Foreign media: Huawei has settled down, and the restrictions of the US market can no longer restrict Huawei’s continued development. From 5G to operating systems to semiconductor chips, Huawei has embarked on a path of “de-Americans”.
In the future, Huawei will not only be a smartphone supplier and communication equipment supplier, but also an operating system giant like Google and a supplier of intelligent driving solutions.
This does fulfill the old saying: The more the US sanctions China, the stronger it will be!
Trump is the best thing that has happened to China in half a century – to wake up China and some of their citizens that were sleep-walking with globalization and to remind Chinese people of Anglo-Westerners inherent imperialism, hegemony, racism, superiority complex.
US Supreme Court overturned its Roe v. Wade ruling in a 6-3 decision on abortion after 50 years. Chinese has a saying: “昨天的我打倒今天的我” UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres also condemns US abortion decision a ‘huge blow’ to human rights
Video: Professor John V Walsh MD in SF: STOP US War Funding In Ukraine! Protest At Congresswoman Barbara Lee’s Oakland Office 美國加州舊金山醫學博士 John V Walsh 教授：停止美國在烏克蘭的戰爭資助！ 在國會女議員芭芭拉李的奧克蘭辦公室抗議
A rally was held on 6/23/22 against East Bay Congresswoman Barbara Lee’s office to protest her support for massive war funding for the war in Ukraine. The US Congress Democrats, Republicans and independents including Bernie Sanders have voted for $56 billion for the US NATO war machine. Speakers from organization spoke out about the war and who Lee and the rest of the capitalist politicians represent. Additional media: Barbara Lee Supports Tens Of Billions Of Military Aid To Ukraine Ukraine, War & Labor: Presentation by Vermont AFL-CIO Executive Director Liz Medina Labor, Imperialism, Fascism & The War In Ukraine With Cliff Smith, LA Roofers Local 36 Fascism, Imperialism & Labor With Vermont AFL-CIO President David Van Deusen Vermont AFL-CIO President David Van Deusen & The Fight To Defend Working People & The AFL-CIO For info: This rally was initiated by United Against War & Militarism. https://youtu.be/znASOrg6nqA
Video: George Bush’s Iraq slip when slamming Putin is perfect irony. The Iraq War architect is one to talk about Russia’s incursion into Ukraine 喬治布什在抨擊普京時對美國入侵伊拉克吐真言是完美的諷刺. 伊拉克戰爭的制造者無權談論俄羅斯入侵烏克蘭
Former US President George W. Bush made an embarrassing gaffe, perhaps a Freudian slip, when speaking on the importance of democracy and threats to democracy from abroad, and taking aim specifically at Russia.
“Russian elections are rigged,” he said. “Political opponents are imprisoned or otherwise eliminated from participating in the electoral process. The result is an absence of checks and balances in Russia and the decision of one man to launch a wholly unjustified and brutal invasion of Iraq. I mean of Ukraine.”
Then Bush brushed the mistake aside and said, “Iraq, too,” insinuating that Russia was somehow involved in Iraq – which is obviously not true.
In any case, simple mistake or not, it is the most perfect example of the outright hypocrisy of US politicians who call out Russia’s incursion into Ukraine. Bush himself launched an illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 that resulted in the estimated deaths of over 1 million Iraqis in the first several years alone.
All told, the war ended up being a bloody nine-year operation under the false pretense of ‘weapons of mass destruction’ supposedly held by then-Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. US forces openly committed war crimes, including the use of illegal chemical weapons, the killing of tens of thousands of civilians by US forces, as well as the widespread use of torture. All of these transgressions were either confirmed by the US or admitted in internal documents leaked by WikiLeaks.
The fact that the man who presided over this horrible war – the war that drew the largest protests in human history – has the nerve to call out Russia’s actions in Ukraine is a display of narcissism. It’s so clearly ridiculous that even he himself let it slip that, yes, what happened in Iraq was a travesty.
What makes this travesty even more apparent is exactly what he was saying about Russia, that “one man” can launch a military operation without checks and balances. That is exactly what happened during the Iraq War. There are international laws and institutions designed to prevent these types of crimes from happening – all of which were ignored. This proved that international law is not the law as such, but merely a political tool to manifest the desires of one hegemon, i.e., the United States of America.
It is precisely this situation, this breakdown of international law and the resulting sense that international law does not actually protect anyone, that created the conditions for the situation in Ukraine. Prior to Russia’s intervention in the conflict, which had actually been ongoing since 2014, Moscow sent its legitimate security concerns – including about the militarization of Ukraine and the potential for Ukrainian NATO membership – to the West, but they were all ignored.
Ironically, it’s again Bush who began the approach of patently disregarding Russia’s interests. After the fall of the Soviet Union, there was hope that Russia could become a partner with the West, not an enemy. When Russian President Vladimir Putin began his first term, that was a hope that he himself shared.
In fact, as Russia was dealing with terrorism in Chechnya, President Putin wanted to partner with the US in counter-terrorism operations. He pledged support for the US in its own efforts against terrorism, including in Afghanistan, offering the use of Russian airspace and other resources.
