Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

Chinese Foreign Ministry stands behind Pakistan, criticises Trump and SLAMS India

According to China, India is “slapping its own face” with its provocative actions along the Chinese border.

Published

on

2,280 Views

Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Hua Chunying has held a press conference where she discussed recent events while taking questions from journalists. The overall weight of her remarks speak to the fact that China is getting increasingly fed up with India’s failure to engage in dialogue with China over the Doklam/Donglang border dispute as well as other areas of the China-India frontier whose demarcations are not universally recognised.

In her statements Hua also affirmed China’s commitment to its manifold partnership/friendship with Pakistan while subtly warning Donald Trump not to insult Islamabad’s commitment to peace in South Asia.

When asked about Donald Trump’s recent announcement on Afghanistan, Hua Chunying responded in the following way,

“The Chinese side is actively committed to promoting the peace and reconciliation process in Afghanistan. We always maintain that political dialogue is the only way out for resolving the Afghanistan issue. The international community should support the ‘Afghan-led’ and ‘Afghan-owned’ reconciliation process, support Afghanistan in realising the widespread and inclusive political reconciliation, support the Afghan people in exploring a development path suiting their own national conditions and support the Afghan government in enhancing counter-terrorism capability and combating extreme terrorist forces. We need to attach importance to the important role of Pakistan in the Afghanistan issue and respect the sovereignty and legitimate security concerns of Pakistan. The Chinese side is willing to maintain communication and coordination with the United States on the Afghanistan issue and make concerted efforts for achieving the peace and stability of Afghanistan and the region at large”.

When asked a follow up question about the Pakistani Foreign Secretary’s recent visit to China, she stated,

“In recent days, Pakistan’s Foreign Secretary Tehmina Janjua visited China. State Councilor Yang Jiechi, Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Assistant Foreign Minister Kong Xuanyou met with her respectively. The relevant press release has been issued. The Chinese side said that China and Pakistan are all-weather strategic cooperative partners and the two sides always firmly support each other on the issues concerning each other’s core interests. Against the backdrop of the complex and volatile international and regional situations, the strategic significance of the China-Pakistan relations has become more prominent. The Chinese side appreciates the efforts made by Pakistan to fight terrorism and safeguard the security of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and is willing to strengthen all-round cooperation with Pakistan so as to achieve common development. Foreign Secretary Tehmina Janjua said that China and Pakistan enjoy ironclad friendship and no matter how the political situation changes in Pakistan, its friendly policy towards China remains unchanged. The Pakistani side will as always firmly stand together with China on the issues concerning China’s core interests and join hands with China to advance the building of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and continuously move forward the bilateral relations”.

In describing the friendship between Pakistan and China as “ironclad” while emphasising the importance of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor all the while rebuffing Donald Trump’s statements which said that Pakistan isn’t doing enough to help foster peace in Afghanistan, China has shown that it is willing to stand by its Pakistani ally on several fronts including, trade, infrastructure, peacekeeping and regional stability. With China’s firm commitments to Pakistan, it will be unlikely that any American economic threats to Pakistan will have the impact they would have had in recent decades.

Furthermore, China’s firm commitment to Pakistan’s sovereignty implies that China will at the very least condemn any further US drone strikes on Pakistan’s soil, strikes which in the past, the US conducted with impunity, often killing civilians in the process.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman was then asked the following question on India’s provocative acts along India’s lengthy borders with China,

“According to the report of the Hindustan Times, recently, India’s Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has cleared a proposal to construct a road from Marsimik La to Hot Spring. Marsimik La is only 20 kilometers away from the northwestern tip of the Pangong Lake. The Indian media said that the road will give Indian security forces in the remote regions the access to the disputed areas of the China-India boundary so as to “ensure the strength of the Indian border troops”. What is your comment”.

