Geopolitics & Empire

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8npPSB90ZU&t=15s The founder of peace and conflict studies, Dr. Johan Galtung, discusses his predictions of the US Empire collapsing and becoming a dictatorship, before eventually rebuilding its democracy. Show Notes USA–Where Are You Heading? Pentagon Study Declares American Empire Is Collapsing DOD Risk Assessment in a Post-Primacy World US Power Will Decline Under Trump Says Futurist Who Predicted Soviet Collapse Websites https://www.transcend.org https://www.galtung-institut.de Books https://www.transcend.org/tup/index.php?book=5 About Johan Galtung Johan Galtung, dr, dr hc mult, a professor of peace studies, was born in 1930 in Oslo, Norway. He is a mathematician, sociologist, political scientist and the founder of the discipline of peace studies. He founded the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo (1959), the world’s first academic research center focused on peace studies, as well as the influential Journal of Peace Research (1964). He has helped found dozens of other peace centers around the world. He is currently the president of the Galtung-Institut for Peace Theory & Peace Practice. He has served as a professor for peace studies at universities all over the world, including Columbia (New York), Oslo, Berlin, Belgrade, Paris, Santiago de Chile, Buenos Aires, Cairo, Sichuan, Ritsumeikan (Japan), Princeton, Hawai’i, Tromsoe, Bern, Alicante (Spain) and dozens of others on all continents. He has taught thousands of individuals and motivated them to dedicate their lives to the promotion of peace and the satisfaction of basic human needs. He has mediated in over 150 conflicts between states, nations, religions, civilizations, communities, and persons since 1957. His contributions to peace theory and practice include conceptualization of peace-building, conflict mediation, reconciliation, nonviolence, theory of structural violence, theorizing about negative vs. positive peace, peace education and peace journalism. Prof. Galtung’s unique imprint on the study of conflict and peace stems from a combination of systematic scientific inquiry and a Gandhian ethics of peaceful means and harmony. [spoiler] Johan Galtung has conducted a great deal of research in many fields and made original contributions not only to peace studies but also, among others, human rights, basic needs, development strategies, a world economy that sustains life, macro-history, theory of civilizations, federalism, globalization, theory of discourse, social pathologies, deep culture, peace and religions, social science methodology, sociology, ecology, future studies. He is author or co-author of more than 1600 articles and over 160 books on peace and related issues, including Peace By Peaceful Means (1996), Macrohistory and Macrohistorians (with Sohail Inayatullah, 1997), Conflict Transformation By Peaceful Means (1998), Johan uten land (autobiography, 2000), Transcend & Transform: An Introduction to Conflict Work (2004, in 25 languages), 50 Years – 100 Peace and Conflict Perspectives (2008), Democracy – Peace – Development (with Paul Scott, 2008), 50 Years – 25 Intellectual Landscapes Explored (2008), Globalizing God (with Graeme MacQueen, 2008), The Fall of the US Empire – And Then What (2009), Peace Business (with Jack Santa Barbara and Fred Dubee, 2009), A Theory of Conflict (2010), A Theory of Development (2010), Reporting Conflict: New Directions in Peace Journalism (with Jake Lynch and Annabel McGoldrick, 2010), Korea: The Twisting Roads to Unification (with Jae-Bong Lee, 2011), Reconciliation (with Joanna Santa Barbara and Diane Perlman, 2012), Peace Mathematics (with Dietrich Fischer, 2012), Peace Economics (2012), A Theory of Civilization (forthcoming 2013), and A Theory of Peace (forthcoming 2013). In 2008, he founded the TRANSCEND University Press. 36 of his books have been translated into 33 languages, for a total of 134 book translations. He is the weekly editorialist for TRANSCEND Media Service-TMS, which features solutions-oriented peace journalism. He is founder (in 2000) and rector of the TRANSCEND Peace University, the world’s first online Peace Studies University. He is also the founder and director of TRANSCEND International, a global non‑profit network for Peace, Development and the Environment, founded in 1993, with over 500 members in more than 70 countries around the world. As a testimony to his legacy, peace studies are now taught and researched at over 500 universities across the globe and some are contributing to peacemaking efforts in conflicts around the world wihtout buying into the securitization sell out. He was jailed in Norway for six months at age 24 as a Conscientious Objector to serving in the military, after having done 12 months of civilian service, the same time as those doing military service. He agreed to serve an extra 6 months if he could work for peace, but that was refused. In jail he wrote his first book, Gandhi’s Political Ethics, together with his mentor, Arne Naess. As a recipient of over a dozen honorary doctorates and professorships and many other distinctions, including a Right Livelihood Award (also known as Alternative Nobel Peace Prize), Johan Galtung remains committed to the study and promotion of peace. [/spoiler] Transcript Interviewer: We are speaking with the renowned founder of Peace and Conflict Studies, Dr. Johan Galtung, author of countless publications, conflict mediator, founder of Transcend International, and the Galtung Institute, consultant to governments, the UN, and so much more. I’d like to cover two central themes today. First, the fall of the US empire and its consequences, either a blossoming republic or a catastrophe as you say, and second, what global issues you consider the most pressing today and what suggestions you have to resolve these conflicts. In 1980, you successfully predicted the fall of the Soviet Union, which you said would happen in 1990. You used six indicators to do this, and then in recent years, you doubled those indicators to twelve and applied them in analyzing the fall of the other superpower, the USA. You brought up the subject in an article recently on Transcend Media, citing an essay by Nafeez Ahmed and a new Pentagon study which seemed to further confirm your findings that Empire America is approaching its final death throes. Even renowned researcher Alfred McCoy has published a book that will be out soon on the same theme. He has set 2030 as the Empire’s time marker for passing. You recently revised your prediction for the collapse, from 2025 to 2020. Is this the most important event of our time, and can you unpack the key points and implications of the empires and for us and help us understand what is about to happen? [spoiler] Johan Galtung: Well, let us first be very clear about the terms here. You see, the other person you quoted, I think he gets it wrong. An “empire” means that you have a client state that does the job for you, and when I predicted the decline and fall of the US empire, I did not predict the decline and fall of US violence. I did not predict the decline and fall of the United States of America. I predicted that we would do the killing for the United States, because the empire would collapse. Now, the situation is the following. You may have noticed that in Bratislava, November 6th last year, they had a big discussion about this in the European Union countries. What they said, again and again and again, was, “We are no longer going to fight the wars of the United States.” That was a very clear statement, and that is the kind of thing I’m looking for. However, there are some countries that are still, and still have been fighting wars of the United States, more particularly three countries. United Kingdom, Denmark, and Norway. Denmark and Norway were rewarded by the United States for fighting in Libya by being appointed Secretary General of NATO one after the other. The present one is a former Norwegian Prime Minister. Why United Kingdom, Denmark and Norway? Well you see here you have to look into history. I could say immediately, because they’re Evangelical Protestant countries like the United States, but I’m not saying that these are religious wars. I’m just saying that being Evangelical Protestants, the United States, England, with the famous Anglican Church from which very many people came to United States, Norway and Denmark, being that they have something in common, some kind of loyalty, solidarity, and the countries that refuse to fight US wars, the Catholic countries, and Orthodox countries. You see, we are not saying that this is religious. I’m only saying that old ties of solidarity play an enormous role. If I then predicted a decline and fall of the United States Empire by 2020, one might say, “We are today 2017 and we are into the month of September, so Johan Galtung, about your prediction. You said