La politique américaine comme si vous y étiez...

Rappel du premier message :

Citation :: Ce militant démocrate qui défie Barack Obama

Candidat à la présidence, Darcy Richardson exprime la frustration d’une partie des progressistes états-uniens face au bilan du président sortant. Il participe aux primaires démocrates afin de «r amener,dit-il, Obama à gauche ».

Il n’a eu droit qu’à quelques entrefilets  dans deux, trois journaux mais le New York Times ne l’a pas cité une seule fois dans  l’un de ses articles. Il ne collecte que quelques milliers de dollars de-ci, de-là. Il ne bénéficie donc ni de la puissance financière ni de la couverture médiatique, éléments indispensables à toute campagne électorale  aux États-Unis. Pourtant Darcy Richardson  est bel et bien candidat à la présidence des  États-Unis (www.darcy2012.com). Mieux  même, il est le seul à défier Barack Obama  dans plusieurs États. Même si le barnum ultradroitier des républicains l’a occulté,  il n’en reste pas moins que le Parti démocrate organise lui aussi un processus de désignation  de son candidat.

« Je suis le premier à admettre que je n’ai aucune chance de battre, voire d’inquiéter le président sortant », répète Darcy Richardson en  préambule des rares interviews que des chaînes locales lui accordent. Même si Eugene  McCarthy constitue sa référence politique  (les deux hommes ont notamment milité ensemble au début des années quatre-vingt-dix dans l’aile gauche du Parti démocrate), ce féru d’histoire sait que 2012 n’est pas 1968. Cette année-là, le sénateur progressiste du Minnesota, Eugene McCarthy, avait défié, au nom  du mouvement antiguerre, Lyndon Johnson, président depuis 1963, embourbé dans  son escalade militaire au Vietnam. Après  des premières primaires très serrées,  Johnson renonça finalement à se représenter.

Pourquoi dès lors se lancer dans une telle  bataille à cinquante-six ans ? Parce qu’Obama  doit répondre de son bilan, rétorque en substance cet ancien assureur devenu auteur et bloggeur (www.battleground.com). « Il n’a accompli aucune des choses dont il a parlé en 2008. L’administration Obama est un cas d’école de l’influence corruptrice de l’argent de Wall Street dans la politique américaine. Le président a abandonné sans mener le combat. » L’accusation est rude mais le ton toujours posé. Il cite : renoncement de la réforme du système bancaire et de Wall Street et de la création d’un véritable système public de santé, poursuite de la guerre en Afghanistan, reconduction des réductions d’impôts pour les plus riches votés sous  George Bush. « Les frustrations et les déceptions de l’électorat démocrate sont immenses, ajoute-il. De plus en plus de gens se rendent compte que  le premier mandat d’Obama est en fait un  troisième mandat de Bush. Nous ne voulons pas d’un quatrième mandat de Bush. »

Darcy Richardson a reçu le soutien  de la Nouvelle Alliance progressiste (www.newprogs.org), organisation créée par le philosophe noir Cornel West, très critique envers l’hôte  de la Maison-Blanche et qui avait appelé  à une candidature unifiée pour défier  Obama. Aucune des personnalités évoquées  depuis plusieurs mois (Jeffrey Sacks, Robert Reich, Bernie Sanders, Dennis Kucinich…)  n’a relevé le gant. Darcy Richardson, si.  Son slogan de campagne : « Un démocrate progressiste pour président. » Et son espoir : « Ramener Obama à gauche. »

http://www.humanite.fr/monde/ce-militant-democrate-qui-defie-barack-obama-491746

Citation :: Aux États-Unis, il n’y a pas que Lyndon LaRouche pour accuser Obama d’avoir trahi ses promesses. Bien que boudé par la grande presse, le démocrate progressiste Darcy Richardson défie le président Barack Obama dans plusieurs États dans la course à la présidentielle. Car, même si le barnum ultradroitier des républicains l’a occulté, il n’en reste pas moins que le Parti démocrate organise lui aussi un processus de désignation de son candidat.

