Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Geopolitica Mondiale, Ideologia liberal, Ong - Ngo

Ngo (Ong) e le guerre ibride.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-05-16.

Macbeth__011

von Clausewitz aveva argutamente detto come la guerra altro non sia che la prosecuzione dell’attività politica con metodi cruenti. Nella sua ottica, guerra e pace altro non sarebbero che due aspetti complementari di una stessa realtà.

Il postulato implicito sarebbe che tutta la realtà diviene nel tempo, muta sé stessa e le sue intercorrelazioni, determina la formazione di nuovi equilibri sottominando quelli vecchi. Quasi invariabilmente è in gioco l’acceso e la gestione del potere. Talora il vecchio potere collassa, e quello nuovo ne prende il posto quasi senza colpo ferire, almeno senza troppo spargimento di sangue, ma ciò non è la norma: queste evenienze sono storicamente rare.

Usualmente sono le armi a rimuovere il vecchio ed instaurare il nuovo.

In fondo, a ben pensarci, la guerra altro non sarebbe che il mezzo per addivenire ad una nuova pace ragionevolmente stabile, che sancisca i nuovi equilibri.

In questa ottica, le Coalizioni Europee anti-napoleoniche altro non sarebbero state che lo strumento bellico per lasciare una Francia grande, ma non immensa, in una Europa abbastanza equilibrata. Tranne poche guerra locali, questa realtà restò in piedi fino alla fine dell’ottocento. Servirono poi due guerre mondiali per affermare la nascita di nuovi equilibri.

*

Ma adesso lo scenario mondiale sembrerebbe essere mutato.

Se negli anni sessanta l’Occidente rendeva ragione di quasi il novanta percento del pil mondiale, nelle proiezioni dell’IMF al 2023 i paesi del G7 renderanno conto del 27.06% del pil ppa mondiale, mentre i Brics garantiranno il 35.90% dello stesso.

Governare l’Occidente non significa più governare il mondo, ed il mondo inizia a manifestare ampi segni di intolleranza verso l’Occidente.

Ma sarebbe severo errore estinguere il confronto nel mero comparto economico: la contrapposizione è invece tra due differenti Weltanschauung, tra due tradizioni di civiltà.

I paesi dell’est e del sud asiatico, e non solo loro, non condividono, ed avversano, i valori classici dell’Occidente. Non ne condividono etica e morale, e rigettano, perché alieno dalla loro tradizione culturale, il concetto di ‘democrazia’ che si estingua in un suffragio universale. La Cina è diventata un grande impero proprio perché non ha adottato questo sistema.

*

Cercando di andare alla radice, non sono tanto in discussione le radici religiose, culturali, sociali, artistiche e politiche dell’Occidente, quando piuttosto la sua deriva illuministica, sfociata quindi nel giacobinismo, nell’idealismo dialettico e storico, ed infine, attraverso molte tappe, nel’attuale ideologia liberal. È questa ultima che sta crollando e che cerca disperatamente di sopravvivere.

Impero Romano. Analogie con l’attuale Occidente.

Tramonto non dell’Occidente ma della dottrina illuminista.

Davvero Autori quali Dostoevskij, Solov’ëv, Benson, Spengler ed Orwell avevano saputo guardare ben lontano.

*

Le ngo, ogn, non sono dei fini, bensì dei mezzi, e come tale possono essere usate in situazioni pacifiche così come in situazioni belliche. Hanno il grande vantaggio che le loro azioni non coinvolgono in orima persona gli stati che le finanziano, potendo quindi svolgere guerre per procura.

Soros George. Uno stato negli stati. Ecco i suoi principali voivodati.

Soros, ngo e debito studentesco. 50 milioni di americani resi schiavi.

Guerra civile americana. Si avvicina lo scontro finale.

Trump vs Liberal. Ultima battaglia per la vita o la morte nel generale silenzio.

*

Ciò premesso, riproponiamo alla lettura questo articolo datato tre anni or sono: molti dei suoi contenuti si sono dimostrati essere fatti reali.

«Foreign-linked NGOs all across the world play an irreplaceable role in fomenting Hybrid Wars»

Siamo chiari.

Al momento attuale, per moltissimi ambienti e persone, le guerre, ancorché pudicamente denominate ‘ibride’, sono di grande utilità, e quindi le attizzano e le fomentano con la massima cura possibile. Non potendo o volendo farle in prima persona, utilizzano l’esercito delle ngo.

Tuttavia la guerra è l’ultima ratio: non si sa mai come possa finire, ed il destino è spesso beffardo.

È una realtà della quale occorrerebbe prenderne atto.


Oriental Review. 2016-09-29. NGOs And The Mechanics Of Hybrid War

Foreign-linked NGOs all across the world play an irreplaceable role in fomenting Hybrid Wars. The Law of Hybrid War states that these sorts of conflicts are manufactured identity clashes predicated on disrupting, controlling, or influencing multipolar transnational connective infrastructure projects in key transit states by means of enacting Regime Tweaking, Regime Change, or Regime Rebooting (R-TCR). These three tactics could also be described as political concessions, a ‘peaceful’ or violent leadership transition, or a fundamentally altering of the state through such means as its pressured devolution into an easily manipulatable Identity Federation.

As for the sorts of identity conflicts that are expected to comprise Hybrid Wars, they can be categorized as being historical, ethnic, religious, socio-economic, and geographical (both in terms of political administrative and regional belonging). The catalyst for Hybrid War could be premeditated or happenstance, but in both instances, conflict scenarios are driven forward by the crucial public or discrete participation of foreign-linked (as in funded, managed, allied, etc.) NGOs, thereby justifying the reason why they’re being studied in this analysis alongside the latest trends in warfare.

Preconditioning

Just about all foreign-linked NGOs (hereby referred to simply as NGOs) aside from those engaged purely in humanitarian work with the explicit permission and supervision of the host state engage in preconditioning the target population to accept constructed political narratives. These mostly focus on historical, social, and/or political themes which aim to shape the mindset of the audience and contribute to the formation of absolutely new identities (e.g. “Kosovars”) or reformat existing ones (e.g. from patriotism to nationalism, or inclusive citizenship to exclusive separatist longings).

NGOs work alongside new and traditional media outlets in disseminating these ideas and multiplying the effect that they have in altering their audience’s consciousness so as to promote the organization and its patrons’ predetermined objectives in fostering weaponized identity separateness. False, disreputable, and/or questionable “facts” are usually circulated among the information-media-academia triangle of communities and sympathetic operatives in order to spread new mythologies that resultantly socio-engineer the targeted demographics’ mentalities through the crafted illusion that “authoritative voices” are endorsing them.

The seeds of new and/or historically debunked ideologies such as Liberalism and Nazism are planted in the minds of the audience and watered with a steady stream of supportive information designed to increase their appeal and build the foundation for the forthcoming anti-government gambit. After becoming indoctrinated with Liberalism, for example, one might become more susceptible to playing the role of a “useful idiot” and aggressively demonstrating against their government, while believers in Nazism and World War II-era “nationalism” might become emboldened to carry out hateful provocations against their historical ‘enemies’.

Both categories of ideological imprinting are thus equally useful in promoting set political objectives within the targeted state, with the promoted foundation being dependent on what the exact end game conflict is envisioned to be. Liberalism is more amenable to the formation of new identities for separatist purposes, whereas Nazism (or “extreme nationalism” to generalize) has a role to play in generating furious anti-government hate and provoking interstate conflict (e.g. Croatian Ustasha obsessively trying to destabilize Bosnia and the Serbian Province of Vojvodina).

Funding

NGOs must receive their money somehow, and aside from panhandling (or “canvassing for donations” as they term it) in the streets for some extra pocket cash, most of them receive the bulk of their funding from one of three main sources:

Governments:

The US government funds organizations such as the “National Endowment For Democracy” (self-described in 1991 as openly doing what the CIA used to covertly pull off 25 years before then) in order to behave as public-private intelligence fronts abroad, blending professional operative experience with a civilian “plausible deniability”.

Corporations:

Certain companies may have an interest in independently deploying their own NGOs, whether to lobby on behalf of their commercial interests or to agitate against their opponents, with this potentially escalating to the level of putting R-TCR (Regime – Tweaking, Change, Reboot) pressure on one or another government for these purposes.

“Philanthropies”:

“Private” donors such as George Soros and the Saudi Princes operate the Soros Foundation and “Islamic charities” respectively (the latter being the first large-scale weaponized worldwide NGO network during the 1980s Afghan War period), with their organizations having spread all across the globe by this point and sometimes working to promote their shadowy interests hand-in-hand with selected government clients.

Each of these three different sources provide seed funding and training to their on-the-ground proxies, with the desire being that they’ll succeed in cultivating a community of fifth and sixth columnists to aid with their goals. Organizational training and organizing techniques are pivotal because of how strongly they influence a group’s effectiveness, since at the end of the day, it’s usually just the small core membership that truly counts since their affiliated cohorts and civilians are either volunteers or low-cost temporary expenses.

NGOs are also very useful to their patrons because they function as middlemen facilitators in giving bribes and conveying blackmail to different private individuals (e.g. journalists) and political figures, and if they operate in a ‘laissez faire’ environment, then they could also valuably partake in different scales of money laundering activities to these ends or in support of their backers’ pecuniary interests. Even if they get caught, the single degree of separation that they “plausibly” enjoy from their sponsors due to their allegedly “independent” status is enough to insulate their supporters from any “official” blame.

Figureheads

NGOs have learned to employ local faces and personnel for staffing their foreign offices, understanding that this helps to deflect any immediate criticism of their foreign ties as well as confuse naïve ‘investigative reporters’ who only superficially look at the passports of the people working there in drawing their determinations. In reality though, this policy is actually less about obscuring the said NGOs links to abroad than it is about duping the populace that they plan on interacting with, since dedicated sleuths are usually successful at uncovering the financial, communication, and personal connections that link an investigated organization to a foreign entity.

Regular individuals on the street, however, might not have any idea that their fellow citizen passing out anti-government fliers and encouraging them to join a protest might be in the employ of foreign entities, even if some of the group’s staff themselves aren’t even aware of this. The disingenuity that comes with tricking people into joining an activity or organization due to the fact that the foreign ties behind it are deliberately obscured proves that the initiative’s backers knowingly accept that locals would likely shy away from these sorts of things if they knew that they were sponsored from abroad. Because many of them otherwise have no idea about this, however, they’re more susceptible to being misled into participating.

Along the lines of NGO figureheads, it should relatedly be mentioned that the leaders of the eventual anti-government government are sometimes pastors (Zimbabwe), monks (Myanmar, the Tibet Autonomous Region), or students (‘traditional’ Color Revolutions), all of which have an international reputation as being seemingly innocuous and harmless. No matter if this was actually true before The Event (the specifics of which will be described soon) or not, the fact is that the moment that these purportedly peaceful actors begin aggressively demonstrating against the government, provoking conflict with the police and military, and sometimes even attacking law enforcement officers and public & private property, they’ve forfeited their right to be responded to in a non-violent fashion, thus justifying the authorities’ decisive (and sometimes heavy-handed) crowd control techniques.

These figureheads also play another complementary role as well, and it’s to promote their presumably peaceful reputations through collusive media channels that have an interest in portraying these individuals as “calm pro-democracy protesters” so as to selectively edit and deliberately misreport their provoked clashes with the authorities as being the result of an “unpopular and power-hungry dictatorship killing its own people”. Never mind that none of this is factually true, but it’s the purposeful misperception that counts because of the ease with which such manufactured narratives can quickly blow a local, regional, or national event completely out of proportion in order to rapidly turn it into an “international crisis” that prompts foreign governments to put much-publicized pressure on the targeted state.

Demanding “Democracy”

The one tactic that all politically affiliated NGOs (whether openly stated or secretly of this disposition) end up pursuing is to eventually put pressure on their host government in a bid to make it more “democratic”. The reason why “democracy” is such an obsession for these organizations and their backers doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with its inherent ‘normative’ qualities (most often of the Western iteration of this ideology), but with its convenient structure in regularly phasing out leadership cycles. Western-influenced ‘democracies’ have predictable election cycles which are understood in the Theory of Hybrid War as representing nothing more than ‘peaceful’ opportunities for regime change, ergo the frantic activity that NGOs engage in before, during, and immediately after this time. Western ‘democracy’ is also marked by the inseparable political culture of lobbyists (legal bribers) and commercially driven mainstream media outlets, which makes it all the much easier for foreign actors and their local NGO pawns to interfere with the ‘democratic’ process and hijack it in the direction of their aims.