before 2020.” Yes, I stand by that one, but I think the three countries I mentioned, United Kingdom, Denmark, and Norway, will distance themselves from United States killing, and that it’s already happening, and of course it’s particularly easy to distance oneself when the president of the United States is a clinically insane person, Donald Trump. Clinically insane, suffering from throughout his autism, living in his own little bubble and deriding this so-called foreign policy from his bubble. In other words, I stand by my prediction, but it’s a little bit more complicated than the person you quoted. I think he got almost everything wrong, and I prefer to forget about it. Interviewer: In your research, you say you were inspired by analyzing the fall of the Roman Empire. Could we say that Trump is not a cause, but a symptom of the end, a degenerating face of the empirical cycle? Johan Galtung: He’s a part of it. He’s a part of it, but what is collapsing now is more than the United States empire. What is collapsing right now is the United States of America itself. But that was not my prediction. I did not predict that they would elect a clinically unsane person as president. There’s an American term for it. They call it “unleveled,” one whose mind is unleveled. Well, it’s a very polite term for it. I say “clinically insane,” autism, suffering from advanced autism, that means lack of reciprocity. Living in your own bubble and not being sensitive to what happens around you. Of course he is sensitive. He is paranoid, so he is sensitive to negative noises, and he lashes out against them. At the same time, he is very clearly narcissistic, with much too high thoughts about himself. Narcissism plus paranoia is the precise nature of the psychosis, but he’s a part of the package, and as you very well put it, he’s not a cause. He’s a symptom. Interviewer: Where do you see the US going in the next few years? Could you give us some indicators of how things might unfold or what might occur with the economy or the society? Johan Galtung: Well you see, history is a good guide. In 1898, the Spanish Empire collapsed, and the United States moved into the gaps left by the Spanish Empires. Now the US empire is collapsing and moving into the gaps left by the United States influence, particularly China, India, economically speaking. Chindia, they are often called, and there are other countries too. Islamic countries play an increasing role in very many regards. But, you can then ask the question, “What happened to Spain?” Well Spain became fascist. The fall was in 1898, [inaudible] immediately, as a dictatorship, and it lasted 70 years. Franco was the last one. He died in November ’75, and there was a short interlude of so-called Second Republic, which [inaudible] in Spanish history, so if I now should say, “Maybe this is going to happen to United States too,” in other words, we will get a dictatorship, to establish “law and order” as dictators always say, and many will argue it is already there. But it is not [inaudible] course. It is the dictator. It is more run by a combination of Pentagon and Wall Street. In other words, by top generals and top billionaires. Top actors in the Wall Street conglomerate, and how they are organized among themselves, I think would be interesting to know. I don’t know. I think very few people know it, [inaudible]. Interviewer: Looking at say Afghanistan, you said earlier that the US obviously should and perhaps would withdraw from Afghanistan. It seems they are reinforcing their commitment to stay, and attempting a classical imperial military overstretch. What can you say of the recent Afghan policy statements? Johan Galtung: Overstretch. That’s not a good analysis. How about simply understanding what Afghanistan is about? You see, in my profession as a mediator, I take direct contact with the parties concerned. I sit with generals, two-star generals from Pentagon. I sit with people high up in State Department. I sit with people in a place in Afghanistan, and in front of me are three leading Taliban. What does a mediator say? What is my question? I have a very simple question. It’s the same question all the time. What does the Afghanistan look like that you would like to live in? What does the Middle East look like? What does a marriage look like that you would like to be a party to? And so on. In other words, I just ask them to spell out their wishes, their goals, their possible future. Now it would be interesting, if anybody is listening to this in Washington are able to guess what the Taliban said. The Taliban said the following. “Eliminate the Durand Line.” Durand, D-U-R-A-N-D. “Why?” “Eliminate it immediately.” Now since I’m into history, and since this is my profession, I of course knew what that was. It was the line drawn by a British imperialist in 1893 to make a border between what was then the British Empire, today it’s called Pakistan, but part of it, and Afghanistan. That guy decided to draw a line 4,000 kilometers, 2,500 miles long, and he drew it according to some principle he was very proud of. The line cut the biggest nation in the world without a state, the Pashtun, in two parts. Now today there are 50 million, and they live, many of them I Afghanistan, many of them in Pakistan, and to them Pakistan, and to them that line is a complete crime. It cuts them in two. That line was drawn in 1893, and it is quite obvious that when I asked them “What does the Afghanistan look like that you would like to live in,” they said immediately, “Eliminate the Durand Line. Open border between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Let us move back and forth in what was our old “stan” or old where we used to live. It’s not a question for also seeking refuge in Pakistan. Pakistan, we live partly there, we live partly in Afghanistan. Let us continue with that.” And out of today’s Pakistan and Afghanistan, you might make some kind of, shall we say communicate, and if I should spin more on that, I would say “Yes. A Central Asian community, and maybe not only Pakistan and Afghanistan, maybe you would like to add Iran too, and maybe you would like to add the five other stans, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and so on. Maybe you would like to add all of that. Suddenly you have a Central Asian community of about 12 million … Excuse me. Let me be careful. 12 million people and enormous area. Excuse me, 12,000 square kilometers and I think 20 million people. Now, this is a big one, and interesting. I’m not quite sure that India or China that are neighbors would be very happy about it, but that’s their right to establish a community and to do away with the borders that were drawn by others. Many of these borders, [inaudible], are drawn by the former Soviet Union. The 1893 Durand one is what we have to eliminate. Instead of that, the United States is now building palisades high, high up in the sky and deep, deep down to prevent tunnels from being digged, and will make the situation even worse. Interviewer: Another term perhaps for what you just described could be the new Silk Road, and on the news we keep hearing about this new Cold War with the US targeting Russia and China, do you think there’s a chance for real escalation towards thermonuclear war? Is the Pentagon preparing a genuine offensive on the Eurasian heartland and the maritime rimlands of China? Do you see this escalating? Johan Galtung: Personally, I don’t think we will get that far. I don’t think it … It’s too risky for all the parties. They are in a certain sense deterring each other. The North Korean has, it seems, been able to dig 19,000 caves insides their mountains. That’s where they are hiding all their weaponry. Very many of these caves and also others, although not necessarily in the mountains, will serve as a refuge for the people. It’s not that they are not aware that they are in a dangerous position, mind you, when other states have been bombing Pyongyang to pieces before. They did that and they could do it again. It’s only that this time, North Korea is much, much better prepared. With all this highly credible, it so-calls the artillery aimed at Seoul. That artillery is also inside the mountains, and it seems that it can, if really launched, kill eight million people very quickly. Seoul knows that this is not going to happen. But Seoul is also at the same time, South Korea, really worried about United States provocations, and those provocations are partly the weapons shield that they are building to catch possible Chinese missiles, and partly the so-called Twin Spirit exercises, right off North Korea’s coast, practicing invasion of North Korea. Just right outside. That has been going on every year. It’s going on right now. And it’s an enormous provocation to North Korea. Russia and China have asked them to dampen it, to abolish it, to postpone it. But US doesn’t listen to anything. US is a