Pour Darcy Richardson, qui mène lui aussi campagne pour rétablir la séparation des banques d’affaires des banques de dépôt (retour au Glass-Steagall Act), le bilan du mandat d’Obama est plus que calamiteux : «  Il n’a accompli aucune des choses dont il a parlé en 2008. L’administration Obama est un cas d’école de l’influence corruptrice de l’argent de Wall Street dans la politique américaine. Le président a abandonné sans mener le combat.  »

Et comme le précise un article paru dans l’Humanité du 8 mars : « L’accusation est rude mais le ton toujours posé. Il cite : renoncement de la réforme du système bancaire et de Wall Street et de la création d’un véritable système public de santé, poursuite de la guerre en Afghanistan, reconduction des réductions d’impôts pour les plus riches votés sous George Bush. "Les frustrations et les déceptions de l’électorat démocrate sont immenses, ajoute-il. De plus en plus de gens se rendent compte que le premier mandat d’Obama est en fait un troisième mandat de Bush. Nous ne voulons pas d’un quatrième mandat de Bush." »

La référence politique de Darcy Richardson reste Eugene McCarthy (rien à voir avec l’anti-communiste Joseph McCarthy). Ce sénateur progressiste du Minnesota avait défié en 1968, au nom du mouvement contre la guerre du Vietnam, Lyndon Johnson, président depuis 1963. Eugene McCarthy était aussi en très bonnes termes avec Lyndon LaRouche et s’était fait remarquer en 1988 en faisant campagne en faveur de l’Initiative de défense stratégique (IDS), initiative anti-guerre initié par LaRouche et caricaturé par la presse comme « la guerre des étoiles ». Il avait également signé l’appel pour un Nouveau Bretton Woods de LaRouche.

Aujourd’hui, Darcy Richardson dispose du soutien de la Nouvelle Alliance progressiste, organisation créée par le philosophe noir Cornel West, très critique envers l’hôte de la Maison-Blanche et qui avait appelé à une candidature unifiée pour défier Obama. Le slogan de campagne de Richardson : «  Un démocrate progressiste pour président.  » Son espoir : «  Ramener Obama à gauche.  »

http://www.solidariteetprogres.org/Le-candidat-democrate-progressiste-Darcy-Richardson-Obama-c-est-Bush-III_08678

https://twitter.com/SecBlinken/status/1378123961628778496 a écrit:

Blinken et Ashkenazi se sont entretenu...( je suppose surement avant la réunion sur l'iran la semaine prochaine vu qu'ils ont parlé de la sécurité d'Israel dans leur entretien...)

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

Bruce Wayne a écrit:: Blinken et Ashkenazi se sont entretenu...( je suppose surement avant la réunion sur l'iran la semaine prochaine vu qu'ils ont parlé de la sécurité d'Israel dans leur entretien...)

Je pense principalement il l a informé de cette décision
https://www.state.gov/ending-sanctions-and-visa-restrictions-against-personnel-of-the-international-criminal-court/

Aah merci Ssi Shugan j'avais loupé sa... Je pense que c'est plus probable comme vous dites

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-mideast-usa-israel-idUKKBN2BP1JT?taid=6067a1f8c8c94b000185640c&utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter a écrit:

Lors de leur entretien téléphonique ils ont aussi discuté des accords de normalisations mais y'a pas eu plus de détails la-dessus..

A statement from State Department spokesman Ned Price said the two leaders discussed regional security challenges, humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people, and the normalization of relations with Arab and Muslim majority countries. Trump last year helped seal normalization deals between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco. Biden has yet to focus heavily on adding more countries to the list. Some Arab countries want to see the long-standing dispute between Israel and the Palestinians resolved before agreeing to a deal. a écrit:

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

_________________
Les peuples ne meurent jamais de faim mais de honte.

Si ils le font pas maintenant ils le feront jamais.

C’est une formidable opportunité pour eux de réinvestir dans leur infrastructures délabrés.