If elections don’t result in the desired outcome that the NGOs and their international backers are seeking, or if the next electoral cycle isn’t for a few years and these actors grow impatient and/or believe that the window for achieving their political ends might close by that time, then they’ll conspire to engineer an Event that puts pressure on the government to embark on R-TCR under the omnipresent threat of Hybrid War. Examples of the type of pressure that could be brought to bear against the authorities are election-related drama, corruption scandals (possibly sparked by NSA-‘leaked’ wiretaps and/or documents like Brazil’s ‘Constitutional Coup’ and the failed Macedonian Hybrid War attempt), disruptive ‘civil society’ movements (e.g. Armenia’s “Electric Yerevan”), and the politicization of controversial deals (e.g. Ukraine’s EU Association Agreement) that attempt to force a new or early round of elections.

If the government doesn’t tweak, change, or reboot after experiencing the ‘peaceful’ Color Revolution coercion that the foreign interests and their NGO foot soldiers try to ‘democratically’ force upon it, then the foreign government(s) behind the charade might take the decision to commence Hybrid War by transitioning the Color Revolution to an Unconventional War. It’s not always guaranteed that this will be the case, since sometimes certain Color Revolution disturbances aren’t fully backed up by their foreign sponsors and NGO network and are instead test probes for assessing structural vulnerabilities, responses, and other sorts of valuable intelligence that could come in handy in a future R-TCR scenario that’s more determinately supported for these purposes. After all, if the state is strong enough to defend against this asymmetrical attack using Democratic Security measures and/or the future insurgency lacks the long-term viability to sustain a successful R-TCR Hybrid War campaign (perhaps if an effective “Lead From Behind” regional arrangement can’t be constructed in time), then the foreign backers might pull out their support for the unrest and wait until another future opportunity could be engineered at a more decisive moment.

Making The Leap

When the Color Revolution undergoes the phased transition into Hybrid War by evolving into an Unconventional War, there’s a lot of the former behind-the-scenes structural arrangement that simply stays the same but under a different name. Many of the NGO networks and their personnel transition into armed insurgents or provide the fighters with informational, organizational, logistical, and/or material support.

Although the tactics of R-TCR have changed, the principle still remains the same, though with a noticeable and less covert influx of foreign assistance (insurgents, weapons) in pursuit of these ends.

Not all foreign-linked NGOs and their workers might partake in these openly seditious activities, but it’s a fair bet that many of them will to some extent or another, since after all, the only difference between the Color Revolutionaries and their Unconventional Warfare counterparts are the means which they’re willing to employ in achieving their shared goal, with ‘each hand washing the other’ in carrying out complementary tasks to this end.

Concluding Thoughts

Hybrid War is the latest form of aggression being waged by unipolar forces against the emerging Multipolar World Order, and the indirect way in which it’s practiced shields the perpetrator from immediate repercussions and thus increases the attractiveness of this stratagem. Seeing as how the reliance on Hybrid War as a foreign policy instrument shows no signs of realistically abating for the foreseeable future due to the novel and cost-effective nature in which it’s applied, there’s a pressing urgency to understand every facet in which it’s fought, ergo the pertinence in exposing the pivotal role that NGOs play in this process.

Remembering that Hybrid Wars are premised on the outside instigation and subsequent manipulation of identity conflict in a targeted transit state along the route of a prominent multipolar transnational connective infrastructure project, then it’s much easier to conceptualize the function that hostile foreign-linked NGOs have in putting this sequence of ‘controlled chaos’ into motion. These groups are tasked with provoking a sense of identity separateness among the population, a socially engineered sentiment which the organizers envision will eventually turn patriotic citizens into anti-government sympathizers.

The NGO networks and local personnel that participate in this foreign-assisted scheme and aspire to disrupt, control, or influence these aforementioned infrastructure projects through varying degrees of R-TCR pressure against the authorities usually transition into insurgents and other forms of asymmetrical threats when their failed Color Revolution tactics begin phasing into an enhanced Unconventional Warfare form. Since foreign-linked NGOs are the vanguard forces spearheading the latest iteration of Hybrid War all across the world, it’s in the best interests of every responsible government to place supervisory checks and operative restrictions on these groups in order to neuter their offensive capabilities and ensure national security.

Annunci
Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Ong - Ngo, Unione Europea

Eurostat. Domande di asilo nella EU -11%. In Italia -61% a/a.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-04-04.

2019-04-01__Migranti__001

Il problema degli immigrati clandestini illegali è stato risolto nel modo più semplice e logico: impedendo l’immigrazione clandestina.

Nei primi due mesi e mezzo sono arrivati 335 migranti illegali, ossia il 95% in meno rispetto l ostesso periodo dello scorso anno.

*

«Sono state nel complesso 580.800 le domande di asilo fatto in Ue nel 2018, in calo dell’11% dalle 654.600 del 2017, e pari a meno della metà del picco di 1.256.600 registrato nel 2015 in piena crisi dei migranti»

*

«L’Italia ha ricevuto 49.200 domande, pari all’8% del totale, contro le 161.900 della Germania (28%), le 110.500 della Francia (19%) e le 52.700 della Spagna (9%).»

*

«L’Italia ha quindi registrato il calo più significativo di tutti i 28, con 77.400 domande in meno rispetto al 2017 (-61%), seguita da Austria (-49%, 11.100 in meno), Svezia (-19%, 4.100 in meno) e Germania (-18%, 36.400 in meno)»

*

«Chi ha visto invece schizzare le domande d’asilo rispetto all’anno precedente sono stati Cipro (+70%) e la Spagna (+60%), poi il Belgio (+29%), l’Olanda (+27%), la Francia (+20%) e la Grecia (+14%).»

*

«L’Italia è il secondo Paese Ue per domande d’asilo pendenti alla fine del 2018 (103.000, pari al 12% del totale Ue), preceduta di gran lunga dalla Germania (384.800, pari al 44%) e seguita dalla Spagna (78.700, 9%) e Grecia (76.300, 9%).»

*

«In Italia i richiedenti asilo nel 2018 provengono principalmente dal Pakistan (7.315 domande sulle 49.165 complessive, pari al 15%), Nigeria (5.140, 10%) e Bangladesh (4.160, 8%).»

*

«In questi primi due mesi e mezzo del 2019 sono arrivati via mare soltanto 335 migranti, il 95% in meno rispetto allo stesso periodo del 2018»

* * * * * * * *

Virtualmente cessato l’afflusso, 335 migranti in due mesi e mezzo sono ben poca cosa, Il problema della immigrazione clandestina è stato risolto alla radice. Fiumi di inchiostro versati, che al massimo saranno oggetto di ricerche storiche in un futuro più o meno lontano.

Resta aperto però il problema della miriade di strutture di prima accoglienza che erano state montate da tutte quelle organizzazioni filantropiche, che si erano fatte finanziare alla grande dallo stato, ossia dai Contribuenti.

A rigor di termini, i finanziamenti statali dovrebbe cessare e queste chiudere i battenti: sarebbe ben difficile trovare un motivo per continuare a mantenere per nulla strutture che pesano oltre dieci miliardi ai Contribuenti,

Ci si dovrebbe aspettare uno straziante pianto greco innalzato da parte di tutti coloro che da tale situazione ne traevano sostentamento. Dovranno cercarsi un lavoro produttivo.


Ednf. 2019-04-01. L’Italia fa segnare il record europeo nel calo delle domande d’asilo nel 2018: -61%

Bruxelles – L’Italia è il Paese Ue che ha registrato il calo maggiore di domande di asilo nel 2018, pari a -61% rispetto al 2017. Nell’Ue le richieste d’asilo sono scese dell’11%. La Germania, che pure ha visto un calo del 18%, resta il primo Paese Ue per domande presentate con il 28%. Seconda è la Francia con il 19%, terza la Grecia con l’11%, quarta la Spagna con 9%, e quinta l’Italia con l’8%, a cui segue la Gran Bretagna con il 6%. Lo comunica Eurostat. Siriani (14%), afghani e iracheni (7%) sono le prime nazionalità dei richiedenti asilo.

Sono state nel complesso 580.800 le domande di asilo fatto in Ue nel 2018, in calo dell’11% dalle 654.600 del 2017, e pari a meno della metà del picco di 1.256.600 registrato nel 2015 in piena crisi dei migranti. Il livello di richieste di protezione internazionale è quindi pari ai livelli pre-crisi del 2014, sottolinea Eurostat. L’Italia ha ricevuto 49.200 domande, pari all’8% del totale, contro le 161.900 della Germania (28%), le 110.500 della Francia (19%) e le 52.700 della Spagna (9%). L’Italia ha quindi registrato il calo più significativo di tutti i 28, con 77.400 domande in meno rispetto al 2017 (-61%), seguita da Austria (-49%, 11.100 in meno), Svezia (-19%, 4.100 in meno) e Germania (-18%, 36.400 in meno). Chi ha visto invece schizzare le domande d’asilo rispetto all’anno precedente sono stati Cipro (+70%) e la Spagna (+60%), poi il Belgio (+29%), l’Olanda (+27%), la Francia (+20%) e la Grecia (+14%). I Paesi che invece, in base alla loro popolazione, hanno ricevuto proporzionalmente più domande sono Cipro (record con 8.805 domande per milione di abitanti), Grecia, Malta e Lussemburgo, mentre quelli che ne hanno ricevute di meno sono Slovacchia (28 per milione di abitanti), Polonia, Ungheria, Estonia e Lettonia. L’Italia è tredicesima tra i Paesi Ue (813 domande di asilo per milione di abitanti), la Germania ne ha 1.954, la Francia 1.644 e la Spagna 1.130.

L’Italia è il secondo Paese Ue per domande d’asilo pendenti alla fine del 2018 (103.000, pari al 12% del totale Ue), preceduta di gran lunga dalla Germania (384.800, pari al 44%) e seguita dalla Spagna (78.700, 9%) e Grecia (76.300, 9%). In Italia i richiedenti asilo nel 2018 provengono principalmente dal Pakistan (7.315 domande sulle 49.165 complessive, pari al 15%), Nigeria (5.140, 10%) e Bangladesh (4.160, 8%).

Sul fronte degli sbarchi, i 60 arrivati a febbraio in Italia rappresentano – certifica Frontex – il minimo negli ultimi nove anni. Complessivamente, in questi primi due mesi e mezzo del 2019 sono arrivati via mare soltanto 335 migranti, il 95% in meno rispetto allo stesso periodo del 2018. Tunisini (67) i più numerosi, seguiti da bengalesi (57) e algerini (48).

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Ong - Ngo, Stati Uniti, Trump

Trump. Interrotti i fondi alle ngo estere pro aborto.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-03-31.

Neonato 008

La reazione dei liberal democratici è ben sintetizzata da codesta frase:

«The GOP is a psychotic party with deranged goals and no shame, and it must be destroyed.»

*

«What is the ‘global gag rule’?

The rule, otherwise known as the Mexico City policy, requires NGOs to certify that they will not perform or promote abortions anywhere in the world as a condition for receiving US family planning funds. Every Republican president since 1985 has implemented it. But in 2017, Donald Trump adopted a stringent version of the rule, under which NGOs that refuse to sign will be refused all health assistance, including for HIV, primary care, nutrition, tuberculosis and malaria programs. As much as $8bn in US funding could be affected – money that developing world health budgets can ill afford to do without.»

Emergono alcune domande.

– Su quali basi la donna avrebbe il diritto di sopprimere il frutto del concepimento?

– Se per concepire un figlio servono sia il maschio sia la femmina, perché questa decisione dovrebbe essere solo appannaggio di quest’ultima?

– I diritti del padre che volesse far vivere il proprio figlio dove sarebbero finiti?

– Perché lo stato dovrebbe finanziare la soppressione di una vita invece di contribuire al suo allevamento?

* * * * * * *

Trump admin expands ban on foreign aid for abortion services

«Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., urged congressional leadership to vote on legislation to revoke the Mexico City policy. ….

