Hat jemand die 2014er Krimkrise vorausgesagt? (Did Anyone Predict the 2014 Crimean Crisis?)

Klingt wie eine dämliche Frage, hat aber eine gewisse Berechtigung. In einem Artikel vom 26. Dezember 2008(!) sagt ein russischer Politologe namens Andrei Okara voraus, daß die Wallstreet-Berater des (damals noch nicht amtierenden) amerikanischen Präsidenten Obama eine Eingliederung der Ukraine in die westliche Hemisphäre geplant hätten, mit besonderer strategischer Berücksichtigung der Halbinsel Krim. Hier der Artikel in russischer Sprache: 

Обама начнет третью мировую с Крыма (Arseny Palkin)

Mit der Wayback Machine kann das originale Datum bestätigt werden. Leider kursieren nur Google Translator Übersetzungen im Netz, zB. hier. Wäre interessant, wenn jemand eine ordentliche Übersetzung des Textes herstellen könnte.

Eine weitere Voraussage im Text bezieht sich auf das US-amerikanische Vorhaben die Präsenz auf der Krim zu stärken und auszubauen, u.a. mit einer Art US-Konsulat. Tatsächlich gab es solche Bestrebungen, die schon 2009 diskutiert wurden: Ukraine's Crimean parliament speaker opposes US embassy office in Simferopol.

Stellt sich die naheliegende Frage: Haben die Russen deshalb so schnell, wohlorganisiert und reibungslos mit der Annexion der Krim reagiert, weil sie schon lange im voraus wussten/ahnten, was gewisse westliche Mächte und Organisationen in ihrer Wiederbelebung des Traumes vom "Lebensraum im Osten" planten?

See also: The Crimea crisis was predicted in 2008 by Russian round table of political scientists.

US Foreign Policy in a Nutshell

The president of the United States, who put the essence of his country's foreign policy in a nutshell

"If we see that Germany is winning the war, we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible. . ."

Harry S. Truman, 1941

see  www.colnect.com

died on December 26, 40 years ago. To the honor of this war criminal, the Republic of Liberia, released a 5-Dollar coin. Liberia was founded by repatriated black American slaves who established an apartheid state in order to suppress and exploit the manpower of the local black population - in a similar manner as they had experienced slavery in the US previously.

www.colnect.com

Danke für das billige Dope, NATO!

"Zehn [chinesische] Arbeiter wurden meuchlings von anonymen Tätern ermordet. Es handelte sich dabei nicht um einen politisch motivierten Anschlag. Die Chinesen hatten eine Grundregel des afghanischen Spiels mißachtet. Als nämlich der lokale Warlord ihnen - gegen gute Besoldung natürlich - den bewaffneten Schutz seiner Stammeskrieger anbot, hatten die Ingenieure aus der Volksrepublik das leichtfertig abgelehnt. Aber am Hindukusch ist es nun einmal nicht üblich, daß Ausländer solche Offerten ausschlagen und sich weigern, die angeforderte Summe für die wackeren Wächter zu zahlen. Diesen Verstoß gegen die Regeln hatten die Chinesen mit zehn Toten bezahlt und sich seitdem den strengen Überlebensgeboten dieser Region angepaßt. Schließlich verhalten sich die internationalen Kampfeinheiten von "Enduring Freedom" und ISAF ähnlich, wenn sie die sich ständig steigernde Produktion von Opium und Heroin im Umkreis ihrer Stellungen dulden, um sich nicht den Zorn der Nutznießer dieses Geschäfts, der örtlichen Stammesfürsten und Bandenchefs zuzuziehen. Nur unter dieser Bedingung sind ja die meisten NATO-Positionen abzusichern." Peter Scholl-Latour [2008], S. 202.

Als ich kürzlich im Keller eines der vielen Amsterdamer Coffee-Shops der ganzen Palette an Dope und Weed ansichtig wurde, fand ich heraus, daß der Afghane weitaus der Günstigste war. "Der CIA überschwemmt die Welt mit billigem Stoff" hatte ich mir gedacht ...  Nur zu gut, daß "Deutschland am Hinduskusch verteidigt wird" ... 