_________________
Sois généreux avec nous, Ô toi Dieu et donne nous la Victoire

La politique américaine comme si vous y étiez... - Page 37 Signat10

https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2021/04/05/florida-dem-60-minutes-hit-piece-desantis-publix-absolute-malarkey/ a écrit:

Aux USA la véritable bataille est pour 2024, après Ted Cruz les médias s'attaquent maintenant à DeSantis (le seul que je verrais gagner contre kamala en 2024), on l'accuse d'avoir accorder à une entreprise la distribution des vaccins après que celle-ci ai fait des donations politiques (quelques jours avant Desantis avait refusé la mise en place d'un passeport vaccinal en Floride car le passeport est délivré par des entreprises privées et non pas par un organisme public ce qui selon lui ne protège pas la protection de la vie privée...)

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

https://twitter.com/SecBlinken/status/1380575737174966272 a écrit:

Blinken et Ledrian se sont entretenu principalement au sujet de la Russie et de l'Ukraine

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2021/04/11/gop-donors-privately-pan-trumps-horrible-rnc-speech-492435 a écrit:

Lors d'une interview dans sa résidence à mar-e-lago Trump a qualifié ironiquement Joe Biden de ''saint'', il a traité McConnell de son of ***** Very Happy

, et a dit que s'il se présentait en 2024 son ''Running-mate'' serait DeSantis (mon préféré et mon favoris pour 2024 et ça serait une excellente chose pour nous) , le GOP perdra si Trump se présente à mon avis, maintenant ça se jouera entre ces trois-là : DeSantis , Trump et Cruz ( ce dernier me semble loin des 2) les autres ''rhinos'' sont dead

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

Les américains vont commencer à casser les coui* de tout le monde sur la question chinoise
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/download/strategic-competition-act-of-2021

Les démocrates: faites ce que je dis mais ne faites pas ce que je fais... L'hypocrisie à son summum

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

The EurAsian Times a écrit:: Germany-US Relations: Honeymoon Over Before It Even Started – German Diplomat

Germany was among many European countries that breathed a deep sigh of relief when Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump in the US presidential elections in November 2020.

Viewing Europe as an enemy, Trump went out of his way to damage US relations with its key European allies, and he often targeted Germany as Chancellor Angela Merkel faced his wrath.

He openly called Merkel “stupid” and lashed out at Berlin for not only its trade surplus but also for refusing to boost its military spending and its deepening energy cooperation with Russia.

So it came as no surprise that the Merkel government welcomed President Biden’s willingness and readiness to rebuild American-German relations.

In fact, Biden’s election win gave rise to high hopes not only in Berlin but throughout European capitals.

There was also no lack of grand gestures, such as Biden’s participation in the virtual EU summit last month and his cordial words about common values and interests. New US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, a seasoned diplomat, called Germany “our most important ally in Europe” and vowed to consult with Berlin on all contentious issues.

New US Government

The Biden administration showed early on its steadfast readiness to patch up its relations with the Merkel government by rejoining the Paris climate agreement and the World Health Organization, both of which Trump had quit.

Also, Biden reaffirmed his country’s commitment to NATO’s Article 5 on collective defense — suggesting that an attack on one alliance member shall be considered an attack on all members — agreed to extend the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) with Russia and expressed readiness to return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on Iran’s nuclear program.

All in all, hopes were high that all these moves by Biden would open a new chapter in close relations with Germany, but differences loom large in the political sphere.

Nord Stream 2 Tops The List Of Differences

A major dispute remains the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline running under the Baltic Sea from Russia to Germany, which is now about 95% completed.

Under intense pressure from Congress, the Biden administration has reiterated its opposition to the pipeline.

Blinken issued a statement last month reaffirming the government’s intent to comply with Congressional legislation calling for sanctions and warning that “any entity involved in the Nord Stream 2 pipeline risks US sanctions and should immediately abandon work on the pipeline.”

On March 23, Blinken expressed strong opposition to the pipeline in his talks with his German counterpart Heiko Maas.

Washington’s hardline policies towards Beijing and Russia pose another headache for Berlin that may prove difficult for repairing American-German relations.