The Trump administration is expanding a ban on U.S. aid to foreign groups that promote or provide abortions to include those who support others who do, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced Tuesday.

“We will enforce a strict prohibition on back-door funding schemes and end runs around our policy,” Pompeo said. “American taxpayer dollars will not be used to underwrite abortions.”

The Mexico City policy, named for the city where it was first announced, requires foreign non-governmental organizations to certify that they do not perform or promote abortion as a part of family planning programs in order to receive U.S. funds.

Pompeo said the ban will now extend to those foreign NGOs that provide financial support to other groups who provide abortion services or counseling. ….

The U.S. currently provides $9 billion in aid to global health programs, and Pompeo said assistance would remain at the same level.

“This administration has shown that we can continue to meet our critical global health goals, including providing health care for women, while refusing to subsidize the killing of unborn babies,” he said.»

*

Trump Administration Dramatically Expands Global Gag Rule on Abortion

«Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced today that the Trump administration is expanding its global gag rule on abortion. Instead of merely banning funds for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that “perform or actively promote” abortion, Pompeo said, the government will now “refuse to provide assistance to foreign NGOs that give financial support to other foreign groups” that provide abortion—or, as he put it, groups in the “global abortion industry.” ….

The GOP is a psychotic party with deranged goals and no shame, and it must be destroyed.»

*

Trump expands global gag rule that blocks US aid for abortion groups

«The Trump administration has expanded its ban on funding for groups that conduct abortions or advocate abortion rights, known as the global gag rule, and has also cut funding to the Organisation of American States for that reason.

The new policy was announced on Tuesday by the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, who declared: “This is decent. This is right. I am proud to serve in an administration that protects the least among us.”

The Trump administration has already expanded the reach of the funding ban which dates back to the Reagan administration, to apply to all US healthcare assistance, totalling about $6bn.

The extension of the policy announced by Pompeo would not only cut funding to foreign non-governmental organisations directly involved in abortions or abortion rights advocacy, but also those who fund or support other groups which provide or discuss abortion.»

*

Deutsche Welle. 2019-03-27. US extends foreign aid ban for NGOs supporting abortion

The US is toughening a policy denying funding to foreign NGOs that perform or promote abortions. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the US refused to “subsidize the killing of unborn babies.”

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Tuesday announced that the US had expanded its restriction on foreign aid for non-governmental organizations that support abortions or work with groups that help women access the medical service.

“We can continue to meet our critical global health goals,” Pompeo said. “While refusing to subsidize the killing of unborn babies.” He announced new limitations on the use of federal government funds.

“We will refuse to provide assistance to foreign NGOs that give financial support to other foreign groups in the global abortion industry,” Pompeo said.

Restriction of ‘backdoor funding schemes’

Pompeo said that the new restrictions would “enforce a strict prohibition on backdoor funding schemes and end runs around our policy,” adding that “American taxpayer dollars will not be used to underwrite abortions.”

The Secretary also said the US would cut some assistance to the Organization of America States (OAS) for allegedly lobbying for abortion availability in the Western Hemisphere, but it was unclear how much this would be.

“The institutions of the OAS should be focused on the crises in Cuba, Nicaragua and in Venezuela and not advancing the pro-abortion cause,” Pompeo said.

The changes are an expansion of the so-called “Mexico City policy,” which was first established under President Ronald Reagan but was rescinded by subsequent Democrat administrations.

Just days after taking office in 2017, President Donald Trump reinstated the policy and expanded it to include not only reproductive health programs, but all health programs.

Pompeo denies funding cuts hurt maternal healthcare

Critics of the policy call it the “global gag rule” and say it hurts reproductive and maternal health care in developing nations.

Pompeo denied that and said the US would continue to be a leader in such aid.

Critics have also said that not only does it limit what organizations can do with their own money, but it places restrictions on the types of conversations health care providers can have with patients.

In January last year, one year after Trump announced the initial funding cuts, Marie Stopes International, an NGO focused on providing contraception and safe abortions, estimated the funding gap would result in 2.5 million unintended pregnancies, 870,000 unsafe abortions, 6,900 avoidable maternal deaths and a €125-million ($141-million) increase in direct healthcare costs.

Human Rights Watch warned last year that Trump was applying the rule not only to the tens of millions of dollars the US gives to family planning programs, but also to the more than $8 billion the US donates to global health issues.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Ideologia liberal, Ong - Ngo, Russia

Ngo. Ci stanno provando di nuovo con la Russia.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-02-10.

Kremlino 002

Nei paesi ove la società civile ha potuto esprimersi liberamente, partiti e/o movimenti ad ideologia liberal socialista non trovano più albergo.

Appena eletto alla Presidenza del Brasile, Mr Bolsonaro ha pronunciato alcune frasi che sono tutte un programma:

Brasile. Bolsonaro. I fondi delle ngo saranno supervisionati.

«This is the beginning of Brazil’s liberation from socialism, political correctness and a bloated state»

*

«the distortion of human rights and the breakdown of the family»

*

«economic irresponsibility and ideological submission.»

*

«There are hundreds of bureaucratic governing bodies across Brazil, of regulators as well. … We have to untangle the mess»

*

«Brazil would no longer serve the interests of international non-governmental organizations»

* * * * *

Soros George. Uno stato negli stati. Ecco i suoi principali voivodati.

Iniziata la rivolta mondiale contro il regime liberal di Mr Soros.

*

Così il Brasile ha raggiunto con la forza delle elezioni il mondo libero e Mr Lula è nelle patrie galere. Molti altri paesi lo avevano preceduto.

Cina. Una nuova legge sulle Ong (Ngo).

Ungheria. Mr Orban mette fuori leggi le ngo pro-immigrazione.

Polonia. Scacciare le ong (ngo) di Mr Soros.

L’elenco sarebbe molto lungo, ma sarebbe anche incompleto senza ricodare il primo bastione dellalibertà.

Russia. Nuova legge sulle ong (ngo). Povero Mr Soros.

* * * * *

Di questi tempi le ngo ci stanno riprovando in Russia, azione che trova risonanza esclusivamente sui media liberal occidentali.


NGOs in Russia say Kremlin cracking down on human rights activists

«Human rights activists have warned of the oppressive lengths Russia is willing to go to silence its critics. They claim that when it comes to quashing dissent, the Kremlin gives security forces “carte blanche.”»

*

«During a press conference in the Russian capital on Thursday, leading human rights activists from the Moscow Helsinki Group condemned the treatment of Anastasia Shevchenko, the coordinator of nongovernmental organization Open Russia»

*

«Shevchenko is currently under house arrest in the western city of Rostov for allegedly being a member of an “unwelcome organization.”»

*

«Activists say the charges against her are fabricated.»

*

«Activists are making the same demands for the case of the environmental activist Vyacheslav Yegorov, who is under house arrest in the city of Kolomna, outside Moscow»

* * * * * * *

Alcune considerazioni.

Se delle persone cercassero di organizzare negli Stati Uniti delle manifestazioni a supporto del fatto che l’omosessualità sia una patologia psichiatrica, e che dovrebbe essere contemplata come reato dal codice penale, oppure che l’aborto non solo non sia un diritto, bensì sia un omicidio volontario, bene, quelle persone sarebbero immediatamente arrestate ed i media si scatenerebbero in ogni sorta di scandalizzato improperio.

In Russia Governo e società civile non ne vogliono sapere delle ngo e di quello che sostengono.

Ciò che le ngo denominano ‘diritti civili‘ altro non sono che reati.

Forse che non lo sapevano che ogni stato sia tenuto a reprimere i reati?

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Geopolitica America Latina., Ong - Ngo

Brasile. Bolsonaro. I fondi delle ngo saranno supervisionati.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-01-09.

gufo_001__

Si stanno rivelando corretti i presentimenti esternati a suo tempo dal The Guardian, giornali liberal socialista integralista.

How a homophobic, misogynist, racist ‘thing’ could be Brazil’s next president

Questo lungo articolo dovrebbe essere letto e riletto con grandissima attenzione.

Infatti, tutto ciò che è puntigliosamente imputato a Mr Bolsonaro costituisce la motivazione per cui ha vinto le elezioni presidenziali, ed anche con largo margine.

*

Insediatosi da una settimana, nel discorso inaugurale aveva detto:

Bolsonaro. Un discorso da statista. Il Brasile inverte la rotta. 2019-01-04

«This is the beginning of Brazil’s liberation from socialism, political correctness and a bloated state»

*

«the distortion of human rights and the breakdown of the family»

*

«economic irresponsibility and ideological submission.»

*

«There are hundreds of bureaucratic governing bodies across Brazil, of regulators as well. … We have to untangle the mess»

*

«Brazil would no longer serve the interests of international non-governmental organizations»

* * * * *

Brasile. Esce dall’UN Migration Pact e disconosce l’Accordo di Parigi sul ‘clima’. 2019-01-06

* * *

International NGOs issue stark warning to Bolsonaro on climate change & human rights

«The policies proposed by Brazil’s new President, Jair Bolsonaro, threaten a human rights and environmental catastrophe with global implications. ….

As an international community of NGOs, we call on President Bolsonaro to use his position not just as a national leader, but as a global leader, to fulfil Brazil’s global responsibilities to protect human rights, democracy and the environment, and to honour the agreements and conventions it has signed up to Governments and the international business community must work to do the same.»

* * * * * * *

Questo lunedì sei gennaio emette un provvedimento sulle ngo.

Il titolo del The New York Times è esplicativo:

Brazil’s Bolsonaro Says NGO Funding to Be Rigidly Controlled

«Brazil’s right-wing President Jair Bolsonaro said on Monday that funding of nongovernmental organizations working in the country will be rigidly controlled, reflecting increased oversight by the new government over such groups.

Government Secretary Carlos dos Santos Cruz, a retired Army general, said in a local interview published on Monday that the aim is to determine whether the NGOs are fulfilling their role of complementing government actions and not to restrict their activities in Brazil.»

* * *

«Funding of nongovernmental organizations working in Brazil will be rigidly controlled, President Jair Bolsonaro said on Monday, reflecting increased oversight by his new right-wing administration over such groups»

*

«Plans to boost scrutiny over public funds that NGOs receive has raised concern that their activities might be restricted by a nationalist government»

*

«The responsibility for monitoring NGOs has been put in the hands of Government Secretary Carlos dos Santos Cruz, a retired Army general who said the initiative will help determine whether the organizations are fulfilling their role of carrying out work that complements government actions»

* * * * * * *

«This is the beginning of Brazil’s liberation from socialism, political correctness and a bloated state»

Più chiaro di così non lo si sarebbe potuto dire.


Reuters. 2019-01-07. Brazilian oversight of NGOs will be tightly controlled: new president

Funding of nongovernmental organizations working in Brazil will be rigidly controlled, President Jair Bolsonaro said on Monday, reflecting increased oversight by his new right-wing administration over such groups.

Plans to boost scrutiny over public funds that NGOs receive has raised concern that their activities might be restricted by a nationalist government that has criticized foreign interference in the Amazon region.

The responsibility for monitoring NGOs has been put in the hands of Government Secretary Carlos dos Santos Cruz, a retired Army general who said the initiative will help determine whether the organizations are fulfilling their role of carrying out work that complements government actions.

An executive order issued last week gave the new administration potentially far-reaching and restrictive powers over NGOs.

“The government’s intention is to optimize the use of public funds and bring more benefits” to people assisted by the NGOs, Cruz said in an interview published on Monday on the G1 news portal.

He denied the intention was to restrict their activity.

“The plan is not to interfere in the life of the organizations or restrict anything. But it’s public money. There needs to be transparency and there needs to be results,” Cruz said.

Leaders of NGOs that work in Brazil, such as Jose Miguel Vivanco, director of the Americas division of Human Rights Watch, said the decree on NGOs could be viewed in a positive light, but also expressed concerns.

If the new rules “facilitate a constructive relationship between international civil society groups and the government,” that is positive. But Vivanco said he was also worried about how far the Bolsonaro government will go in monitoring the groups.

Rules to increase oversight over NGOs was one of Bolsonaro’s very first acts after he was sworn in on Jan. 1.

Bolsonaro’s temporary decree, which expires unless it is ratified within 120 days by Congress, gives Cruz’s office the power to “supervise, coordinate, monitor and accompany the activities and actions of international organizations and nongovernmental organizations in the national territory.”