Besonders Russland leidet an der Heroinschwemme: an die 50 Tonnen (!) sollen jährlich an die alten Feinde Afghanistans geliefert worden sein. Russland verlangte daraufhin von der NATO mehr Härte bei Drogenbekämpfung, doch diese lehnte ab, mit der Begründung, die lokalen Bauern müßten doch Geld verdienen ...

What "Going to the Mountains" Really Means in the North Caucasus

http://wikitravel.org/en/North_Caucasus#b

In 2009, I met young people from Russia's Caucasus Mountains who told me about their situation. They have been long-term unemployed and desperate since they could hardly provide their families with foods. They had lost hope of political solutions. So they were entertaining the idea of "going to the mountains" - which meant nothing less then going up there and joining the Islamistic militants terrorizing the Russian population, especially Russian authorities and people linked to them. What they expected from "going to the mountains" was to get some money from the jihadists. In return, they would receive some combat training and perform one or the other assassination. The jihadists are said to be sponsored by the long-term U.S. ally Saudi-Arabia. I was also told that the Wahhabi's determined goal is to establish a caliphate (or emirate) across the whole Caucasus region. 

Mosque in Mahatchkala, capital of the Republic of Dagestan, Russia

Wahhabism (a form of extreme fundamentalist Salafism) is relatively new in the Caucasus region and skeptically viewed by old local Sunnis. Whether Wahhabi money also directly flows into the building of mosques and Qur'anic schools is hard to tell. But it can be assumed that even less radical local Sunni Muslims will not look a gift horse in the mouth - thereby indirectly supporting the Wahhabi agenda to strengthen and spread their cultural and political hegemony over the Caucasus region.

Qur'anic school opposite to Mosque in Mahatchkala, Dagestan

But the guys I have met were neither extremists, nor did they support the extreme fundamentalist Muslim agenda. They were strong and stubborn believers, no doubt, but didn't even attend Friday prayers on a regular basis. They were rather muslims by tradition than fundamentalists. They couldn't speak or understand Arabic and were not really interested in translations either (maybe due to the influence of Sufism in the Caucasus; some Sufis say that it is better just to view the Arabic letters of the Qur'an than to read a (bad) translation). Though some people I met told me they attended Arabic lessons in the Qur'anic school, their knowledge of the language appeared to be very restricted.

Mahatchkala at the Caspian Sea: Filthy beach section
where once used to be a city beach during the Soviet Union

During my travel from Mahatchkala to Derbent (further to the south) I was once present during a discussion between young Dagestani and a native Arabic speaker. At times he amusedly corrected their use of the Arabic language when it came to religious topics. At some point he felt obliged to lecture them on a topic concerning the Qur'an. The Dagestani politely listened to him (via translation) until he was finished and then continued by totally ignoring of what he had said. Afterwards he told me those guys had no idea of the Arabic language and dubious knowledge of the Qur'an. When they asked me about my belief, I answered "agnostic", suppressing the fact that I'm an infidel towards the book religions I got acquainted with. Those guys were very quick at hand with some religious verses bashing agnostics and depicting them even less favorable than atheists (something which you can hear also in the Bible Belt). 

Mahatchkala at the Caspian Sea, view from the foot of the Caucasus Mountains I

Stubborn resistance: not even the anti-religious suppression during the Soviet Union could annihilate the multi-ethnic Caucasian population's adherence to Muslim belief which had arrived there in the late 8th century AD. Under the Soviets, religious practice in public was forbidden. After the collapse of the Soviet Union the Dagestani threw out all Russians but later invited them to come back after they had realized that nothing goes without them (long story short!). There was no one left running the infrastructure, hospitals, universities, ...

Mahatchkala at the Caspian Sea, view from the foot of the Caucasus Mountains I I

It would be an oversimplification to think young people in the Caucaus were peaceful in principle and only forced by bad economical and political conditions to join the Wahhabi terrorists. The situation is much more complicated. I assume though that they wouldn't voluntarily "go to the mountains" if they'd see other possibilities. But here's the problem: they don't have much choice, if you try to see it their way. Why?