unilateralist country, and the horrible thing about it is that they don’t want negotiation, because negotiation has something to do with equals, and it indicates that you respect the other or third party, so they’re taken seriously. United States is unilateralist. Exception. United States tells others what to do, and if you don’t do it you will suffer the consequences. And now they’re up against China doesn’t obey that. Russia doesn’t do it. And what must be even more vexing for them, a small country called North Korea doesn’t do it. We’re dealing with you could say 19 million inhabitants with a small country, and that country is now at the level of United States when it comes to the verbal escalation and de facto escalation, with different types of weaponry and so on. All that story we know, it’s out in the open. But I don’t think we will get a war. Sooner or later, one of them has to make some kind of move, and I don’t think it will be United States. If you want my prediction, it will be South Korea. It may also be South Korea and Japan. It may be Japan’s prime minister is ambivalent about it. On the other hand there is an alliance shoulder to shoulder as I call it with the United States of America fighting. On the other hand we know it perfectly well, where in the world Japan is located? It’s in East Asia. It is not off California. Interviewer: Ultimately, after all is said and done, would you say the way things will go is that these new Silk Road countries that you mentioned, that in a few decades that will be the center of global economy and culture and politics which may include South Korea and Japan? Johan Galtung: China will be important, but also be aware of China’s weaknesses. It’s an aging population. That’s one problem they have. Another problem is that they have a very complicated way of doing those things. I call it the both-and approach. You know, they do so many both-ands. They are both doing growth and distribution, where you will see that the West is trying to focus on both, which now it does badly, and very bad at distribution, with rising inequality. We have rising inequality in China, but you also have lifting the bottom up. Both inequality and lifting the bottom up. Now I have a long list of these both-ands for China, and may be too complicated even for the Chinese. It may also be that they’re incurring debt, because they’re focusing less on export problems and more on internal changes, very much on lifting lagging villages up. The president, Xi Jinping is very much insisting on that, and at the same time turning into a Buddhist religious position. It has escaped the rest to a large extent, but Xi is a very believing Buddhist, and that’s also escaped Western attention, by putting, however much they see him as a politician they don’t approach, is at the same time are deeply believers in Orthodox Christianity. So we have this interesting thing. Or a kind of secular pagan leadership, very much by money and by arms in Washington, where you sense nothing religious, no kind of Christian “Love your neighbor alike yourself,” and things of that kind. Nothing of that. You have nothing to waste. That works as it’s own failure often as spiritual and Christian, and at the same time you have two deeply religious leaders in the most competitive countries, China and Russia. It’s a new world, [inaudible]. A very different one. You see, when I say the US empire is going down, I have emphasized, I’m not saying that they’re stopping killing, but they have to do the killing themselves. The first who started doing that, who understood that “I had to do the killing myself,” was Obama. But Obama didn’t talk about it. He killed, and the way he killed was little bit by drones, and the Western media focused on that. Much more important was snipers. Sending shooters who could kill a person at a range of one kilometer, wearing long, long rifles, and they travel by ordinary airplanes, and the rifles are of course called “for hunting.” Well, they were hunting people that the local CIA had designated as anti-American. And they killed a lot, a lot, a lot. “We travel a lot these days,” the lieutenant general in charge of it said in a famous interview. Obama did all of that, but he didn’t talk much about it. If I then should say about Trump, he talks an enormous amount, but he hasn’t done much killing. He has done some, and we sense it in Yemen and Somalia. In the Sudan, we sense it. And there could be more, but not so much as Iran. Obama is reputed to have done the type of killing that I mentioned in 134 countries without asking any permission from the governments concerned, just sending the snipers who had long “hunting” rifles. Interviewer: We just have a minute or two left, and can you leave us with any final thoughts or any other prognostication or prediction you might have for the future world order, and any other final thought? Johan Galtung: You see, out of all of this, and you may be surprised to hear me say it, I think the world as a whole is actually moving in a quite good direction. We have, practically speaking, no wars between states. That’s already something. Wars between states were outlawed in 1928. They came up with their own treaty, but that is not maybe the major reason. I think the major reason that the states are afraid of each other, and the military don’t like to fight in other states when they can do something else. They can kill civilians. They can sit up in a plane at 14,000 feet, or as they say 4,000 meters, and they can just push a button. And they can send a rain of bombs on innocent civilians where there may be a couple of militias among them. They can do what we read about all the time, killing wedding parties. You know in the old days, if you go back in history, the condition for taking somebody’s life in a war was that you put yourself at risk. You put your own life at risk. In other words, you risk. You had courage. You entered warfare with courage, putting your own life at risk. These people sitting up at 14,000 feet are cowards. Just simply cowards. They’re killing people without the slightest chance of retaliating. They don’t have anti-aircraft missiles. They don’t have anything of that, and they’re just killing killing killing, these cowards. And they should be known as such. They shouldn’t be called even military, they should just be called cowards. Should be the technical term for it. I have contempt, disgust, for these people. How can I then nevertheless say that things are moving where it’s one country, the United States of America, and I think it’s coming to an end? I think Trump is making a caricature of the United States of America that the US itself will reject, but I don’t think the future inside the US is good. I predict a fascist dictatorship, but I don’t think we will be killing. Like the fascist dictatorship that came out of the Spanish fallen empire, we can kill anybody that we want. We can just, well, we can say there was the element of Guernica, but that was [inaudible] Spain, but by and large it was a civil war that took place by its civilians, which is a staunch oppression, and internal war. So it’s that kind of future I see for the US, and I see gradually, slowly, US democratizing again. Coming back to democracy and coming back to finding a reasonable place in the world as a part of Anglo-America in the northern part of the Americas, in dialogue with Latin America. Anglo-America versus Latin America, and Latin America reasonably united. First of all rejecting US imperialism was done by Fidel Castro when he started [inaudible]. Secondly, coming together. And that was done by Hugo Chavez, also when they started [inaudible]. US has done their very best, or worst, to try to negate what Castro and Chavez were doing. They won’t succeed, and it will be in Anglo-America’s interest simply to sit down somewhere and have a balanced, nice dialogue about the best relations between Anglo-America and Latin America. Latin America will cross into the Caribbean, which is a very complex part of the world, but it is possible, and I think one should remember that Latin America/Caribbean has 35 countries all together, 35 states. There is only one of them that can be said to be very much tied to Anglo-America, and not to US but to Canada, and that is Trinidad, Tobago. Between Trinidad and Canada there is a very close relationship. But otherwise, the relationship could be improved, and it would improve greatly if Anglo-America is willing to face Latin America together. ELAC as they call it, Estados Latinoamericanos y Caribe. Well, we are not yet quite there, but that is an optimistic vision of the future, and the United States finds its place as one state among others, a big one, an important one, a fantastically innovative one, and it plays one of its best cards, and the best card from the United States is not military, not economic, not political. It’s cultural. The United