He met for the first time with Bush at the latter’s Texas home in 2001 just after the 9/11 terror attacks. At a local Texas high school, Bush described Putin as “a new style of leader, a reformer…, a man who’s going to make a huge difference in making the world more peaceful, by working closely with the United States.” Then just weeks later, Bush withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in order to, the administration said, protect NATO allies from a potential Iranian missile attack. Putin said publicly that this move would undermine arms control efforts and weaken European security.
Such duplicitousness has essentially remained the norm in Washington ever since. The Americans assure world leaders that they want to cooperate, build ties and reduce tensions, but then immediately enact policies that contradict their own words. Over the course of Putin’s leadership, which has overlapped with several US presidents, Russia has endured successive waves of NATO expansion that has encroached right up to Russia’s doorstep and militarized Russia’s neighborhood – despite verbal promises that this would not happen from, ironically, President George H.W. Bush, the father of George W. Bush.
George W. Bush thus clearly has no ground to stand on when it comes to illegal invasions and a lack of checks and balances on foreign policy. Bush’s having even ventured a censorious opinion of Russia’s actions in Ukraine is irony enough — the Freudian slip is merely that irony in all of its distilled clarity.
Bradley Blankenship is an American journalist, columnist and political commentator. He has a syndicated column at CGTN and is a freelance reporter for international news agencies including Xinhua News Agency.
By taking on American hegemony and challenging the dollar, BRICS members represent the best hope for a fairer world order 通過挑戰美國霸權和挑戰美元，金磚國家代表了建立更公平世界秩序的最大希望 by Bradley Blankenship, an American journalist.
The 14th BRICS Summit in Beijing is just wrapping up amid a turbulent international geopolitical landscape, which highlights the importance of the organization in general. Given the combined challenges of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, global conflict, a looming economic crash and climate change – the current international system is failing and a new, multi-polar alternative must take its place.
It’s worth noting the context of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) format. Started in 2009 amid a financial crisis, the main goal of that year’s first BRICS (or BRIC as it was then) summit in Yekaterinburg was to improve the global economic situation and reform financial institutions.
Although these countries are not joined by any particular ideology, each saw the need to democratize the global economic system that had been crashed pretty much single-handedly by the United States in an extraordinarily irresponsible – even illegal by US law, in some instances – manner. The head of China’s Central Bank bluntly called for abandoning the dollar as the global reserve currency in 2009 because of a lack of faith in US monetary leadership.
That was 13 years ago, yet the necessity of a new reserve currency could not be more relevant these days. In fact, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced on June 22 just ahead of the latest BRICS summit that the group was indeed developing its own reserve currency based on a basket of their currencies. With this, Putin said the group is hoping to develop alternatives to the existing international payment scheme.
While this could be seen as provocative in the West, it is actually for the betterment of mankind and is not aimed strictly at one country or one coalition of countries. To note, India pushed back against any “anti-US” rhetoric in the group’s joint statement, being a country that is considered part of the Global South, e.g., a developing country, and also has strong relations with the West.
Yet, at the same time, it’s clear that all BRICS states, including India, would benefit from a democratized global economic and financial system. That is why New Delhi has not joined Western-led sanctions against Russia over the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, because doing so does not serve India’s economic interests – and it would also establish a bad precedent where countries could essentially be excluded from the international community over political disagreements.
Indeed, BRICS and its members have gone a long way to pursue zero-strings-attached development cooperation. China alone had already replaced the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank as the world’s largest net creditor at the beginning of the last decade, expanding investments in tangible assets across the Global South (and beyond) through the Belt and Road Initiative. But in a direct challenge to these two previously mentioned US-led institutions, which have morphed into weapons of economic coercion, BRICS established the New Development Bank in 2014.
Another area where BRICS is currently not active but could be is security. Financial and economic stability is an inextricable part of security; without a stable economic and financial system there can be no sustainable peace. Likewise, without a stable security framework, there can be no drive for the human development that BRICS and its partners desire. Unfortunately, the connection between these two facets has not been established in the prevailing liberal international system, but BRICS could help tie them together which would be an extraordinarily beneficial development.
Meanwhile, as BRICS wraps up, the G7 and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), two US-led international formats, will convene soon. Of note, NATO will draft its first “strategic concept” – the document which defines the organization’s objectives and principles – since 2010. It is anticipated that it will expand the military bloc’s reach far beyond Europe and probably to the Asia-Pacific, representing a serious challenge to China’s neighborhood. This probably explains why Chinese President Xi Jinping denounced “small circles” built around hegemony in his BRICS address.
At a minimum, BRICS has a serious role in balancing out the malignant influence of the US, NATO and the prevailing Western-led world system. Finance and economics are no small part of this, and BRICS’ drive to establish alternatives to the dollar-based Bretton Woods system, providing credit to the Global South without political conditions and establishing a new reserve currency, is an extraordinary push toward a multi-polar future.
Johnson Choi Biz 