Down south through the Caucasian foothills, on the road to Derbent

First, there is the strong archaic-patriarchal structure of the tribes. I think it's justified to speak of tribes or clans here, because if you ask the people, they can name the patriarch of their family and his possible successors, and these families are big; marriages are often arranged between cousins in order to strengthen the ties between families; possible genetic disorders are totally ignored; weddings take three days and can be crowded with thousands of people (depending on the size of the involved clans); women have no desirable status there: their value is measured by their fertility; they can be easily divorced and a divorced woman is a pariah - it would be the best for her to flee the Republic; I was always feeling very bored spending hours in the living room with men only, while women and girls had fun in the kitchen from which they would show up at times serving us the meals; nevertheless, these archaic-patriarchal family structures are often softened by several factors, e.g. it appeared to me that the gender separation was less important when no other member of the clan was watching. Coming back to the question of choice: most notably in cities, men are supposed not to have an "unmanly" profession - a doctor, a professor at the university, a lawyer, a technician, not to speak of gardeners, shoemakers or cooks - these are not "manly" professions, these are for slaves, girlies or foreigners; the choices for a "real man" are restricted to either "business men" (including all sorts of businesses) or "fighter" (including "manly sports", the military and the police); Now, since a country cannot be run by business men and fighters only, they need "guest workers" like Russians and folks from other regions of the former Soviet Empire who do the skilled, the "dirty" and the "unmanly" jobs for them. And - by the way - this is no exaggeration. In Chechnya, this Caucasian Machismo is even stronger. (Craftsmanship is acceptable in the countryside though, where you can't do without it.)

View from Naryn-Kala citadel (Цитадель Нарын-кала) over Derbent at the Caspian Sea

Second, the market for business and fighter jobs is naturally constantly saturated, young folks from the North Caucasus either stay unemployed, "go to the mountains" or leave the Republic. Now, "going to the mountains" is the last option, I assume. This leaves emigration the only way out. Now, there is the problem with education, especially with foreign languages. Mostly they don't know any other "foreign" language than Russian. (In fact, Russian is the only common language they have and is obligatory in schools. If they hadn't Russian, the tribes couldn't even communicate with each other.) This is why many young people from the region go to Russia or other neighboring countries where Russian is still spoken. But in Russia the people from the south are uniformly called "the blacks", viewed as possible terrorists and not very welcomed. Since they cannot accept "unmanly" job offers, they are subject to the same restrictions as at home. So this often leaves them with the hard option to study at a Russian university - a challenge for which they are hardly prepared because of the bad education at home. Only a small percentage, I guess, will master this rocky road. Another small percentage will choose the "unmanly" way of staying at home, studying or buying some academic degree and working as a doctor or the like. (I would not recommend consulting a dentist in this region.)

Garden on top of Naryn-Kala citadel, Derbent  

Third, there is an atmosphere of hopelessness regarding the political situation, especially the high level of corruption. In Chechnya there is Dr. Ramzan Akhmadovich Kadyrov, a ruthless vassal by the grace of Moscow. He's Muslim. Nevertheless, he and his henchmen are doing the dirty work to keep the Republic quiet and clean from the Wahhabi terrorists (who allegedly tried to kill him in 2009). Consequently, the Islamists more and more flee from Chechnya to Dagestan or Ingushetia. Whistle blowers have been assassinated by Kadyrov's gang even outside of Russia, so in Dubai, Istanbul and in Vienna. If anyone comes nearer to Sasha Baron Cohen's figure in The Dictator than the Saudi princes, it must be Kadyrov. In Dagestan the situation is different. In contrast to Chechnya, Dagestan is a melting pot of different ethnicities and historically these have been much more loyal to Russia than Chechens. Putin continued the old Soviet style strategy to appoint members of the local elite as vassals: Kadyrov in Chechnya and Magomedsalam Magomedov in Dagestan. The latter is an ethnic Dargin. Now, whatever his merits might be, there we have already a severe problem, since the Dargins are just one out of a wide range of ethnic groups each of which is a closed society, dominated by clan mentality. Under such conditions, problems are bound to occur. Even Dagestani told me that it would have been a much better idea to appoint an ethnic Russian - provided he is capable of forcing back corruption - the hardest problem in the region.

