Read Book Online : http://www.archive.org/stream/gatewaytosaharao00furl#page/n7/mode/2up

Download pdf Book : http://ia600300.us.archive.org/15/items/gatewaytosaharao00furl/gatewaytosaharao00furl.pdf

A tribute to the innocent Libyans whose country will soon be bombed beyond recognition, whose families will be killed and their natural resources plundered...all in the name of freedom !

So, dear leaders, when're we going to Bahrain? Yemen? Saudi Arabia? Myanmar? Turkmenistan? Oh, right.

Myanmar does not have Oil !! Oh yes...they have drugs. But then thats another story like Afghanistan.

And rubies. And jade. And ELEPHANTS. Maybe Qaddafi should go there to rustle up some pachyderms to march across the Alps.

But then...Gaddhafi is protecting the Oil of his country from the plundering hordes. This is the stuff of many a book we have posted on RBSI.

But no Sanskrit treatise on warfare would be complete without a discussion of elephant cavalry! (Elevalry?) A modern-day Hannibal could do worse than to consult the wisdom of the ages.

Plunderers...is the simple definitive word !

You don't get that high without sinking pretty low. It's frustrating for a lot of us in America. We voted for a president who promised to stop the wars, and here we are getting into even more.

I know that the Europeans are in on this too, but I speak as an American.

Unfortunately, the alternative would be even more disastrous. Current politics in the US = absolute mess. An extremist party has a lot of representatives at both the national and state levels right now.

Lets not get mixed here. The American people like the Indian people or the Italian people are good. People everywhere are good. Its the real-powers of the state and the policy-makers who are responsible for these carnages. The American President has always been the 'face of power' to the world...he has never been 'the powerful one'. Definitely not after Andrew Jackson and Abe Lincoln.

The real powers of America and as a consequence the whole world are the Bankers and the Military-industrial complex.

That's exactly the problem right now. The public is polarized. Obama can't risk looking like the 'angry black man' or 'crypto-Muslim traitor', so he tries to make peace with both sides. Unfortunately, there can be no peace right now. There's too much hate.

That's the other problem. The extremists are shamelessly allied with big business. They voted to keep /huge/ tax cuts for the rich and severely cut education and services for the poor.

...which makes sure that politicians are indebted to big business, as a national campaign can cost almost $1 billion.

They are bought by and beholden to the Big Business even before they take the oath of office ! Thats the way the system works.

And the populace is kept in fear of the outside world.

Robert Welch Explains Purpose of Vietnam War : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co73TDl_F7E&feature=related

Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY&feature=related

@RBSI,,,this is so butting in…sorry for this…have been watching the way events have been unfolding these past few months…felt like having a bit of a say myself….so here goes …tell me is Gaddafi really protecting Libya’s Oil for his people…??? Name a ruler in the Middle East who was democratically elected to rule his country…these guys can break modern day governance records when it comes to the tenure of their rule. Even in the most modern of Arab states…do we find evidence of any kind of mechanism in place that makes a ruler accountable for the manner in which he spends his country’s oil revenue – their so called Petro Dollars. Is this not the very reason then that justifies why such ruthless attempts are made by these despotic rulers to snuff out popular movements for change in these very countries. Is it not confusing that if there is an anti establishment movement there is always one that is pro establishment….in the whole gamut of movements for change can we define who these pro people really are…?? Tools of propaganda and justification perhaps….soldiers…secret police in disguise…?? Tribes to which the ruler himself belongs…??...whatever it is…it is clearly another depraved arm of a decadent…stubborn and power hungry ruler to help him hold on….it probably is the very arm that has tortured dissent…the arm that makes those out of line disappear…the arm that has stifled the voice of discontent in his people…all along and has helped him continue to stay in power. Mubarak, Gadaffi and the rest of them have systematically been plundering their own countries for decades now…it is a time of reckoning for all of them... Personally I am not a great fan of America butting their noses into conflict when it happens anywhere in the world…but like it or not one has to look at the broader picture…the global arm twisting and power games that are being constantly played out between America and Russia and of course the new Super Kid on the block China… One has to be naïve to say its none of their business….because it is their business and its about their business. They have a myriad of reasons that makes it their business. None of them will stand around as mute spectators when there is a kill to be made. Why blame them…when even smaller countries indulge in power play…is not Iran a big player in what is happening in Bahrain…South Lebanon or then in a smaller way in the west of Afghanistan and even in Iraq. @RBSI when it comes to plundering…it’s happening all around us. Democracy…Dictatorship…Monarchy…which form of government guarantees no plundering…??? All tried and tested…it’s the 21st Century and we know by know they have all failed…miserably. As you have so rightly pointed out its all about money and as for America let me quote from the work of an American author “ Inequality is always with us. Class is a fact of life. All men and women are not created, nor do they grow up equal: there will always be somebody smarter or richer or stronger or more talented or more audacious than his fellows. Since the eighteenth century, American society has consciously strived for equality in education, opportunity and due process of law. But that does not change the fact that social animals always arrange themselves into hierarchies. America’s founding fathers took this for granted, their own grandfathers having carried across the Atlantic a set of remarkably mismatched mental luggage in which the democratic notions of John Locke were packed together with some extremely traditional European assumptions about social organization. …Inequality said Williams Dean Howells some three hundred years later, ‘is dear to the American heart as liberty itself’” That’s in a nutshell American society for you. Democracy has no place in any society that has no sense of equality…then it is something else in disguise. Tell me, we proudly call ourselves the largest democracy in the world can we as proudly say that there’s equality…freedom…due process of law in our country..?? The bottom line as you have so rightly pointed out @RBSI, is that its all about the money.

