clearly to the nub of what makes the West great and what threatens that greatness.

Categories: Europe and freedom, European establishment, European populism, European security, European values, European weakness, Islamic terrorism, NATO, Trump in Poland
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

China’s Creeping Invasion of India

July 6, 2017

China’s Creeping Invasion of India, The Diplomat, Saurav Jha, July 6, 2017

(Please see also, Modi’s visit: Strategic leap in Indian-Israeli ties. India seems to be augmenting its ability to defend against an increasingly aggressive China. — DM)

New recruits of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) patrol the border area at Ngari, Tibet Autonomous Region, China (April 26, 2017). Image Credit: Reuters

In late May, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi chose to commemorate three years of his administration by opening the country’s longest ever bridge over the Lohit river, Called the Bhupen Hazarika Setu (BP), the bridge will significantly cut down travel time to the easternmost parts of Arunachal Pradesh (AP), an Indian state that has been publicly claimed in its entirety by Beijing since 2006 as “Southern Tibet.” The high-profile opening was also intended to convey a message to the Chinese that India was moving forward with its current strategy of developing infrastructure in regions bordering Chinese-controlled territory in order to facilitate the defense of every inch of territory it considers its own. Overall, at a time of heightened India-China tensions and fears about Sino-Pak military collusion potentially culminating in a two-front situation, India is now working to upgrade its military posture vis-a-vis China from one of dissuasion to one of deterrence.

A conventional deterrence posture toward China requires the creation of appropriate last mile connectivity to facilitate axes of advance for counterstrike forces in addition to being able to reinforce “in sector” defensive formations. After years of deliberately keeping its frontier with China devoid of much infrastructure under the premise that the absence of such connectivity would lead to invading forces getting bogged down, India is now scrambling to match China’s extensive infrastructure in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR).

China’s Military Build-up 

That infrastructure now allows People’s Liberation Army Ground Force (PLAGF) units to mount patrols right into Indian territory along the 4,057 kilometer long Line of Actual Control (LAC). The LAC currently represents the de facto border between India and China and is divided into three sectors: the western, middle, and eastern. In the absence of timely Indian Army (IA) patrols to counter such intrusions, there would be concession of small bits of territory to China over time. In some places, particularly lacking in connectivity, Chinese-built helipads and short tracks inside Indian territory have been discovered by Indian forces in the past.

The Chinese can now also build up forces along the LAC at various points much more quickly than before and in more significant numbers if so desired. In any case, the Chinese have built motorable tactical roads to all 31 passes that are of military significance along the LAC. Various border “laterals” of low classification also exist just south of subsidiary axes to the main tactical roads and can be used for switching forces between sectors. Clearly, the IA no longer has the luxury of hanging back as the Chinese move in at a time or place of their choosing. While current defensive formations ensure that the Chinese cannot advance deep into Indian territory or, as IA insiders put it, “capture targets of value,” the need of the hour from the Indian perspective is to extend road infrastructure right up to various points along the LAC.

Post re-organization, the total area of responsibility (AOR) under the former Lanzhou and Chengdu military regions in China has been merged by the PLA into the newly created Western Theater Command, which now controls the 76th and 77th  “Combined Corps-Level” group armies (GAs) that are not merely integrated arms units of PLAGF but will also progressively include inter-service elements from the PLA Air Fore (PLAAF) and the PLA Rocket Force (PLARF) in furtherance of the integrated joint operations that are supposed to be a key facilitator of China’s doctrine of “winning local wars under conditions of informatization.” In addition to the 76th and 77th GAs, the Xinjiang Military Division (MD) and Tibet Military Division (MD), which are also part of the Western Theater Command have some additional eight infantry divisions/brigades and two special operations brigades at their disposal.

Indian military sources believe that the 77th and the 76th could concentrate the equivalent of up to seven division-sized formations (indicative figures, since the PLAGF is currently reorganizing itself into a brigade-based structure) in TAR within a week’s time with one “rapid reaction division” being inducted into Lhasa in as little as 24-36 hours. Using the 1,142 km long Qinghai-Tibet Railway, the three main highways that converge on Lhasa, as well as aviation infrastructure, the PLAGF could also bring 12 divisions into TAR in around a month’s time. For a much larger campaign that would see multiple fronts opened against India on the LAC, the PLAGF could mobilize up to 32 divisions in a single campaigning season and these could be sustained in TAR for a month (although it is debatable whether the PLAGF would really want to send deploy so many troops in TAR).