As the Biden administration seeks to pursue a get-tough policy to contain China and Russia more effectively, it will look to its European allies for support.

Meanwhile, Berlin is also upset over the fact that the US failed to consult the German side on its plans to withdraw combat troops from Afghanistan by May.

There is now a deep sense of frustration in the German capital when it comes to its political expectations towards the Biden administration.

German officials slam US ‘Neo-Colonial’ Attitude

The Hamburg-based German weekly Der Spiegel cited unnamed German government officials who accused the Biden government of “neo-colonial behavior,” an attribute that was previously reserved for the Trump administration’s controversial Ambassador to Berlin Richard Grenell.

An unidentified top German diplomat summed up the overall mood on the state of US-German ties as the following: “The honeymoon is over before it has started.”

This is also how the German government’s transatlantic coordinator Peter Beyer sees the situation.

“We expected more from the restart of the transatlantic relationship,” he lamented.

The dispute over vaccines amid the coronavirus pandemic is almost symbolic of the messed-up US-German relationship.

While the German vaccination disaster is primarily homemade, the US is sitting on 30 million AstraZeneca jabs that the country will likely never need.

The British-Swedish manufacturer applied for quite some time to export parts of it to Europe, but Biden refused.

To many Germans, the Biden administration is merely a “softer version” of Trump’s government as only its rhetoric appears to be less hostile.

Meanwhile, the Merkel government is now increasingly aware of the fact that rebuilding US-German ties will be much tougher than previously anticipated.

_________________
Les peuples ne meurent jamais de faim mais de honte.

Citation :: Les Etats-Unis débloquent la vente de F-35 aux Emirats arabes unis

Le 27 janvier, la Maison blanche annonçait suspendre temporairement la mise en œuvre de la vente de F-35 aux Emirats arabes unis. Hier, l’administration Biden a finalement décidé de soumettre pour examen au Congrès le contrat scellé avec Abou Dhabi sous la présidence Donald Trump. Le porte-parole du département d'État a déclaré que Washington irait de l'avant avec les ventes proposées aux Émirats, «même si nous continuons à examiner les détails et à consulter les responsables émiratis» liés à l'utilisation des armes, rapporte Reuters.

Ce déblocage devrait réjouïr Rabat quant à la question de la reconnaissance par les Etats-Unis de sa souveraineté du Maroc sur le Sahara. Un cadeau de l’administration Trump, tout comme la vente des F-35 aux Emirats, pour la signature de l'accord de paix avec Israël. Le décret de Trump a d'ailleurs été signé le 10 décembre, soit le même jour de l’annonce de la reprise de relations entre Rabat et Tel-Aviv.

En attendant une confirmation de la part de Biden sur la question du Sahara, son équipe a déjà décidé, le 25 mars, de poursuivre la politique de Donald Trump d'exportations de drones armés, annonçait en exclusivité l’agence Reuters. Le royaume est un des bénéficiaires du choix du président américain qui «ouvre la porte à des centaines de millions et éventuellement des milliards de dollars de ventes américaines aux gouvernements du Taiwan, de l'Inde, du Maroc et des Émirats arabes unis qui, dans le passé, n'avaient pas le droit de les acheter».

Pour rappel, Antony Blinken avait affirmé, le 19 janvier lors de son passage devant la Commission des Affaires étrangères au Sénat pour approbation de sa nomination à la tête de la diplomatie américaine, qu’il envisage d'«examiner attentivement les engagements qui ont pu être pris dans le contexte de la normalisation des relations» entre des pays arabes avec Israël.

...Suite : https://www.yabiladi.com/articles/details/108565/etats-unis-debloquent-vente-f-35-emirats.html

_________________
"C'est un plaisir de faire sauter l'ingénieur avec son propre pétard".
William Shakespeare ; Hamlet (1603)

_________________
Les peuples ne meurent jamais de faim mais de honte.

The EurAsian Times a écrit:: Unreliable Ally: Should US Withdrawal From Afghanistan Be A ‘Wake-Up Call’ For All Major Non- NATO Allies (MNNA)?