Well said Frank. Of course there is no equality anywhere...now or at anytime. But how can any sensible person condone this kind of outright and blatant slaughter of innocent lives (and when will we move on from that outdated concept that non-European and non-American lives are also equally valuable) and a clear daylight robbery of a country's natural resources. So what if Gaddafi is a dictator and rules with a iron hand ? Its for the people of Libya to decide. There are a hundred more dictators around the world...why arent the Anglo- American forces attacking and bombing them as well ? Well...as we all know these lucky guys dont have the Oil which can be forcefully stolen from their land. For all the freedom Americans pride themselves about...do they really have freedom of speech ? I guess not...most toe the official line out of unexpressed fear. I guess that makes it slightly better than Libya for now. Lets see what will happen when the Homeland security and the Patriot Acts come into full force. Lets face it...even the most intelligent section of the people have been made complicit to these extraordinary criminal acts (call it business, power games or what have you) by their silence. Its almost incredible...almost like 'the silence of the lambs'. If all the people around you start stealing...does stealing become right ? The last power we have as truly powerless citizens in a world controlled by the 'all powerful few'...is atleast the 'power to dissent' !

No, if all the people around us start stealing, that does not make stealing right.

Elsewhere, a landlord in Scotland is going in appeal for a judicial review under the "European Law" of the Scottish Government's decision to permit the local community to buy out the land owner in a "hostile" bid.

Well...as Frank has rightly said...it has always been that 'might is right'. The modern man has somehow come to believe albeit unrealistically that the 'small guy also has equal rights'. What else can one say of the forceful land acquisition of ordinary citizens to make way for SEZ's , Mining etc. even in our country.

It is important to take a closer look at the situation in the Middle East before we begin to criticize the Americans. In this particular case, the U.S. would have been criticized whether it had participated or not - for doing too much or too little. Life in those countries is miserable; there is total repression. I say so since I spent some time in Kuwait. I had gone there for the purpose of starting genetic engineering on a 2-year leave from my University; I resigned after only 2 weeks. I had to resign three times to finally get out of that country. The rulers of these countries have no sense of freedom, human dignity, human rights etc. that are hallmarks of civilization. They run these countries as if they are their private properties and do not hesitate to subjugate and brutalize their own people, sometimes in the name of their religion. Anyone who watched the Son-of-Qaddafi (SOQ) warn the people of "bloodbath" if they ask for their democratic rights knows that. I thought it sounded just like Hitler. Thus the western nations had to intervene to protect the civilians, otherwise there would bave been a true "bloodbath" in Benghazi. The right thing to do for the West is to neutralize Qaddafi and his clan and get out of Libya so that the Libyans can settle their own affairs. The Americans did not take over Iraqi oilfields nor would they do so in Libya. If the powerful nations do nothing to ensure fundamental rights for all humanity, who will? Do we allow mass exterminations as happened in Rwanda, or unjust repression in other places. No. So far the West has done the right thing in Libya; the mistake would come if they stay there.

Asad Ahmed : As always I respect your opinions. But I differ quite vehemently with you here. The track record of America in the past 100 years outside America is worse than Gaddafi in his own nation. The official line is always civilized and is designed to suit our sensibilities. But the truth is far different. The world does not need America to bomb civilians in order bring freedom to civilians. How delusional can we be ? Middle East is only about the control of Oil...at least half the world seems to believe so.