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Giustizia, Ong - Ngo, Unione Europea

Ong (ngo). Cosa dicono il codice di navigazione e le norme internazionali.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-07-08.

Animali_che_Ridono__007_Gufo

Il professor Augusto Sinagra, docente di diritto internazionale. ha pubblicato un interessante studio, che riportiamo a seguito in abstract.

«Cercherò di fare una riflessione esclusivamente tecnico-giuridica di diritto internazionale di cui sono stato Professore Ordinario nell’Università.

  1. Le navi che solcano i mari battono una Bandiera. La Bandiera non è un oggetto meramente folkloristico o di colore. La Bandiera della nave rende riconoscibile lo Stato di riferimento della nave nei cui Registri navali essa è iscritta (nei registri è indicata anche la proprietà pubblica o privata).

  2. La nave è giuridicamente una “comunità viaggiante” o, in altri termini, una “proiezione mobile” dello Stato di riferimento. In base al diritto internazionale la nave, fuori dalle acque territoriali di un altro Stato, è considerata “territorio” dello Stato della Bandiera.

Dunque, sulla nave in mare alto si applicano le leggi, tutte le leggi, anche quelle penali, dello Stato della Bandiera.

  1. Il famoso Regolamento UE di Dublino prevede che dei cosiddetti “profughi” (in realtà, deportati) debba farsi carico lo Stato con il quale essi per prima vengono in contatto. A cominciare dalle eventuali richieste di asilo politico.

  2. Non si vede allora quale sia la ragione per la quale una nave battente Bandiera, per esempio, tedesca, spagnola o francese, debba – d’intesa con gli scafisti – raccogliere i cosiddetti profughi appena fuori le acque territoriali libiche e poi scaricarli in Italia quando la competenza e l’obbligo è, come detto, dello Stato della Bandiera.

  3. Da ultimo è emerso che due navi battenti Bandiera olandese e con il solito carico di merce umana, non si connettano giuridicamente al Regno di Olanda e né figurino su quei registri navali, come dichiarato dalle Autorità olandesi.

Allora, giuridicamente, si tratta di “navi pirata”, le quali non sono solo quelle che battono la bandiera nera con il teschio e le tibie incrociate.

  1. Ne deriva il diritto/dovere di ogni Stato di impedirne la libera navigazione, il sequestro della nave e l’arresto del Comandante e dell’equipaggio.

Molti dei cosiddetti “profughi” cominciano a protestare pubblicamente denunciando di essere stati deportati in Italia contro la loro volontà. Si è in presenza, dunque, di una nuova e inedita tratta di schiavi, con la complicità della UE, che offende la coscienza umana e che va combattuto con ogni mezzo.»

* * * * * * *

È un testo estremamente chiaro, che non dovrebbe necessitare di commenti.

*

Una lettura interessante potrebbe essere il trattato

Zanarelli, Comentale, Pinto. Manuale di diritto della navigazione e dei trasporti. 2016. III Ed. Cedam.

Seguono alcuni excerpta.

*

«Se si parla di “nazionalità” in ordine alla nave e all’aeromobile, ci si riferisce al criterio di collegamento di tali beni con l’ordinamento giuridico di un determinato Stato: lo Stato, perciò, esercita la sovranità su quelle navi e quegli aeromobili che battono la bandiera di quest’ultimo.

È da considerare che la libertà di navigazione marittima e aerea appartiene allo Stato sotto la cui bandiera e la cui responsabilità i mezzi di navigazione si muovono e non all’individuo. Attraverso l’iscrizione nei registri dello Stato, come ribadito nella Convenzione UNCLOS (art. 91) e nella Convenzione di Chicago del 1944 (art. 17) le navi e gli aeromobili ottengono la concessione della nazionalità dello Stato. Tuttavia, si nota che, per quanto concerne le navi, la Convenzione UNCLOS nell’art. 93 stabilisce che tali mezzi possano battere bandiera di altri soggetti dotati di personalità giuridica di diritto internazionale, quali le Nazioni Unite, le sue agenzie specializzate e l’Agenzia Internazionale per l’Energia Atomica.

Sull’attribuzione della nazionalità a navi e aeromobili, la dottrina ha sottolineato un “accentuato intervento pubblico” nel settore dei trasporti la cui conseguenza è stata quella di ritenere che soltanto una nazionalità possa essere concessa ad una nave e, quindi, che le navi apolidi non possano godere della libertà di navigazione.

In particolare, in merito al possesso di più nazionalità, sia la Convenzione UNCLOS sia la Convezione di Chicago del 1944 prevedono espressamente il divieto di possedere più di una nazionalità per nave o per aeromobile, rispettivamente nell’art. 92, comma 1 e nell’art. 18. Parimenti, nel diritto interno il codice della navigazione, con gli artt. 145 per le navi e 751 per gli aeromobili, sancisce il divieto di iscrizione nei registri italiani per quei veicoli che sono già in possesso della nazionalità di altri Stati perché già iscritti. Possibile deroga a tale regime si verifica nei casi di bare-boat charter registration, nei casi di locazione a scafo nudo del veicolo: in tali casi, infatti, i soggetti che sono in possesso dei requisiti per ottenere la registrazione e quindi l’attribuzione della nazionalità possono chiedere la sospensione temporanea dell’iscrizione delle navi nei registri di uno Stato per iscriversi temporaneamente nei registri di un altro.

Nell’ordinamento giuridico italiano, come anche negli altri paesi di tradizione marittima, la nazionalità è legata alla proprietà nazionale e, dopo diversi interventi di riforma, alla proprietà di cittadini ed enti di altri Stati europei.

L’art. 143 del codice della navigazione, come modificato dall’art. 7, d.l. 30 dicembre 1997, n. 457, convertito in legge 27 febbraio 1998, n.30, elenca i requisiti per chiedere l’attribuzione della nazionalità alla nave e stabilisce che “Rispondono ai requisiti di nazionalità per l’iscrizione nelle matricole o nei registri di cui all’articolo 146: le navi che appartengono per una quota superiore a dodici carati a persone fisiche giuridiche o enti italiani o di altri Paesi dell’Unione europea; le navi di nuova costruzione o provenienti da un registro straniero non comunitario, appartenenti a persone fisiche, giuridiche o enti stranieri non comunitari i quali assumano direttamente l’esercizio della nave attraverso una stabile organizzazione sul territorio nazionale con gestione demandata a persona fisica o giuridica di nazionalità italiana o di altri Paesi dell’Unione europea, domiciliata nel luogo di iscrizione della nave, che assuma ogni responsabilità per il suo esercizio nei confronti delle autorità amministrative e dei terzi, con dichiarazione da rendersi presso l’ufficio di iscrizione della nave, secondo le norme previste per la dichiarazione di armatore”.

Per quanto concerne gli aeromobili, invece, l’art. 756 del codice della navigazione al comma 1 prevede che “Rispondono ai requisiti di nazionalità richiesti per l’iscrizione nel registro aeronautico nazionale gli aeromobili che appartengono in tutto od in parte maggioritaria: a) allo Stato, alle regioni, alle province, ai comuni e ad ogni altro ente pubblico e privato italiano o di altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea; b) ai cittadini italiani o di altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea; c) a società costituite o aventi una sede in Italia o in un altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea il cui capitale appartenga in tutto od in parte maggioritaria a cittadini italiani o di altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea, ovvero a persone giuridiche italiane o di altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea aventi le stesse caratteristiche di compagine societaria e il cui presidente, la maggioranza degli amministratori e l’amministratore delegato siano cittadini italiani o di altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea”.

L’art. 143 del codice della navigazione, come modificato dall’art. 7, d.l. 30 dicembre 1997, n. 457, convertito in legge 27 febbraio 1998, n.30, elenca i requisiti per chiedere l’attribuzione della nazionalità alla nave e stabilisce che “Rispondono ai requisiti di nazionalità per l’iscrizione nelle matricole o nei registri di cui all’articolo 146: le navi che appartengono per una quota superiore a dodici carati a persone fisiche giuridiche o enti italiani o di altri Paesi dell’Unione europea; le navi di nuova costruzione o provenienti da un registro straniero non comunitario, appartenenti a persone fisiche, giuridiche o enti stranieri non comunitari i quali assumano direttamente l’esercizio della nave attraverso una stabile organizzazione sul territorio nazionale con gestione demandata a persona fisica o giuridica di nazionalità italiana o di altri Paesi dell’Unione europea, domiciliata nel luogo di iscrizione della nave, che assuma ogni responsabilità per il suo esercizio nei confronti delle autorità amministrative e dei terzi, con dichiarazione da rendersi presso l’ufficio di iscrizione della nave, secondo le norme previste per la dichiarazione di armatore”.

Per quanto concerne gli aeromobili, invece, l’art. 756 del codice della navigazione al comma 1 prevede che “Rispondono ai requisiti di nazionalità richiesti per l’iscrizione nel registro aeronautico nazionale gli aeromobili che appartengono in tutto od in parte maggioritaria: a) allo Stato, alle regioni, alle province, ai comuni e ad ogni altro ente pubblico e privato italiano o di altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea; b) ai cittadini italiani o di altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea; c) a società costituite o aventi una sede in Italia o in un altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea il cui capitale appartenga in tutto od in parte maggioritaria a cittadini italiani o di altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea, ovvero a persone giuridiche italiane o di altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea aventi le stesse caratteristiche di compagine societaria e il cui presidente, la maggioranza degli amministratori e l’amministratore delegato siano cittadini italiani o di altro Stato membro dell’Unione europea”.

L’iscrizione nei registri: i criteri

I requisiti per ottenere l’attribuzione della nazionalità variano a seconda delle leggi dello Stato in modo non omogeneo: è la Convenzione di Montego Bay, all’art. 91, comma 2, che stabilisce il principio della libertà degli Stati di determinare le condizioni di iscrizione delle navi nei propri registri.

È noto, infatti, che alcuni Stati siano particolarmente disponibili e richiedano requisiti elastici tali essere classificati come “bandiere di comodo”, “bandiere ombra o di convenienza”. Tale prassi permette di ottenere una registrazione più agevole, laddove altre nazioni possiedano regole più ferree e vincolanti, e viene spesso utilizzata per godere di un regime fiscale di favore, pur compromettendo la sicurezza e le condizioni di lavoro a bordo. L’ITF[6] aggiorna costantemente una lista composta dalle nazioni che utilizzano le proprie bandiere a questo scopo.

Sebbene non ci sia una definizione a livello internazionale dei requisiti necessari [7], la Convenzione UNCLOS stabilisce, all’art. 91, che per l’attribuzione della nazionalità tra la nave e lo Stato della bandiera dovrebbe esistere un collegamento effettivo, il c.d. genuine link. Tuttavia, diverse sono le difficoltà che si riscontrano nell’attuazione di tale principio dal momento che, nell’assenza di sanzioni per le navi che battono bandiere di convenienza, gli Stati possiedono giurisdizione esclusiva e non permettono alcuna interferenza di terzi sui mezzi.

La tendenza attuale degli Stati tradizionalmente marittimi, utilizzata per arginare il fenomeno dell’outflagging, o meglio la fuga verso i registri di convenienza, è stata quella di prevedere dei registri internazionali da affiancare a quelli ordinari con requisiti meno rigidi per la concessione della nazionalità. Anche l’Italia, con il d. l. 457 del 1997, convertito in l. 30 del 1998, ha previsto sgravi fiscali e contribuitivi, nonché facilitazioni per l’imbarco di marittimi non comunitari. Tuttavia, va sottolineato che l’imbarco in tale registro internazionale è ammesso solo per le navi adibite a traffici commerciali internazionali.

Il problema della giurisdizione delle navi

Le navi sono sottoposte esclusivamente al potere dello Stato di bandiera, perciò rappresentano un’estensione della nazionalità anche al di fuori del limite delle acque territoriali. Il principio di giurisdizione esclusiva dello Stato di bandiera, eppure, subisce delle deroghe nel momento in cui la nave entra nelle zone sottoposte alla sovranità dello Stato costiero o portuale.