US President Joe Biden’s announcement that all American troops will withdraw from Afghanistan by the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks, thus ending what is arguably America’s longest war, may have great political significance in his country.

But his bold decision, after fluctuating deadlines set by his two predecessors – Donald Trump and Barack Obama – seems to have reignited the geopolitical debate over the dependability of Washington as a reliable ally in the world.

At the moment, there are about 2,500 US troops in Afghanistan, although the number fluctuates. Additionally, there are 7,000 foreign forces in the US-led coalition there, the majority of them belonging to NATO allies.

Those questioning the decision are not impressed by the standard argument that Afghanistan will prove to be another Vietnam for America unless Washington opts for a quick exit from a country, which otherwise has great strategic significance as an economic corridor connecting South Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle-East.

American Wars — Vietnam vs Afghanistan

It is said that the war in Afghanistan is strikingly different from it was in Vietnam. At the peak of the Vietnam War, there were more than half a million (500,000) American soldiers fighting in that country’s civil war. And that saw the deaths of more than 58,000 American soldiers.

In contrast, the largest number of US troops in Afghanistan was 10,000 (one-fifth of the number in Vietnam) between 2010 and 2011. And since 2001, a total of only 2312 US military personnel have died there (as per the latest estimate).

The war in Vietnam had provoked an outcry in US domestic politics and was extremely unpopular. It had opened rifts in the American social fabric. But as in Afghanistan, the US has fought with a volunteer army, employed far fewer troops, and sought to keep casualties low, there have been no comparable domestic protests or street demonstrations involving people at large.

There have been critics, no doubt; but unlike in Vietnam, the war in Afghanistan has never aroused an opposition potent enough to force discussion of a withdrawal.

Finally, in Vietnam, the US was fighting a formidable army of North Vietnam (then one of the largest standing armies of the world), which was drawing substantial outside support from the Soviet bloc and China.

In a marked difference, the US enemy in Afghanistan has been mainly the Taliban insurgents, a far smaller military force backed mostly by Pakistan.

Thus, operations in Afghanistan have not been marked by the complexity of the great power rivalry that was the case in Vietnam; Russia and China are equally opposed to the Islamic fundamentalism inherent in any Taliban takeover of the country.

More than its implications on the Afghan polity, analysts making the aforementioned points are worried over the ominous signal that the US troop withdrawal will have on the credibility of the US as a dependable military partner in other parts of the world.

Is The US Abandoning Its ‘Afghan Ally’?

Their argument is that once the US is seen as abandoning a partner or an ally (in this case the elected Afghan government), other allies or partners of the US will apprehend similar “disloyalty” in the future. Thus, the Afghan instance can damage, or even destroy, America’s alliances with other states.

In other words, there is always the interdependence between developments in one alliance with those in other alliances, so runs their logic.

It may be noted that between 1948 and 2014, the US had as many as 66 defense commitments, including commitments to NATO members and Rio Treaty partners (most countries in Latin America).

The US is also linked to formal alliances with South Korea, Japan, Thailand, the Philippines, Australia, Liberia, and some small Pacific island states that previously were US territories.

In the 1980s, Washington created a new category of partners called “major non-NATO allies” (MNNA), primarily to ease arms transfers and facilitate military cooperation.

Currently, 17 countries are designated as MNNAs: Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Brazil, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Korea, Kuwait, Morocco, New Zealand, Pakistan, the Philippines, Thailand, and Tunisia. Taiwan is also treated as an MNNA, without formal designation as such.

However, from the above list, it is also clear that the US has never been a very loyal ally in the strict sense of the term. So the case of Afghanistan is not arising for the first time. America’s loyalty has depended on its changing geopolitical needs as well as the reciprocity of loyalty from its allied or military partners.

Take, for instance, the case of Pakistan, which despite getting billions of dollars worth of economic and military assistance has moved closer to China. As a matter of fact, America’s weary military alliance with Pakistan has cost the Americans nearly $40 billion since the September 11 attacks.

Therefore, for Pakistan to expect that the US will always side with it and not move closer to India has always been too realistic to be achieved.