An old Soviet slogan on top of the building: "Long Live the Defenders of Dagestan" (going back to  WW2)

At the same time corruption is a general problem in Russia, not only in the Caucasus region. Take for instance streets and highways: often you see new streets which have been obviously designed to have two or more lanes but in fact there is only the minimum of one prepared to go. Sometimes you drive along a new street and it suddenly stops in the middle of nowhere. Road signs are rare. Here's how it works with Russian public funds: a full-blown project for a public building or street is sent to Moscow, everything's included, no flaw. After being approved in the Russian capital, the money is sent to the local authorities. Now, here's a simplified scheme: the first quarter of the money stays in Moscow, the second gets lost somehow on the way and when half of the money arrives in Dagestan, the third quarter of the estimated sum disappears into some local's pocket. The poor rest is finally spent for the construction of the street or building, provided the raw materials or construction machines are not stolen during the process. This distribution scheme of public wealth goes under the name "sharing". "Sharing" is an important concept in Russia. If you want your business to survive, you've got to "share". If you ask Russians why oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky is imprisoned, they often simply comment "he didn't want to share".
Nevertheless, there are some republics and districts in Russia where you can observe improvements, where new housing space is created, tolerable infrastructure and public buildings like schools, baths and sport centers are built. There you can see that corruption is not a destiny - not even in Russia. But in the Caucasus region it's still a plague and a job-killer. Ask the locals and they will name you the exact prices in $ for all kinds of governmental posts, licenses and academic degrees. It is more than obvious that most young people are not bound to participate in that system. They are marginalized.

Note also that the Wahhabi hunt declared by Moscow much too often affects the wrong people, i.e. the moderate Muslims instead of the extremists. In addition, conditions in Russian prisons are so inhumane that even moderate young Muslims, arbitrarily imprisoned, are put odds with Russian politics which again turns out counter productive and playing into the hands of Islamist.

If you put it all together, what are the root causes for young people in the Caucasus to "go to the mountains"? It's a combination of corruption on all levels, failed policy of the Russian Federation, the archaic-patriarchal mindset of the Caucasian tribes, the hegemonic ambitions of Saudi-Arabia based Islamists and, last but not least, the devastating influence of a religion whose holy scriptures are open to violent interpretations whenever desired.

In particular, the archaic-patriarchal mindset of the closed tribal societies restrict young people to only a narrow set of possible ways to earn their living; this causes per se tight job market conditions (in major cities); political and economic corruption further tighten these conditions which also erode social life in the region; the archaic-patriarchal structures also imply that violent conflict resolution is socially acceptable; unfortunately, this traditional cultural readiness to use violence meets here with  militant adherents of possible violent interpretations of the Qur'an, financially sponsored from certain groups abroad, especially from Saudi-Arabia; Moscow's failed politics of vassals and Wahhabi hunt further creates resistance and causes a spiral of violence: in Chechnya, the Russians are lying in bed with the devil and in Dagestan they just don't stop taking counter productive measures.

Further readings:
Russia’s Dagestan: Conflict Causes (recommended!)
Islam in the North Caucasus (Uwe Halbach)

Some more impressions from Mahatchkala:

Young Dagestani school girls in front of a statue of Lenin

another house of prayer

at the bazar

inside the market hall

governmental building

Über die allgegenwärtige Kriegstreiberei in den Massenmedien

Der Kommentar des Historikers Kurt Gritsch im österreichischen Standard über die auffallend systematisch und einheitlich wirkende Kriegstreiberei im Infotainment.

Gut inszeniert, die Mainstream-Meinung

Sind bürgerliche Qualitätszeitungen Kriegshetzer? Medienkritik aus Sicht eines Konfliktforschers

"[...] wussten Sie, dass das Assad-Regime 2011 mit Reformen begonnen hat? Dass der seit 1963 geltende Ausnahmezustand aufgehoben, Gefangene freigelassen, korrupte Gouverneure abgesetzt und die alleinigen Herrschaftsansprüche der Regierungspartei aufgegeben wurden? Wo stand zu lesen, dass Teile der innersyrischen Opposition einen Machtkompromiss mit Assad einzugehen bereit sind, während die u. a. von den USA mit Geld unterstützte Exil-opposition zu keinem Entgegenkommen bereit ist?"

Base2014 Kommentar: Nein, wußten wir nicht.

