TODAY. “The empire” – an exaggerated, emotive, term?
Well, I always thought that “Empire” was a dramatic, over-stated, term. And it annoyed me that writers kept using it, in relation to the USA. I thought that criticism of America was warranted – but don’t weaken your case by using such an emotive word.
“Empire” brings up thoughts of the murderous regimes of history – the murderous Mongol Empire, the quite punishing Roman Empire, the cruel Empire of Japan, the rapacious British Empire
Oh no – America’s not like that!
Yes, it is.
And in today’s world, the USA government has access to weapons undreamt of in earlier regimes. Not just its smorgasbord of every possible kind of killing tool, but also its economic weaponry, and its media weaponry.
Not that I think that Americans are bad people. They are good, kind people, who value their families highly. So highly that hanging on to their income – their lucrative weapons-company shares, or their jobs, in deceptive and even killer industries is their top priority. And if they have any doubts – well – the magic term “our national security” justifies all government action.
Americans have bought the idea of American exceptionalism. America is good and always right, and can justly interfere in any country, because they know best. So – they’ve got military bases worldwide:
If you didn’t notice America’s interference – South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia – in Chile, Nicaragua, – Libya, wars in Afghanstan, Iraq, – you’d have to be noticing what’s going on now in Ukraine, and in Israel’s massacres in Gaza.
The military bases in increase, the belligerent propaganda increases, and the ‘Western world steels itself to faithfully be the patsies for USA’s next big intervention – Taiwan.
Ukraine, Taiwan , Gaza – all wonderful laboratories for testing the bestest American weapons, enriching American corporations, and no risks to American lives.
When you see articles by Caitlin Johnstone , Chris Hedges, Ralph Nader, Robert Kennedy Jr, Patterson Deppen, and more – talking about “The Empire” – don’t be too hasty to brush them off as way-out radicals.
Australia doesn’t need nukes: International Energy Agency boss
AFR, Hans van Leeuwen, Europe correspondent, 10 May 24
Paris | Australia does not need to join the global nuclear energy renaissance, and should focus on its advantages in renewable energy, the head of the International Energy Agency says.
In an interview with AFR Weekend in Paris, Fatih Birol, one of the world’s most influential energy officials, challenged the Coalition’s plan to make nuclear power a centrepiece of Australian energy policy.
“When I look around the world, nuclear is making a strong comeback. I have been a proponent of nuclear for many years,” he said.
“But if there is a country that has a lot of resources from other sources, such as solar and wind, I wouldn’t see nuclear as a priority option. I’m talking about Australia now.”
The IEA supported France, Britain and Japan making a renewed push on nuclear, Dr Birol said. But the time frame for starting a nuclear industry from scratch, as Australia would have to, was too long. “For Australia, we have other priorities to push,” he said.
He said this also applied to small modular reactors, which are less costly to build but are not yet commercially proven.
“If we get these small, modular reactors technologically and economically competitive by the mid-2030s, it would be good news,” he said.
But for Australia, “you’ve seen a lot of untapped potential in solar and wind – in Australia I would put the priority on those technologies”.
Dr Birol said he was aware that energy security and the clean-energy transition was a hotly contested issue in Australia.
“In Australia you have a lot of discussions on those things. I hope the discussions can be made more factual, less emotional and political,” he said.
Dr Birol, who has led the IEA since 2015, has turned the Paris-based agency into a major champion of the energy transition and the net zero agenda…………………………………………………………………….. more https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/australia-doesn-t-need-nukes-international-energy-agency-boss-20240510-p5jcge
Australia votes ‘yes’ at United Nations as Palestinian push for full membership gathers momentum
It’s not all that often, these days, that I can feel proud of my government’s foreign policy, or international statements.
But on this occasion, I can at last feel proud.
ABC News 11 May 24
- In short: A Palestinian bid for full membership of the United Nations gathered momentum on Friday, after a resolution passed through the organisation’s General Assembly recognising it was qualified to join.
- A total of 143 nations — including Australia — voted in favour, while nine were against and 25 abstained.
- What’s next? The vote doesn’t grant the Palestinians full membership, but they have been given extra “rights and privileges”.
Australia voted “yes” and the United Nations General Assembly emphatically supported a Palestinian bid to become a full member of the organisation by recognising it as qualified to join.
The vote, held at the UN’s New York headquarters on Friday, local time, passed with 143 nations in favour and nine against — including the United States and Israel — while 25 countries abstained.
The resolution was seen as a de facto step towards future Palestinian statehood.
The Palestinian push for full UN membership comes seven months into a war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.
While there is a Palestinian ambassador to the UN, they are considered an “observer”.
Australia, which had previously abstained from voting on a call for an immediate humanitarian truce in the war, voted “yes” on Friday.
It does not give the Palestinians full UN membership, but simply recognises them as qualified to join, and gives them more “rights and privileges”.
“We value this decision. And we thank Australia for this position,” said Omar Awadalla, the assistant minister for the United Nations from the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) that governs the West Bank.
“And this is an action and actionable step by Australia toward recognising the rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, and to their membership to the United Nations,” Mr Awadalla told the ABC.
He said Australia was supporting with its actions the two-state solution.
“And we think that those states who want to support the peace and justice and stability in the Middle East should take the same decision like Australia did, by accepting Palestine in having their membership to the United Nations as a step toward achieving their independence … and having the two-state solution based on international law and very well-known differences and the Arab Peace Initiative.”
Full membership unlikely……………………………………………………… more https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-11/australia-votes-yes-at-un-for-more-palestinian-rights/103833838
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 