States is THE cultural power shaping the world more than any other culture. Not even the British Council has been able to spread English with an English accent. United States America does that by its pop culture, its popular culture, it’s basic English, the English of a 10 to 12 years old, according to the British English, but it has become the world dominant culture. The world dominant culture is US. And US has reason to be proud of it and say, “If you are dominating the world culture, isn’t that already quite a lot? And it might be that you yourself would benefit from trying to understand the Hindu message, the Buddhist message, the Japanese message, the Chinese messages,” and so on and so forth. Well, I think we are heading for the multipolar world, and I think we are doing it to a large extent, but United States has to be tamed or tame itself. And Israel has to be tamed or tame itself, and it looks like that is what’s happening right now, to be [inaudible]. Interviewer: Dr. Galtung, we thank you so much for your time, and we wish you the best in your continued work and your efforts at Transcend Media and at your Galtung Institute. Johan Galtung: Thank you so much indeed for the interview, and be sure, I’ll continue. Thank you. [/spoiler] *Podcast intro music is from the song “The Queens Jig” by “Musicke & Mirth” from their album “Music for Two Lyra Viols”: http://musicke-mirth.de/en/recordings.html (available on iTunes or Amazon)

Geopolitics & Empire · Liz McIntyre: How Microchip Implants and Google Threaten Our Privacy #057 Privacy consultant Liz McIntyre discusses the new trend of biometric human microchip implants by corporations and governments provided to their employees as well as citizens who volunteer for implants. She explains the threats posed by implants as well as the current surveillance malpractices by tech-giants such as Google. Show Notes You WILL Get Microchipped Eventually Websites http://www.spychips.com https://twitter.com/LizMcIntyre Books Spychips: How Major Corporations And Government Plan To Track Your Every Purchase And Watch Your Every Move About Liz McIntyre Liz McIntyre is a consumer privacy expert and co-author of a series of books about the societal implications of microchip tracking technology, including Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track your Every Purchase and Watch Your Every Move. This explosive book reveals how organizations like Procter & Gamble, Wal-Mart, Gillette, and even the U.S. Government are deploying tiny computer chips that can keep close tabs on everyday objects—and even people. McIntyre is the former Communications Director for CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering) and the master strategist for many of the organization’s most successful media campaigns. Her eye-catching headlines and compelling stories have helped to make the technical topic of radio frequency identification interesting and accessible to the general public. New York Times reporter Barnaby Feder once commented on McIntyre’s writing, saying, “I don’t usually see such entertaining metaphors outside of the baseball blogs…where I go for escape reading.” McIntyre now steps in from time to time to offer strategic advice and help create platform documents like the Position Paper on the Use of RFID in Schools. McIntyre has logged hundreds of hours as a guest expert because of her proven ability to captivate audiences and generate listener calls. She has shared her views on shows like Forbes, Allan Handelman, Thom Hartmann, Greg Allen, CBC Radio, Coast to Coast, BBC Radio, WBAI’s “Law and Disorder,” and Kiss FM’s “Open Line.” *Podcast intro music is from the song “The Queens Jig” by “Musicke & Mirth” from their album “Music for Two Lyra Viols”: http://musicke-mirth.de/en/recordings.html (available on iTunes or Amazon)

Geopolitics & Empire · John Rubino: Converging Crises Point to Global Financial Collapse #056 Author John Rubino gives a macro overview of economic indicators that point us toward a financial crash as early as 2018 or 2019 which even China won’t escape. Show Notes High-Profile Sectors Start to Roll Over Dumb And Dumber – Money Keeps Pouring In The Perfect Crash Indicator is Flashing Red Websites Dollar Collapse Books The Money Bubble: What To Do Before It Pops The Collapse of the Dollar and How To Profit From It Clean Money: Picking Winners In The Green Tech Boom About John Rubino After earning a Finance MBA from New York University, he spent the 1980s on Wall Street, as a Eurodollar trader, equity analyst and junk bond analyst. During the 1990s he was a featured columnist with TheStreet.com and a frequent contributor to Individual Investor, Online Investor, and Consumers Digest, among many other publications. He currently writes for CFA Magazine. He is the co-author, with GoldMoney’s James Turk, of The Money Bubble (DollarCollapse Press, 2014) and The Collapse of the Dollar and How to Profit From It (Doubleday, 2007), and author of Clean Money: Picking Winners in the Green-Tech Boom (Wiley, 2008), How to Profit from the Coming Real Estate Bust (Rodale, 2003) and Main Street, Not Wall Street (Morrow, 1998). *Podcast intro music is from the song “The Queens Jig” by “Musicke & Mirth” from their album “Music for Two Lyra Viols”: http://musicke-mirth.de/en/recordings.html (available on iTunes or Amazon)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHupmIlYoeY Investigative journalist Rick Sterling analyzes the Trump Administration’s recent moves in Syria and Russia and whether they serve to restore relations or sow further discord. Show Notes President Trump Confirms Covert CIA Programme in Syria PBS’ Anti-Russia Propaganda Series Websites https://twitter.com/ricksterling99 https://consortiumnews.com About Rick Sterling Rick Sterling is an investigative journalist based in northern California. He can be contacted at rsterling1@gmail.com *Podcast intro music is from the song “The Queens Jig” by “Musicke & Mirth” from their album “Music for Two Lyra Viols”: http://musicke-mirth.de/en/recordings.html (available on iTunes or Amazon)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmEOUWQ-MZU International Human Rights Lawyer Dr. Curtis F. J. Doebbler discusses the destruction of the Middle East by outside forces and how international law must be applied to resolve the precarious situation. Show Notes Why the United States’ Use of Force Against Syria Violates International Law American Hypocrisy on International Law Court asked to rule Saddam detention unconstitutional Websites http://doebbler.net https://twitter.com/cdoebbler Books http://cdpublishing.org About Dr. Curtis F. J. Doebbler Curtis F.J. Doebbler is an international human rights lawyer who since 1988 has been representing individuals before international human rights bodies in Africa, Europe, the Americas and before United Nations bodies. He is also an American lawyer authorized to practice before the courts of the District of Columbia in Washington, DC and several federal courts in the United States, including the Supreme Court of the United States. Doebbler was born in 1961 in Buffalo, New York, and has American, Palestinian, and Dutch nationality. He is known for his outspoken opposition to human rights violations by the U.S. government and his support of individuals in countries that have been subject to armed attacks by the United States. He has worked almost two decades in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East teaching international human rights law and representing individuals in human rights cases. In the case of the former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, Doebbler argued before the Iraqi Special Tribunal that the court was illegal and did not respect human rights. He has made representations before the UN Human Rights Council and at numerous side-events of the Council calling for an impartial, fair and equal application of international human rights law and an end the selective punishment of human rights violators, especially by taking steps to end the impunity of powerful countries. He has advised governments, including the Palestinian National Authority and the Hamas government. He is currently Research Professor of Law at the University of Makeni, Department of Law in Sierra Leone and a visiting professor at Webster University in Geneva. Interview Transcript G & E Podcast:   Dr. Curtis Doebbler is an international human rights lawyer who has represented governments, heads of state, and millions of refugees or displaced persons. He is also a professor who researches and teaches at a number of universities. He’s constantly traveling between the US, Europe, Africa and the Middle East. We’ve currently caught up to him at the UN in New York. It’s great to have you on the podcast Dr. Doebbler. Dr. Doebbler:     Nice to speak with you. G & E Podcast:   The Middle East has been in crisis since time and memorial, but there