Was will man aber erwarten, wenn Information zu einem reinen Geschäft geworden ist, das in erster Linie dem Gedanken der Gewinnmaximierung unterworfen ist? Das Personal der Redaktionen wird gekürzt und journalistische Arbeitsabläufe kostengünstig optimiert, indem man sich darauf beschränkt unkritisch die Beiträge von Lieferanten zu adaptieren (Presse- und PR Agenturen), die wiederum selbst von wirtschaftlichen Interessen geleitet sind. Das Resultat ist ein Copy & Paste Journalismus, bei dem die Qualität (respektive die Wahrheit) keine Rolle mehr spielt. Teuere Auslandskorrespondenten will man sich kaum noch leisten und so erhält man Kriegsberichterstattung ohne Kriegsberichterstatter, oder im Falle der USA - Kriegsberichterstattung durch sog. "eingebettete Journalisten" - was auf dasselbe hinausläuft. Echte "war correspondents" wie Scholl-Latour, Robert Fisk oder John Pilger sind eine aussterbende Gattung. So erklärt sich die einheitliche Berichterstattung. Ob dahinter eine - von wem auch immer ausgeheckte und kontrollierte  - Strategie steckt, ist eine ganz andere Frage. Wahrscheinlich nicht, denn Krieg verkauft sich von alleine gut, viel besser als Friede, Freude und Eierkuchen. Und so entsteht und floriert die Kriegstreiberei aufgrund einer unheiligen Allianz zwischen den jeweils gewinnorientierten Interessen von Medienkonzernen und Eisenhowers "militärisch-industriellen Komplex", unter kräftiger Mitwirkung von nationalen Regierungen und privaten Interessensverbänden. (Der Grad an Einfluß der genannten Mitspieler mag von Fall zu Fall variieren.)

Al Jazeera vs Russia Today

Al Jazeera about RT (Russia Today) 
 

RT Replies to Al Jazeera 

Die russischen 5000 Dollar Bettler

Hat hier jemand zu tief ins Wodkaglas geschaut, oder stimmt hier was mit der Übersetzung nicht? Auf die Frage, was denn der Westen an Russland nicht verstehe, anwortete der angebliche Zoologe, Soziologe, und Ex-Redenschreiber Simon Kordonsky für Putin:

"Russland ist anders organisiert. Ein Bettler in New York und ein Bettler in Moskau sind nicht das Gleiche. In Russland ein armer Mensch zu sein ist ein Beruf. Die Invalidität, dass er zum Beispiel keine Hände hat, wird ausgenützt, um Einkommen zu lukrieren. Damit verdient man bis zu 5000 Dollar im Monat. Im Wesentlichen geben intelligente Menschen Almosen, damit wollen sie Buße tun für ihre Intelligenz, die andere nicht haben."

Über welchen verqueren Geisteszuschnitt muß jemand verfügen, um sich auf so widerliche Weise selbst zu widersprechen? 5000-6000 Dollar verdienen in etwa durchschnittliche Programmierer oder Anwälte in Moskau, wo die Lebenskosten allerdings dementsprechend hoch sind. Ist der Mann nie aus Moskau oder St. Petersburg rausgekommen? Hat er nie die Babushki auf ihren kleinen Schemeln am Straßenrand sitzen sehen, wenn sie die kärglichen Schätze ihrer harten Gartenarbeit zu verkaufen versuchen? Weiß er, wie niedrig Pensionen sind, wie wenig Ärzte oder Lehrer in seinem Land verdienen? Betreiben Soziologen in Russland keine empirische Feldforschung oder hat der Mann sich den akademischen Titel auf dieselbe Weise "erworben" wie die Mehrzahl der Abgeordneten der russischen Duma?

Das Interview im österreichischen Standard "Die Russen sind Ressourcenempfänger, aber keine Bürger" ist mit Sicherheit eines der seltsamsten und teilweise widerlichsten, die in letzter Zeit unkommentiert veröffentlicht wurden. Falls die angebliche, scheinbare Oligarchennähe des Herrn Kordonsky tatsächlich zuträfe, dann hätten wir damit aber auch ein Dokument vorliegen, das mehr oder weniger ungeschminkt die Sichtweise derjenigen andeutet, welche in Russland "die Ressourcen verteilen". Es ist jedenfalls kaum vorstellbar, daß Kordonsky sich eine derartige Verhöhnung der Armen und Mittellosen (in seiner Sprache "Ressourcenlosen") daheim in Russland erlauben würde. Und man fragt sich unwillkürlich, ob die markigen Sprüche Putins von seinen Redenschreibern stammen oder jene eigentümlich martialische Sprechweise und sein machohaftes Gebaren in der Öffentlichkeit auf letztere abgefärbt hat.

