Monday, 4 April 2016

The Empire Strikes Back: BRICS under attack

SA president Jacob Zuma facing impeachment, future of Mandela’s party in doubt

South African president and ANC leader Jacob Zuma © Siphiwe Sibeko
South African president and ANC leader Jacob Zuma © Siphiwe Sibeko / Reuters

2 April, 2016

Embattled South African President Jacob Zuma could be nearing the end of his long political career, after a former Robben Island prison mate of Nelson Mandela called for his resignation Saturday following a damning Supreme Court ruling this week.

The move could potentially end the influence of the ruling African National Congress (ANC), which came into power when Mandela was elected president in 1994.

Zuma took to the national airwaves on Friday to apologize for the "frustration" caused after it emerged he had spent $23m (£15m) of public money renovating his home, which he now must pay back.

Wake up ANC and realize what damage this man is doing to your party and country, time for consequences

Mandela served 1 term & exited gracefully. Mbeki and Zuma will be remembered for wanting to stay on thereby ripping the party apart.

Zuma said he had "never knowingly and deliberately set out to violate the constitution" and that "any action that has been found not to be in keeping with the constitution happened because of a different approach and different legal advice.”

The apology came after the Constitutional Court ruled the 72-year-old "failed to uphold, defend, and respect the constitution as the supreme law of the and.”

Many hoped Zuma would announce his resignation during his live address, but this Nixonian moment never materialized, much to the anger of the Democratic Alliance (DA), the main opposition party.

He’s also lost support within his party from those who believe he has trampled on Mandela’s legacy.

Ahmed “Kathy” Kathrada, who served 18 years of a life sentence alongside Nelson Mandela in the notorious island prison, wrote a letter to Zuma on Saturday, which read, “in the face of such persistently widespread criticism, condemnation and demand, is it asking too much to express the hope that you will choose the correct way that is gaining momentum, to consider stepping down?”

letter calling on to step down is deeply moving; "I am just a rank-and-file member of my ANC branch"

Why is it even necessary for someone who has suffered so much still to be fighting for SA at 86?

Referencing Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), the armed wing of ANC co-founded by Mandela, he added, "To paraphrase the famous MK slogan of the time, there comes a time in the life of every nation when it must choose to submit or fight. Today I appeal to our president to submit to the will of the people and resign," added Kathrada.

It is clear too that the ANC cannot be relied upon to do the right thing,” said DA party leader Mmusi Maimane on Friday.“They have blindly and shamefully protected him from the consequences of his corruption. How far has President Zuma and the ANC of today strayed from the path set by Nelson Mandela?”

As a SAfrican, the Statement by Zuma & ANC insults us. This is no longer NMandela's party, it's departed from constitution.
Jacob Zuma is the cancer at the heart of South African politics,” wrote Maimane. “He is not capable of honorable conduct, and cannot continue to be president of our country. Zuma will not change. The ANC will not change,” he added.

Absolutely pathetic. All of you.
In a series of tweets on Saturday, Maimane said his party, in cooperation with the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) party, are proposing impeachment of the president as “Zuma and the Constitution cannot co-exist.”

Tuesday, Motion to will be debated in the National Assembly. The ANC and Zuma are the same: both disregard the Constitution.
The ANC, which has been the ruling party of post-apartheid South Africa, has faced an increasing number of accusations of corruption since Zuma took office in 2009, with the DA saying in March that the party had “degenerated into a crony network that has long forgotten the people of this country.”

Brazilian Democracy Thrown to the Dogs
Pepe Escobar

31 March, 2016

It took only 3 minutes for a bunch of lowly crooks – more known for excelling in corruption than competent administration – to (literally) throw young but vibrant Brazilian democracy to the dogs.

With no votes counted, so traitors would not be publicly identified, the centrist Brazilian Democratic Movement Party (Partido do Movimento Democrático Brasileiro or PMDB) in Brazil abandoned the coalition that supports President Dilma Rousseff in power in Brasilia, thus increasing the chances of a – Kafkaesque – impeachment drive against Rousseff being approved in April.

The PMDB is Brazil’s largest party – accounting for 69 out of 513 members of Parliament. In the short term, the party will be contributing for one of its own, current vice-president Michel Temer, 75, a not exactly brilliant constitutionalist lawyer, to ascend to the presidency until the next elections in 2018, thus fulfilling the white coup/regime change scenario dreamed about by the proponents of Hybrid War in Brazil and their lowly vassals.