seems to be a renewal of tensions given the Syrian war of intervention, the Israeli/Palestine crisis, and the latest temple mount incident, the Saudi sponsored war in Yemen, and now fallout between GCC countries and Qatar due to what some say is Qatar’s pursuit of more independent policies and desire to work with Iran. For the first part of this interview, I wanted you, somebody with great authority on this subject and who has skin in the game so to speak, who’s on the ground, to give an overview of what you consider to be the main sources of chaos in the Middle East, who’s destroying the Middle East? Is it US/EU intervention, Russian meddling, Israel, Saudi Arabia, the struggle between  Wahhabism Sunni-Islam? What do you consider are the main driving forces behind the chaos and the human rights violations? Dr. Doebbler:     I think it’s probably all of those that you’ve mentioned and maybe a few more. The Middle East, as many parts of the world, but particularly perhaps the Middle East because of it’s geopolitical status over the last at least 100 years, perhaps the most complex geopolitical status of anywhere on the globe. It’s been subject to a lot of forces and I would say mainly outside forces that did not always produce good, in part because they weren’t concerned with the interest of the people in the Middle East. If you look at the countries in the Middle East that have been destroyed, Syria, one of the most advanced countries in the Middle East, Iraq, a developed country, Libya, the richest country in Africa, an impoverished continent to a large extent, but the richest country in that continent was destroyed. All of those were destroyed by actions taken or promoted mainly be people outside our countries government outside the Middle East. I think certainly there’s a very strong element of outside meddling that has not contributed to the betterment and the development of the lives of the people in the Middle East. I find that very unfortunate. This body where I’m in today, the United Nations headquarters I think has made a half hearted effort to try to address these issues. I think it’s right now in very grave danger of becoming part of the problem and the part of the problem where people will lose faith in it. If you remember, some of these problems were existing, in fact many of them, but some of the more longer standing ones were existing before the creation of the United Nations. For example, the situation in Palestine, that predates the United Nations by quite a few years. It was on the agenda of the United Nations was created and I think it’s unfortunate that it is something that has not now been resolved to date. The United Nations has put some time and energy into it, but they don’t have a lot to show for that. I think these types of situations certainly indicate that there were a lot of outside forces at work, either promising solutions, or creating problems in these areas that has not been very valuable. Having said that though, you can’t absolve the people in any country of some degree od responsibility for their own fate. Palestinians as you know are right now the biggest enemy of Palestinians is probably each other. Hamas and Fatah are fighting against each other rather than Israel. In fact, they have a Golden opportunity right now to show the injustice of what Israel is doing, but often that opportunity is handicapped by one side not wanting to show that the other side is being treated unfairly. I think that’s unfortunate. One of the more recent examples that you mentioned is the example of Qatar where the problem in Qatar, although I think it had a hand from outside, but still you can certainly not absolve the countries involved that are pressing against them. I think in my view, I am not hesitant to say in I think a very unfair way, particularly I think that’s shown mainly by the fact that one of the conditions that they want to impose on Qatar is the fact that they want to shut [inaudible 00:05:07], a media out. I can’t imagine anywhere in the world a country that’s not free or that is free that they would accept a condition that they close a media outlet, even their own state media, much less send a more independent one. That is something that the countries that are demanding that should be embarrassed of. Again, it’s an example of how Middle Eastern countries are sort of feuding with each other. G & E Podcast:   You mentioned the UN and how it seemed to be losing its legs or influence. Can you tel us a little bit more about that with the recent developments in the recent years? What’s happened at the UN and the level of enforcement it has or that it’s lost? Dr. Doebbler:     As you know, there’s been a lot of resolutions adopted, but very few of these resolutions have been implemented. At least when they don’t have a strong country like United States behind it. For example, the resolution against Iraq in August 1991 was implemented, but it was implemented more because of the will of one of the major powers than it was because of the commitment to the standard to the rule of law. I think that that’s unfortunate. I think that in fact, is one of the biggest problems that we have right now in the United Nations. The United Nations is a body, like any international organization, whose heart and soul is its mandate. The mandate of the United Nations is a charter of the United Nations. It’s not a country that has an army and political or that same type of political weight and monetary weight that a country has that it can throw around its political power. It is an international organization made up of a community of states in which the different states are technically sovereign equals, but at least have to balance different interests and where it should be able to move forward on areas of consensus. The area bar none that we have that we that we call consensus is international law, either customary international law or treaties. It has not been very successful in implementing the rules that are laid down in those treaties. The right to self determination is in the UN charter. It’s in the first article of two of the three instruments that make up the international bill of rights. Two treaties, legally binding documents signed by each over 160 countries, I should say ratified. State parties of over 160 countries of the United Nations states. Yet still we have Western Sahara where the international court of Justice of 1974 decided said that these people have the right to self determination. They’ve been giving that right. Again, that’s almost two Arab states fighting with each other, the Palestinian people that have the right to self determination, had the right even before the creation of the United Nations and have still not had that right acknowledged. I think these ongoing failures of the United Nations to ensure respect for the rule of law are eventually going to catch up with them as they do with any government or any body that cannot enforce its own internal rules. G & E Podcast:   You mentioned the right to self determination then if we could go back to Syria, what would you say to Syria and their right to making their own sovereign decisions and self determination as well as Russia’s role. Would you agree that Russia’s participation in the war in Syria has been following the rule of law, an international law because they have been invited by president Assad to participate? What can you tell us about that? Dr. Doebbler:     I think Syria is a good case to look at how the rule of law should be implemented because the rule of law provides that states should not use force against another state. It also provides, or international law I should say, the rule of international law provides that one state should not use force against another state. It also provides though that a sovereign state is responsible for the security and the public order in its country. We might not like a particular government, but that’s not really somebody outside the country’s interest to say they like or don’t like a country. That’s what none interference is all about. It’s the people in their country that decide on their government. That’s what self determination is all about. In the case of Syria, I think we’ve violated both of those provisions. That’s first of all within the country, the people have even during this war elected the president of a country that is still the president. You can argue is that was fair election, but that’s a different argument. That’s something that could be considered in the context of a sovereign country, but to provide resources to people, non state actors who use force against a sovereign government, that is clearly outside the realm of international law. Within the realm of international law, since you asked the question about the comparison, is for a state to ask for assistance from another state to help it secure its own responsibilities towards its