She responded in the following way,

“This report makes me feel that India is slapping its own face. The Chinese side constructs roads on its own territory, but India illegally crossed the boundary to obstruct that under the so-called pretext of ‘security concerns’. Now the actions of India exactly prove that on the relevant issues concerning the China-India boundary, India’s deeds cannot match its words and what it did is inconsistent and contradicts with what it said.

The western sector of the China-India boundary has not been delimited. China and India have agreed that pending the final settlement of the boundary issue, they will make concerted efforts to uphold the peace and tranquillity of the border area. India’s construction of the infrastructure which is obviously for the military purpose near the Line of Actual Control in the western sector cannot help to uphold the peace and stability of the western sector of the China-India boundary or ease the current situation of the boundary between the two countries”.

The Chinese position remains clear. While China legally builds roads on Chinese territory, India is sending troops and builders into non-Indian territory. She further accused India of effectively disturbing the peace and failing to take appropriate measures to ease the current tensions.

In many ways, the most startling aspect of the recent flare-ups along the Sino-Indian border is that China has remained so calm in the face of Indian provocations that have not been accompanied by any apparent willingness to discuss the issue in a diplomatic forum.

The forthcoming BRICS summit which will begin on August 31st in Xiamen, located in China’s Fujian Province will be the first time that the Indian and Chinese leadership will have met since the commencement of this summer’s stand-off in Doklam/Donglang.

This could present India with an opportunity to once and for all speak directly with China at the highest levels about the issues. As BRICS members, India, China and Russia are also members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). In this sense, the BRICS meeting could also theoretically pave the way for a conflict solving session among SCO members. Russia which retains good relations with both China and India could almost certainly mediate in the dispute, but this is only possible if India admits that dialogue must begin at once while further provocations must cease.

By contrast, the summit could inversely reveal the growing schism between Beijing and New Delhi if Indian Prime Minister Modi refuses to speak about the issue, which clearly China is eager to resolve peacefully.

In six days time, India and Mdo in particular will be put to the test. Modi can either maturely utilise the BRICS and SCO to bring an end to the conflict, or otherwise prolong the conflict, making many fellow BRICS and SCO members begin to doubt India’s international commitments and its wider commitment to diplomatic problem solving.

It is of course in India’s economic and geo-political interests to work with the BRICS and SCO to solve the crises amicably. The prolonged conflict is counter productive in respect of India’s own economic advancement or as China stated, India “slapping its own face”.

There already exists a precedent for Modi to seek out a bilateral meeting with China to solve these longstanding issues once and for all. Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte has broken with his successors and spoken directly to China about disputes in the South China Sea. China has received Duterte graciously and both sides have ruled out the use of force while committing to cooperation.

READ MORE: DUTERTE’S TRIUMPH–China hails “golden period” of relations with Philippines

India has the opportunity to do the same in respect of settling disputes with China and organising a permanent problem solving mechanism through the SCO and/or through bilateral channels. This would be a win-win but thus far Modi has been a master of the lose-lose.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Avramijevdan
Guest
Avramijevdan

India is seeing China as her adversary, so it seems. If Pakistan manages to come out as more reliable partner then India that will be the strangest thing ever and India will have only her government to “thank” for.

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

BRICS should be interesting. Funny, how India has her independence and so much hatred for the time she was a colony of Great Britain. So why is her Government seriously wanting to go back to those times, aligned with the same crowd that was responsible for the East India Tea Corporation? Wans’t the same crowd responsible for the ‘Chinese Opium War’? The Chinese moved on, as ‘justice is a dessert best served cold’ so comes to mind. Not being able to make head or tail of any of it, thanks Guy, for recommending this book, which will no doubt help… Read more »

Suzanne Giraud
Guest
Suzanne Giraud

Hi Anne-Marie, On the subject of this Modi creature (he reviles me), have a read of this May 2014 article, shared by a The Duran reader recently:
https://pando.com/2014/05/26/revealed-the-head-of-omidyar-networks-in-india-had-a-secret-second-job-helping-elect-narendra-modi/

