America Owns Georgia

Full article can be viewed on RussiaToday site and I would appreciate any comments to be made on this page.

Washington is holding on to everything it has in Georgia, and for a reason. It needs a platform of allies surrounding Russia, which is nothing new. In addition, the fact that has purposefully been overlooked in the mainstream media is that the U.S. is more interested in the economy of Georgia, which will ensure their alliance. The system that America uses to keep hold of Georgia and its President is an elaborate scheme that will ensure political cooperation of Georgia and big profits for U.S. companies.

Making the Rich Even Richer

United States’ “private” companies have long been working in favor of their government abroad. Their actions are commendable as they show patriotism and a belief in both the capitalist system and the American way of life. Nevertheless, working in favor of your country, more often than not, means making citizens of a country worse off than before the investments came into that country’s economy.

The system is fairly simple – bring in U.S. companies to build up energy production, infrastructure, and re-arm the military. The financing of the projects is done through loans made to Tbilisi by the World Bank or similar financial institutions. The loans are given in such large amounts that Georgia will most likely default in the near future. Defaulting will in turn mean that the U.S. will have a firm hold on Georgia’s politics and its system of government as a whole.

The projects that the loans will be issued for will make the rich that own the power plants, dams, and other industrial investments richer. These are the same individuals that sit in the Georgian parliament and run the country. The people, on the other hand, whose land is used for the projects and whose labor is used to make the whole industry work, will be getting a below-acceptable wage and most will likely be out of work as a whole.

Reports indicate that in Georgia’s capital, Tbilisi, the unemployment rate is close to 30%. In 1991, after gaining independence, Georgia reported a 17% unemployment rate. Today, although Georgia reports economic growth and higher per-capita income, people are actually worse off now than before America took an interest in the small Caucasus nation.

It is true that Georgia is growing economically, producing more power, and that more industries are working. However, most of the income earned from the industries goes to paying off the huge loans taken out for the projects. In addition, the wealth of the rich has grown, which produces a higher statistic for the country’s economy. It’s a case of simple math – the more overall wealth divided by the approximately the same number of people in the country produces a higher per-capita statistic.

Georgia Owes America

The people in the Georgian government owe their increase in wealth completely to America. If the U.S. had not offered to help build up the country and lend them the money, Georgia would’ve been struggling just as much today as it had in the 1990s. What does this mean for Washington? It means that they can utilize Georgia’s military, UN votes, WTO membership, and many other tools of politics in their favor.

Tbilisi owes Washington for setting up the Rose Revolution. It is a simple fact that no one in Georgia had the money to set up such a well-funded and well organized action. Not too surprising that in 1999, Georgia’s GDP grew at 3%. The following year, with the introduction of new investors from the West, their GDP grew at 2%, 4.5%, and 5% in 2000, 2001, and 2002 respectively. Right after the Rose Revolution, the GDP growth nearly doubled in 2003 to 8.3%.

In addition to investing in the Georgian political and economic welfare, America and a row of its allies invested heavily in rearming the Georgian military. It was a necessary measure in ensuring that the Georgian army is under their control. If Georgia would side with Russia once again, the project of reequipping the military again would be a costly affair. It is a headache which Tbilisi is not willing to go through again in the near future.

What’s Going to Happen Next?

America has a firm hold on Georgia. Tbilisi is bound by the “friendly” gesture of the Western states to be their allies and to side with America on its foreign policy. Georgia has already become a firm base for the American military. In case of an armed conflict with Russia, Georgia will provide a buffer zone that will be able to hold out for the necessary time needed to bring U.S. troops to the region.

Economically, it benefits the U.S. industries and the few that hold the wealth of Georgia. The U.S. and European companies reap good profits off the projects in the region. On the flip side, the Georgian elite get their share of income that keeps them out of meddling with U.S. interests. The platform has been prepared in case of a potential threat from the Russian Bear.

U.S. Debt in Chinese Coffers

Full article can be viewed on RussiaToday site and I would appreciate any comments to be made on this page.