people, including keeping public order and maintaining security in the state. In fact, if you look at what Russia has done in Syria, it’s really been more productive for the people of Syria than what the outside community has been doing before and after Russia got involved in it. It’s really the state’s decision and the people of that state’s decision to choose a government that decides then how best to protect its people and maintain public order. To ask another state to assist is possible, but when a state intervenes in the affairs of another country without being asked, we know very clearly since 1986, we’ve known that that is clearly illegal. In 1986, the international court of justice at the behest of prestigious gentleman who just passed away Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann who was then the foreign minister of Nicaragua, they brought this question to the international court of justice in relation to the United States support of Contras in El Salvador that were intervening in Nicaragua. The court unambiguously said it is illegal. These are not issues that you can have so much debate about in terms of the principles of international law that are being contravened. Again, I think that leads back to your last question that that undermines the authority of a body like the United Nations when a rule of law has been determined and interpreted in a certain way and it’s not respected. I think the United Nations should be doing more to do that. Instead, you’ve seen several of the bodies created by the United Nations looking at just criticizing the government of Syria instead of working towards a resolution that recognizes the responsibility of all sides. G & E Podcast:   What are your thoughts about how the situation in Syria will resolve? Do you see it becoming another Iraq? Do you see things winding down and the Assad government regaining control again? Dr. Doebbler:     I think, certainly I think the government … I don’t think you call it an Assad government. I call it the Syrian government. I think the Syrian people have to decide who they want their leader to be now and in the future. They’ve voted not so long ago, but they will have to do that again in not too long a time. They will have to decide. But I think what is important for us is people looking at this as part of the International community is that we respect the sovereignty of Syria. I think it would have been a very serious matter if again an outside intervention had succeeded in destroying essentially and the sovereign integrity of a country. I think Syria will make it through this. I think it’s not 100% now, but I am much more confident than a couple years ago, or even a year ago. I think that they’re moving in the right direction. They still have strong responsibilities. The government seems to recognize those. It has the responsibility to rebuild its country. It has the responsibility to give redress to people who have been injured. It has the responsibility to respect the human rights of the people in Syria. The government has never denied these responsibilities. I think that’s already a good starting point for a rebuilding process, but I hope that very soon we will start to consolidate some of the gains that have been made militarily there and turn them into political process to start rebuilding Syria. As I said, Syria was one of the leading countries in the Middle East, one of the most developed countries in the Middle East. It translated more english or other language books to Arabic than every other country in the Middle East put together. Just in terms of knowledge and education, it had a tremendous impact. Really I don’t think the Middle East and the people there deserve to lose another sovereign state like that that has had such a strong impact in building the history of the globe. G & E Podcast:   What can you say about the media and propaganda and the west? You mentioned that a lot of these things seem to be straight forward, documented and clear, yet we find in Europe and the West that they’re still toeing the same line, repeating the same lies. Still what you’re saying that still doesn’t seem to have broken through, or is it? How do you see the media involvement in all of this? Dr. Doebbler:     Although I’m an international lawyer now, I actually did my university degrees in journalism and worked for a few years as a journalist. I am very sensitive to journalistic integrity. I’m very troubled by what we see in today’s, particularly main stream media. What I think is good is the proliferation of media. Even though I don’t agree with everything people like Press TV and RTV say and Al Jazeera, I think it’s very important we have this other media having a voice there. I think that’s good. Even programs like yours are very important. I’m not at all somebody who’s against the proliferation of small media outlets. Sometimes they do the best reporting. Here at the United Nations, a little group called Inter City Press, who the reporter is Matthew Lee, is probably the best media outlet here, even though his budget is 1% of what some of the mainstream media’s budget is for covering the United Nations. I think the media is very important and we need to maintain the integrity of it to have it continue to have that importance. Otherwise, it just becomes advertising. Advertising is something that just tries to push people in a direction that the advertiser wants and not to get them to really make up their own mind. News is supposed to give people information in a society of where people participate. That’s what we’re trying to strive for. That’s what it state actually in article 25 of the international covenant of civil and political rights that every individual has a right to participate in their own government. That means they have a right to know what is happening in their government and be to be able to contribute to either by voting or by running for election, or by even campaigning for others in a knowledgeable form. When you’re not knowledgeable, when you’ve been giving things that are not true or that are biased or you’re not being told the whole story, then you participation is handicapped and you can’t participate to the extent that the right requires or that the right allows. I think that is a very dangerous thing we have right now with the media. We’ve had cases where the BBC, where american networks, CNN even, Fox news, have been caught falsifying news. That is a very serious matter when you do that. As a journalist, I’ll tell you when I was studying journalism, someone who did that would not only be immediately fired, the news outlet would be possibly closed down for doing something like that. I think that’s something that needs to be much more attention to and I don’t think there is right now. G & E Podcast:   Just to summarize again, if you could add anything else to it, you believe that a lot of foreign intervention has systemically been causing problems in the Middle East as well as problems that predate the creation of the UN, as well as you say the responsibility of the individuals in the countries and the problems they have between themselves. If you want to add anything to that, and then if you could mention what you think would be prudent measures that would be taken towards resolving some of these conflicts, you’ve mentioned the UN again and the application of international law. We know that representatives like in the US Tulsi Gabbard have proposed bills such as the stop arming terrorists act. What recommendations do you have for civil society for regional organizations or international organizations or even states themselves? Dr. Doebbler:     My recommendations as an international lawyer would probably be where I started that really we need to take more seriously the respect for the rule of international law. I don’t say that just because I’m a lawyer. I say it for the same reason I mentioned at the beginning. It forms the lowest common denominator that we have agreed on in the international community. It is something that we have already agreed on. It’s not holding people to my moral or ethical standards. It’s holding people to what they have agreed in solemn agreements to be the minimum standard that they need to coexist together peacefully. I think that’s extremely important. I think whether you’re in NGO, whether you’re in government, whether you’re an inter governmental organization whose heart and souls as I mentioned is based on international law, you need to ensure respect for the rule of law as a Sine Qua Non for being able to progress further than that. If we can’t ensure respect for the rule of international law, we’re never going to be able to achieve development to the level of the SDGs that we talked about. We’re never going to be able to live in a peaceful society. Having said that, I think we have made some progress on it. One of the things I was surprised to hear, I’m