Please see this video explaining of just one of the many pointless wars. The official lines are almost mocking at us...thank God for Internet...some of these lone voices can be heard. Robert Welch Explains Purpose of Vietnam War : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co73TDl_F7E&feature=related

What was the purpose all these wars : Korean War Vietnam War War in Cambodia War in Afghanistan War in Iraq and War in Libya Ofcourse I must have missed a few more...which brought about world peace and improved the lives of the people living there. In case they did improve, inspite of the War it would only be due to the resilience of the people.

Nobody can do a better job of exposing Americans than Americans themselves. If you hear of a fight next door, you are supposed to ring the bell of that house. Next step, call in the authorities. If all else fails, and you have the courage and conviction, you intervene.

Subbiah: I agree with you completely that the Vietnam War and the invasion of Iraq by the Americans were totally immoral and unjustified and caused untold misery and suffering for the civilian population. But today we are witnessing a new phenomenon: brutalization of their own people by bandits posing as rulers. What is the qualification of Qaddafi to rule Libya? He remains in power because of sheer savagery, as did Saddam, Pol Pot, Pinochet, Hosni Mabarak and countless others. Qaddafi thinks he owns Libya and that he is indispensable. No one is. A ruler who has to use such brutal measures to remain in power does not deserve to rule. He must be removed from power. Under the present circumstances, the U.S. has to take this responsibility. I am not saying that they should control oil in Libya; just bring freedom to the people and leave. Of course, American record in Iraq, Afghanistan, and specially Vietnam is contemptible but many Americans agree with that. Obama has so far handled the Libya situation with great skill; this time the Americans are on the right side but I am afraid they might mess it up by using excessive force or staying longer than necessary. In all wars, civilians do get killed, but this is the price the Libyans have to pay for attaining freedom. This is tragic, but the gift of freedom is incalculable.

Asad Ahmed : We are all insignificant little pawns discussing the official versions of a rather murky and brutal side of real history with childlike simplicity. Most the of the tinpot dictators and their kind like Saddam Hussein, Qaddafi, Hosni Mubarak, Bin Laden etc. were either propped up or supported by the CIA. They were disposed off once they became inconvenient and less obedient.There are too many forces at play here which are confusing for an ordinary law abiding civilian to comprehend. The real Game as we all know is dirty. It has nothing to do with freedom or liberation. Its plain and simple - power, domination, oil, dollar, business and control. a world far removed from our little worlds of fairness, decency and justice. First of them all : The Military-Industrial Complex. This man-made monster has to produce expensive arms and is compelled to create international tensions so that all countries are forced to buy these armaments to protect their borders. After a while, it is necessary to create wars and conflicts so that the existing arm stocks are consumed. How else can one explain civil wars in Africa and other impoverished regions to gon ofor decades. I mean how else can you use a bomb other than drop it somewhere. Therefore a war to topple a recently-demonized dictator comes in handy to deplete the existing stocks…as well as use the war as a demo for the potential buying countries. Well I could go on…but I will let John Perkins (Confessions of an Economic Hitman ) explain the Game better : Confessions of an Economic Hit Man http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oARBdBtGenM&feature=related Interview - Confessions of an Economic Hit Man - Part I http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTbdnNgqfs8&feature=related Interview - Confessions of an Economic Hit Man - Part II http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29GhXsx7-Rs&feature=related

John Perkins explains how countries are taken over by America...quite different from what we read in the mainstream media : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay-nUI3b_oU&feature=related

Subbiah: I am fully aware of the intrigues of the military-industrial complex; of the power of money, oil, and resources; and the incessant desire of powerful nations to dominate weaker ones. In fact, I abhor war as a means of settling problems, but I also believe strongly in the right of Man to be free. Yes, it is true that they are using their stockpiles of weapons in this war to manufacture new ones and make more money. But what we are looking at is a War against tyranny and oppression by an uncultured, savage dictator. Was the Vietnam War not fought towards the same end - to eliminate repression by colonial and imperialist forces? Would you have liked the "Dear Leader" of North Korea ruling over the South had not the UN intervened in the 1950's? Would you have liked the regime of Pol Pot preparing more "killing fields" in Cambodia had the Vietnamese army not intervened to throw him out? Thus, although the notion of war is abhorrent and should be avoided whenever possible, it becomes necessary to use it as a last resort to protect human dignity and freedom - an inalienable right of Man. This is not a war to grab resources, to dominate other people, or to try to reduce the inventory of unused weapons but to support the young people of Libya who only want freedom, a breath of fresh air. The Russians are unhappy because they themselves are suppressing the people in the Caucasus with whom they have nothing in common except a history of domination since the Czarist times.

