Миру мир

[tijd]

Когда по Fox News в конце прошлого года показывали результаты опроса немцев, которые называли Трампа главной угрозой мира во всем мире, это могло выглядеть странно.

Germans were asked who was more dangerous: North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un, Chinese President Xi Jinping, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Russian President Vladimir Putin or US President Donald Trump.
Some 41% of Germans said they thought Trump was the most dangerous out of the five world leaders.
In second place was Kim with 17%, followed by Putin and Khamenei with 8%. Coming in last was China's Xi with 7%.
Over 2,000 people in Germany took part in the survey, which was commissioned by news agency dpa.
https://www.dw.com/en/germans-think-trump-is-more-dangerous-than-kim-jong-un-and-putin/a-51802332

Но с точки зрения идеологии трампизма в этом была своя логика. “World peace” в этой идеологии воспринимается не положительно, а отрицательно - как символ победы глобализма и прихода Антихриста.



В книжке с названием “Global Peace and the Rise of Antichrist: Communism, Ecumenism and the New World Order” (1990) евангелический проповедник Дэвид Хант предупреждал об опасности наступления мира после краха коммунизма и таким образом прихода Антихриста и страшного Нового Мирового Порядка.

О влиятельности Ханта говорит отзыв Тима Лахайя, патриарха христианского фундаментализма, на его другую книжку: “This book could well be the most important book written in the twenty-first century for all evangelical Christians to read.”



Поскольку демократические страны не воюют друг с другом, а мир во всем мире является злом, то уцелевшие диктаторы и диктатуры представляются добром, потому что служат занозой в планах коварных глобалистов. В глазах идеологов с подобными взглядами дружба Трампа с диктаторами разных стран не вызывает совершенно никаких нареканий, потому что представляется благом.

У подобных взглядов есть исторические прецеденты. Один из идеологов американского нацизма Фрэнсис Паркер Йоки был также пионером «краснокоричневого» сотрудничества. Йоки попал в руки ФБР случайным образом в 1960 - во время самолетного перелёта его багаж по ошибке попал в другой аэропорт, и при вскрытии там обнаружилось несколько поддельных паспортов. В предварительном заключении в тюрьме Сан Франциско Йоки впал в паранойю и покончил с собой. Его книга “Imperium” продолжает вдохновлять нацистов.

US Intelligence began tailing Yockey while he was residing in Germany back in 1946-’47. Incredibly, he had earlier been hired as a review attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials, where he worked surreptitiously to help some of the very Nazi war criminals he had been hired to prosecute.
In 1947, Yockey wrote Imperium, a 600-page book often described as “a modern-day Mein Kampf for neo-Nazis.” The book called for a “Resurgence of Faith and Authority” and declared fascism to be “the Spirit of the Age,” an amazingly wrongheaded reading of the world’s mood after the end of the war (Yockey had been declared delusional by the US Army and discharged in 1943).
Imperium is explicitly anti-American, expressing its author’s contempt for the United States as an irrelevant, mongrelized colony of Europe, with no future in what the author calls the coming “Age of Absolute Politics.” The United States, according to Yockey, was hopeless because it lacked what he called a “Culture-Bearing Stratum.” Remarkably, Imperium continues to attract readers and admirers on the American far-right to this day; since first being reprinted back in the early 1960s (by Noontide Press of California), it has never gone out of print.
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-fascist-and-the-preacher-gerald-l-k-smith-and-francis-parker-yockey-in-cold-war-era-los-angeles/