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Thanks Suzanne. I have just skimmed through the article and will go back as it is well worth reading. ‘…Shortly after Sinha left Omidyar Network to help Modi win, Modi gave a speech calling for opening India’s e-commerce market to foreign companies such as Ebay, whose largest shareholder is Pierre Omidyar. The message was clear: Modi is the candidate of hi-tech India, violent ultranationalism notwithstanding…’ Silicon Valley is so reliant on cheap, Indian Labour and it screams out ‘beware’. The only thing that appealed to me, initially with regards Modi, was the fact India was close to Russia and appeared… Read more »

DarkEyes
Guest
DarkEyes

Maybe Mr. Modi has been “promised something nice” by the Hegemony. But he will receive it not earlier than having made a mess between India and China so the Hegemony “have to come in” to help defend the Indian “democracy” and they can build another military base near the Chinese border “anywhere” along the line.
Remember that the Yankee democracy is intensifying its “profits” from Afghanistan which is near Russian Federation and near China. Just driving a wedge. India does do the dirty work, for Israel first, as usual.
IMO.

Suzanne Giraud
Guest
Suzanne Giraud

Love it: “What did make my tonsils need a chat with the S Bend” – cracked me up but so very, very ‘politically correct’ xoxoxo

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Haha and feel free to use the line.

VeeNarian (Yerevan)
Guest
VeeNarian (Yerevan)

Who is pulling Modi’s strings? And why is he such a willing puppet? How long will China and India allow this charade to continue? How long will the Chinese and Indian people allow this kind of immature behaviour to continue? The petty disputes between China and India must be resolved face-face and at this BRICS meeting urgently, in the spirit mutual respect and partnership to build an Asian century. As a British Indian, let me point some brutal facts to both sides: India: this country has been independent since 1947. Its ancient civilization from the time of the Vedas does… Read more »

DarkEyes
Guest
DarkEyes

The Zionists want to own the planet, remember?

Bente Petersen
Guest
Bente Petersen

I do not think Modi will be re-elected in India… he is a trouble maker in so many areas… ambitious for himself not for india and its people…

Hudaf Shaikh
Guest
Hudaf Shaikh

Afghanistan is very crucial to China’s goal to become #1 world power by 2030 – China continues to encourage it’s ally Pakistan to provide support and harbor the Taliban and other Islamic terrorists in order to drain US both politically and financially and distract it from the huge damage it is inflicting on the European and US core industries like steel and aluminum through aggressive dumping.

Today, UK has just a single operation aluminum factory and it’s steel industry is cutting back on production sharply under the onslaught – European and US producers too are in a similar boat –

Herbert Dorsey
Guest
Herbert Dorsey

The problem with Modi is the undue influence that the U.S. and Israel have over him.

Latest

Midterm Elections: A Disaster Denied, and What is Coming

The Democrats intend to mount a non-stopping offensive against the President.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Jeremiah Johnson (nom de plume of a retired Green Beret of the United States Army Special Forces ) via SHTFplan.com:


Before the 2016 Presidential Election, and both before and after the inauguration, I wrote specifically about how important the midterm election would be, and the results if the President should lose even one House of Congress.  That happened: the Republicans just lost the House of Representatives. Now that the Democrats control it, not one piece of legislation will pass that is on the President’s agenda. In the supreme act of denial, the Republican party claims the “Blue Wave” was not successful; even the President declared a “victory” with the midterms.

Nothing could be further from the truth, on either count.

The Democrats intend to mount a non-stopping offensive against the President. First, they are going to demand that Mueller go on the attack again. They are already demanding the President’s tax returns. On Thursday, 11-8-18, thousands of people marched in Times Square in New York City in protest of Jeff Sessions’ departure from the White House…although Sessions was the one who tendered a letter of resignation. The mob of protesters carried mass-produced “No one is above the law” placards and signs.

Not one of those Marxists carried those signs when former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton resigned after Benghazi, where a U.S. Consular Outpost of the United States was destroyed, and the U.S. Ambassador and four of his staff murdered.