Le eccezioni sono previste nei casi di: pirateria, dal momento che la nave pirata che compie violenze contro le altre navi, può essere catturata da ogni Stato e può essere sottoposta a misure repressive; contrabbando di guerra in tempo di pace, laddove sia in corso una guerra civile, lo Stato può visitare e catturare, anche in acque internazionali, qualsiasi nave che abbia intenzione di supportare gli insorti; diritto di visita, che consente a navi da guerra di vistare navi in alto mare, quando vi è un fondato sospetto che la nave pratichi  la pirateria o la tratta di schiavi, che faccia partire trasmissioni radio-televisive non autorizzate, che adoperi la bandiera in maniera fraudolenta.

Nella zona economica esclusiva, oltre a quanto detto, le eccezioni aumentano e comprendono la facoltà di esercitare sulla  nave straniera tutti i poteri connessi alla regolamentazione dello sfruttamento delle risorse proporzionalmente alle infrazioni commesse. Nel mare territoriale vige il principio del passaggio inoffensivo e della sottrazione penale dello Stato costiero ai fatti puramente interni: laddove una nave straniera che abbia violato le leggi di uno Stato, le navi da guerra o di servizi pubblici la possono inseguire purché l’inseguimento abbia avuto inizio nelle acque interne o nel mare territoriale. Tuttavia, l’’inseguimento deve essere necessariamente continuo e potranno essere esercitati solo quei poteri ammessi nella zona in cui ha avuto inizio l’inseguimento, ma deve cessare se la nave entra nel mare territoriale di un altro Stato.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Unione Europea

Sanchez rinchiude i migranti Acquarius, che poi deporterà in Africa.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-06-17.

Filo Spinato 001

«The migrants will be granted a special humanitarian permit to stay in Spain for 45 days while the authorities review their cases and give them medical attention.»

*

«The Spanish government said it would review all of the 630 migrants’ cases to decide whether to grant them asylum.»

*

«Those who do not fulfill the criteria would face deportation»

*

«two other ships with the flag of Netherlands — Lifeline and Seefuchs — have arrived off the coast of Libya, waiting for their load of human beings abandoned by the smugglers.»

*

«These gentlemen know that Italy no longer wants to be complicit in the business of illegal immigration, and therefore will have to look for other ports (not Italian) where to go»

*

«i 600 clandestini africani a bordo della Aquarius verranno rinchiusi nei Cie, veri e propri centri di detenzione ed espulsione, per poi essere rispediti in Africa. Solo pochissimi veri profughi saranno smistati tra Parigi e Francia.»

*

«Alla frontiera con il Marocco, per farla breve, i militari hanno il grilletto facile. Si spara senza troppe discussioni. E chi entra normalmente viene riaccompagnato alla porta in tempi relativamente brevi»

*

I seicento salvati dall’Aquarius, quindi, verranno trasferiti in un Cie, centro di identificazione e espulsione che ricorda molto una galera»

*

«Qui saranno rapidamente schedati e – in molti casi – reimbarcati su aerei e traghetti diretti a Sud»

*

«A giorni ci saranno novità sul ruolo delle Ong. Vedremo chi rispetta la legge e chi non lo fa»

* * * * * * *

La Spagna si riserva di valutare caso per caso la posizione dei migranti e di rimpatriare in Africa tutti coloro che non ottengano il diritto di asilo. Se si rispetteranno le pregresse statistiche spagnole di accoglienza, sei o sette persone potrebbero ricevere lo status di profughi.

Molta attesa è posta in una frase pronunciata da mr Salvini.

«A giorni ci saranno novità sul ruolo delle Ong»

Molti si aspettano che le ogn, ngo, siano bandite dall’Italia e che la nuova legge non sia tutta latte e miele come quella recentemente approvata in Ungheria.


The New York Times. 2018-06-17. Shunned by Italy, Migrants at Sea Arrive in Spain

MADRID — More than 600 migrants disembarked from three ships on Sunday in the port of Valencia, Spain, more than a week after they had been rescued at sea only to be turned away by Italy and Malta.

Arriving separately, the Aquarius, a rescue ship, and two Italian Navy vessels reached Valencia carrying a total of 630 migrants — including pregnant women and children — that the Aquarius had originally picked up from six rubber dinghies in the Mediterranean Sea off Libya.

After their exhausting journey, migrants shouted with joy as their ships entered Valencia’s port. Some disembarked singing.

The fate of the Aquarius has underlined the deep divisions in Europe over how to handle an influx of migrants mostly from the Middle East and Africa.

The Aquarius is operated by two European humanitarian groups, SOS Méditerranée and Doctors Without Borders. David Noguera, the president of the Spanish branch of Doctors Without Borders, said on Sunday that the migrants had completed a journey that was “too long and generates contradictory feelings.”

He added, “The blockade of European ports sets a very negative precedent.”

The landing in Spain opens a new chapter in a saga that began last Sunday, when Italy’s new populist government followed through on anti-immigration campaign promises by refusing to let the Aquarius dock at an Italian port.

Italy’s interior minister and the leader of the anti-immigrant League, Matteo Salvini, had argued that “an army of fake refugees” had long exploited what he called the country’s lax rules.

That left the ship, which at the time was overburdened with the rescued migrants, stranded at sea in dangerous conditions.

The migrants will be granted a special humanitarian permit to stay in Spain for 45 days while the authorities review their cases and give them medical attention. The Spanish government said it would review all of the 630 migrants’ cases to decide whether to grant them asylum. Those who do not fulfill the criteria would face deportation.

Italy’s decision to bar the migrants drew a furious reaction from humanitarian groups and other European countries. Spain brought an end to the standoff when its new Socialist government offered to let the migrants land there instead.

During the standoff, Italy allowed emergency services to board the Aquarius to check on the migrants, who were crammed on board. The Italian government also sent two navy ships to escort the Aquarius to Spain and to help transport the migrants to reduce overcrowding.

Mr. Salvini has cast his government’s turning away of the Aquarius as a political victory. His party campaigned on promises to expel hundreds of thousands of migrants and to prevent new arrivals from landing on Italian shores.

Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez of Spain said his government’s decision to let the refugees land was an “obligation to avoid a human catastrophe.” Mr. Salvini responded acerbically to the Spanish decision. He welcomed the “good heart” of Mr. Sánchez’s government and urged him to “also use his generosity in coming weeks” to welcome more migrants, given that Spain has received far fewer than Italy.

Even as the Aquarius migrants reached safety in Valencia after their week at sea, others faced a similar ordeal.

Mr. Salvini warned on his Facebook page on Saturday that “two other ships with the flag of Netherlands — Lifeline and Seefuchs — have arrived off the coast of Libya, waiting for their load of human beings abandoned by the smugglers.”

He said Italy would block those other rescue ships, too, writing: “These gentlemen know that Italy no longer wants to be complicit in the business of illegal immigration, and therefore will have to look for other ports (not Italian) where to go.”

On Sunday morning, Spanish medical staff boarded the Dattilo to carry out preliminary health checks when the Italian Navy ship reached its assigned dock at Valencia’s port, shortly before 7 a.m. local time. Spanish police officers began registering the first migrants once they were allowed to disembark. The Orione, another Italian Navy vessel, was the last to reach Valencia, more than six hours after the Dattilo.

The first migrant who completed the registration process was a 29-year-old man from Sudan, according to Spanish news reports. Over 2,000 people helped receive the migrants in Valencia, including Red Cross workers and interpreters.

Some of the migrants are expected to be transferred to France, after the government of President Emmanuel Macron announced that passengers from the Aquarius who wished to resettle in his country would be welcomed.

Aquarius’s arrival coincided with the rescue of almost 1,000 migrants off the southern coast of Spain over the weekend. The migrants were picked up by the country’s maritime rescue services as they were trying to cross the waters separating Morocco from Spain in dozens of dinghies.

“Spain faces an avalanche of migrants because of the call effect,” the headline on the front page of ABC, a Spanish right-wing newspaper, read on Sunday. The newspaper said that “almost 1,000 illegals” had reached southern Andalusia, calling it the largest influx of migrants since 2014.

According to ABC, the message sent by the Socialist government’s humanitarian gesture could be “used by the mafias that traffic human beings to increase their activity, because it allows them to make their clients believe that the entrance to Spanish territory — and hence that of Europe — will be easier from now.”


TG News 24. 2018-06-17. Spagna, la beffa del “compagno” Sanchez ai buonisti: i migranti dell’Aquarius saranno rispediti tutti in Africa

Il grande bluff della Spagna, il “compagno” Pedro Sanchez, l’icona della sinistra italiana, si beffa dei buonisti: i 600 clandestini africani a bordo della Aquarius verranno rinchiusi nei Cie, veri e propri centri di detenzione ed espulsione, per poi essere rispediti in Africa. Solo pochissimi veri profughi saranno smistati tra Parigi e Francia.

Qualche settimana in Spagna, poi tutti a casa, in Africa. Sarà questo il destino della gran parte dei seicento migranti finiti al centro di un feroce scontro diplomatico fra Roma, Madrid e Parigi. Il governo di Pedro Sánchez – primo ministro dipinto dai giornali italiani come un illuminato filantropo da contrapporre alle barbarie del nuovo esecutivo a trazione leghista – ha confermato che non ci sarà alcun trattamento di favore per i profughi respinti da Malta e Italia. Potranno sbarcare a Valencia, ma dopo verranno seguite le procedure standard. Quelle stesse procedure che hanno reso la penisola iberica uno dei luoghi meno attraenti d’ Europa per le ondate di stranieri che ogni anno attraversano il mare in cerca di fortuna. Alla frontiera con il Marocco, per farla breve, i militari hanno il grilletto facile. Si spara senza troppe discussioni. E chi entra normalmente viene riaccompagnato alla porta in tempi relativamente brevi

L’ODISSEA – I seicento salvati dall’Aquarius, quindi, verranno trasferiti in un Cie, centro di identificazione e espulsione che ricorda molto una galera. Qui saranno rapidamente schedati e – in molti casi – reimbarcati su aerei e traghetti diretti a Sud. I pochi che resteranno saranno smistati tra Spagna e Francia. Per azzardare qualche previsione, si può ricordare un dato utile: circa il settanta per cento delle persone che partono dalla Libia non ha i requisiti per ottenere lo status di rifugiato. Si tratta di semplici clandestini. Non scappano da nessuna guerra. E quindi devono tornare alla base.

Forse è anche questa la ragione per cui il personale della Ong franco-tedesca che attualmente naviga al largo della Sardegna non sembra essersi affatto arreso all’ idea di fare rotta verso la penisola iberica. Al contrario, lo scontro mediatico con l’ esecutivo guidato da Giuseppe Conte continua, anche con colpi bassi.

«Dattilo, la nave della Guardia Costiera italiana che guida il nostro convoglio, ha deciso di cambiare rotta», ha scritto ieri su Twitter il comandante della nave. «Le condizioni meteo non sono favorevoli. Le persone a bordo sono esauste, scioccate e con il mal di mare». Non sono abituati, poveracci. Abbandonati in mezzo al Mediterraneo, senza neanche una pasticca di xamamina. Un ennesimo allarme sanitario, lanciato nella speranza di aprire una breccia nei cuori italiani. Matteo Salvini tuttavia non sembra intenerito: «La nave prende a bordo sistematicamente cinquecento persone a tratta: ora sono in cento, un quinto.

Non è che adesso possono anche decidere dove cominciare e dove finire la crociera». E ancora: «A giorni ci saranno novità sul ruolo delle Ong. Vedremo chi rispetta la legge e chi non lo fa»

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Unione Europea

Ungheria. In aprile elezioni politiche. Le voci delle opposizioni.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-04-03.

2018-04-03__Ungheria__001

In aprile l’Ungheria andrà alle urne per nuove elezioni politiche.

Fidesz, il partito del Presidente Orban, dovrebbe conseguire la maggioranza percentuale e dei seggi parlamentari: si vedrà se sarà una maggioranza relativa oppure se riuscisse ad ottenere anche quella assoluta.

Si fa un gran vociare che l’Ungheria sarebbe un paese che vive sotto una dittatura che imbriglia la voce del’opposizione: ciò non corrisponde al vero.

In questo articolo daremo spazio proprio all’opposizione nei confronti del Fidesz e del Presidente Orban. Poi, saranno i Signori Lettori a farsi la loro propria opinione in materia.

Sarebbe impossibile poter riportare tutta la stampa avversa al Presidente Orban: in ogni caso, chi ne fosse interessato potrebbe cliccare sul logo delle testate riportate.