Asad Ahmed : Please the see the videos I have justed posted on John Perkins - Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. To put it mildly...its revelatory.

Asad Ahmed : I am honestly curious to know your opinion. Just imagine for a minute that George Bush won the third time and he has implemented a hybrid Patriot Act where every action of the American citizen is monitored and recorded. And soon freedom of speech would be restricted. Prices of food would sky rocket and the dollar would be highly devalued (My God, I am beginning to sound like Gerald Celente : )....People would be living in anxiety and would be quite unhappy. In that event...would it be fair for China, India or Spain to send in their aircraft and armed forces and bomb the cities, kill a few hundred thousand civilians and finally free the unhappy American people from tyranny ? I guess this is what America is trying to do everywhere in the world.

Dissent of any sort has not been very well tolerated even in the states. One must remind oneself of the Kent State University shootings in May 1970 where the National Guard opened fire on anti war student demonstrators and killed 4. The event was immortalised by the rock group Crosby, Stills,Nash and Young in their hit "Ohio". We have reduced the power of Labor Unions satrting from the Taft Hartley act. This has made collective bargaining rights a joke and the recent fiasco in Wisconsin highlights the inewquality more. Economists have called this "Orwellian Equality" the great divergence- check this website out-www.slate.com/2266025/entry/2266031/

Subbiah: Thank you. I watched the video. It is revealing - but I knew all those wrongdoings of the past U.S. administrations. Some of those actions deserve condemnation. From reading all the comments, it seems to me that one must distinguish between past wrongs and the present policies of the U.S. government. Many people do not seem to realize that the current administration (Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton) has turned U.S. policies by 180 degrees in additiojn to bringing a high level of intelligence to the U.S. foreign policy. I am confident that, had Bush been the President, he would have sided with Hosni Mubarak. The reason that the Egyptian Army did not go on a rampage against the people was because of some behind-the-scene work by the U.S. Army advising them that the military does not engage in politics. So the U.S. policy under Obama is very different in many respects; it is a silent revolution, but it may not last very long. I heard a Senator say that we should not repeat the mistakes of Iran by siding with the Shah so that all future relationships with Iran got messed up.

Now the scenario you present is interesting. If the United Nations or the Security Council asks other countries to do so, it should be done. But the scenario is very hypothetical since such a situation can never arise in a democracy. This is the beauty of democracy; it can occur only in a totalitarian state. The Americans are furiously individualistic and free people. If such a thing occurs, the Americans will take care of it themselves. This is why I say support the introduction of true democracy in the Middle East. There are occasional 'blips' like McCarthyism and the Tea Cup movement but Americans themselves will take care of them - no outside interference will be necessary. Democracy, Subbiah, is a great idea.

How can I ever disagree with you regarding the primacy of Democracy...even with all its delusions and illusions. I live in probably the worlds only real democracy...albeit a corrupt one ! But then where on earth is corruption non-existent today. But do look around...the last freedom Americans have today alongwith to other democracies is only freedom of speech and freedom to protest. I dont think it is as free as its projected to be. These guys have even finished four of their Presidents...because they didnt toe their line !! I beleive Orwell was right after all. How else can you justify the Patriot Act...and dear Sir...do look behind the veil !

Like all human creations democracy is neither infallible nor immutable. It cannot be considered the apotheosis of social development. Nevertheless- it is the best system most of us have. Its definition was "a government of the people, by the people, for the people". The first requirement is met only in a parliamentary democracy. The second requirement is nullified by the big businesses. The third requirement is partly fulfilled and can inly be fully satisfied if freedom of expression is free. One out of three or two out of three tenets being fulfilled is a tragedy after all the achievements we have made this last century. I agree that, nevertheless , it is the best system we have and may succeed if at least the Fourth estate does not become the Fifth column.

Subbiah: There are 'democracies' and there are 'illusions of democracy' in the world today. Three levels of democracy can be discerned. The first is 'true democracy' as practised in the Scandinavian countries, Western Europe, Britain, Japan, and North America. They permit free and fair elections, the judiciary is completely independent, freedom of expression is guaranteed, all citizens have equal rights, and minorities are protected. The second level consists of 'flawed democracies' exemplified by countries like Israel, India, Turkey, Russia etc. They permit free and fair elections, freedom of expression, judicial independence to a certain degree, but practise inequality and use their military to suppress segments of their own population or occupy neighboring territories. This is a fairly heterogeneous group depending on their malpractices. The third and the most deplorable level is 'false democracies' that includes countries like Pakistan, most of of the Muslim world and African countries. Here elections are habitually rigged, there are no human rights, the judiciary is state-controlled, there is no freedom of expression, and minorities are barely tolerated. In fact, there elections are used only to usurp power, and the power is then used to suppress or loot the very same people who elected them. Another word for this class is 'kleptocracy' - a government run by thieves. I must acknowledge that India has made impressive progress towards become a true democracy during the present government but still stands on shaky grounds and there is a risk that it may revert to being a flawed democracy again.