US Would Rely On Democratic Govts

The US now realizes that nondemocratic regimes are inherently unreliable partners, though entering into alliances with them is much easier. But then not only the longevity of these regimes are suspect because of their very nature (always vulnerable to democratic pressures from below), thus raising questions over their successors’ commitment to the alliance; their rulers, when strong and stable, also renege on their liability to the alliance in the absence of the restrictions of a constitution, an independent judiciary, and an elected legislature in a true sense.

In fact, it is much easier for authoritarian regimes to violate treaties. We have the glowing example of how Uzbekistan president Islam Karimov literally cheated the Americans after entering an agreement with the then Bush administration in March 2002 to set up the Karshi-Khanabad airbase (also known as K2) in southern Uzbekistan for launching operations into Afghanistan, but not before grabbing US assistance, both direct and indirect, worth of nearly $400 million.

Policy-makers and analysts in the US now prefer closer military relations with democratic countries willing to host the military facilities for the American troops with base facilities to those that are authoritarian.

Security alliances or interactions among democracies are much more enduring. There may be occasional hiccups because of domestic developments of the democratic partners, but despite all that, the governments do continue to honor their security commitments because those deals are guaranteed by an established legal order.

Loyalty Tests

That explains why notwithstanding the differences among the leaders from time to time, America’s security relations with Israel, Germany, the UK, France, Australia, Japan, and South Korea are fundamentally sound.

The US stands out to many around the world as the country their own nation can rely on most, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.

Pluralities or majorities in around half of the 17 countries where an open-ended question was asked named the US as their most dependable ally going forward.

Israelis are the most likely to name the US as a reliable partner (82%) among the countries surveyed. People in Australia and Canada – countries that, like South Korea, are American allies by treaty – are also more likely to name the US as their top ally than any other country.

Another survey conducted in 2018 in 14 countries that have hosted large US military deployments, including Japan and South Korea, with approximately 1,000 respondents in each, has found that people in the host country generally feel positive or have neutral attitudes toward the US personnel stationed in their country.

In Australia, only 11 percent of the people were against the alliance. The respective figures were 15 percent in South Korea, 19 percent in the UK, 16 percent in the Netherlands, 20 percent in Portugal, 26 percent in Germany, and 27 percent in Japan.

In other words, an overwhelming majority in democracies is in favor of a stable security alliance with a fellow democratic America.

Security alliance with America has also been economically beneficial to the host countries, helping their investment, trade, political development, and economic growth, directly and indirectly.

According to the recent report, the US currently has approximately 174,000 active-duty personnel deployed to overseas locations in approximately 140 countries. The Department of Defense Comptroller’s Office estimates the total cost of overseas bases and deployments at $24.4 billion in the fiscal year 2020. These figures generally exclude the costs of ongoing combat operations.

The moral of the story is thus clear – the US has got a much better record in keeping its military commitments to fellow democracies and that the latter do appreciate the American commitments.

Viewed thus, the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, may not be a real test of US loyalty.

_________________
Les peuples ne meurent jamais de faim mais de honte.

https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2021/04/20/mort-de-george-floyd-le-policier-derek-chauvin-reconnu-coupable-de-meurtre-par-le-jury_6077467_3210.html a écrit:

derek chauvin a été reconnu coupable de meurtre au 2e et 3e degré et d'homicide involontaire

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/24/statement-by-president-joe-biden-on-armenian-remembrance-day/ a écrit:

Biden annonce la reconnaissance US officielle du génocide Arménien ...

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

Turquie et Russie dans l’œil du cyclone démocrate Laughing

_________________
Sois généreux avec nous, Ô toi Dieu et donne nous la Victoire

La politique américaine comme si vous y étiez... - Page 37 Signat10

Le Lobbye arménien a pris exemple sur le lobbye juif
Ils ont réussie en France ou le lobbye arménien est bien en place a Paris, maintenant ils ont eu les USA.