*

Ungheria. Le elezioni del 18 aprile. Orban ed ungheresi contro Soros.

V4 Report. Viktor Orban responds: The government doesn’t let in migrants, only refugees

Orban calls for Hungarian spy agencies to probe ‘Soros empire’ of NGOs

Soros furibondo attacca Orban e l’Ungheria: sono degli ingrati.

Juncker and Soros hold Brussels meeting to plot legal action against Hungarian government

Soros finanzia la campagna anti-Brexit. Inglesi irritati.

Trump attacca frontalmente Mr Soros come un toro infuriato.

Ungheria. Mr Orban mette fuori leggi le ngo pro-immigrazione.

*

I punti centrali del programma di Mr Orban sono il mantenimento dell’identità nazionale senza cedere all’Unione Europea alcunché della propria sovranità nazionale, la valorizzazione del retaggio religioso, storico, culturale e sociale dell’Ungheria, il rifiuto delle quote di migranti, l’allontanamento dal suolo ungherese del ngo (ong) facenti capo a Mr Soros.

* * * * * * * * * * *


Hungarian Free Press. 2018-03-28. Viktor Orbán’s xenophobic speech at the ThyssenKrupp factory opening

Why did the German conglomerate ThyssenKrupp give a podium to Viktor Orbán?

On March 2, 2018 Prime Minister Viktor Orbán inaugurated a new plant for Thyssenkrupp at Jászfényszaru, Hungary. Orbán started by saying, “Naturally, I don’t wish to use the present occasion for campaign purposes,” then immediately launched into a campaign stump speech against migrants and foreigners. He delivered his usual xenophobic and racist message; although, and for this he deserves credit, he didn’t once mention his nemesis, George Soros.

Orbán said, “but I’d like to point out briefly that every project, every job created here, every town development and the dramatic development of Jászfényszaru itself can only be meaningful and enduring if we are able to protect Hungary, and if we can keep the country how we want it to be. If we falter, if we make the wrong decision, if we fail to protect Hungary, within a few years all our developments will prove to have been in vain. If we are no longer Hungarians, if Hungary fails to remain a country of Hungarians, our developments will be of no benefit to us.”

“Because the world – at least as I see and understand it – is heading in a direction in which the only communities which survive and gain in strength will be those which truly know who they are. This means that Hungary, too, can only be successful if it remains a country of Hungarians and does not abandon its traditions…. Therefore our position is clear. We do indeed sympathize with those peoples of the world which are experiencing hardships, but our position is that their problems should not be brought here: instead of bringing problems here, help must be taken there.”

ThyssenKrupp is a large company and has a corporate “Diversity Charter” which is part of their Human Resources policy. Here is an excerpt.

“Diversity breed success. We believe that different cultures enrich us and make working together more enjoyable and more successful. We are committed to a corporate policy that values, supports, and utilizes diversity.”

t is shameful that ThyssenKrupp let Prime Minister Orbán deliver a speech which was against ThyssenKrupp’s own corporate charter as well as core human values. I will ask Heinrich Hiesinger, ThyssenKrupp’s CEO, to comment on this incident because I believe that his company owes an apology to his diverse shareholders and public for this unfortunate inauguration speech. What do you think?

*


Hungarian Free Press. 2018-03-17. Péter Márki-Zay’s 12 point program for a post-Orbán Hungary

Péter Márki-Zay, the newly-minted Mayor of Hódmezővásárhely, formerly a Fidesz bastion, has launched a website entitled “Regime Change 2018.” The site’s main purpose is to encourage full coordination among the opposition candidates in all 106 electoral districts and to inform citizens as to which candidate to vote for in a given riding, if they wish to defeat the Orbán government. Mr. Márki-Zay’s website also provides a 12-point program for how to rebuild Hungary after the eventual defeat of the Orbán regime–a program developed not only by the mayor, but by both left and right-wing intellectuals, including Gábor Matlák, Péter Ákos Bod and Kálmán Mizsei. My aim is to provide an English-language summary of this program for our readers.

Electoral reform, allowing for a just system for elections, and the restoration of a system of checks and balances. The authors of this manifesto write that this is critical, so as to ensure that “never again will a political minority gain a power monopoly and appropriate the nation’s assets and honour.”

Removal of the Chief Prosecutor of Hungary, Péter Polt, from office and the appointment of an independent prosecutor to investigate corruption during the Orbán regime. The authors write: “We cannot allow ever again for the prosecutor’s office, based on partisan considerations, to let criminals run free or to imprison and persecute innocent people.”

The return of national assets and holding people accountable: the authors of this manifesto aim to map out how national assets and public funds were passed illegally to individuals associated with Fidesz and would also investigate the “network of stooges” that have allowed Fidesz politicians to amass their wealth over the last eight years. The manifesto calls for a slogan that can be adopted by all people and parties interested in eliminating the Orbán regime and this slogan is “you will be jailed.” (In Hungarian: “ülni fogtok,” which literally means “you will sit.”)

Press freedom and an end to the politically-motivated, lavish funding of propaganda publications. Government ads placed in publications would be limited and better regulated, and a post-Orbán Hungary would also end discrimination against independent, critical journalists.

A reaffirmation that Hungary is part of the western world, rather than an autocratic east led by Russia, Turkey or China. “In the last century, Mátyás Rákosi and János Kádár, and most recently Viktor Orbán, wanted to change” Hungary’s long-standing traditional alignment with West, dating back to King Stephen.

A reassessment of secret contracts and agreements signed by the Orbán regime, including Paks 2. The manifesto accuses Mr. Orbán and Fidesz of representing the interests of Vladimir Putin and those of “Russian imperialism.”

A true free market economy and predictability, where an empowered competition bureau protects economic competition, ensuring that it is free from party politics. “The foundation of success must be creativity and work, not political connections,” write the authors of the document.

The introduction of the euro in Hungary as soon as possible. The authors of this document believe that it is risky and costly for small and open economies to maintain their own national currencies. The manifesto proposes that after a brief, transitional period adopting the euro in Hungary would stabilize the economy and would make the country more internationally competitive.

Investing in education and health care. Public education should encourage upward social mobility and equal opportunity for all youth in Hungary. In terms of health care, the manifesto prioritizes addressing the intense brain drain in the health care sector, where doctors and nurses leave the country in large numbers for work in western Europe.

Making the files of the communist era state security (secret police) fully open and accessible to the public. The authors believe that full openness with it comes to people who once served as informants or agents of community state security is the only way to ensure that contemporary Hungarian parties do not blackmail opponents with such information.

A new relationship with Hungarians living abroad, particularly in neighbouring countries. The authors suggest that never again can we allow Hungarians in Romania and elsewhere to become political pawns of a ruling party. The manifesto suggests that the way to halt the assimilation of these Hungarian minorities is to make Hungary economically successful and a leading force in the region, like it was after 1989, thus serving as a source of pride for Hungarians abroad.

Defending Hungary from illegal immigrants. The manifesto suggests that Mr. Orbán’s anti-migrant rhetoric is merely a smokescreen, while the regime has allowed upwards of 20,000 Arabs, Chinese and Russians to buy their way to settlement and permanent residency in Hungary, many of whom are believed to have pasts involving criminal activity back home.

It appears as though the Mayor of Hódmezővásárhely has his eyes on national politics. At the moment, as an avowedly conservative politician he certainly enjoys a level of respect in both left-wing and anti-Fidesz right-wing circles and has shown himself as capable of cooperating with both–a true rarity in Hungary.

*


The Budapest Beacon. 2018-03-30. OVB fines Viktor Orbán $1,400 for campaigning among children

The National Election Committee (OVB) has fined Prime Minister Viktor Orbán HUF 345,000 (USD 1,360) for unlawfully campaigning among children without the consent of their parents, reports index.hu.

On March 21 Orbán posted a video on his official Facebook page in which he is seen visiting a kindergarten with government commissioner Judit Czunyi-Bertalan in the Komárom-Esztergom county village of Dad. The village belongs to the electoral district where Czunyi-Bertalan is running as Fidesz’s candidate in the general election on April 8.

Throughout the 55-second heavily edited video, Orbán is seen introducing himself to and shaking hands with at least half a dozen kindergarteners. At one point, he calls the children to get together for a group photo but later corrects himself and says “alright, those of you who want to, can pose for a group photo.” All the children are herded together for a photo nevertheless. Standing in the middle with Czunyi-Bertalan, Orbán theatrically raises a shorter boy so that he would be seen in the photo. Then the video ends.

A day later, Orbán shared another video titled “Unexpected visit in Bakonysárkány”. Still campaigning for Czunyi-Bertalan, the prime minister paid a surprise visit to the local community hall where he shook hands with unknowing children dressed in glad rags. The same day, Momentum Movement announced that it would file a report with the OVB for “political pedophilia.” Együtt and three private persons also filed reports with the authority.

On Thursday, a photo (as seen on top) was published on Orbán’s Facebook page in which he is seen shaking hands with children dressed in hussar uniforms during his campaign visit at the Balaton-side resort of Fonyód.

The OVB argues that both Orbán and Czunyi-Bertalan violated the election and the public education laws that prohibit using children for campaign purposes without the consent of their parents. OVB announced that it would forward the case to the National Authority for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (NAIH). In addition to the fine, OVB’s resolution ordains Orbán to remove the video that was shot at the Dad kindergarten and prohibits him and Czunyi-Bertalan from further violation of the law.

Normally, such a distinct action against Fidesz politicians, let alone Orbán, would be unthinkable on the part of OVB. However, in accordance with the election law, each political party that manages to run a national list can delegate one member to the OVB oversight committee who can participate in its work until the inaugural session of the new National Assembly. The current resolution was passed by 13 yes and 7 no votes. This ratio matches that of the opposition and Fidesz members on the committee.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Unione Europea

Devoluzione del socialismo ideologico. – Eu Observer

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-01-24.

Vincent van Gogh - Disperazione

«In a constitutional state, the true ruler is the voter».


Questa considerazione, che al mondo vale quasi esclusivamente per i popoli occidentali, racchiude l’essenza del dominio politico di una parte: conquistare la maggioranza percentuale e, con essa, la maggioranza dei deputati, formando quindi un governo.

Al dominio politico fa seguito quello amministrativo burocratico: il potere politico tenderà a nominare burocrati e funzionari, giudici compresi, aderenti al proprio modo di vedere le cose, alla propria Weltanschauung.

Questo insieme di dipendenti delle pubbliche amministrazioni collegati tra di essi da un comune modo di sentire possono formare ciò che usualmente è designato come “deep state“, ossia un insieme più o meno coordinato che mira ad influenzare e condizionare un eventuale governo che non condivida le proprie ideologie. Come asseriva Hegel, si governa tramite la burocrazia.

Un giudice liberal o socialista governa con le sentenze molto più efficacemente di un parlamento. E, con la scusa della separazione dei poteri, un cambio di governo ben poco potrebbe fare contro di esso. Si consideri anche come i funzionari pubblici, giudici compresi, almeno nelle nazioni europee, non siano cariche elettive, bensì nominate in una qualche maniera dal governo. Così facendo il deep state socialista può sopravvivere al cambio di governo, e favorire il ritorno.

La maggior parte dei dipendenti delle pubbliche amministrazioni non è tanto un “fedele servitore” dello stato, quanto piuttosto della componente politica che gli ha procurato il posto che occupa. Solo molto raramente resterà in quel posto solo se la componente politica di cui è espressione resti al governo: una delle più efficaci invenzioni liberal è stata quella del posto pubblico a vita, inamovibile.

Ma la definizione di deep state sarebbe incompleta se non si considerassero le ngo (ong). Associazioni di diritto privato con qualche migliaia di associati che i media schierati denominano “società civile” e che riportano le loro azioni esattamente come se rappresentassero la totalità degli elettori della nazione. Burocrati e funzionari le riconoscono, concedono loro finanziamenti e le istituzionalizzano spesso rendendo obbligatoria la loro consultazione al fine di stendere leggi e regolamenti. Questa è forse la forma più raffinata di potere, che legalizza la piazza.

Infine, liberal e socialisti ideologici grande cura riposero nel dominare i mezzi di comunicazione, in particolare quell ‘pubblici‘ di nome, loro feudi di fatto. Liberi di supportare l’ideologia liberal e socialista.