Don't forget Shylock. You have to later fight the one who might demand your pound of flesh. Such cure can be worse than the remedy. Help is welcome only when it is disinterested (devoid of self-interest) and is based on principles or the help is rendered purely for self-defense. Freedom loving people everywhere have had to learn to earn their freedom. People fighting for freedom must set their terms for receiving any help from neighbours or from distant do-gooders.

Asad Ahmed : Excellently presented. But with all informaion now openly available...it would be appropriate to place America (one of my favorite countries) in the third category. It has been openly taken over by private banking cartels and power groups. Kleptocracy is the perfect word. Whatever I have read to convince me of this conclusion has been expressed by respected American citizens only. Why else would rich become super and super richer...and the poor so much worse off on a daily basis as in America today. I am talking economics here.

Asad Ahmed: Isn't it rather academic to try to classify democracies as you have done? Better still, isn't it risky to do so? In real life you have to take sides and cannot afford to remain an onlooker, detached from all cares in the world. Any artificial or facile classification most likely will misguide you. Real-politic is much harder than one can imagine. American political system is best described by their own works fiction. Don't we know facts can be stranger than fiction? As RBSI says, America is my favourite too, but certainly not because of its politics and the power itsr establishment wields over my destiny. They will do the world a lot of good if they leave it alone and give only moral support, if there is any such thing.

The Rise and Fall of American Democracy by Robert Kiyosaki Alexander Tytler (1747-1813) was a Scottish-born English lawyer and historian. Reportedly, Tytler was critical of democracies, pointing to the history of democracies such as Athens and its flaws, cycles, and ultimate failures. Although the authenticity of his following quote is often disputed, the words have eerie relevance today: A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by dictatorship. Read more at : http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/richricher/280341

America is a truly free society. The first time I breathed freedom was the day (September 3rd, 1960) when I landed in America. Freedom runs deep in that society. Now it has many faults within its society too -the worst being the so-called "American Dream" - which is nothing more than Greed, plain and simple. The thing I admire most about America is the vast reservoir of knowledge, originality, and ingenuity that is enshrined in its great educational institutions. Nobody can beat that. They also accept all human beings at face value - unprejudiced by other considerations better than in any other country.

Asadbhai, I am intrigued by your observation about America. We should be concerned about the American State. Freedom enjoyed by the Americans in their own land is irrelevant. Like religion in other places, freedom is their opium. Average Americans citizens are so wallowed in their version of freedom that they care two hoots about what happens to others even if their own State is responsible for some of the world's woes. Comparatively, the British Colonialists did a great service to the colonies by contributing to their upbringing. The American State on the contrary has supported despots and tyrants and terrorists consistently. Enemy's enemy is not a friend. Hence America's new-found aggression on autocracies should be viewed with caution.

Well said Shekar ! The distortion of reality has been accomplished to such a degree today that even the most intelligent Americans will at once conclude your views to be anti-American !! I truly pity the Americans as they will soon be the most hated people by half the world...because of the actions of their leaders which they dont seem to condemn. They are destroying country after country...and still some more to go ! Please see this video : This amazing interview was done back in 1985 with a former KGB agent who was trained in subversion techniques. He explains the 4 basic steps to socially engineering entire generations into thinking and behaving the way those in power want them to. It's shocking because our nation has been transformed in the exact same way, and followed the exact same steps. How to Brainwash a nation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeMZGGQ0ERk

RBSI, in the same breath, I say that others or not exactly a gift of god to mankind. We have to fight our own battles in our own homes without expecting "external" support. The next thing I will say is that ends do not justify the means. So our "satyagraha" should be based on principles.