A Bloomberg report recently stated that China has become the biggest U.S. treasuries holder, surpassing Japan. China holds $585 billion worth of U.S. treasuries, compared to Japan holding $573.2 billion.

Underneath the market transactions and commercial trading, there is a reason for Beijing’s interest in holding U.S. Treasuries and financing U.S. debt during today’s economic crisis. Think of it in simple terms: the U.S. is now in the pocket of China. Beijing’s willingness to help America finance its debt is simply a way of gaining political leverage.

China’s Leverage Over America

Tibet and Taiwan have long been sticking points between Washington and Beijing. Nevertheless, Americans have not spoken out against China’s lack of personal or political freedoms, nor has Washington expressed concern over China’s policies. It is very simple – America is depending more and more on Chinese investments, which gives the Chinese leverage over Washington in case the latter decides to criticize Beijing over its policies regarding Taiwan or Tibet, or if the White House meddles in China’s internal affairs.

Let’s think back to Economics 101:

GDP = Consumer Expenditure + Investments + Government Spending + Net Exports.

The Chinese imports into America in 2007, according to the U.S.-China Business Council, totaled $321.5 billion. U.S. exports to China (primarily specialized high-tech equipment and goods) have totaled $65.2 billion. This creates a negative balance on the U.S. side of the equation of -$256.3 billion.

Although the exports and imports part of the GDP equation is fairly small (approximately 5-6%), the Chinese stake in the government variable is double its investment in the net exports sector. The total U.S. balance in the net exports sector for 2007 was -$700.258 billion, which is about 37% of the U.S. trade balance.

Nevertheless, the goods that are imported from China for $1, for example, are sold for triple that value in the United States. This gives China a stake in the Consumer Expenditure part of the GDP. The major consumer products (clothing, electronics, etc) are a crucial part of U.S. retail business, in which the Chinese manufacturers dominate.

In addition, China’s businessmen have invested in American companies, holding stocks and corporate bonds that are essential to the big corporations’ survival. This gives Beijing power over the investment side of the U.S. economy.

Chinese control over such a large chunk of the U.S. economy gives Beijing a lot of power over the U.S. It is no wonder why America is not active in its criticism of China’s violation of the human rights their system of government.

Why Does This Matter?

The importance of the Chinese financing the U.S. debt is that Beijing can pressure Washington to stand by and allow Beijing to continue on its course of human rights violations and authoritarian control over the population.

In addition to this, the Chinese can use their economic influence to strong-arm America on key matters, such as allowing more Chinese companies to gain a share in the U.S. market, keeping the U.S. military from meddling in Taiwan and Tibet – in short, letting China do what it wants without criticism or repercussions.

The United States has been doing similar operations in South America, Nigeria, and many nations in Southeast-Asia. Now, however, China is using the same tactics to take advantage of the current economic crisis. The advantage is the leverage that they gain in the political arena will allow them more freedom to do what they want and to expand as an emerging power.

Is U.S. missile defense necessary in Europe?

This original published article can be found here. RussiaToday is the original source of this article.

United States officials say that the missile defenses are aimed at Iran. However, Iran’s missiles and motives indicate no threat to Europe.
One of the main issues facing the new President-elect Barack Obama is the European Missile Defense System that the Bush administration has been trying to deploy in Poland and the Czech Republic. The Russian Federation has been fiercely protesting this action and has viewed the installation of Anti-Missile Defenses as a direct threat to its national security.

The Kremlin has threatened to counter the deployment U by placing short to mid-range Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad. U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack stated that the Anti-Missile Defenses are not aimed at Russia and expressed hope that one day Russia will see this. The threat that the defenses are aimed at, according to the White House, is Iran. But why would U.S. place missile defenses some 3,000 kilometers away from Iran? A look at the U.S. missile defense system and the Iranian ballistic missiles shows that Tehran’s strike on a major European city is highly unlikely.