In sintesi: il deep state è mezzo per controllare una sistema formalmente democratico ma sostanzialmente dittatoriale, non de iure bensì de facto.

* * * * * * *

Gran quota dell’ultimo secolo è stato dominato dall’ideologia socialista in Europa, liberal negli Stati Uniti: che promettevano benessere economico e sociale in cambio di una sempre maggiore partecipazione della cosa pubblica nel possesso e nella gestione dei beni pubblici. Essendo fenomeni ideologici erano alieni dal pragmatismo per cui si tende a fare ciò che in quel particolare momento sia utile: si attua invece ciò che l’ideologia impone di fare.

Le ideologie sono in un certo qual senso delle idee coatte e cogenti.

Il sistema regge fino a tanto che vi siano beni da spartire e gestire: quindi implode. Ma implode anche quando la presenza del pubblico condizioni troppo severamente il privato.

Ma detta implosione si attua lentamente nel tempo, in quel processo denominato “devoluzione“. Il crollo finale è solo l’evento conclusivo.

Dapprima viene a meno il consenso politico, con perdita delle leve di governo, quindi, lentamente, il deep state si sgretola.

Due recenti episodi storici sono chiari esempi di quanto detto.

L’Unione Sovietica è andata lentamente disgregandosi fino ad implodere, ma la classe dei dipendenti delle pubbliche amministrazioni rimasti nel cuore e nella mente comunisti sono stati espulsi da sistema con grande lentezza, si direbbe quasi per rinnovo fisiologico: i vecchi muoiono. L’attrito imposto dal deep state è stato causa efficiente della relativa lentezza dell’emersione della nuova Russia non comunista.

Lo stesso fenomeno è accaduto in Cina, con la variante che Deng Xiaoping nel breve volgere di due settimane ha trasferito gran parte dei supporter del deep state nei laogai, donde erano non più in grado di nuocere a sé ed agli altri. Lo sviluppo cinese è sotto gli occhi di tutti. Nel solo sistema scolastico furono epurati oltre 600,000 insegnanti entrati in ruolo tramite la rivoluzione culturale: Deng non se ne fece scappare nemmeno uno.

Anche in politica le parole di Caifa sono profetiche: “La morte di uno può salvare una nazione“.

* * * * * * *

Ma la devoluzione dell’ideologia liberal e di quella socialista sarebbe poco comprensibile se il discorso si limitasse al sistema economico. Certo, il fallimento economico è sotto gli occhi di tutti. Nella foga di realizzare i propri dettami ideologici, si fece di tutto per imporre la propria Weltanschauung etica e morale. Come risultato l’istituto familiare è stato quasi distrutto, ogni cosa contro natura è stata esaltata ed imposta, e con il controllo limitativo della proliferazione l’Occidente si avvia ad esperire la più severe crisi demografica dopo la peste di Giustiniano e quella del 1300.

Questo è un elemento logicamente inspiegabile se non considerando come esso sia ideologico.

Se sarebbe stata cosa crudele ma comprensibile la sua applicazione agli altri, liberal e socialisti hanno volutamente limitato la propria progenie al punto tale da andare in estinzione loro, non gli altri.

Come risultato paradosso, tra qualche decennio l’Europa sarà popolata dagli autoctoni di fede cattolica: si tenga presente che le famiglie che fanno capo a movimenti cattolici hanno un minimo di tre figli, ma la mediana super i sei: la loro stirpe sopravvivrà, mentre quella liberal e socialista sarà scomparsa.

*

Nulla di cui stupirsi se l’ideologia liberal e quella socialista abbiano vistosamente perso consensi e quelli residui siano sostenuto per lo più da vecchi: è un’ideologia condannata dalla demorgafia.

Non ci si faccia ingannare dal fatto che i media sono ancora saldamente liberal e socialisti: senza l’appoggio di un governo in carica sono destinati a scomparire. Un solo esempio per tutti? Leggiamoci gli archivi del Corriere della Sera nel periodo a cavaliere tra il 1° aprile ed il 30 maggio 1945.

Solo per fare qualche esempio, nel 2000 in Grecia il partito socialista valeva il 43.8% ed ora quota il 5.7%; In Francia è ridotto al 6.3%; nella Repubblica Ceka è sceso dal 30.2% al 7.4%; in Spagna dal 34% al 22.7%; in Germania dal 38.5% al 18%; in Italia dal 43.2% all’attuale 23.5%.

«But in the meantime, the voter has – more than 150 years later – clearly lost faith in Lassalle’s political idea»

*

«Almost everywhere in Europe, social democratic and socialist parties are losing support: last year, the German SPD saw a historic bad result in the parliamentary elections. Its sister parties in France, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic have even sunk to single digit shares of the vote.»

*

«European social democracy is fighting for its political survival: since the new millennium, its vote share has fallen in 15 of the 17 countries we examined – sometimes dramatically»

*

«But there are also common roots that can explain the crisis faced by socialists and social democrats in many countries»

*

«First, parties have lost many of their core voters. European social democracy, born out of the labour movement of the nineteenth century, had a large support base upon which it could rely for votes: the workers, above all people engaged in manual labour»

*

«It is now an ever-shrinking demography: the working class is fragmented, the conditions that supported the social democrats for decades across Europe have disappeared»

*

«Second, in the past couple of decades, parties on the political fringes of many countries have emerged or have won approval»

*

«populist right-wing parties are appealing to the remaining traditional working class – like the Front National in France, the FPO in Austria, Geert Wilders’ party in the Netherlands and the AfD in Germany»

*

«Third, people have long been concerned by a fundamental crisis among mainstream parties»

*

«A big comeback for social democracy is not yet on the cards»

* * * * * * *

La devoluzione socialista interessa ovviamente i singoli stati, ma nel contempo svolge una pesante azione anche sull’Unione Europea.

Questa è governata dal Consiglio Europeo, ossia dalla riunione dei capi di stato o di governo dei paesi afferenti. Similmente l’Ecofin governa indirettamente l’Eurozona.

Se venti anni or sono l’indirizzo dell’Unione era chiaramente socialista ideologico, tutto volto a concretare gli Stati Uniti di Europa, ad oggi questa unanimità di intenti e vedute è venuto a meno. Non ancora completamente, ma i socialisti ideologici non hanno più la maggioranza e sembrerebbero essere destinati ad estinguersi anche in quel consesso.

Questo periodo di transitorio è destinato a durare ancora molti anni e la attuale starvation politica tedesca ne è chiaro esempio.


Euobserver. 2018-01-22. Europe’s social democrats are having a hard time

The near collapse in the vote for Germany’s SPD is just the latest crisis for social democratic parties across Europe.

*

“In a constitutional state, the true ruler is the voter”, in the famous phrase of Ferdinand Lassalle, the champion of workers and intellectual force behind European social democracy.

But in the meantime, the voter has – more than 150 years later – clearly lost faith in Lassalle’s political idea.

Almost everywhere in Europe, social democratic and socialist parties are losing support: last year, the German SPD saw a historic bad result in the parliamentary elections. Its sister parties in France, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic have even sunk to single digit shares of the vote.

European social democracy is fighting for its political survival: since the new millennium, its vote share has fallen in 15 of the 17 countries we examined – sometimes dramatically:

Major developments can be seen across Europe:

Germany

In Germany, the SPD result in 2017 federal elections was the worst since the end of the Second World War (at 20.5 percent). But, at the turn of the millennium, it was the strongest party: Gerhard Schroeder led it into government in 1998 with 40 percent of the vote; in 2002 it won 38.5 percent and again named the chancellor. Since then, however, it has gone downhill. Particularly after the ‘Grand Coalition’ from 2005 to 2009, when voters punished the SPD, the junior partner; its vote share collapsed by more than ten percentage points. After a slight increase in 2013, the downward trend has resumed.

France

Last year in France, the Socialist Party (PS) entered its worst-ever crisis. President Francois Hollande, the most unpopular person to hold the office in history, did not even stand for re-election. The party’s candidate, Benoit Hamon, finished in fifth place, with a mere six percent of the vote. A few weeks later came the vote for the National Assembly. In 2012, the PS became the strongest party, this time it fell by more than 20 points and won only seven percent of the vote.

Netherlands, Czech Republic

In the Netherlands and the Czech Republic, the social democratic parties also scored in the single figures for parliamentary elections last year. In comparison to the preceding elections, they dropped by 19 and 13 percentage points respectively.

Greece

In Greece, the decline has already been underway for many years. After the start of the sovereign debt crisis, the ruling Pasok Party resoundingly lost its absolute majority in parliament. In the 2012 vote, it tumbled by more than 30 percentage points, in 2015 it lost even more trust, and today it barely plays any role at all.

Austria

In Austria’s recent vote, although SPO was able to match its results of four years ago, it nevertheless left the government and has lost almost ten percentage points over the past 15 years.

Iberia and Mediterannean

In Italy, Spain and Portugal the social democratic parties were still scoring over 40 percent in elections held over the 2000s. They are far away from that today, with the Spanish PSOE reaching only 22 percent in the last election.

Scandinavia

In Sweden and Finland, too, the election results of the social democrats have been steadily worsening since the turn of the millenium.

In Norway the workers party AP significantly recovered from its decline at the start of the millenium. In 2001, the AP lost more than ten points, winning only 24.3 percent of the vote and finding itself in opposition after more than 40 years in power. It was afterwards able to balance out those losses by shifting to the left. Since the 2009 vote, however, it has gone into reverse once again, winning 27.4 percent of the vote in 2017. While it is still the strongest party, the country is now governed by a conservative coalition.

UK exception

Until recently in the UK, the Labour party was following the same downward trend, losing ten percentage points between 2001 and 2015. But Labour was able to recoup its losses in last year’s general election and clearly profited from the consequences of the Brexit vote earlier in the year.

In every country there are of course differing, individual reasons for this development.

But there are also common roots that can explain the crisis faced by socialists and social democrats in many countries.

First, parties have lost many of their core voters. European social democracy, born out of the labour movement of the nineteenth century, had a large support base upon which it could rely for votes: the workers, above all people engaged in manual labour.

It is now an ever-shrinking demography: the working class is fragmented, the conditions that supported the social democrats for decades across Europe have disappeared.

Industrial jobs are being made superfluous by new technologies or are moving to countries with lower wages.

High-earning permanent staff work alongside wage workers, who often do the same tasks but receive less money for them.

In Germany, the share of traditional workers fell in the last 50 years from half the workforce to barely a quarter. And surveys carried out after elections illustrate that the remaining workers no longer only vote for the social democrats.

Second, in the past couple of decades, parties on the political fringes of many countries have emerged or have won approval.

Socialist and populist left-wing parties have been able to win over voters who earlier voted for the social democrats. It is, to some extent, what Syriza in Greece has managed, along with the left parties in Portugal and Denmark, or Die Linke in Germany, which is the successor party to both the East German Communist Party and the West German WASG.

At the same time, populist right-wing parties are appealing to the remaining traditional working class – like the Front National in France, the FPO in Austria, Geert Wilders’ party in the Netherlands and the AfD in Germany.

Third, people have long been concerned by a fundamental crisis among mainstream parties.

Voter commitment is decreasing, or worse: trust in politics as a whole is dissolving. Many countries in Europe are struggling with diminishing voter participation.

In Germany, around 90 percent of voters went to the ballot box in the 1970s, while in the 2000s that figure was only between 70 to 80 percent.

In France, participation in the second round of the parliamentary vote last year fell to a historic low, and in Greece, too, disengagement with politics is high.

The future?

What would a future for European social democracy look like? How can it respond to the challenges of a globalised, digitalised world? And will it manage to win back voters’ trust?

Europe’s next parliamentary election takes place in Italy in March.

Matteo Renzi, the head of the fractious social democratic party Partito Democratico, would like to lead it back to power once more.

Renzi sees himself as playing a similar role to France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, who presented himself as the renewer of the political scene. Yet in the polls, the anti-European Five Star Movement and Silvio Berlusconi’s right-wing alliance are in the lead.

A big comeback for social democracy is not yet on the cards.

Methodology

The following election results were included in the data: the observations above use the electoral results from 17 European countries. They were collected by the Norwegian Centre for Research Data and the International Foundation for Electoral Systems and processed and compiled by the New York Times in a different context. We have added any missing data.