The Brazilian Constitution allows for impeachment; but in Rousseff’s case, no undisputable «crime of responsibility» has been proven. The alleged accusations – centered on embezzling of public debt and fiscal mismanagement – are essentially bogus.

It gets worse; this undisguised white coup/regime change process will run in parallel to a dirty deal preventing the leader of the lower house in Brasilia, notorious crook Eduardo Cunha, from being thrown out of office for corruption. Cunha would simply «resign» – under the assumption that the new Temer administration would need to articulate a new majority in Parliament.

A jury of crooks

This new phase in Brazil’s massive, ongoing politico-economic crisis now privileges the right-wing opposition, bolstered by the PMDB gang, all geared up to snatch the necessary two-thirds majority (342 votes) to bring the accusations against Rousseff to the Senate.

What should be expected is a massive PSYOP for the next few weeks, where the vicious politico/mainstream media/old comprador elite combo will impose the perception on the majority of the population that the jig is up. Well, the jig is not up, because those 342 votes essential for the white coup/regime change scenario are far from a given.

Some PMDB congressmen – to their credit – still support Rousseff. Brazilian Federal Police has shown that quite a few PMDB members are directly involved in the massive Petrobras scandal at the heart of the Car Wash investigation – including Temer himself. Corrupt to the core Cunha, the lower house leader, should have been in jail already. In this landmark case of Soft Hybrid War, as I argued before, the heart of the matter is a woman President who has not been found guilty of any wrongdoing being «judged» by a bunch of crooks.

Assuming a Temer administration born out of a white coup/regime change comes to fruition, its political platform, according to Brasilia insiders, will have been concocted by the current right-wing opposition, soundly defeated at the previous four presidential elections.

Temer will be at best a tampon. He will not be allowed to run in 2018. He will be gently «persuaded» to compose a ministerial team of right-wing notables. And he won’t meddle with the Car Wash investigation, which will be dissolved into a bathtub full of nitrate, as its initial intention was never to investigate those notables, only the Workers’ Party.

Watch that dustbin

Car Wash will then be unmasked for what it is. This tropical remix of the Mani pulite in Italy in the 1990s was never a legitimate drive to purge the Brazilian political system from corruption; absolutely everybody profiting from this system is corrupt to the core.

Car Wash instead was conceived as a relentless New Inquisition machinery operating to the benefit of the same old comprador elites which are already celebrating Rousseff’s impeachment, plus the potential destruction of Lula’s aura, in case he’s legally prevented from running for President again in 2018.

As for the whole Rousseff impeachment drive, it rests on a dubious legal proceeding by a former opposition Congressman who is – what else – being investigated himself for corruption.

Military coups are so Pinochet-era. It’s never enough to stress that what’s taking place in Brazil is advanced Hybrid War, a white coup/regime change operation organized by the Federal Public Ministry, corporate media (controlled by four families) and a significant part of Congress.

All bets are still off, though. The regime changers are in a hurry because in an extremely fluid situation in a country totally paralyzed and polarized, damning new information will certainly come to light; rats are ratting on a full-time basis, and many a regime changer is bound to be reduced to road kill.

And if by yet another elaborate twist of fate the Brazilian Senate deliberates that Rousseff did not commit a «crime of responsibility» – after all, there’s no evidence she did – the President will be back in power. And the provisional regime change «government» will be thrown to where it already belongs; the stinky dustbin of History.

BRICS Under Attack: The Empire Strikes Back In Brazil

Eric Draitser
BRICS Under Attack: The Empire Strikes Back In Brazil
24 March, 2016

In Brazil, the government of Dilma Rousseff is facing a major destabilization campaign orchestrated by powerful right-wing elements in the country and their U.S. backers. Under the always convenient banner of “anti-corruption,” millions have turned out in the streets to demand the ouster of the twice-elected Rousseff government on the heels of a series of revelations about alleged corruption pertaining to the quasi-state, quasi-private Petrobras oil company.  
According to the allegations, a number of leading political figures, some of whom are connected to President Rousseff and the Workers’ Party, have skimmed at least 3 percent of the billions in oil revenue from Petrobras, illustrating the still active tradition of corruption in Brazil.  
The latest target is former President Lula da Silva, who was forcibly removed from his home in an ostentatious show of force by law enforcement authorities meant to humiliate the 70-year-old founder of the Workers’ Party. Because of his working class background, the former president was seen as the hope and pride of the left in Brazil, and the public removal from his home earlier this month sparked the latest round of protests.