China can now not only mobilize such forces against India in a relatively short period of time but can also sustain them for relatively long periods of time. The significant number of camps that have come up in TAR simply plug into existing civilian water and power utility infrastructure. Incidentally, the Chinese have built hyperbaric chambers with storehouses in some of these camps to facilitate the rapid acclimatization of some troops inducted from lower altitudes in the event of a contingency. Apart from specialized storage (many underground), massive dual-use logistics centers, such as the one at Nagqu, have been constructed which also host command and control facilities.

Indeed, with its hub based around Lhasa-Nagqu, an optical fiber cable network radiates to Ngari in the West and Nyingchi in the east while also connecting with successive higher headquarters all the way up to Beijing. Together with the optical fiber cable mesh, 58 VSAT (Very Small Aperture Terminal) satellite stations have been built to provide the backbone for a C4ISR network necessary to prosecute a “local war under conditions of informatization.”

As far as airpower is concerned, besides the six fully operational dual-use airbases facing India at Lhasa Gonggar, Nyingchi, Qamdo, Hoping, Ngari Gunsa, and Shigatse, PLAAF has built another nine for its use in TAR. TAR also has some 27 additional airstrips that the PLAAF can utilize. Unlike in the past, the PLAAF now operates year-round from TAR, with reportedly some 24 combat aircraft, a mix of J-10s and J-11s, being based there on a near-permanent basis with other frontline combat aircraft being deployed to airfields in the region as detachments for durations of up to three months. Several airfields dedicated to helicopter and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) operations are also being constructed in TAR. In May 2017, the PLAAF took the lid off a base in TAR that hosts a GJ-1 armed UAV unit.

The PLAAF can also look forward to integrated joint operations with PLARF, which controls China’s missiles, in TAR. Opposite India, the PLARF currently deploys various versions of the DF-21 medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) family, DF-15 short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) variants, and possibly the new DF-16 SRBM as well. The PLARF is likely to use conventionally armed missiles in the opening stages of any conflict to attack Indian Air Force (IAF) airbases in addition to other targets, thereby making it a key enabler of air operations for the PLAAF.

Overall, China’s ability to mobilize troops into TAR in addition to growing PLAAF activities backed by the PLARF has given it the confidence to engage in a game of brinkmanship along the LAC with numerous intrusions, despite the fact that the Tibet Military Division has only three regular and one special operations brigade permanently stationed there. And in May 2016, China raised the status of Tibet Military Command (TMC), by putting it directly under the jurisdiction of the PLAGF.

India’s Response

Despite the muscle flexing, the PLAGF is going to find it rather difficult to conquer any target of value along the LAC. Take Tawang, for instance. An entire IA mountain division, the 5th under IV Corps, has its headquarters in neighboring West Kameng district. Indian forces deployed in Tawang have the best firepower the IA has at its disposal and have essentially fortified Tawang. An advanced landing ground has also been approved for construction in Tawang, with surveys underway for a high-altitude rail link.

In addition to the 5th Division, India has eight more mountain divisions along with one dual-tasked formation under the III, IV, and XXXIII Corps of its Eastern Command, which are all defensively oriented against the Chinese. To support these formations, the IA has also built numerous logistics nodes, troop habitats and underground storage facilities. In recent times, India is also desperately trying to complete the India-China Border Roads (ICBR) Project, which envisages the construction of 73 strategic roads along the LAC of which 27 roads are currently operational. Each of these roads will be capable of conveying 155 mm howitzers and multi-barrel rocket launchers such as the 300 mm Smerch and the 220 mm Pinaka.

India is also progressively improving its aviation facilities in India’s northeast with composite aviation bases and dedicated UAV bases such as the one at Lilabari, Assam. Numerous other forward area refueling and arming points as well as forward operating bases are meant for helicopter aviation, including the soon to be acquired AH-64E Apaches as well as the indigenous Rudra armed helicopter, which is being deployed to the NE.