Es geht hier nicht darum, den empörten Russlandkritiker zu spielen. Putins "gelenkte Demokratie" ist tatsächlich nicht so wesentlich verschieden von der Kleptokratie der USA, dem "offenen Schmiergeldsystem" ("open system of bribary"), wie es der Comedian Bill Maher regelmäßig beschreibt. Die Kritik und Enttäuschung vieler Russen bezüglich der "westlichen Demokratie" sind in vielen Punkten berechtigt. Aber die berechnende Gier und Maßlosigkeit der russischen Oligarchie mit pseudo-wissenschaftlichen Begriffen zu bemänteln oder zu rechtfertigen, ist genauso unerträglich.

Saint Gorbachev

He's still the Saint of the collapse of the Soviet Union - at least for clueless Western Mass Media: Mikhail Gorbachev: Fox News as well as practically all the print and tv media around the world, especially in the West, reported enthusiastically about his recent public announcement "I would step down in Putin's place".

As if the man had to say something. For all the copy & paste cheap-Jacks, in Russia Gorbachev's status is nearly that of  "persona non grata". He's one of the most hated figures in the country, not only because he's blamed for having demolished the Soviet Union, but also because of the accompanying and  following catastrophic developments in the former USSR Republics which lead to thousands of deaths, while he still was in charge, not to mention his disastrous alcohol prohibition campaign.

Gorbachev's popularity can be estimated on the basis of the results of the Russian presidential election in 1996, where he received 0,5% of the votes in the first round. Current protesters all around Russia would rather go home and vote for Putin at the next Presidential Elections to be held on 4 March 2012, instead of following Gorby's advice. But fact is, his voice has no weight in modern Russia whatsoever. The Fox News headline "Gorbachev vs. Putin" is thus pointless. 

The Illusion of the Independent Dictator

At the end of a previous posting „Grown Men Do Not Need Leaders“ there was a question which is reformulated here: Although in most (Western) democracies there are independent institutions controlling the power of the elected governments (like e.g. supreme court, financial regulation or consumer protection), how come that it doesn't work the way Popper believed it should? (And how come that more and more people have the impression of being faced with a democracy solely on paper, a faked democracy?)

One of the replies to this posting was: „it doesn't work without leaders! People need a leader, a strong hand guiding them!“

One could have expected other objections like that - in practice - the mentioned institutions are neither free nor independent. Thus, the reply is surprising on the one hand. On the other hand, it is not surprising at all, because one can still hear it so often. If you go to Russia for instance, you will hear it all the time. Putin is said to be Russia's hero, because he's the strong hand Russia needs and he prevented the country (or the empire) from further breakdown – in contrast to the much hated Gorbatchov and Jelzin in the nineties. Also in the US, you can hear the call for a strong leadership in ever election campaign and people are often disgusted by fruitless congressional debates. The more chaos, the more demanding the wish for a strong leader. Sometimes it appears to be a kind of reflex … it seems you can't kill it. But it's not a reflex. It's an illusion.

Let's go back to 1944, when Karl Popper's „The Open Society and it's Enemies“ was about to be published. Hitler and Stalin were still in power and they were the epitome of strong leaders – no one can doubt that. Popper stated the theory of (uncontrolled) sovereignty as follows: „that political power is practically unchecked, or for the demand that it ought to be so; together with the implication that the main question left is to get this power into the best hands.“ (chapter 7/I)

But before he starts to argue against this theory, he calls in question the picture of the independent/almighty leader some people were still maintaining at that time. And it is these simple remarks questioning an old and problematic concept – not even arguing against it- which make Popper's writings still so valuable.

„Without entering into a detailed criticism, I wish to point out that there are serious objections against a rash and implicit acceptance of this theory. Whatever its speculative merits may appear to be, it is certainly a very unrealistic assumption. No political power has ever been unchecked, and as long as men remain human (as long as the ‘Brave New World’ has not materialized), there can be no absolute and unrestrained political power. So long as one man cannot accumulate enough physical power in his hands to dominate all others, just so long must he depend upon his helpers. Even the most powerful tyrant depends upon his secret police, his henchmen and his hangmen. This dependence means that his power, great as it may be, is not unchecked, and that he has to make concessions, playing one group off against another. It means that there are other political forces, other powers besides his own, and that he can exert his rule only by utilizing and pacifying them. This shows that even the extreme cases of sovereignty are never cases of pure sovereignty. They are never cases in which the will or the interest of one man (or, if there were such a thing, the will or the interest of one group) can achieve his aim directly, without giving up some of it in order to enlist powers which he cannot conquer. And in an overwhelming number of cases, the limitations of political power go much further than this.“ (Popper [1945], chapter 7/1)

Der Wahre Grund für den Irakkrieg? (True Reason for the Invasion Of Iraq?)