But what — or who — is really behind the soft coup in Brazil?

The right wing is the driving force of the protests, despite any progressive-minded, anti-corruption sentiment being expressed by various segments of the protest movement. Two of the principal groups responsible for organizing and mobilizing the demonstrations are the Free Brazil Movement (MBL) and Students for Liberty (EPL), both of which have direct ties to Charles and David Koch, the right-wing, neocon, U.S. billionaires, as well as other leading figures of the far right, pro-business neoliberal establishment.(Click to Expand) The bio of Fabio Ostermann from the Atlas Network website.
MBL is fronted by Fabio Ostermann and Juliano Torres, both of whom were educated in the Atlas Leadership Academy, a satellite of the Atlas Economic Research Foundation, which is directly funded by the Koch brothers. EPL is a direct affiliate of the U.S.-based Students for Liberty, a well-known Koch brothers outfit with deep ties to the right-wing political establishment in the U.S.
One of the leading faces of the movement is Kim Kataguiri, a 20-year-old “activist,” who is both a founder of MBL and a leader in EPL. Unabashedly pro-big business, he’s an adherent of the so-called Austrian School of Economics, the economic ideology that advocates total deregulation of the economy in the interests of private business, and a great admirer of Milton Friedman, the father of what is known today as neoliberal capitalism.
Kataguiri and his fellow right-wing activists have been quick to distance themselves from the blood-soaked legacy of right-wing coups in Brazil and Latin America for obvious reasons. Yet they espouse precisely the same economic policies as those enacted throughout the region, perhaps most famously in Chile under the brutal dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet, whose economic policies were directly guided by none other than Friedman.  
In this March 18, 2015 photo, anti-government protest leader Kim Kataguiri poses for a picture in Sao Paulo, Brazil. (AP/Andre Penner)
In this March 18, 2015 photo, anti-government protest leader Kim Kataguiri poses for a picture in Sao Paulo, Brazil. (AP/Andre Penner)
We defend free markets, lower taxes and the privatisation of all public companies… In Brazil, the left is still seen as cool by young people… We want to destroy this idea that if you defend free markets then you’re an old man who is asking for a dictatorship…  Unfortunately, we don’t have any big sponsors. The government and some sectors of the press say that we are financed by rich people. We would have no problem in being financed by rich people.”
Unfortunately for Kataguiri, Ostermann, Torres and their colleagues, the truth about their connections to powerful finance capital and business in the U.S. and throughout Latin America is well known. Still, the corporate media whitewashes these connections, presenting the protests as some sort of pure expression of people’s discontent, rather than a manufactured form of political manipulation and destabilization which has seized upon difficult economic times to cynically exploit public opinion. Brazil’s economic downturn over the past two years has made this much easier.
Other influential groups such as VemPraRua (“Come to the Streets”) are directly funded by powerful right-wing business interests inside the country, including Brazil’s richest man, Jorge Paulo Lemann. As Bloombergnoted in a 2013 profile of Lemann:
In the U.S., Lemann is virtually unknown, even though he and his two longtime partners, Marcel Herrmann Telles and Carlos Alberto Sicupira, now control three icons of U.S. consumer culture: Heinz ketchup, Burger King, and, after the $52 billion takeover of Anheuser-Busch in 2008, Budweiser beer. The combined market value of the companies they run is $187 billion - larger than that of Citigroup.
In Brazil, Lemann is a business-class hero… Worth some $20 billion, Lemann is No. 32 on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, seven slots behind George Soros and three ahead of Carl Icahn.”
Meanwhile, the reactionary, pro-U.S. elements inside (and outside) Brazil are particularly angered at the Workers’ Party and, more broadly, the left. This is not because of corruption – though corruption undoubtedly remains a problem – but because of the ascendance to power of political forces representing working class and poor Brazilians.
As the North American Congress on Latin America correctly assessed in April 2015: “Don’t believe the right-wing media’s emphasis on corruption—the recent demonstrations are motivated by entrenched elite discontent over expanding economic and political inclusion for the nation’s majority.”
Bringing BRICS to heel
In short, despite all the fancy anti-corruption rhetoric, the assault on Rousseff’s leftist government is the result of a coordinated campaign by business interests tied to the U.S. Washington and Wall Street that see in Brazil a dangerous precedent in which a left-wing government sympathetic to and allied with Bolivarian movements in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, and until recently, Argentina, was able to gain power and preside over an economic boom.  A graph demonstrating the correlation between expansion of anti-government sentiment and the stagnation of GDP growth.
A graph demonstrating the correlation between expansion of anti-government sentiment and the stagnation of GDP growth.
Indeed, this point should not be understated — namely, the economic downturn in commodities such as oil which has put the brakes on Brazil’s rapid economic progress.
In fact, recent data shows that the expansion of anti-government sentiment directly correlates to the stagnation of GDP growth, which itself directly correlates to the decline in commodities prices. As many have convincingly argued, the collapse of oil has no doubt been fomented and encouraged, if not directly orchestrated, by the U.S. and its allies in the Gulf in order to target non-Western countries whose economies are tied to oil and gas revenue — Venezuela, Bolivia, Brazil, and especially Russia.
Essentially, what’s unfolding in Brazil is a multi-pronged effort to destabilize the country via a variety of political and economic means, with the ultimate goal of bringing to heel a key member of BRICS. But it is not the only one.
Brazil is certainly not the only BRICS member facing an offensive by the U.S.-NATO system. The next article in this series will examine the destabilizing forces reaching into South Africa. Future pieces will examine the growing military relationship between the U.S. and India, as well as the multi-faceted strategies to contain, isolate, and destabilize Russia and China.