here for the high level of political form which is the form for the implementation of the SDGs, but it’s mainly just a discussion forum. There’s not really credible implementation mechanism, but I was very surprised to hear that at the opening of this when the secretary general retiarius has spoke, when the president of the Eco-socks spoke, when even Jeffrey Sax, an american academic gave a speech, none of them mentioned what I think is one of the most important instruments, a legal instrument that has the text now has been adopted by the general assembly and it will be open for signature on the 20th of September of this year when the general assembly’s next session opens. That’s a text of the nuclear weapons ban treaty which would ban nuclear weapons around the world. The nuclear weapons ban treaty is probably one of the most important steps that the United Nations has taken almost since its existence. I think it will go into force when it is open for signature, for states to start to join on the 20th of September of this year, but I was surprised to see it not mentioned by anybody during the high level political form. Even though peace was mentioned as being a condition Sine Qua Non for the accomplishment of the SDGs, no leader, including the secretary general of the United Nations who has said that peace is one of his priorities mentioned the nuclear weapons ban treaty. I think that is a example of how it is affective, the rule of law, and if it is respected because it is an instrument of international law, it could make a significant contribution to development as well as peace in the international community. I think that that will be these types of instrumentalists more so than things like the STGs which are not legally binding. The legally binding instruments will really be the litmus test of whether or not the United Nations still has relevance in today’s world. G & E Podcast:   Indeed, the nuclear treaty is very important. In fact, in a few months, I’m moving to a country that harbors the principle soviet nuclear test site. I will be living not too far from it, so it will be good to get rid of these weapons. Finally, your final thoughts or comments. Do you see a future that is a bit brighter the way things are going or darker? Dr. Doebbler:     What I do see that I think is for me a little bit hopefully is some of the young people that I’ve seen, like yourself that are trying to work for a better world. I’ve worked with a lot of older people. I work with Nelson Mandela, [inaudible 00:23:03] Ramsey Clark, Stokely Carmichael, people who are really the past generation. Now I’m becoming the past generation. I’m somewhat fortunate. As a professor, I work also with young people. I have to teach young people at universities. I’m quite optimistic about many of the young people that I’ve seen. They have … Not all of them certainly and I think unfortunately today, a lot of times it’s difficult to be able to maintain that type of optimism with all the material pressures on you just to be able to survive. Remember, I teach in one of the poorest countries in the world, Sierra Leone, but I still see even in Sierra Leone people with the willingness and the intrinsic ability, particularly young people try to change the world for the better. They understand. Not all of them have studied international law, but they understand a lot of the basic principles of international law. They understand that to have development, you need to have peace. You need to have a respect for the sovereignty of your neighbor. That is a good sign. I think a lot of them understand human rights even again, if they don’t understand them in their legal context, they understand that people want to have healthcare, want to have education, want to have enough food, clean water, sanitation. All of these are human rights. I think that makes me optimistic. I think right now I’m in the stage that you are often in a generation. It’s always said that as you get older, you get more cynical about the world. I think I’m maybe becoming a bit more cynical, but I do see the relief in that cynicism coming from the young people. I hope and I’ll try to do all I can to empower them because I think they’re sincere about trying to make this place better, not only for themselves, but for future generation. That’s one way I think, that’s how the UN was established. It was established not thinking of just the people who were living after World War II. Most of them were not going to live much longer. It was thinking about future generations and how we can keep this planet sustainable, leviable for as long as possible. It’s good to see young people thinking about that. I hope this generation will move more in that direction. My generation didn’t do such a great job, but I’m more optimistic about the next generation. G & E Podcast:   That’s a good, hopeful optimistic message to leave us with. We thank you for your time and your work. I wish you the best for your work at the UN, for your teaching, and trying to save the world. Dr. Doebbler:     Just trying to do a little bit. Thank you very much. I think your work is also tremendously important to try to cover issues that might not be covered fully in the mainstream media. Good luck with that and thank you very much. *Podcast intro music is from the song “The Queens Jig” by “Musicke & Mirth” from their album “Music for Two Lyra Viols”: http://musicke-mirth.de/en/recordings.html (available on iTunes or Amazon)

Geopolitics & Empire · Tom Secker: How the Pentagon Controls Hollywood #053 Writer Tom Secker discusses his latest book “National Security Cinema” and how the Pentagon uses Hollywood as a “gigantic engine of propaganda” and a “weapon of psychological warfare”. Show Notes Documents Expose How Hollywood Promotes War on Behalf of the Pentagon, CIA and NSA The Civilianization of Movie Scripts Websites Spy Culture Spy Culture Patreon Books National Security Cinema: The Shocking New Evidence of Government Control in Hollywood About Tom Secker Tom Secker is a private researcher who runs spyculture.com—the world’s premier online archive about government involvement in the entertainment industry. He has used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain unique government documents since 2010, which has been reported on by Russia Today, Salon, Techdirt, The Mirror, The Express and other outlets. He has authored and co-authored articles for Critical Sociology and the American Journal of Economics and Sociology and hosts the popular ClandesTime podcast. *Podcast intro music is from the song “The Queens Jig” by “Musicke & Mirth” from their album “Music for Two Lyra Viols”: http://musicke-mirth.de/en/recordings.html (available on iTunes or Amazon)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xN67XITvut4 Investigative reporter Trevor Aaronson discusses his book “Terror Factory” and how the FBI manufactures terror using 15,000 informants in order to satisfy a $3 billion budget. Show Notes http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/crime/2017/07/03/lawyers-seek-release-man-charged-16-months-ago-plotting-foiled-machine-gun-attack-milwaukee/424399001 https://www.rt.com/usa/395923-ohio-plea-terrorism-hitman Websites https://trevoraaronson.com Book “The Terror Factory: How the FBI Manufactures Terrorism” https://www.amazon.com/Trevor-Aaronson/e/B008Y3PQQ8/ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_1?qid=1499900251&sr=8-1 About Trever Aaronson Trevor Aaronson is the executive director of the Florida Center for Investigative Reporting and a contributing writer at First Look Media’s The Intercept. He is also author of The Terror Factory: Inside the FBI’s Manufactured War on Terrorism. He co-founded the Florida Center for Investigative Reporting, which has won national and regional journalism awards under his leadership. Aaronson reported and produced a one-hour documentary for Al Jazeera Media Network, “Informants,” about the FBI’s counterterrorism program. Aaronson was a 2010-11 fellow at the Investigative Reporting Program at the University of California, Berkeley. Previously, Aaronson was an investigative reporter and editor for The Commercial Appeal in Memphis, where his stories ranged from local government investigations to reporting in Asia, Africa and South America. He was also formerly a staff writer for Miami New Times and New Times Broward-Palm Beach. A two-time finalist for the Livingston Awards, Aaronson has won more than two dozen national and regional awards, including the Molly National Journalism Prize, the international Data Journalism Award and the John Jay College/Harry Frank Guggenheim Excellence in Criminal Justice Reporting Award. Aaronson has been featured on CBS This Morning, NPR’s All Things Considered, MSNBC, This American Life, C-SPAN’s Washington Journal, WNYC’s On the Media and The Leonard Lopate Show, among others. *Podcast intro music is from the song “The Queens Jig” by “Musicke & Mirth” from their album “Music for Two Lyra Viols”: http://musicke-mirth.de/en/recordings.html (available on iTunes or Amazon)