“Happy Veterans’ Day” is coming up, with the cliché eternal: “Thank you for your service.”

Nobody really cares about it, except the vets. Those who have to work receive time and a half for their pay, and Hallmark makes about another $50 million or so on the cards and gifts…about $10 million of that for the Government to “re-ingest” with the taxes….another day on the endless cycle:

The cycle of spending of disposable income, an indispensable part of the economy and all of the governmental employees on paid federal holiday, solemnly dispensed of at the expense of (to paraphrase Metallica) the government’s “disposable heroes.”

Where were the protests in the streets after Benghazi? Everybody was hidden, because at the time we were under Obama. When Donald Trump was elected President, a “hiatus” was granted from the nonstop march toward socialism/communism that reached a zenith as never before. Now that hiatus is shrinking, as the Communists and Marxists begin new offensives under their playbook “Rules for Radicals,” offensives targeting every area of the society.

Their plan should be obvious: to keep the President “backpedaling” and the economy faltering, in order to set the stage for the 2020 election. All of this I have written about before, and it came to pass with the Midterm elections. If they keep the President on the defense and keep pushing the “social issues,” it will render his administration ineffective…not delivering the change back toward the right that the voters wanted to see in 2016.

The Wall Street Journal published a piece on November 9 entitled Democrats plan to pursue most aggressive gun-control legislation in decades.” They have been receiving plenty of help on this one, with the Synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh, and the recent murders by a former Marine last week. Here they come again! All of the legislators…with armed protectors paid for by you, mind you…clamoring for the guns. Here’s a piece of it for you:

Democrats say they will pass the most aggressive gun-control legislation in decades when they become the House majority in January, plans they renewed this week in the aftermath of a mass killing in a California bar. Their efforts will be spurred by an incoming class of pro-gun-control lawmakers who scored big in Tuesday’s midterm elections, although any measure would likely meet stiff resistance in the GOP-controlled Senate. Democrats ousted at least 15 House Republicans with “A” National Rifle Association ratings, while the candidates elected to replace them all scored an “F” NRA rating. “This new majority is not going to be afraid of our shadow,” said Mike Thompson, a California Democrat who is chairman of the House Gun Violence Prevention Task Force. “We know that we’ve been elected to do a job, and we’re going to do it.”

Now of course the argument to this rationale will be that the Senate is needed before a law passes. Yes, we all watched “Schoolhouse Rock” and learned about the three-party system of checks and balances. The problem?  Nothing was accomplished when the Republicans held both houses of Congress, and the Reds and Blues counter one another, and more:

The Democrats’ strategy is not to pass any laws: it is to stir up public controversy, win support of the “Zero” generation, and either force actions through the “tyranny of the majority,” or make it so horrible an arena that it detracts from or prevents any positive efforts and actions from the administration…setting the stage for the 2020 election.

Ocasio-Cortez just entered the House of Representatives at the “sage/sagacious” age of 29, and she is a self-described “democratic socialist” who favors single-payer healthcare, gun control, abolishing border controls, and declared that she would support the impeachment of the President. She was also part of Bernie Sanders’ campaign movement in 2016.

Lenin espoused some “gems” that should be considered. Here is one that falls in line with the “newly discovered wonderful possibility of socialism” the Zero-generation and twenty-somethings have fallen in love with hook, line, and sinker:

“The goal of socialism is communism.”

New York just placed a “democratic socialist” in the White House…a declared socialist, among all of the hidden Marxists camouflaged under the “progressive” or “democratic” monikers.