BRICS Under Attack: The Empire’s Destabilizing Hand Reaches Into South Africa
An undercurrent of political manipulation pulses beneath the surface of popular South African demonstrations organized around legitimate grievances. But who’s pulling the strings? And why?

By Eric Draitser @stopimperialism 

Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Jacob Zuma, Narendra Modi, Dilma Rousseff

Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Jacob Zuma, Narendra Modi, Dilma Rousseff
Leaders of the BRICS nations, from left, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff, China’s President Xi Jinping and South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma, pose for a group photo during the BRICS summit in Fortaleza, Brazil, Tuesday, July 15, 2014. The leaders of the BRICS nations are expected to officially create a bailout and development fund worth $100 billion. It’s meant to be an alternative to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, which are seen as being dominated by the U.S. and Europe. (AP PHOTO)

28 March, 2016

This article is part of a series on Western meddling to foment unrest and destabilize BRICS nations in an effort to ensure the continuation of Western economic and political control over the Global South. The first part, focusing on Brazil, can be found here. Still to come: BRICS under attack in Russia, India, and China.

NEW YORK — (Analysis) Major protests have gripped South Africa in recent months as political forces have emerged to give voice to a growing discontent with the government and ruling party. Beneath the surface of these demonstrations organized around legitimate grievances, however, there’s an undercurrent of political manipulation.

South Africa and its ruling African National Congress (ANC) party have been targeted for destabilization due to the country’s burgeoning relationship with China and other non-Western nations, most obviously typified by South Africa’s inclusion in BRICS, the association of the five major emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.

Last year, for example, China surpassed the United States and European Union as South Africa’s largest trade partner, and the ANC has been hard at work promoting further trade cooperation. Answering questions in the National Assembly, Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa explained: “We trade more effectively with China because the relationship is based on win-win; mutual benefit that they can get out of the relationship and that we can get out the relationship.”

But recent protests against the ANC government have threatened the ruling tripartite coalition of the ANC, along with the South African Communist Party and Congress of South African Trade Unions.

A number of groups on the left such as the Economic Freedom Fighters, led by former ANC youth leader Julius Malema, and the National Union of Metalworkers, have taken part in the protests touched off by student demonstrations against university fees.

At the same time, however, Western-backed opposition forces led by the Democratic Alliance have positioned themselves as leaders and beneficiaries of the anti-government movement.