U.S. Missile Defense

A missile defense system’s purpose is to intercept anything from ICBMs to smaller ballistic missiles. However, the missile defense systems in use today are not as sophisticated as one might think. They still need to be located close to the potential flight path of the missiles. An independent study by the American Physical Society (APS) in 2004 showed that, “effectiveness of interceptor rockets would be limited by the short time window for intercept, which requires interceptors to be based within 400 to 1,000 kilometers of the possible boost-phase flight paths of attacking missiles.”

The United States Army uses MIM-103 Patriot surface-to-air missile system (SAM). The Patriot system proved to be effective during the Gulf War in 1991, shooting down Iraqi SCUD missiles. Still, SCUDs are short to mid-range missiles, and the Missiles Defenses were located very close to the flight path of the missiles. There is no confirmation of U.S. Missiles Defense intercepting long range missiles far away from the launch point. According to the study by the APS, the missiles’ effectiveness decreases as the distance of the potential flight path of the ICBM or other missile increases.

Iran’s Missiles

Little is known about the Iranian missile program. However, the Iranian Mid-Range Ballistic Missile (MRBM) Fajr-3’s operational range is estimated at 2,300 kilometers. The Shahab-6 missile is Iran’s longest range ballistic missile with a range of 4,000-5,000 kilometers. Nevertheless, no official reports come of successful tests of this missile or any detailed information on the missile specifications in general. The last Iranian test that Washington has denounced was the Shahab-3, with a range of 2,300 kilometers.

Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s threat to destroy Israel has not been taken lightly. Iran’s defiance of the West has only added fuel to the fire. Tehran is not allowing international organizations to monitor their nuclear enrichment program and is refusing to shut it down all together. It is already known that Tehran is able to strike Israel, however, there have been no threats made to Europe. There is a possibility that Iran has nuclear capabilities, but they are still a threat to Israel, rather than Europe.

Putting it all together

According to Google Maps, direct path from Tehran to Raciborz, Poland (located between Warsaw and Krakow), is 3,114 kilometers, which is beyond the potential range of Shahab-3 and Fajr-3 missile and it is still unknown whether Iran has successfully made an ICBM capable of striking major European cities. Tehran is more likely to strike Israel rather than a European nation.

U.S. Missile Defenses are more in the way of a possible strike by Russia on Europe, rather than by Iran. Iran may be a good excuse to move missile defenses closer to Russian borders, also creating closer ties with countries that are more outspoken against Russia than most other European nations.

The European Missile Defense System looks like an attempt by the GOP to bring the world back into a Cold War-like state. This only makes sense, as they were the party that claimed the victory over the Soviet Union, when it collapsed in 1991. If things heat up around European Missile Defenses and Russia is made the “bad guy” again, the GOP will have a fighting change to reclaim the White House in 2012, riding on the wave of claims that they’ve defeated the “Evil Empire” once and they’ll do it again.

President-elect Obama has already said that the European Missile Defense system will have to prove its ability to protect Europe against Iran before he allows millions of dollars to be allocated for this project. Obama’s senior foreign policy adviser Denis McDonough stated that, Obama’s “position is as it was throughout the campaign: that he [Obama] supports deploying a missile defense system when the technology is proved to be workable.”

Aleksey Sazonov for RT

Same Sex Marriage – Don’t Call It a Marriage!

A lot of protests right now are going on on California over a recent ban on same sex marriage that was passed due to a referendum. Although the state supported Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama, the same democrats did not necessarily vote “No” on Prop 8.

Most news sites quote that protesters in California say that a ban on gay marriage is wrong. Well, here’s a thought – call it a union, and not marriage. The history and meaning of the word marriage means a union between a man and a woman. For gays and lesbians, it’s obviously not a matter of simple use of the word to symbolize their union and devotion, it’s also a matter of getting tax advantages and other such perks that come with marriage.

So, I suggest the gays and lesbians make a proposition to be able to join in a UNION, not MARRIAGE, and get the same benefits as married couples, except do not call yourselves married. Call each other partners, not husband and husband or wife and wife. People will always vote “NO” on such propositions not because they necessarily oppose gay couples having perks and advantages of marriage, but because they do not want the word marriage used!