Yockey’s Imperium envisaged a revitalized Western civilization that would encompass a Europe extending deep into Russia and also a White hegemonic America. Consistent with this theme, Yockey wrote the book under the nom de guerre “Ulick Varange” - an Irish first name and a Russian surname. The implication was that the Imperium Yockey envisaged would extend from Ireland to the vast expanses of Russia. To Yockey, race was more of a collective cultural character of a society rather than a strict biological category.
In Yockey’s worldview, Jews were implicated as the primary culprits in the decline of Western civilization. Not unlike previous anti-Semitic narratives, Yockey submitted that Jews excelled mainly in parasitism and were incapable of creating a civilization on their own, characterizing them as “culture distorters.” Hitler’s Third Reich was heralded as the “European Imperium,” which defended the West against both Bolshevism on the one hand and a Jewish-directed United States on the other.19 His pessimism notwithstanding, Yockey held out hope that the Russian barbarians could one day be integrated into the West and, in doing so, extend the Imperium to the Ural Mountains.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09546553.2018.1555996

Click to view

В 1947-1949 Чехословакия оказывали помощь Израилю поставками оружия во время войны за независимость
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_shipments_from_Czechoslovakia_to_Israel_1947%E2%80%9349

Им на смену пришла антисемитская чистка в руководстве чешской компартии, осуществлённая по приказу Сталина в рамках борьбы с «космополитизмом».

Slánský, who spent much of the second world war exiled in Moscow, was put on trial along with 13 other high-ranking communists in November 1952, accused of “Titoism” and Zionism. The charges were fuelled by Stalin’s wish to purge eastern European communist parties after the Soviet Union’s break with the Yugoslav regime of Josip Broz Tito and his anger that Israel, born four years earlier, had not become a communist state.
The trial had antisemitic overtones, with Slánský and 10 of the other defendants being Jewish. Slánský is believed to have been tortured into a convoluted, rehearsed confession, which he made in court before requesting to be punished with the death penalty.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/08/rudolf-slansky-czechoslovakia-show-trial

Обвинительное заключение, изготовленное сталинскими следователями на основе выбитых под пытками показаний, представляло собой советскую редакцию «Протоколов сионских мудрецов»:
- правительство Израиля, установив уже в 1948 г. через своих официальных представителей в столице Чехословакии конспиративные преступные связи с Р. Сланским и другими обвиняемыми, якобы систематически вмешивалось во внутренние дела Чехословакии, добивалось выгодных для себя и грабительских для Чехословакии торговых соглашений;
- организовало тайный, противоречащий национальным интересам вывоз из страны оружия для израильской армии,
- экономически ослабляло Чехословакию посредством незаконной массовой эмиграции в Израиль евреев, вывозивших из страны преступными путями огромные материальные и культурные ценности, и т. д.
Состоявшийся в Праге 20-27 ноября 1952 г. суд признал всех 14 привлеченных по этому делу лиц виновными в совершении инкриминируемых им преступлений (государственная измена, выдача военных тайн, подрывная деятельность, экономический саботаж и вредительство, покушения на жизнь партийных и государственных вождей и т. п.), 11 из них приговорил к смертной казни, а троих к пожизненному тюремному заключению.
Приговоренных повесили 3 декабря 1952 года, тела их сожгли, пепел развеяли по ветру. Лишили гражданства, конфисковали имущество.
http://z.berkovich-zametki.com/2018-znomer8-9-shulman/

Став свидетелем показных антисемитских процессов в Праге в 1952, Йоки понял, что Сталин - не противник, а союзник в борьбе со всемирным еврейским заговором.

In an essay that would appear in his Frontfighter newsletter and titled “What Is Behind the Hanging of the Eleven Jews in Prague?” Yockey announced that “the Prague Trials have gone off with an explosive roar to waken this European fascist elite to active resistance against the death plans being hatched for European Culture in Washington by American Jewry.” Urging that neo-Nazis play the Russian card, Yockey wrote, “by thus playing off Russia against the leadership of American Jewry, Europe can bring about its own liberation from the perils of Jewish Democracy imposed by American bayonets.”
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-fascist-and-the-preacher-gerald-l-k-smith-and-francis-parker-yockey-in-cold-war-era-los-angeles/



По иронии истории в 1951 Йоки по заказу написал речь для сенатора Маккарти - в защиту маккартизма и с нападками на внешнюю политику Трумэна, включая ООН, госсекретарей Маршалла и Ачесона, а также увольнение генерала Маккартура во время корейской войны.