The DA, a center-right liberal political party now fronted by “South Africa’s Obama,” Mmusi Maimane, is lauded by Western financial interests. The American Chamber of Commerce, for example, has consistently heaped praise on DA as the way forward for South Africa.

When Maimane delivered a widely publicized speech at a May 2015 business breakfast hosted by the American Chamber of Commerce, he stated:

While China may have overtaken the US as South Africa’s largest trade partner in volume, the US remains an incredibly important partner for our future growth and development.

I refer to ‘future growth and development’ for under the lacklustre and confused leadership of the ANC, our economy has failed to reach its true potential.”

A careful reading of the subtext offers a clearer understanding of what Maimane is implying. By noting that China has overtaken the U.S. as South Africa’s largest trade partner, he is directly tying the ANC and its “lackluster and confused leadership” to the close relationship with China.

In other words, the DA represents “the future” — that is, a future in which the U.S. is able to reclaim its status as South Africa’s dominant trade partner. This certainly would not have been lost on the attendees at a Chamber of Commerce breakfast. (It should be recalled that the Chamber of Commerce is traditionally seen as the main arm of U.S. economic power projection in the Global South — just ask any leader in South and Central America.)

The Wall Street-London connection runs deep

But the ties to the political and financial establishment of neoliberal capital and the U.S. empire do not stop at the American Chamber of Commerce. In 2014 it came to light that one of the principal financiers behind the DA and its short-lived attempt at unity with the centrist Agang SA party, led by anti-Apartheid figure Mamphela Ramphele, was billionaire Nathan Kirsh.

As the Business Times noted in March 2014:

Mr Kirsh said he provided a ‘marginal amount’ of funding to both the DA and Agang SA … but denied bringing the parties together.

I believe there’s got to be an opposition to the government, but I wasn’t involved in the marriage. … When Mamphela [Ramphele] came to me, she represented what could be good, credible opposition and I gave her some money. When [leader of the DA] Helen Zille came to me, she had already shown her ability to put things together and the [Western] Cape runs perhaps better than any of the other provinces,’ said Kirsh.

Zille and Ramphele announced early in February that the short-lived plan to join forces, and for Ramphele to stand as the DA’s presidential candidate, was over.

At the time, Ms Ramphele was quoted as saying ‘a donor pushed the DA and Agang SA together.’”

Kirsh, the business tycoon who heads a multinational business empire controlled through his Kirsh Holdings Group, is one of the richest men in the world, having made his fortune during the Apartheid regime in South Africa and in a variety of other ventures since then.

Aside from his dodgy past, Kirsh is well known to have untold billions in assets and companies domiciled in tax havens from the British Virgin Islands to Liberia. Perhaps most notorious among his recent money-making projects has been the massive contracts awarded to his company Magal Security Systems by the Israeli government to provide electronic fences and security systems for the apartheid wall Israel constructed, and which has been almost universally condemned as illegal.

In fact, Kirsh is well known as being very close to some of the leading institutions of Western finance capital, as evidenced by his choice of Bradley Fried to oversee Kirsh Group. As noted by Bloomberg, Fried will oversee “the management company that holds Kirsh’s disparate assets, which include two U.S. wholesale grocery businesses, commercial and residential real estate, and private equity investments on four continents.” Fried is a member of the Bank of England’s Court of Directors and a well-connected executive in circles of high finance.

Fried “takes over [Kirsh Group] from Ron Sandler, the former CEO of Lloyd’s of London who Kirsh said will remain working as a trustee and adviser to the family.” It should be noted that Sandler, who served as chairman of the infamous Northern Rock, had close ties with former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, himself a creature of the City of London.

Between Kirsh’s connections to the highest circles of finance capital in the U.S. empire, and his lucrative business dealings with Apartheid South Africa and the current apartheid state of Israel, it should be crystal clear that Kirsh is no progressive. So what’s he doing financing the allegedly “liberal-progressive” opposition in South Africa? To put it simply, Kirsh is making yet another investment that he hopes will pay massive political and financial dividends.

Soft power projects from pro-DA think tanks

Another source of soft power projection from the U.S. empire are the think tanks that uphold the neoliberal DA as the future for South Africa. One example is Legatum Institute, which has published numerous papers criticizing the ANC and calling for “democratization” and “plurality of voices” in the political sphere.