Gun control, coming at us once again, and once more, a quote from Lenin for you:

“Disarmament is the ideal of socialism. There will be no wars in socialist society; consequently, disarmament will be achieved. But whoever expects that socialism will be achieved without a social revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat is not a socialist. Dictatorship is state power based directly on violence. And in the twentieth century – as in the age of civilization generally – violence means neither a fist nor a club, but troops. To put “disarmament” in the program is tantamount to making the general declaration: “We are opposed to the use of arms.” There is as little Marxism in this as there would be if we were to say: “We are opposed to violence!” – Lenin, “The Disarmament Slogan,” from October of 1916

The next two years should be interesting, to say the least. Keep in mind: the President is not throwing in the towel, however, he has one more year to turn the tide…before he has to campaign. There is still another way, though: I mentioned it in the last article that I wrote. Bush Jr. used this technique successfully when he was trailing Kerry in the polls. Margaret Thatcher used this technique when she was about to be shown the door, and turned it around, remaining in office.

The “technique” is a war, whether a “quickie” (such as the Falklands War…Malvinas, if you prefer), or a protracted one (Iraq “II” where victory was declared within months of started, and it was achieved…with the decades and a half of Military Industrial Complex contracts…and the transition of the United States into a Surveillance and Police State).

The technique is a war, and if you keep abreast of what is going on, you will see that Russia and China are gearing up for a war, the nations are “decoupling” themselves incrementally from the dying fiat-backed Petrodollar, and North Korea is once again raising itself as a nuclear threat (on its own, or encouraged by one or more nations). A war could either suspend elections, or propel the incumbent into a victory based on the populace’s perception of what they need. Remember this last quote from Lenin, and let it sink in good:

“A standing army and police are the chief instruments of state power.” – Lenin, State and Revolution, 1917

The ultimate truth: the elections are akin to the Stock Market, the Dow-Jones Industrial Average. It doesn’t matter how many shares are bought or sold, as long as there are fluctuations and flux. The winners are the brokers, who pocket their commissions on every trade…a sell or a buy. The same exists here. The blue donkeys versus the red elephants. The “tribalism” of men, and their needs of a social order…a cohesive social grouping that reflects what they believe in…is exploited to its maximum advantage. All the while, the paradigm shifts almost imperceptibly, until before you know it….twenty years have elapsed, and you are not looking at the same country anymore.

The “art” is to make the people think they will be getting what they want…dupe them into believing it is something good, when it’s not. It took the blood of heroes to form and defend this nation.  The downfall is precipitated by traitors from within…bleeding the nation white by circumventing existing laws and replacing them with the greatest injustice and threat to personal liberty of all. What is that greatest threat? A foreign enemy? A spontaneous collapse of everything?

No. The greatest threat is the acceptance of the people of the illusion of “social justice,” that really translates into something for nothing by taking from those who have earned, and giving it to those who live within the entitlement cesspool of their own sloth. Such a mentality pervades our society today. In order to save the United States, we have to return to our fundamental values and become an ass-kicking, straight-shooting people who fear God and care for their families, neighbors, and nation once more. If we do this, we may emerge from the coming night as a nation once more. Ready your NVGs, and steel your hearts for the challenge before it arrives…now…at the twilight’s last gleaming.

May Veterans’ Day bring remembrance to your mind, may your heart find peace, and may any who serve in your family be safe and sound.


Jeremiah Johnson is the Nom de plume of a retired Green Beret of the United States Army Special Forces (Airborne).  Mr. Johnson is also a Gunsmith, a Certified Master Herbalist, a Montana Master Food Preserver, and a graduate of the U.S. Army’s SERE school (Survival Evasion Resistance Escape).  He lives in a cabin in the mountains of Western Montana with his wife and three cats. You can follow Jeremiah’s regular writings at SHTFplan.com or contact him here.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Russia’s Next Weapon: A Church

The Russian military plans to build a military church to bolster the spiritual values of its armed forces.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Michael Peck via The National Interest:


Meet Vladimir Putin’s newest weapon: a church.

The Russian military plans to build a military church to bolster the spiritual values of its armed forces. Construction will soon begin of the Main Church of the Armed Forces, to be erected in Patriot Park outside Moscow, according to Colonel General Andrei Kartapolov, deputy defense minister and chief of the armed forces’ Main Military-Political Directorate, a new organization responsible for political education of the troops.