"They have invented a word, McCarthyism. A clever trick, they thought. The idea was to make everybody think that I am something unique, some sort of wild individualist, somebody all alone. Their trick has not worked. I give it the lie right now. There is no such thing as McCarthyism-what they mean is Americanism.
When I give voice to an idea which is not in accord with the entire spirit of America and its history, an idea which is not in furtherance of America’s destiny, of America’s power, prestige, and honor in the world-then, but not until then, will there be such a thing as McCarthyism. Up until that time-no matter what America’s internal enemies chatter about, your enemies and mine-I shall speak only in the American spirit. <...>
I summon you, not to a Korea-type war in which to seek, and find defeat, but to a war for victory. This, our immediate war is not far beyond our shores, it is here, in our own land, against the inner enemy. How can we conscientiously ask an American soldier to fight a foreign enemy under the command of the Truman-Acheson regime which has been guilty of such monstrous conduct, whose members have been pro-Russian all of their lives, a regime which cannot possibly be trusted to lead a war against Communism, honeycombed with Communist sympathizers and agents as it is?
It is not a part of the divine plan that a great superpersonal force working for order and creativeness in the world, like the Western Civilization, is to be overcome by an onslaught of barbarians against an America weakened by corruption and betrayed by a horde of achesons.
The inner enemy, like the Red Chinese Armies in Korea, has not earned any of his victories. They have been presented to him by the marshalls and achesons. But America is coming back. We shall pull ourselves and our nation out of this swamp of treason, corruption, and disgust.
We shall liberate our land from the domination of traitors, and then, by the help of the Almighty God, we shall restore the word America to its old meaning in the world before all nations.
By the deluge of our votes, by the irresistible storm of our organized protest, we shall sweep America clear of its inner enemies and onward to its God-given Destiny."
https://www.counter-currents.com/2013/09/americas-two-ways-of-waging-war/

Шла подготовка к президентским выборам 1952. Для республиканцев, отстраненных от вершины власти на 20 лет, все стояло на кону. На республиканских праймериз большинство голосов набирал сенатор из Огайо Роберт Тафт, сторонник "America First" и противник вступления США в НАТО. Однако руководство партии опасалось риска на основных выборах и умелыми маневрам сумело пропихнуть номинацию умеренного Эйзенхауэра.

Most historians now believe that Eisenhower's nomination was primarily due to the feeling that he was a "sure winner" against the Democrats; most of the delegates were conservatives who would probably have supported Taft if they felt he could have won the general election.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1952_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries

I just visited the Yad Vashem Holocaust Remembrance Center in Jerusalem, and saw this 1939 letter from Senator Robert Taft on why he was voting against admitting Jewish refugees to the US. Please read it and think about how little has changed. pic.twitter.com/KU1PudPHi0
- Tom Malinowski (@Malinowski) August 6, 2019
Тафт умер от рака в 1953, успев поработать главой республиканского большинства в Сенате. Между тем Маккарти продолжал набирать популярность и критиковать Эйзенхауэра, но в итоге надорвался.

Eisenhower versus McCarthy looked in its moment to be “one of the great constitutional crises of our history,” in Lippmann’s words. Perhaps. But more practically, it was a war within the Republican Party, and the battle was as much cultural as ideological. McCarthy wasn’t appreciably more or less anti-Communist than many others, Republicans or Democrats. He had no program to speak of and little interest in economics or in exploiting racial and religious fears. His enemy was what would soon be called the establishment-the policy elite in Beltway institutions. He attacked the CIA, the State Department, and overseas enterprises like the Voice of America.
His genius was for disruption. He was one of those “men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs,” who, as James Madison warned in the Federalist Papers, “may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests, of the people.” What finished McCarthy was his rash decision to resume his attack on the executive branch with a popular Republican in office. Had Eisenhower not been so well liked, a national hero, McCarthy might have won. Demagogues sometimes do.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/who-stopped-mccarthy/517782/

Именно обида на предательство республиканской партией Тафта и Маккарти привела к созданию John Birch Society и появлению параноидально-конспирологического крыла на правом фланге американской политики, которое в итоге привело к триумфу Трампа.