In an innocuously titled 2014 report, “South Africa and the Pursuit of Inclusive Growth,” Legatum noted:

Together opposition voters constituted just over 34 percent of the national vote. The ANC is understandably proud of its achievements in attracting such a large proportion of votes. However, the weakness of the opposition has reduced the pressure on the ANC to win electoral votes on the basis of its performance in government. It also means that at the national level the ANC’s commitment to democracy has not been put to the ultimate test: the transfer of power to a victorious opposition.”

While the report notes the democratic nature of South Africa’s election, the implied argument, couched in the typically duplicitous rhetoric of Western think tanks, is that the ANC should be unseated from power in order for a truly democratic South Africa to emerge. The report, it should be noted, was edited and overseen by the notoriously anti-Russia, anti-China, anti-BRICS, neoliberal Anne Applebaum, who has repeatedly used her pen and face in the service of the empire’s agenda. (Interesting to note also is that Applebaum is married to Radek Sikorski, the vehemently pro-NATO former foreign minister of Poland.)

One example of Applebaum’s anti-Russia outlook is her widely read 2014 essay in the New York Review of Books, “How He [Putin] and His Cronies Stole Russia,” which argued the typical neoliberal finance capital line that Russia was on the right path in the 1990s under the stewardship of the U.S.- and Wall Street-backed Russian President Boris Yeltsin and his gaggle of thieves, but that Putin and his “kleptocratic KGB apparatchiks” seized control of Russia for their own purposes.

Such nonsense, in addition to Applebaum’s unmitigated warmongering in matters relating to Syria and Libya, demonstrates just what sort of slant exists in her report on South Africa.

Another important element in this equation is an understanding of exactly what the Legatum Institute really is and who funds it. As Pando’s Mark Ames wrote in 2015:

Legatum turns out to be a project of the most secretive billionaire vulture capital investor you’ve (and I’d) never heard of: Christopher Chandler, a New Zealander who, along with his billionaire brother Richard Chandler, ran one of the world’s most successful vulture capital funds …

Brother Christopher Chandler took his billions to Dubai, where he launched Legatum Capital, and, in 2007, the Legatum Institute … The Legatum Institute’s motto, displayed proudly on its homepage, reads ‘Prosperity Through Revitalising Capitalism and Democracy.’

[T]he Chandler brothers were the largest foreign portfolio investors in Russia throughout the 1990s into the first half of the 2000s, including the largest foreign investors in natural gas behemoth Gazprom. …

From what I’ve learned, the Chandlers make buckets of fast money by buying into totally depressed and corrupt emerging markets when everyone else is too afraid to, driving up the price of their assets by making a lot of noise about corporate governance and corruption, and then selling out when those investments tick up during what look like to outsiders as principled battles over corporate governance issues. In other words, a form of extreme green-mailing.”

Applebaum’s official title with Legatum is “director of the Transitions Forum,” “a series of projects that examine the challenges and opportunities of radical political and economic change.” No wonder the think tank’s prized propagandist is so gung-ho in her hatred of all things Putin and Russia: Her bosses were directly targeted by Putin and the Russian government as it sought to reverse the “vulturization” of Russia’s economy carried out by Western capitalists like the Chandlers.

It seems then that Legatum is part of the same anti-Russian, anti-BRICS network of Western NGOs and think tanks that includes the International Republican Institute, Freedom House, the National Democratic Institute, and the National Endowment for Democracy. And it should come as no surprise that Russia and many other countries have moved so strongly to curtail their presence and influence in their respective countries (this author has written detailed analyses of the political significance of the NGO laws in Russia and China).

Powerful forces aligning

Make no mistake, though: Institutional issues such as corruption and political and economic disenfranchisement do indeed exist in South Africa, and these must be addressed. The challenge against the ANC from leftist forces who seek wealth and land redistribution, socialization of the economy, and other traditional policies associated with leftist politics is to be welcomed. That challenge could likely push the ANC to make much needed policy changes, including moving further away from neoliberal capitalism, as it broadens its engagement with the non-Western world.

However, one should not miss the forest for the trees. There are powerful forces aligning behind the DA and other Western proxy political forces in order to destabilize a key partner of the BRICS project.

No comments:

Post a Comment