Nachdem seit 2009 die Lizenzen von 11 irakischen Erdölfeldern verkauft worden waren, schienen auf den ersten Blick jene recht zu behalten, die nicht daran geglaubt hatten, die USA hätten "nur" des Erdöls wegen das Land überfallen. Nur zwei der großen US-Öl Giganten werden sich vorerst direkt am irakischen Öl gütlich tun, einer davon Exxon Mobile. (Übrigens, welcher Ökonzern hat den höchsten jemals in Deutschland nachgewiesenen Preis pro Liter Superbenzin verlangt? Richtig: Esso! Wieviel?)

Aber, Hand auf's Herz, wer glaubt schon, daß der Hegemon, der für die Besetzung des Iraks Unsummen an Geld und Ressourcen investiert hat, sich die Butter vom Brot nehmen lassen würde? Kann man so naiv sein?

Der New York Times zufolge geht die Hälfte der 150 Milliarden, welche die Lizenznehmer in den nächsten zehn Jahren für die Ausbeutung des irakischen Öls investieren werden, an die Bohrspezialisten und Zulieferer Halliburton, Baker Hughes, Weatherford International und Schlumberger, die allesamt enge Beziehungen zur texanischen Ölindustrie aufweisen. Und das, wohlgemerkt, bei einer Steigerung der Tagesproduktion von 2,5 Millionen Barrels derzeit auf geplante 12 Millionen (!) bis 2017.

"Those four have won the largest portion of the subcontracts to drill for oil, build wells and refurbish old equipment.“Iraq is a huge opportunity for contractors,” Alex Munton, a Middle East analyst for Wood Mackenzie, a research and consulting firm based in Edinburgh, said by telephone. Mr. Munton estimated that about half of the $150 billion the international majors are expected to invest at Iraqi oil fields over the next decade would go to drilling subcontractors — most of it to the big four operators, which all have ties to the Texas oil industry. Halliburton and Baker Hughes are based in Houston, as is the drilling unit of Schlumberger, which is based in Paris. Weatherford, though now incorporated in Switzerland, was founded in Texas and still has big operations there."

Aber es kommt noch besser, denn im Vergleich zu den anderen internationalen Ölmultis werden die US-Firmen besser abschneiden, obwohl sie nicht (alle) an den Lizenzen beteiligt sind. Die russische Lukoil hatte die Bohrlizenz für das West Qurna 2, dem zweitgrößten Ölfeld der Welt, für 13 Milliarden Dollar erworben. Unabhängig vom Ölpreis müssen die Russen an das irakische Ölministerium $1.15 pro Barrel abführen. Das Geschäft wird sich dann erst nach etwa 10 Jahren amortisieren. Bis es soweit ist, werden die genannten US-Bohrfirmen schon ordentlich verdient haben.

"While Baker and its American peers are poised to make significant profits from such work in Iraq, wafer-thin margins seem to await Lukoil and the other international oil producers — which include BP of Britain, CNPC of China, ENI of Italy and the Anglo-Dutch company Shell.Lukoil’s contract, for example, is typical in paying a flat fee of $1.15 for each barrel produced, regardless of oil’s price.That means even if Lukoil ramps up West Qurna 2 production from almost nothing now to 1.8 million barrels a day by 2017, as specified in the contract, it will require more than a decade of subsequent production just to recoup capital costs of about $13 billion. A good portion of those costs, meanwhile, will have gone to its drilling contractors. Lukoil says it intends to drill more than 500 wells over six years.""