D. J. Mulloy, in “The World of the John Birch Society,” published in 2014, shows how Welch’s anti-New Deal views, ordinary enough in a businessman, contained an “embryonic” radicalism that expanded during the early years of the Cold War. He describes Welch’s “belief that both his great political heroes, Robert Taft and Joseph McCarthy, had been ‘betrayed’ at crucial points in their careers by the Republican political establishment”-an entity that remains a given to both far-right Republicans and mainstream journalists. It has no clear counterpart in the Democratic Party, which even in periods of insurgency (Eugene McCarthy’s candidacy, say, or George McGovern’s) is rarely imagined to be operating by directives whispered from on high. Taft’s defeat by the Eisenhower vanguard at the 1952 Convention was especially embittering to Welch, “providing one of the principal launching pads for his career in conspiracism,” according to Mulloy. Two years later, in “The Life of John Birch,” Welch argued that “suppression” of the truth about Birch’s killing was “a minor chore” for the Communist conspiracy within the American government.
For a full understanding of that conspiracy, Welch directed his readers to “go back further”: past urgings by Dean Acheson and Henry Morgenthau, in 1933, that the U.S. recognize the U.S.S.R.; past the prior radicalization of American labor unions; even past the social-welfare experimentation of Bismarck’s Germany, which resulted in more “minute controls over the lives of its subjects than had been seen since the time of Constantine.” As the years went on, Welch became lengthily fixated on the Illuminati of the eighteenth century. But, in 1954, the immediate aim of his lives-of-the-saints prose (“love for his parents that amounted almost to reverence . . . his deep and glowing affection for his brothers and sisters”) was to make John Birch into the first Bircher. The conditional-perfect tense provided much help: “he would never have been willing to accept peace, even for a short time, when purchased by a tolerance of such evils as he would soon have seen the Communists spreading across China and the world.”
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/11/a-view-from-the-fringe



Хотя план Маршалла закончился вместе с Трумэном, Эйзенхауэр во многом продолжил международную политику своего предшественника - активным участием в НАТО и других международных организациях. Он также вошел в историю борьбой с военно-промышленным комплексом.

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."
https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=90&page=transcript

Разъясняя свою политику на Ближнем Востоке в докладе Конгрессу в 1957, Эйзенхауэр подчеркивал, что у СССР нет никаких экономических интересов в регионе, а есть только политические, и что США должны быть готовы военным вмешательством защитить независимость стран региона, поскольку есть опасность, что ООН не сможет справиться с этой задачей - как в случае советского вторжения в Венгрию в 1956.