Even as India hastens military infrastructure in the northeast, the critical Depsang Plains at the northernmost part of the LAC in Eastern Ladakh has emerged as a flashpoint since it abuts the Siachen Glacier. In 2013, the area witnessed a major incursion by the PLAGF that led to a standoff, which was defused only after the IA managed to deploy sizable forces with the help of the IAF. Nevertheless, the area continued to be perceived by the PLAGF as vulnerable given its road network and its deployment of armor in the vicinity. However, India has reinforced this area, which falls under the area of responsibility of the IA’s XIV Corps, with a brigade in addition to deployment of T-72 tanks. Importantly, India is in the process of deploying an entire armored brigade in Eastern Ladakh, with two T-72 regiments already operational. Incidentally, the armored brigade in Eastern Ladakh could also be used to spearhead an attack toward the Western Highway passing through Aksai Chin via the Chushul-Demchok axis and this has the Chinese worried.

Perhaps the PLA is now thinking that the least disputed middle sector of the LAC is the one to eye, given that they have vastly superior accessibility to all five passes of military significance in this sector. Of late, Chinese helicopters have been violating Indian airspace this area and the PLAAF has flown its synthetic radar aperture equipped Tu-154s over this sector recently. Preemptive occupation of some features here would be difficult for the Indians to dislodge later. However, the Chinese would in turn find it rather difficult to sustain their ingressing forces in this sector since the passes remain closed for six to eight months in a year. As such, the lines of communication for Chinese forces would be rather vulnerable to interdiction by the IAF, which has several major airbases in the vicinity.

In fact, the IAF, with 31 airfields (nine in the western and 22 in the eastern sector) located much closer to the LAC, has an edge over the PLAAF in any air war over Tibet. IAF aircraft, with their bases in the plains, will be able to take off without any payload penalties and will require considerably less fuel to reach their targets. Even with extra lengthened runways, PLAAF aircraft flying out of TAR airfields, whose average elevation is 4,000 meters, will continue to suffer from payload restrictions. And the PLAAF currently does not have enough refueling capability to really sustain aircraft that can fly in from distant airbases located at lower altitudes. Moreover, most PLAAF airbases in TAR do not have hardened shelters and have only poor support facilities. PLAAF aircraft could well be caught out in the open during early stages of any conflict by the IAF, which has already deployed frontline aircraft like the Su-30 MKI to airbases near TAR. The IAF also intends to base a squadron each of Rafales at Hashimara and Ambala, both located very close to the LAC. The IAF has also activated seven advanced landing grounds (ALGs) in Arunachal Pradesh in recent times (besides three in Ladakh), whose efficacy was demonstrated with operations such as the landing of a Su-30 MKI in Pasighat ALG in August 2016 and then a C-17 in Menchuka ALG two months later.

To mitigate the threat posed by a PLARF missile attack, the IAF is introducing proper “rehabilitation” capabilities in its LAC facing airbases to ensure that it stays in the game. India is also deploying the Brahmos Block III cruise missile with steep dive capability in the northeast as a “symmetric counter” to the PLARF.

Indeed, rather than opt for a major campaign that isn’t going to end quickly, given that there would be no element of surprise, the PLAGF could use its ability to mobilize modest-sized forces much more quickly to make a grab at tactical features and a pass or two at certain places along the LAC where such opportunities exist. In the process, the PLAGF could create more encroachment possibilities for itself while possibly foreclosing axes that might be used by counter-attacking Indian forces. China would try to gain the initiative by striking first, very much in consonance with its philosophy of “active defense,” and then offer a negotiated settlement to India.

It is precisely to cater to this kind of a scenario that the IA has created the Mountain Strike Corps (XVII Corps) under its Eastern Command, which is designed to launch a quick counter-offensive to make a similar quid-pro-quo shallow grab of territory inside TAR to strengthen India’s hand in the ensuing negotiations. XVII Corps could also be launched in a “stabilization” role in the event of the Chinese opening a major front along the LAC at, say, the Doka La Pass in the Sikkim-Tibet-Bhutan tri-junction, which lies near the all-important Siliguri Corridor that is India’s link to its northeast (the site of a current stand-off).