Par ailleurs, les USA ont toujour eux une politique d'équilibre des forces dans les régions. Vu que la Turquie-Azerbaijan ont gagnée le conflit du H-K. Il fallait contrebalancer par autre chose.

_________________
La politique américaine comme si vous y étiez... - Page 37 Marche12

Çe que je donnerai pour savoir ce qu’ils nous prépare concernant notre sahara........les Démocrates je leurs fais pas confiance .

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kamala-harris-southern-border-migrant-kids-veeps-book a écrit:

Les enfants migrants qui sont amenés dans des refuges reçoivent en guise de cadeau de bienvenue un livre de Kamala Harris ..Le titre de ce fameux bouquin ''superheroes are everywhere''..Elle est déjà en campagne pour 2024 (ou elle veut remplacer la belle Gal Gadot dans le rôle de wonder woman Very Happy

)

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

La politique américaine comme si vous y étiez... - Page 37 47146

Matthew Continetti - The American Enterprise Institute / The Washington Free Beacon a écrit:: Biden Builds Back Obama’s Middle East

And makes a mockery of his democracy agenda

That didn't take long. One week after piously and erroneously repudiating the Commission on Unalienable Rights established by his predecessor Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State Antony Blinken revealed the hollow selectivity of this administration's commitment to human rights and democratic reform.

On April 7, Blinken said he was "pleased to announce" the reinstatement of tens of millions of dollars in aid to the West Bank and Gaza and of some $150 million to support the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). "All assistance will be provided consistent with U.S. law," Blinken added.

Easier said than done. The Taylor Force Act, signed into law in 2018, withholds aid from the Palestinian Authority until the State Department certifies that the ruling party of the West Bank has terminated payments to family members of terrorists. It hasn't. That was one reason the Trump administration slashed the aid in the first place. Nor is there evidence that suddenly the Palestinians have curtailed the so-called pay-to-slay schemes that incentivize the murder of civilians and the perpetuation of conflict. On the contrary: They bristle at the idea of changing their corrupt and self-destructive ways.

A second law from 2018, the Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act, holds beneficiaries of foreign assistance legally and financially responsible for terrorism committed against U.S. citizens. This notion—that the Palestinian Authority might actually have to pay a price for its incitement to anti-Semitic violence—so terrified the leadership in the West Bank that it sent a letter to the Trump administration in February 2019 renouncing U.S. aid. I must have missed the make-up note postmarked Ramallah.

UNRWA long ago abandoned its original mission for anti-Israel activism. According to Pompeo, there are fewer than 200,000 Palestinian Arabs who remain displaced by the 1948 war. Rather than work to resettle this dwindling population, UNRWA devotes its resources to the delegitimization of Israel and to the perpetuation of a mythic "right of return" that obstructs peace. UNRWA also operates in the Gaza Strip, where its facilities were used by Hamas operatives and other terrorists during the 2014 war with Israel.

"Obviously, there are areas where we would like to see reform," State Department spokesman Ned Price said at a recent briefing. That's the understatement of the year. But what hope is there for reform of UNRWA when the Biden administration rewards it for doing nothing?

A conceit of President Joe Biden's foreign policy is that involvement in corrupt multilateral institutions somehow gives the United States an opportunity to improve them. "By resuming this assistance today, not only do we have that dialogue, but we have a seat at the table," Price said. "We can help drive UNRWA in the ways that we think it is in our interest and consistent with our values to do." That was also his argument for rejoining the World Health Organization and the U.N. Human Rights Council. He has little to show for it. The results so far: A propagandistic and misleading investigation into the origins of the coronavirus, and four anti-Israel resolutions. Having a seat at the table doesn't matter when everyone ignores you.

What was particularly galling about Blinken's announcement was its disconnect from the nature of Palestinian governance. Here is an administration that says the conflict between democracy and authoritarianism will define the 21st century. Here is an administration that prides itself on its support for human rights. And here is an administration that says it will be able to prevent millions in taxpayer funds from directly benefiting the Palestinian Authority, and thereby breaking U.S. law, by taking into account:

the intended primary beneficiary or end user of the assistance; whether the PA is the direct recipient of the assistance, of course; whether the assistance involves payments of Palestinian Authority creditors; the extent of ownership or control the PA exerts over an entity or an individual that is the primary beneficiary or end user of the assistance; and whether the assistance or, in some cases, the services provided directly replace assistance or services that the PA would otherwise provide.