We looked at parliamentary votes from 2000 to 2017. In countries with two-chamber systems, only the lower house was included in the analysis. In countries with multiple voting rounds, only the first round was examined.

For each country, we analysed the results of all parties that are members or partners of the Party of European Socialists (PES), an alliance of social democratic parties in Europe.

Pubblicato in: Criminalità Organizzata

Ngo (ong) chiedono maggiori fondi all’Unione Europea

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-01-22.

 Parassiti Afidi

Le ngo (ong) si trovano in crescenti difficoltà ad operare in molti stati europei.

La European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) ha recentemente rilasciato un Report (riportato in calce), su codesto argomento.

Queste sono le ragioni che adducono.

«The centre-right European People’s Party has been pushing to restrict EU funds for NGOs.»

*

«The lack of sustainable long-term financing hampers the effectiveness of the civil groups’ work. Most funds are only available through short-term projects that do not cover advocacy and awareness-raising.»

*

«The agency recommends setting up funds for long-term financing and that the administrative burdens should be proportionate and reasonable. The free movement of capital – something that has come under threat in Hungary and the UK – is also key in providing funding.»

*

«Another issue highlighted by the report is that governments across the EU are not keen to consult with civil organisations when working on new legislation. Even if governments are open for consultation, they give very little time – in extreme cases only a few hours – for organisations to comment on bills.»

*

«Counterterrorism, anti-moneylaundering measures, shrinking budgets and threats curtail the work of civil rights’ groups in the EU, a new report published on Thursday (18 January) by the EU’s Vienna-based Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) has found. »

*

«While there is a clear effort to crackdown on NGOs in Hungary and Poland, experts say that rights groups face threats across the bloc.»

*

«In a number of countries counterterrorism measures had a direct or indirect effect on NGOs. Freedom of assembly for instance was reduced in countries such as France and Spain.»

*

«Anti-moneylaundering measures also had an impact: in the UK over 300 UK-based charities’ bank accounts were frozen at least temporarily because of strict implementation of the new rules»

*

«Civil society groups under attack in Hungary and Poland urged the EU on Tuesday (9 January) to set up a fund geared towards NGOs that are protecting European values in member states»

*

«The European Commission in December referred Hungary to the EU’s top court because of the law, which the bloc’s executive said infringed EU rules»

*

«She said that the police, the interior ministry and other law enforcement organisations have ceased their contracts with the NGO»

*

«She said NGOs used to rely on public financing, but with the government of the Law and Justice Party (PiS) in power those funds have dried up»

* * * * * * *

Il cuore del problema risiede nella prima frase enucleata.

«The centre-right European People’s Party has been pushing to restrict EU funds for NGOs.»

La Commissione elargisce sponte sua grandi quantità di fondi alle ngo, notabilmente quelle facenti capo a Mr Soros. Poi vi sono i fondi incanalati tramite la European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Poi tutto il resto.

Quindi enuncia come sia insito nei principi fondamentali dell’Unione Europea l’accettazione delle ngo sul territorio nazionale degli stati membri.

Indi queste ngo agiscono facendo attiva propaganda contro i governi legittimamente eletti, qualora essi fossero dissenzienti dalla linea della dirigenza europea. La piazza deve aver ragione sulle libere elezioni.

Tutto questo è dagli eurocrati denominato “democrazia”

«She said foreign funding has been the key in maintaining the independence of her organisation»

*

«Hungary …. which the bloc’s executive said infringed EU rules »

*

Ricapitoliamo.

Se le ngo mantengono la loro indipendenza dagli stati dove operano perché ricevono finanziamenti dall’estrero, allora dipenderanno dai voleri dei finanziatori esteri.

A quanto sembra i Trattati EU conterrebbero la norma in accordo alla quale gli stati membri debbano accogliere e lasciare operare le ngo. Si sarebbe davvero molto curiosi che ci fosse indicato dove si trovi scritto un simile assunto.


EuObserver. 2018-01-14. Hungarian and Polish NGOs urge EU funds against crackdown

Civil society groups under attack in Hungary and Poland urged the EU on Tuesday (9 January) to set up a fund geared towards NGOs that are protecting European values in member states.

NGOs in the two central European countries, where what Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orban once boasted was ‘illiberal democracy’ has taken a hold, have called for the creation of a so-called “European Values Instrument” that would support civil society groups that are promoting democracy, human rights and rule of law.

“We should be putting our money where our mouth is,” Marta Pardavi, co-chair of the Hungarian Helsinki Committee, which has recently been the target of a government campaign against NGOs, said at a European Parliament hearing.

She said foreign funding has been the key in maintaining the independence of her organisation.

The Helsinki Committee partly focuses on protecting the rights of asylum seekers and refugees, which has made the NGO a target for Orban’s government, which vehemently opposes taking in refugees.

“European institutions should set up a instrument to defend civil rights organisations,” Pardavi said, adding that there were such mechanisms for accession and third countries, but not for EU member states.

Pardavi told EUobserver that existing EU funds are designed for specific, short-term projects, usually available for 18 months. She argued that for the sustainable functioning and reinforcement of human rights NGOs, an overarching funding should be available.

“The later this fund comes to life, the more money it would need,” she argued.

The Hungarian Helsinki Committee is one of the organisations affected by new legislation targeting civil society groups that receive foreign – including European – funding, forcing them to label themselves as “supported from abroad”.

The European Commission in December referred Hungary to the EU’s top court because of the law, which the bloc’s executive said infringed EU rules.

Pardavi said her organisation would not comply with the new law.

She said that the police, the interior ministry and other law enforcement organisations have ceased their contracts with the NGO, despite having worked together for over 20 years.

“There is desperate need for the EU to start recognising the problem of the civil society organisations,” Malgorzata Szuleka, lawyer and researcher at the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights in Poland said at the event, adding that NGOs are usually the first victims in countries where rule of law is under pressure.

She said the shrinking space for NGOs to consult with the government is one of the ways Poland is shutting out the civil society from telling their opinion on draft laws.

Szuleka told Euobserver that certain NGOs are on a “starvation diet” in Poland, especially those dealing with migrants and refugees, and women’s rights.

She said NGOs used to rely on public financing, but with the government of the Law and Justice Party (PiS) in power those funds have dried up. She cited the example of EU funds for migration and refugees that has not been distributed in Poland by the authorities.

Szuleka said the EU should step in and help make NGOs more resistant to the changing of the governments.

‘Ill democracies’

At the parliament hearing, human rights advocates argued that governments in Poland, Hungary and, for a period of time, in Croatia, are working from a similar “playbook”, when building an illiberal democracy, undermining fundamental rights and the rule of law.

Hungary has been regularly criticised by the European Commission, whic has also launched the Article 7 sanctions procedure against Poland on rule of law issues.

“We see a number of countries, where there are worrying developments on the rule of law, democracy, and fundamental rights. And the EU is struggling to cope with that,” said liberal MEP Sophie in ‘t Veld, one of the organisers of the event, along with EPP MEP Frank Engel.

In ‘T Veld added that this is not about a divide between the eastern and western part of the EU, but among people who stand up for the rule of law and those authoritarians who take away human rights.

 


EuObserver. 2018-01-18. Rights NGOs face fresh threats across the EU, agency says

Civil rights group – particularly LGBT groups – face threats in the EU.

*

Counterterrorism, anti-moneylaundering measures, shrinking budgets and threats curtail the work of civil rights’ groups in the EU, a new report published on Thursday (18 January) by the EU’s Vienna-based Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) has found.

Civil society as a whole – a key pillar of democracy – is under threat in many parts of the EU, it concludes.

“A thriving democracy needs a healthy civil society. Unfortunately, the EU’s own civil society is facing a pattern of threats and pressures in many parts of the EU,” FRA director Michael O’Flaherty said, adding that addressing this “unacceptable situation should be a high priority” for the EU and member states.

The FRA focuses on human rights and makes recommendations to both the EU and member states to protect human rights when implementing EU law.

While there is a clear effort to crackdown on NGOs in Hungary and Poland, experts say that rights groups face threats across the bloc.

In a number of countries counterterrorism measures had a direct or indirect effect on NGOs. Freedom of assembly for instance was reduced in countries such as France and Spain.

Anti-moneylaundering measures also had an impact: in the UK over 300 UK-based charities’ bank accounts were frozen at least temporarily because of strict implementation of the new rules.

The agency wants EU member states to make sure that new measures do not have negative side-effects on NGOs.

Attacks, physical abuse, threats and smear campaigns against NGOs have become the new norm, researchers say. “They feel it’s part of their job now,” an official familiar with the issue said.

The attacks typically come from political groups, for instance from people unhappy with groups helping refugees. LGBTI rights, womens’ rights and the rights of refugees tend to be the most sensitive subjects, receiving the brunt of threats.

However, it is difficult to assess the scope of the threat, because there are no figures on this as authorities do not register if a physical abuse was a direct attack against a civil group. The agency plans a report specifically on that in the autumn.

In some cases, civil groups fear state surveillance, the report notes. In July 2015, Amnesty International reported that “UK government agencies had spied on the organisation by intercepting, accessing and storing its communications”.

Short on money

The lack of sustainable long-term financing hampers the effectiveness of the civil groups’ work. Most funds are only available through short-term projects that do not cover advocacy and awareness-raising.

Shrinking national budgets and increasing administrative burdens also complicate the NGOs’ work.

The agency recommends setting up funds for long-term financing and that the administrative burdens should be proportionate and reasonable. The free movement of capital – something that has come under threat in Hungary and the UK – is also key in providing funding.

Recently, several NGOs have called for the establishment of a specific EU fund for rights groups. The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) also urged such a move last autumn.

Another issue highlighted by the report is that governments across the EU are not keen to consult with civil organisations when working on new legislation. Even if governments are open for consultation, they give very little time – in extreme cases only a few hours – for organisations to comment on bills.

The report was compiled after NGOs said they are coming under increasing political pressure by changing laws and some have endured physical attacks.

While the EU is often visible at helping civil society outside of the bloc, there have been few measures to protect or even to assess the situation of civil groups within the EU.

The Civil Liberties Union for Europe (Liberties), an NGO promoting the civil liberties in the EU, said in a statement that with the FRA’s report it could be harder for “politicians in Brussels to ignore” the increasing threat to NGOs.

The organisation notes that the EU commission and European Parliament have been “largely uninterested in pleas” from activists to protect rights groups.

The centre-right European People’s Party has been pushing to restrict EU funds for NGOs.

 

 

 

 

 

European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. 2018-01-18. Civil society under threat, Fundamental Rights Agency finds.

In many parts of the EU, civil society is under threat, finds a new report by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). Given the vital role civil society plays in upholding democratic processes and in promoting human rights, decision makers need to ensure the important work of civil society is not undermined through policy and legal changes and funding cuts.

“A thriving democracy needs a healthy civil society. Unfortunately, the EU’s own civil society is facing a pattern of threats and pressures in many parts of the EU. Addressing this unacceptable situation should be a high priority for policy makers at EU and national levels,” says FRA Director Michael O’Flaherty.

The ‘Challenges facing civil society organisations working on human rights in the EU’ report explores how these challenges vary across the EU. It points to:

– Threats, physical and verbal attacks against activists, as well as smear campaigns;

– Legal changes that negatively affect civil society, such as freedom of assembly restrictions, often a by-product of counter-terrorism laws;

– Shrinking budgets and increased difficulties in getting funding;

– Lack of appropriate involvement of civil society in law- and policy-making.

Member States should abide by the laws, including international standards that recommend civil society participation in policy cycles. Due attention must also be paid to ensure that new or redrafted laws and policies do not undermine the work of civil society. Civil society funding also needs to be protected. In addition, channels of dialogue between civil society and the EU need to be strengthened to ensure their concerns are heard and addressed. This includes finding ways to collect comparable and reliable data on the challenges civil society face, such as threats, intimidation and attacks.

This report contains promising practices that are being used to address these challenges.

Notes to editors:

– FRA is the EU’s independent body for delivering fundamental rights assistance and expertise to the EU and its Member States.

– As part of its cooperation with non-governmental organisations and civil society, FRA initiated this research to look into how best to enable and protect civil society. 

– The report will be launched at an event in Brussels at the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) on 19 January which will also be livestreamed.