RBSI and Shekhar: No one goes brainwashing people in the U.S. It probably happens in the intelligence services but certainly not in public. Americans are really fine people with deep human (and Christian) values, but they are easily misunderstood by outsiders. This is because their sense of freedom and justice is confined to their own people; outside, the U.S. has admittedly participated in serious atrocities as in Latin America and the Middle East. But you must realize that America has changed considerably after the Viet Nam War, and especially after George Bush Jr. And whatever residual excesses may have been committed under Obama are the hangovers from the past. Most observers feel that their recent actions in Libya are not motivated by oil but by the urgency to protect civilians. Look at the Russians; they are unhappy with military operations in Libya but they forget the serious crimes they themselves committed in Chechnya. The entire city of Grozny was converted into rubble; over 200,000 people were killed. The important difference is that the Americans are protecting civilians in their own ways while the Russians were killing and raping them. The Russians stayed in Chechnya; the Americans have no intention of staying in Libya. So the aims of the two operations are quite different. During the Bosnian War, it was the Americans who saved the Bosniaks; otherwise the Serbians would have wiped them out in their savage ways. And there in no oil in Bosnia!

Asadbhai : Wow !! This is far is the most breath-taking statement I've heard in recent times : ...."Most observers feel that their recent actions in Libya are not motivated by oil but by the urgency to protect civilians."... We are not speaking of the American people (who are really wonderful) or the Russians here...the discussion is on American forces. With a track record like this...how in the world can any kind human being view a war as to protect the civilians.... Please read this : '655,000 Iraqis killed since invasion' By Sarah Bosely - Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/oct/11/iraq.iraq

Oil, Currency and the War in Iraq By Cóilín Nunan It will not come as news to anyone that the US dominates the world economically and militarily. But the exact mechanisms by which American hegemony has been established and maintained are perhaps less well understood than they might be. One tool used to great effect has been the dollar, but its efficacy has recently been under threat since Europe introduced the euro. The dollar is the de facto world reserve currency: the US currency accounts for approximately two thirds of all official exchange reserves. More than four-fifths of all foreign exchange transactions and half of all world exports are denominated in dollars. In addition, all IMF loans are denominated in dollars. But the more dollars there are circulating outside the US, or invested by foreign owners in American assets, the more the rest of the world has had to provide the US with goods and services in exchange for these dollars. The dollars cost the US next to nothing to produce, so the fact that the world uses the currency in this way means that the US is importing vast quantities of goods and services virtually for free. Since so many foreign-owned dollars are not spent on American goods and services, the US is able to run a huge trade deficit year after year without apparently any major economic consequences. The most recently published figures, for example, show that in November of last year US imports were worth 48% more than US exports1. No other country can run such a large trade deficit with impunity. The financial media tell us the US is acting as the ‘consumer of last resort’ and the implication is that we should be thankful, but a more enlightening description of this state of affairs would be to say that it is getting a massive interest-free loan from the rest of the world. While the US’ position may seem inviolable, one should remember that the more you have, the more you have to lose. And recently there have been signs of how, for the first time in a long time, the US may be beginning to lose. One of the stated economic objectives, and perhaps the primary objective, when setting up the euro was to turn it into a reserve currency to challenge the dollar so that Europe too could get something for nothing. This however would be a disaster for the US. Not only would they lose a large part of their annual subsidy of effectively free goods and services, but countries switching to euro reserves from dollar reserves would bring down the value of the US currency. Imports would start to cost Americans a lot more and as increasing numbers of those holding dollars began to spend them, the US would have to start paying its debts by supplying in goods and services to foreign countries, thus reducing American living standards. As countries and businesses converted their dollar assets into euro assets, the US property and stock market bubbles would, without doubt, burst. The Federal Reserve would no longer be able to print more money to reflate the bubble, as it is currently openly considering doing, because, without lots of eager foreigners prepared to mop them up, a serious inflation would result which, in turn, would make foreigners even more reluctant to hold the US currency and thus heighten the crisis. There is though one major obstacle to this happening: oil. Oil is not just by far the most important commodity traded internationally, it is the lifeblood of all modern industrialised economies. If you don’t have oil, you have to buy it. And if you want to buy oil on the international markets, you usually have to have dollars. Until recently all OPEC countries agreed to sell their oil for dollars only. So long as this remained the case, the euro was unlikely to become the major reserve currency: there is not a lot of point in stockpiling euros if every time you need to buy oil you have to change them into dollars. This arrangement also meant that the US effectively part-controlled the entire world oil market: you could only buy oil if you had dollars, and only one country had the right to print dollars - the US. If on the other hand OPEC were to decide to accept euros only for its oil (assuming for a moment it were allowed to make this decision), then American economic dominance would be over. Not only would Europe not need as many dollars anymore, but Japan which imports over 80% of its oil from the Middle East would think it wise to convert a large portion of its dollar assets to euro assets (Japan is the major subsidiser of the US because it holds so many dollar investments). The US on the other hand, being the world's largest oil importer would have, to run a trade surplus to acquire euros. The conversion from trade deficit to trade surplus would have to be achieved at a time when its property and stock market prices were collapsing and its domestic supplies of oil and gas were contracting. It would be a very painful conversion. ...Continued