Good luck. The renewed assistance, remember, will be circulated in a polity whose president is in the 16th year of a 4-year term, whose official corruption is legendary, whose 2.7 million subjects are policed by no less than six internal security forces, and whose entry in the 2020 State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices reads as follows:

reports of unlawful or arbitrary killings, torture, and arbitrary detention by authorities; holding political prisoners and detainees; significant problems with the independence of the judiciary; arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; serious restrictions on free expression, the press, and the internet, including violence, threats of violence, unjustified arrests and prosecutions against journalists, censorship, and site blocking; substantial interference with the rights of peaceful assembly and freedom of association, including harassment of nongovernmental organizations; restrictions on political participation, as the Palestinian Authority has not held a national election since 2006; acts of corruption; lack of investigation of and accountability for violence against women; violence and threats of violence motivated by anti-Semitism; anti-Semitism in school textbooks; violence and threats of violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or intersex persons; and reports of forced child labor.

The entry for Hamas is no better.

For all of his "transformative" ambitions at home, Biden's Middle East policy is remarkably backward-looking and uninspired. By denying aid to the Palestinians and UNRWA, the Trump administration recognized that the Israeli-Palestinian peace process had become a counterproductive sideshow, and that U.S. aid wasn't contributing to the resolution of conflict, but incentivizing it. The more urgent problem is Iran, which is why Trump was able to broker the Abraham Accords between Israel, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Sudan, and Morocco.

Now Biden has pivoted away from the anti-Iran coalition and toward the pro-Iran deal European allies. He's distanced himself from Israel and moved toward the Palestinians. He's rebuked the Saudis and coaxed the Houthis. He is trying to reconstruct, ever so slowly, Barack Obama's Middle East. But he hasn't really explained why this time will be different. After all: When you reward bad behavior, you get more of it. And that is exactly what Biden is doing.

_________________
Les peuples ne meurent jamais de faim mais de honte.

https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1387388503810625540 a écrit:

Biden va s'adresser au congrès ce soir..

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/05/04/readout-of-president-joseph-r-biden-jr-call-with-abu-dhabi-crown-prince-mohamed-bin-zayed/ a écrit:

Biden et MBZ se sont entretenus aujourd'hui

In that regard, the President underlined the strategic importance of the normalization of relations between the United Arab Emirates and Israel. He expressed his full support for strengthening and expanding these arrangements. a écrit:

Cette fois-ci c'est sorti de la bouche du POTUS... Les accords d'abraham deviennent une politique d'état et non celle d'un seul président

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/desk a écrit:

Donald Trump a sorti sa nouvelle plateforme d'expression..

_________________
Le courage croît en osant et la peur en hésitant.

» La politique américaine comme si vous y étiez...
» base militaire américaine en Algérie
» base de l'AFRICOM au Maroc
» aide américaine à la DCA
» US Army

La politique américaine comme si vous y étiez...

Germany-US Relations: Honeymoon Over Before It Even Started – German DiplomatGermany was among many European countries that breathed a deep sigh of relief when Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump in the US presidential elections in November 2020.

Unreliable Ally: Should US Withdrawal From Afghanistan Be A ‘Wake-Up Call’ For All Major Non- NATO Allies (MNNA)?

US President Joe Biden’s announcement that all American troops will withdraw from Afghanistan by the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks, thus ending what is arguably America’s longest war, may have great political significance in his country.

Biden Builds Back Obama’s Middle EastAnd makes a mockery of his democracy agenda

Germany-US Relations: Honeymoon Over Before It Even Started – German Diplomat

Germany was among many European countries that breathed a deep sigh of relief when Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump in the US presidential elections in November 2020.

Biden Builds Back Obama’s Middle East

And makes a mockery of his democracy agenda