The first division of the MSC, the 59th, headquartered at Panagarh in West Bengal, is set to be operationalized this year and is meant for the eastern sector of the LAC. The MSC’s second division, the 72nd, headquartered at Pathankot in Punjab, is currently being raised and is expected to be operational by 2020. The location of the 72nd Division indicates that it is a dual-tasked formation whose area of responsibility lies in the western sector of the LAC but could be used to reinforce Indian formations in the east once its task in the west is done.

However, if the MSC has to create tactical surprise, some of its elements must acquire serious air mobility (at least a brigade) in order to be deposited close to possible axes of advance in a much shorter timeframe. The number of such axes of advance must also be increased especially in the eastern sector, which will be the center of gravity for any Indian war effort against China. In the years ahead, India will seek to further extend its border roads network under a “General Staff Long-Term Perspective Plans” project, introduce hover barges in order to optimally use the Brahmaputra for riverine movement, and build strategic mountain railways. All this will be in aid of moving division sized forces (including dual-tasked formations) to their frontline stations in a very short period of time besides allowing for rapid switching of brigade and battalion sized forces between sectors.

Meanwhile, China is also busy extending the line from Lhasa to Nyngchi and then all the way to Dali in Yunnan province. Once the connection to Dali is ready, the PLAGF will be able to bring in sizeable forces even more quickly to the southeastern TAR opposite Arunachal Pradesh. The Chinese are extending a rail link to Yatong in the Chumbi Valley right next to the Doka La pass, which heads into Bhutan’s Doklam Plateau. While this is intended to reduce their vulnerability in the Chumbi Valley, since Indian forces sit atop its eastern shoulders, it also means that this area will emerge as more of a flashpoint in the near future, with the current standoff being only the beginning. Last year, Unit 77656 which sits at Khamba Dzong at the gates of the Chumbi Valley was honored as a “model plateau battalion” by President Xi Jinping and China has been trying to acquire the Doklam Plateau from Bhutan by offering greater amounts of territory in exchange elsewhere.

Clearly for the foreseeable future, the India-China border dispute will be contingent on the balance of “mutually assured construction” as each side tries to gain a tactical advantage.

Saurav Jha is a commentator on energy and security issues. He is currently writing a book on the India-China military balance. Follow him on twitter @SJha1618

Categories: China vs India, Chinese military, India military
Tags: , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Ayala Shapira’s mother: Why I didn’t go to court to see the terrorist sentenced

July 6, 2017

Ayala Shapira’s mother: why I didn’t go to court to see the terrorist sentenced | Anne’s Opinions, 6th July 2017

(Ayala Shapira is a young teenager (and one of my granddaughter’s best friends) who, two and a half years ago, at age 11, was horrifically injured in a firebomb attack by a Palestinian terrorist.

The open letter below, in the body of my article, was written by her mother Ruth, and I would stress that I have translated it and posted it with her permission. — anneinpt)

You may remember that Ayala Shapira was the 11-year old girl who was terribly injured in December 2014 by a Molotov cocktail (i.e a firebomb) thrown by a Palestinian terrorist at the family car. She suffered horrific burns to her face and upper body, and was more dead than alive for a while. She has made a miraculous recovery but still suffers from the burns, has endured many operations and skin grafts, and will have to undergo still many more until she is completely rehabilitated. She has to wear a pressure mask for much of the time as well.

Ayala Shapira before the terrorist attack

Ayala has shown remarkable courage and stoicism in coping with the terrible pain and disfigurement, as well as her missing schoolwork and social life. Her friends (I’m proud to say my own granddaughter is one of her best friends) and her parents’ friends, family and community have been fantastic in helping out, whether practically or giving moral support, and of course the State has given the support that it gives to all victims of terrorism in Israel. Yet none of this compensates for the damage done.

Ayala Shapira in her pressure mask addressing the EU

Ayala recently addressed the EU, recounting the attack and the story of her not-yet-finished recovery, stressing that she is determined to continue her life as normally as possible.

The terrorists were arrested shortly after the attack, and this week the adult terrorist (the second was a minor) Muhammad Badwan, was sentenced in court to 18 years in prison and fined NIS 50,000 ($14,200) for the attack.

If you think that 18 years and a paltry fine is not enough for this attempted murder, you are not alone.

But it is not only the sentence that is infuriating the Shapiras and their supporters. It is the confused response of the Israeli government, that can’t decide whether this attack is a criminal offense or an act of war (which is what terrorism essentially is) which is angering not only them, but all victims of terrorism and their supporters, and probably most Israelis.