Geopolitics & Empire · Stephen Kinzer: The True Flag of American Empire #051 Award-winning journalist, academic and author Stephen Kinzer discusses his latest book The True Flag: Theodore Roosevelt, Mark Twain, and the Birth of American Empire. Show Notes https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2017/05/13/new-allies-for-new-world/xVbB3usL9CPF7vvPDliTNM/story.html https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2017/06/10/saudi-arabia-destabilizing-world/ivMeb7TWGk1fQaVjZWWKGP/story.html https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2017/05/27/foreign-policy-mixtape/3UEjCooruAmF3uHoJXQb8O/story.html Websites http://stephenkinzer.com https://twitter.com/stephenkinzer Books https://www.amazon.com/Stephen-Kinzer/e/B00455F1NC/ref=dp_byline_cont_book_1 About Stephen Kinzer Stephen Kinzer is an award-winning foreign correspondent who has covered more than 50 countries on five continents. His articles and books have led the Washington Post to place him “among the best in popular foreign policy storytelling.” Kinzer’s most recent book is “The Brothers: John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, and Their Secret World War.” The novelist John le Carré called it “a secret history, enriched and calmly retold; a shocking account of the misuse of American corporate, political and media power; a shaming reflection on the moral manners of post imperial Europe; and an essential allegory for our own times.” Kinzer’s previous book was “Reset: Iran, Turkey, and America’s Future.” “Stephen Kinzer is a journalist of a certain cheeky fearlessness and exquisite timing,” The Huffington Post said in its review. “This book is a bold exercise in reimagining the United States’ big links in the Middle East.” In 2006 Kinzer published “Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq.” It recounts the 14 times the United States has overthrown foreign governments. Kinzer seeks to explain why these interventions were carried out and what their long-term effects have been. He is also the author of “All the Shah’s Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror.” It tells how the CIA overthrew Iran’s nationalist government in 1953. Kinzer spent more than 20 years working for the New York Times, most of it as a foreign correspondent. His foreign postings placed him at the center of historic events and, at times, in the line of fire. While covering world events, he has been shot at, jailed, beaten by police, tear-gassed and bombed from the air. From 1983 to 1989, Kinzer was the Times bureau chief in Nicaragua. In that post he covered war and upheaval in Central America. He also wrote two books about the region. One of them, co-authored with Stephen Schlesinger, is “Bitter Fruit: The Untold Story of the American Coup in Guatemala.” The other one, “Blood of Brothers: Life and War in Nicaragua,” is a social and political portrait that The New Yorker called “impressive for the refinement of its writing and also the breadth of its subject matter.” In 1988 Columbia University awarded Kinzer its Maria Moors Cabot prize for outstanding coverage of Latin America. From 1990 to 1996 Kinzer was posted in Germany. From his post as chief of the New York Times bureau in Berlin, he covered the emergence of post-Communist Europe, including wars in the former Yugoslavia. In 1996 Kinzer was named chief of the newly opened New York Times bureau in Istanbul, Turkey. He spent four years there, traveling widely in Turkey and in the new nations of Central Asia and the Caucasus. After completing this assignment, Kinzer published “Crescent and Star: Turkey Between Two Worlds.” He has also worked in Africa, and written “A Thousand Hills: Rwanda’s Rebirth and the Man Who Dreamed It.” Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa called this book “a fascinating account of a near-miracle unfolding before our very eyes.” Before joining the New York Times, Kinzer was Latin America correspondent for the Boston Globe. He is now a visiting fellow at the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University, where he teaches international relations. He contributes to The Guardian and the New York Review of Books, and writes a world affairs column for The Boston Globe. In 2009, Dominican University in River Forest, Illinois, awarded Kinzer an honorary doctorate. The citation said that “those of us who have had the pleasure of hearing his lectures or talking to him informally will probably never see the world in the same way again.” The University of Scranton awarded Kinzer an honorary doctorate in 2010. “Where there has been turmoil in the world and history has shifted, Stephen Kinzer has been there,” the citation said. “Neither bullets, bombs nor beating could dull his sharp determination to bring injustice and strife to light.” *Podcast intro music is from the song “The Queens Jig” by “Musicke & Mirth” from their album “Music for Two Lyra Viols”: http://musicke-mirth.de/en/recordings.html (available on iTunes or Amazon)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Goyu9Ro3dpg Russian physicist-engineer and nuclear expert Oleg Bodrov discusses the Russian nuclear-industrial-complex and how nuclear energy and nuclear weapons threaten humanity. Show Notes http://www.nuclear-free-future.com/en/laureates/laureates/oleg-bodrov https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/628592/Chaos-Russians-flee-Chernobyl-style-plant-radioactive-leak https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fki5fi8CTYA Websites http://www.greenworld.org.ru/?q=ang_news About Oleg Bodrov Oleg Viktorovich Bodrov studied engineering and physics at the Leningrad Polytechnic Institute. Following his studies, he became a researcher testing nuclear submarine reactor units at the Alexandrov Scientific Institute. On the night of June 20, 1979, an explosion occurred inside the institute’s nuclear submarine test tank, killing two workers. While analyzing the accident, Oleg learned of other whitewashed serious mishaps, including the nuclear meltdown of a submarine reactor some five years before – an accident turned state secret. Oleg tells us: “That is when I understood I need to use my knowledge not for military research, but to protect nature from the nuclear industry.” Together with 1999 Nuclear-Free Future Award laureate Lydia Popova, Oleg is a founding member and, since Lydia’s passing, chairperson of the GREEN WORLD Council. From 1998 to 2003, Bodrov was the moving spirit behind the Clean Baltic Coalition. In 2004, nominated by the environmental community, Oleg was named Russia’s “Green Person of the Year.” Since 2006, Bodrov has published a number of manuscripts and produced four documentary films on the technical and social aspects of decommissioning nuclear power plants, labors that have not only reshaped thinking at RosAtom (the State Corporation for Nuclear Energy in Russia), but sparked interest internationally among government authorities and concerned citizens beset by the same problem: what to do when the reactor’s time has come? Bodrov has traveled with his PowerPoint presentations to Lithuania, Belarus, Germany, England, and the USA. Our laureate describes his role in the push for a nuclear-free world as that of a “philosopher-organizer.” *Podcast intro music is from the song “The Queens Jig” by “Musicke & Mirth” from their album “Music for Two Lyra Viols”: http://musicke-mirth.de/en/recordings.html (available on iTunes or Amazon)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHBLcpNjcHc Activist and author David Swanson discusses the New Cold War from the frontlines in Russia while on a citizen diplomacy peace mission with the Center for Citizen Initiatives. Show Notes http://davidswanson.org/why-you-should-visit-russia http://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-looks-east-capitalism-with-a-strong-state-sector-observations-and-impressions-from-russia/5592762 Websites http://davidswanson.org http://worldbeyondwar.org https://twitter.com/davidcnswanson https://twitter.com/WorldBeyondWar Books https://www.amazon.com/David-Swanson/e/B002DBLH6U/ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_1?qid=1496421232&sr=8-1 About David Swanson David Swanson is an author, activist, journalist, and radio host. He is director of WorldBeyondWar.org and campaign coordinator for RootsAction.org. Swanson’s books include War Is A Lie and When the World Outlawed War. He blogs at DavidSwanson.org and WarIsACrime.org. He hosts Talk Nation Radio. He is a 2015, 2016, 2017 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee. *Podcast intro music is from the song “The Queens Jig” by “Musicke & Mirth” from their album “Music for Two Lyra Viols”: http://musicke-mirth.de/en/recordings.html (available on iTunes or Amazon)