...Continued The purely economic arguments for OPEC converting to the euro, at least for a while, seem very strong. The Euro-zone does not run a huge trade deficit nor is it heavily endebted to the rest of the world like the US and interest rates in the Euro-zone are also significantly higher. The Euro-zone has a larger share of world trade than the US and is the Middle East’s main trading partner. And nearly everything you can buy for dollars you can also buy for euros - apart, of course, from oil. Furthermore, if OPEC were to convert their dollar assets to euro assets and then require payment for oil in Euros, their assets would immediately increase in value, since oil importing countries would be forced to also convert part of their assets, driving the prices up. For OPEC, backing the euro would be a self-fulfilling prophesy. They could then at some later date move to some other currency, perhaps back to the dollar, and again make huge profits. But of course it is not a purely economic decision. So far only one OPEC country has dared switch to the euro: Iraq, in November 20002,3. There is little doubt that this was a deliberate attempt by Saddam to strike back at the US, but in economic terms it has also turned out to have been a huge success: at the time of Iraq's conversion the euro was worth around 83 US cents but it is now worth over $1.05. There may however be other consequences to this decision. One other OPEC country has been talking publicly about possible conversion to the euro since 1999: Iran2,4, a country which has since been included in the George W. Bush’s ‘axis of evil’. A third OPEC country which has recently fallen out with the US government is Venezuela and it too has been showing disloyalty to the dollar. Under Hugo Chavez’s rule, Venezuela has established barter deals for trading its oil with 12 Latin American countries as well as Cuba. This means that the US is missing out on its usual subsidy and might help explain the American wish to see the back of Chavez. At the OPEC summit in September 2000, Chavez delivered to the OPEC heads of state the report of the 'International Seminar on the Future of Energy’, a conference called by Chavez earlier that year to examine the future supplies of both fossil and renewable energies. One of the two key recommendations of the report was that ‘OPEC take advantage of high-tech electronic barter and bi-lateral exchanges of its oil with its developing country customers’5, i.e. OPEC should avoid using both the dollar and the euro for many transactions. And last April, a senior OPEC representative gave a public speech in Spain during Spain’s presidency of the EU during which he made clear that though OPEC had as yet no plans to make oil available for euros, it was an option that was being considered and which could well be of economic benefit to many OPEC countries, particularly those of the Middle East6. As oil production is now in decline in most oil producing countries, the importance of the remaining large oil producers, particularly those of the Middle East, is going to grow and grow in years to come7. Iraq, whose oil production has been severely curtailed by sanctions, is one of a very small number of countries which can help ease this looming oil shortage. Europe, like most of the rest of the world, wishes to see a peaceful resolution of the current US-Iraqi tensions and a gradual lifting of the sanctions - this would certainly serve its interests best. But as Iraqi oil is denominated in euros, allowing it to become more widely available at present could loosen the dollar stranglehold and possibly do more damage than good to US economic health. All of this is bad news for the US economy and the dollar. The fear for Washington will be that not only will the future price of oil not be right, but the currency might not be right either. Which perhaps helps explain why the US is increasingly turning to its second major tool for dominating world affairs: military force. REFERENCES 1. Anon., ‘Trade Deficit Surges to a Record High’, Reuters, (January 17, 2003), http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/4970891.htm. 2. Recknagel, Charles, ‘Iraq: Baghdad Moves to Euro’, Radio Free Europe (November 1, 2000), http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2000/11/01112000160846.asp. 3. Anon., ‘A Look At The World's Economy’, CBS Worldwide Inc., (December 22, 2000), http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/12/22/2000/main259203.shtml. 4. Anon., ‘Iran may switch to euro for crude sale payments’, Alexander Oil and Gas, (September 5, 2002), http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntm23638.htm. 5. Hazel Henderson, ‘Globocop v. Venezuela’s Chavez: Oil, Globalization and Competing Visions of Development’, InterPress Service, (April 2002), http://www.hazelhenderson.com/Globocop%20v.%20Chavez.htm. 6. Javad Yarjani, ‘The Choice of Currency for the Denomination of the Oil Bill’, (April 14, 2002), http://www.opec.org/NewsInfo/Speeches/sp2002/spAraqueSpainApr14.htm. 7. The Associat