Below is an open letter written by Ruth Shapira explaining her thoughts and reactions, (you can read the original letter in Hebrew here) which I translated myself with her permission.

—-

Please share and distribute as much as possible.

After the sentence of the terrorist, I sent an article to all the media outlets in Israel. Unfortunately most of the media are not built for serious articles and therefore the article was cut and distorted. I would be happy for your assistance in distributing the original article:

So why did not I go to court?

Today, the trial ended of one of the two terrorists who threw firebomb that turned our lives upside down.

The defendant admitted to the court two incidents of throwing Molotov cocktails – the first lightly damaged our family car, and the second almost killed Ayala, my eldest daughter.

We often hear from families of victims of crime who came to court to “look the defendant in the eye.” We chose not to come.

The reason for this, we feel, is that the state has not really decided whether this is a specific criminal incident or an event on a national level.

On the one hand, the state recognizes us as victims of hostile acts, finances for us for the (very expensive) medical care and all the accompanying expenses, and supports and accompanies us in the long process of rehabilitation. The media interest in the story also seems to reflect public opinion and the ready spirit that is beating in the heart of the people.

Thus, in effect, the state recognizes Ayala as having been harmed by an act directed against the state, similar to a soldier who was injured during his army service.

(Or in the language of the law: harm from hostile acts by military or semi-military or irregular forces of a state hostile to Israel, from hostile acts by an organization hostile to Israel or hostile acts carried out while assisting one of them, as their emissary or on their behalf or in order to advance their objectives – The Law of Compensation for Victims of Hostilities, 5730-1970).

On the other hand, the same state treats the terrorist himself as a criminal transgressor and not as an enemy soldier and accordingly puts him on trial for “three attempts of murder” (mine, Avner’s, and our daughter Ayala’s) and not (if already) on assisting the enemy.

And the terrorist himself?
He would certainly agree to the language of the law. After all he does not know Ayala personally (in fact, I have difficulty remembering his name) and has nothing personal against her. Did he know, at the time of the act, that she was the one in the car? Definately not. Did he commit “three attempted murders”? He made two attempts to murder as many Jews as possible, with the clear intention of harming the sovereignty of the State of Israel.

But he did not look like a soldier! One of them is even a minor! Well, that’s exactly what “irregular forces of a hostile organization” look like.

How do you distinguish between irregular forces and a “regular” criminal? There are two easy tests:

1. The test of intention: Was the intention to harm the sovereignty of the State of Israel or a specific person?

2. The test of the environment: Was the arrest carried out as an ordinary police action, or was it more like a military operation? If there was a need for large forces to stop the terrorist, and there was a fear that someone might try to harm these forces during arrest, well, this is not a regular criminal, but an irregular combatant of a hostile organization (the hostile organization in this case, forms the hostile environment in which he lives).

And me? As a mother, of course I would like to see the terrorist punished. I would like him to suffer as Ayala suffers. That his mother will go mad with worry as he hovers between life and death. That he will writhe in pain even while he is asleep, and the percentage of painkillers in his blood will exceed all imagination. That he will undergo surgery, after surgery after surgery, without knowing when it will be over. Since there is no clause in Israeli law that matches such a sentence, I would have been content with the death sentence or life imprisonment.

But aside from being Ayala’s mother, I am also an Israeli citizen, and I care about the country’s future as well, so I can not come to terms with his being tried on a clause so far from the act he committed.

It is important for me to clarify that I have no complaints against the military prosecution, which does its work faithfully. The problem is with the government, which prefers to escape responsibility for managing the war, and to transfer it to the legal system.

Who is the main victim of this policy?
Well, the answer is easy. The State of Israel is losing a great deal of money, both on the rehabilitation of victims of hostile acts and on the holding of terrorists in prisons, it is losing the international public relations arena, and slowly losing its sovereignty.

So I should look at the terrorist in the eyes?

It is more important and urgent for policymakers to look into the eyes of the people.

Ruth Shapira, Tammuz 5771
4.7.17

(Translated by “anneinpt”).

Categories: Israel, Palestinian terrorists, Palestinians
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

« Older Entries