Die Russen scheinen aber auch nicht besten Geschäftsbedingungen vorgefunden haben: Lukoils Zulieferer ist Baker Hughes. Dem Lizenzvertrag folgend mußten die Russen das Angebot für die Zusammenarbeit mit einer Bohrfirma im Irak öffentlich ausschreiben ... aber nur Amerikaner hatten sich gemeldet:

"Andrei Kuzyaev, the president of Lukoil Overseas, the company’s subsidiary for foreign operations, said in an interview that he was choosing oil services contractors in Iraq through open tenders, as required by the contract. But in fact, Lukoil officials say privately, only American companies have bid."

Falls die New York Times wahrheitsgemäß berichtet, dürfte es immer schwieriger werden für diejenigen, die an die "Nicht-für Öl"-Hypothese als Rechtfertigung für die US-Invasion des Iraks glauben, abgesehen davon, daß diese Hypothese ohnehin nicht wirklich für hegemoniale Interessen paßt. "Kontrolle über die Ausbeutung der Ressourcen" ist das hegemoniale Stichwort. Auf welche Weise genau etwas für die eigene Wirtschaft abfällt, ist dabei nebensächlich. Und die Russen hat man wieder einmal über den Tisch gezogen.

God's Own State: Russia

Boiko the Great

News agency Reuters reported last week "Russian dairy to dismiss women over abortions". The story is about Russian "oligarch" Vasily Boiko-Veliky announcing his orthodox fundamentalist staffing policy in an interview. His dairy "Russkoye Moloko" was "established  to promote the revival of the Orthodox church in Russia" by applying new rules: no new employees having previously performed abortion, a wedding ultimatum for the unmarried (living in sin) until October 14 , ... and the wildfire catastrophy in Russia this summer being a punishment for sin but improvable by suggested weddings. (Back to the old days of spell and counter-spell)

Boiko-Veliky (his artist name meaning "Boiko the Great") is not the only Russian business man or politician (which often comes to the same thing in Putin's Russia) carrying his prayer-book . Putin himself embraces and propagates "traditional confessions" - as he called Russian Orthodox Church. And as with Yeltsin's tennis club - which anyone had to visit in order to get acquainted to him and make some money, it almost comes down to an obligation in todays Russia to expose oneself as a believer, not unlike for U.S. politicians in order to win elections. No TV-event without orthodox priests.

German Sterligoff

Another Russian business man, German Sterligoff, showed similar fundamentalist attitudes towards labour and politics. In a talk  together with Boiko the Great and some journalists of radio station "Echo of Moscow" he expressed his religious redneck views as shown by the following Question-Answer excerpt [translated by a member of base 2014].

Interview in Echo of Moscow

Question: What shall we do with all the godless people, gays and lesbians?

Sterligoff: As it is written by apostle Paul "there shall be blood on their heads" [this quotation is rather known by Leviticus 20:33: "If a man has intercourse with another man in the same manner as with a woman, both of them have committed a disgusting perversion. They shall be put to death by stoning", comment by base2014]

Question: Are  there gays and lesbians mentioned explicitly?

Sterligoff: Yes, it said specifically about men having intercourse with other men.

Question: So, they ought to be killed?

Sterligoff: Yes, unconditionally.
----------------------------
Question: German, do you exercise birching?

Sterligoff: Birching whom?

Question: Children?

Sterligoff: Yes sure! It's written in the holy scripture: "you are an enemy to your son if you spare birch for him" ... It's important to do it with love. Because, if you punish your children with anger, it humiliates them - ...

Question: Do you birch your employees?

Sterligoff: No, I don't. When it comes to abortions - since already 15 years it has been forbidden [in my firm]  - I pay no salary to those who kill children. I don't have such female employees.

Question: Does that mean that your employees are aware of this precondition?

Sterligoff: Yes, during our interviews I ask everyone if they have performed abortion or not. As a rule, they don't lie and answer openly. It's such a question where it's hard to lie.

Question: But you haven't issued any printed directives on this topic?

Sterligoff: No, everybody simply knows it. It's self-evident because it's scary to work with a murderer of a child. Because you don't know - since he/she had managed to kill a child - ... The same applies to men, bacause some of them force their broads to perform abortion.
----------------------------------------
Question: This is a very important moment for me, because I have to understand that this political correctness which we all curse all the time and which exists in Europe as well as in the U.S. ... Maybe the time has came for us to adopt certain provisions or to initiate their adoption?

Sterligoff: I'm convinced that we have to adopt all your laws based on the holy scripture.