RBSI: The debate on Currency of trade for oil is more political than economic. As long as currencies are convertible, the curency of invoice is irrelevant. What matters most is what do the Sheikhs do with the petro-dollars they earn; whether they choose to keep their wealth denominated in Dollars or the Euro. This is true not just for petro-dollars. It is true of all the countries who have surplus external account balance like India and China. And we are not petroleum producing countries! The appalling trade deficits run by the US have little to do with the Petroleum trade. On the other hand, petroleum has everything to do with narrow economic interest couple with broad political interests. Oil itself, in the first place, is a gift of the Western industrial civilization and the sources were owned by the narrow economic interests of the West. The West preferred Sheikhs owning oil wells. A democratic set up in the oil-producing countries was seen as more amenable to the socialist model. The blocks have broken, but political habits die hard, the narrow interests stay strong. Beuty of America is that it allows its own outspoken critics to survive and flourish. Their present President is one of such people.

If only outspoken critics and good people had real power !

Gentlemen we shall begin to see perceptible change in the 21st century and that is not my wishful thinking. Cost of the Iraqi mis-adventure till 2010 Nov itself was three trillion dollars and counting for uncle Sam. They are going to have a tough time maintaining their 800 military bases worldwide. Not just the OPEC but if anyone from the BRIC especially China switches over to converting their reserves in Euro it will significantly change the world dynamics against the Global Policeman.Post the sub-prime crisis and the snowballing effect it had worldwide the Chinese regime has begun distributing it’s investments in Non-American securities and assets. One cannot remain an economic giant when one ceases to be a manufacturing giant. China has become the factory of the world and India the back-office of the world. That will in due course most certainly have an effect on the global economy.Peat from Newcastle led to British hegemony on the world. Pax Brittania passed the baton to Pax Amircana. Energy needs and who controls them will determine who displaces the states and becomes the new world hegemon. During the cold war both the United states and the Soviet Union established un-equal relations with their sub-ordinate allies which frequently undermined or greatly detracted from the sovereignty of the latter. This is the case in varying degrees of the US’s present relationship with many countries still.But China nad India are on a different scale even to the United states. China has more than three times the population and between them China and India comprise of 38% of the world population. Both are still at athe earlist stages of their transformation , it is impossible at present to conceive what this might mean in terms of their relationship with other states. The Westphalian system may well survive the emergence of China and India as global powers, but it will certainly look very different from any previous stage in history. Hitherto ever since the onset of industralisation the most powerful countries have shared two characteristics. First they have enjoyed one of the highest (if not the highest) GDPs of their times. Second they have also had an extremely high GDP per head. The richest nations have had the richest populations as well. (Britain, France, Germany, the United States and Japan). The only exception has been the USSR.China nad India will share only one of these characterstics not both.Gentlemen welcome to a new kind of Global power which is at one and the same time both a developed- by virtue of the size of it’s GDP- and a developing country-by virtue of it’s GDP per capita.

@ Asad Uncle :There is a strong tendency in the west to view democracy in terms of ‘a one size fits all’ approach.In fact the form of democracy varies greatly according to the history, traditions and culture of a society.. There is no reason to believe except on the grounds of Euro-centrism that the very specific conditions that shaped European society and European derived nations like the United States will result in the same kind of democratic structures world-wide. This is abundantly clear in the case of Japan. It certainly possesses some of the trappings of democracy that is familiar in the west (Not surprisingly as the US authored Japan’s post war constitution following it’s defeat-most notable universal suffrage and a multi-party system). Yet it is evident that in practice the system works vey differently. The liberal democrats have almost been continuously in power since the mid-fifties. The other parties have except for few occasions of co-alition govt been in permanent opposition and wield rather less power. Moreover the real power is vested in the civil service especially in particular ministries rather than in the govt. itself rather in that part which is permanently constituted rather than in that part that is elected. The cabinet barely meets and when it does it’s purpose is purely ceremonial. The significance that attaches to elections –and therefore popular sovereignty –is much less than in the western model.Reflecting the hierarchical character of society and Confucian influence, power has a permanent and un-changing quality that is not affected by electoral process. Please note there are no multi-national, regional or global institutions that could be described as democratic. Their invocation to a modicum of representivity is invariably via the nation states that comprise them.Classic example is the European Union which makes no real claim to be democratic other than by virtue of it’s member states- the European Parliament being elected but largely powerless. One of the reasons democracy has worked in India which is of a continental scale , might in part be because it is far looser and more decentralized so that individual states can act in some degree like quasi nation-states. India remains much less developed than China and yet possesses what by historical standards is a remarkable democracy but in this respect India has so far been history’s great exception