"The Soviet Union has nothing whatsoever to fear from the United States in the Middle East, or anywhere else in the world, so long as its rulers do not themselves first resort to aggression.
That statement I make solemnly and emphatically.
Neither does Russia's desire to dominate the Middle East spring from its own economic interest in the area. Russia does not appreciably use or depend upon the Suez Canal. In 1955 Soviet traffic through the Canal represented only about three fourths of 1% of the total. The Soviets have no need for, and could provide no market for, the petroleum resources which constitute the principal natural wealth of the area. Indeed, the Soviet Union is a substantial exporter of petroleum products.
The reason for Russia's interest in the Middle East is solely that of power politics. Considering her announced purpose of Communizing the world, it is easy to understand her hope of dominating the Middle East.
This region has always been the crossroads of the continents of the Eastern Hemisphere. The Suez Canal enables the nations of Asia and Europe to carry on the commerce that is essential if these countries are to maintain well-rounded and prosperous economies. The Middle East provides a gateway between Eurasia and Africa.
It contains about two thirds of the presently known oil deposits of the world and it normally supplies the petroleum needs of many nations of Europe, Asia and Africa. The nations of Europe are peculiarly dependent upon this supply, and this dependency relates to transportation as well as to production! <...>
Our thoughts naturally turn to the United Nations as a protector of small nations. Its charter gives it primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Our country has given the United Nations its full support in relation to the hostilities in Hungary and in Egypt. The United Nations was able to bring about a cease-fire and withdrawal of hostile forces from Egypt because it was dealing with governments and peoples who had a decent respect for the opinions of mankind as reflected in the United Nations General Assembly. But in the case of Hungary, the situation was different. The Soviet Union vetoed action by the Security Council to require the withdrawal of Soviet armed forces from Hungary. And it has shown callous indifference to the recommendations, even the censure, of the General Assembly. The United Nations can always be helpful, but it cannot be a wholly dependable protector of freedom when the ambitions of the Soviet Union are involved. <...>
The policy which I outline involves certain burdens and indeed risks for the United States. Those who covet the area will not like what is proposed. Already, they are grossly distorting our purpose. However, before this Americans have seen our nation's vital interests and human freedom in jeopardy, and their fortitude and resolution have been equal to the crisis, regardless of hostile distortion of our words, motives and actions.
Indeed, the sacrifices of the American people in the cause of freedom have, even since the close-of World War II, been measured in many billions of dollars and in thousands of the precious lives of our youth. These sacrifices, by which great areas of the world have been preserved to freedom, must not be thrown away.
In those momentous periods of the past, the President and the Congress have united, without partisanship, to serve the vital interests of the United States and of the free world.
The occasion has come for us to manifest again our national unity in support of freedom and to show our deep respect for the rights and independence of every nation--however great, however small. We seek not violence, but peace. To this purpose we must now devote our energies, our determination, ourselves."
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/special-message-the-congress-the-situation-the-middle-east

Доктрина Эйзенхауэра была проверена во время ливанского кризиса 1958, когда американская военная интервенция спасла независимость Ливана от агрессии со стороны ОАР (Египта и Сирии) и тем самым приостановила домино арабских стран, которые поочередно падали под советское влияние.



Как анти-Эйзенхауэр, Трамп совершает нечто противоположное. История поставок оружия Саудовской Аравии для агрессии в Йемене наглядно демонстрирует как сознательный отказ от контроля над ВПК, так и полную потерю принципиальности во внешней политике. Трамп дважды накладывал вето на межпартийные решения Конгресса прекратить эти поставки.

President Trump vetoed a series of bipartisan measures on Wednesday that would have blocked the sale of billions of dollars of arms to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Lawmakers from both parties sent an angry joint message to Mr. Trump last month, saying that he could not go around Congress in his bid to help Persian Gulf allies prosecute their war in Yemen.
But in a veto message, Mr. Trump said blocking the arms sales “would weaken America’s global competitiveness and damage the important relationships we share with our allies and partners.”
Mr. Trump’s veto - the third of his presidency and the second turning back congressional action condemning his administration’s relationship with Saudi Arabia - had been expected. And although the resolutions passed with bipartisan majorities in both houses, lawmakers do not expect to have enough votes to override it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/us/politics/trump-veto-arms-saudi-arabia.html

Трамп также назначил главного лоббиста оборонной фирмы Raytheon министром обороны, а экономического прометея Питера Наварро превратил в лоббиста ВПК.

Mr. Trump’s embrace of arms sales has helped prolong a conflict that has killed more than 100,000 people in the Arab world’s poorest nation, further destabilizing an already volatile region, according to a review of thousands of pages of records and interviews with more than 50 people with knowledge of the policy or who participated in the decision-making.
American arms makers who sell to the Saudis say they are accountable to shareholders and are doing nothing wrong. And because weapon sales to foreign militaries must be approved by the State Department, the companies say they don’t make policy, only follow it.
But as the situation in Yemen worsened, at least one firm, Raytheon Company, did more than wait for decisions by American officials. It went to great lengths to influence them, even after members of Congress tried to upend sales to Saudi Arabia on humanitarian grounds.
Raytheon, a major supplier of weapons to the Saudis, including some implicated by human rights groups in the deaths of Yemeni civilians, has long viewed the kingdom as one of its most important foreign customers.
After the Yemen war began in 2015 and the Obama administration made a hasty decision to back the Saudis, Raytheon booked more than $3 billion in new bomb sales, according to an analysis of available U.S. government records.
Intent on pushing the deals through, Raytheon followed the industry playbook: It took advantage of federal loopholes by sending former State Department officials, who were not required to be registered as lobbyists, to press their former colleagues to approve the sales.
And though the company was already embedded in Washington - its chief lobbyist, Mark Esper, would become Army secretary and then defense secretary under Mr. Trump - Raytheon executives sought even closer ties.
They assiduously courted Mr. Navarro, who intervened with White House officials on Raytheon’s behalf and successfully pressured the State Department, diminished under Mr. Trump, to process the most contentious deals.
They also enlisted the help of David J. Urban, a lobbyist whose close ties to Mr. Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo go back to the 1980s, when all three men were at West Point.
As the nation turned against the war, a range of American officials - Democratic and Republican - tried three times to halt the killing by blocking arms sales to the Saudis. Their efforts were undone by the White House, largely at the urging of Raytheon.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/16/us/arms-deals-raytheon-yemen.html

Click to view

Единственный раз, когда Трамп пригрозил Саудовской Аравии приостановить военную помощь, он делал это, по всей видимости, по просьбе Путина.

As the United States pressed Saudi Arabia to end its oil price war with Russia, President Donald Trump gave Saudi leaders an ultimatum.
In an April 2 phone call, Trump told Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman that unless the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) started cutting oil production, he would be powerless to stop lawmakers from passing legislation to withdraw U.S. troops from the kingdom, four sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.
The threat to upend a 75-year strategic alliance, which has not been previously reported, was central to the U.S. pressure campaign that led to a landmark global deal to slash oil supply as demand collapsed in the coronavirus pandemic - scoring a diplomatic victory for the White House.
Trump delivered the message to the crown prince 10 days before the announcement of production cuts. The kingdom’s de facto leader was so taken aback by the threat that he ordered his aides out of the room so he could continue the discussion in private, according to a U.S. source who was briefed on the discussion by senior administration officials. <...>
Reuters asked Trump about the talks in an interview Wednesday evening at the White House, at which the president addressed a range of topics involving the pandemic. Asked if he told the crown prince that the U.S. might pull forces out of Saudi Arabia, Trump said, “I didn’t have to tell him.”
“I thought he and President Putin, Vladimir Putin, were very reasonable,” Trump said. “They knew they had a problem, and then this happened.”
Asked what he told the Crown Prince Mohammed, Trump said: “They were having a hard time making a deal. And I met telephonically with him, and we were able to reach a deal” for production cuts, Trump said. <...>
Trump’s oil diplomacy came in a whirlwind of calls with Saudi King Salman, Crown Prince Mohammed and Russian President Vladimir Putin starting in mid-March. The Kremlin confirmed Putin’s conversation with Trump and said they discussed both oil supply cuts and the coronavirus pandemic.
On the April 2 call with Prince Mohammed, Trump told the Saudi ruler he was going to “cut them off” the next time Congress pushed a proposal to end Washington’s defense of the kingdom, according the source with knowledge of the call. Trump also publicly threatened in early April to impose tariffs on oil imports from Saudi Arabia and Russia.
After the conversation with the Saudi crown prince, and another the same day with Putin, Trump tweeted that he expected Saudi Arabia and Russia to cut output by about 10 million barrels, which “will be GREAT for the oil & gas industry!”
Riyadh and Moscow later confirmed they had restarted negotiations.
https://www.reuters.com/article/global-oil-trump-saudi/special-report-trump-told-saudis-cut-oil-supply-or-lose-u-s-military-support-sources-idUSL1N2CH29V