The “new church will be one more example of the people’s unity around the idea of patriotism, love, and devotion to our Motherland,” Kartapolov told Russian journalists.

To say the church, dubbed by some as the “Khaki Temple,” will have a martial air would be an understatement.

“The walls of the military church are really made in the color of the standard Russian missile system and armored vehicle,” according to the Russian newspaper The Independent [Google English translation here ] “…From the inside, the walls are decorated with paintings with battle scenes from military history and texts from the Holy Scriptures. The projected height is 95 meters [104 feet] and is designed for 6,000 people.”

“Kartapolov is convinced that the modern Russian serviceman cannot be shaped without shaping lofty spirituality in him,” Russian media said. “Speaking about ideology, the deputy head of the military department pointed out that this will be based on knowledge of the history of our Motherland and people and on historical and cultural traditions.”

“Even though the Russian constitution states that ‘no ideology may be established as state or obligatory,’ the Kremlin continues to search for a unifying set of beliefs,” notes the U.S. Army’s Foreign Military Studies Office.

Religion has long played a role in Russian military life, first through the Russian Orthodox Church in Tsarist times, and then—in a secular way—through Communism in Soviet times. “In late imperial Russia, when they began to build garrisons, every regiment sought to build a regimental church, but not a synagogue or mosque,” Roger Reese, an historian at Texas A&M University who has written books on the Tsarist and Soviet armed forces, told the National Interest. “In Putin’s Russia, the Orthodox Church seeks every opportunity to represent itself as the national religion and tie itself to the state as it had under the tsars, so this act represents continuity broken temporarily by the Soviet years. Of course the Soviet regime did not build churches for the army, but it did build the ‘House of the Red Army,’ shaped like a star, in Moscow dedicated to the use of the Red Army and its soldiers.

In some respects it was analogous to a USO [United Service Organization that supports American soldiers] building. So Putin’s dedicating one particular building to the use of the Russian Army soldiers for purposes of morale—and morals—is in line with that.”

While the thought of a military church will be distasteful to some, Russia is hardly unique in linking the military and religion.

Many armies, the United States and Israel included, maintain chaplains who wear uniform and hold military rank. Chapels are common on military bases, and soldiers are given time for – and sometimes pressured to – attend religious services. While a Russian military church is likely to favor a specific denomination – Russian Orthodoxy – even that isn’t unique: non-Christian members of the U.S. military have complained of religious discrimination , especially by Christian fundamentalists.

What’s interesting is how little things change. Be it the Tsar’s conscripts, or the Red Army’s draftees or the volunteers who comprise much of modern Russia’s military, some spiritual reinforcement is deemed necessary to get soldiers to fight.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Pat Buchanan: Macron Trash Talks “America First”

Charles de Gaulle was perhaps the greatest French patriot of the 20th century. He spoke of a Europe of nation-states and ordered NATO out of France in 1966.

Patrick J. Buchanan

Published

on

Authored by Pat Buchanan via The American Conservative:


In a rebuke that bordered on a national insult Sunday, Emmanuel Macron sniped at Donald Trump’s calling himself a nationalist.

“Patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism; nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism,” Macron said.

As for Trump’s policy of “America first,” Macron trashed such atavistic thinking in this new age: “By saying we put ourselves first and the others don’t matter, we erase what a nation holds dearest, what gives it life, what makes it great and what is essential: its moral values.”

Though he is being hailed as Europe’s new anti-Trump leader who will stand up for transnationalism and globalism, Macron revealed his ignorance of America.

Trump’s ideas are not ideological but rooted in our country’s history.

America was born between the end of the French and Indian War, the Declaration of Independence in 1776, and the ratification of the Constitution in 1788. Both the general who led us in the Revolution and the author of that declaration became president. Both put America first. And both counseled their countrymen to avoid “entangling” or “permanent” alliances with any other nation, as we did for 160 years.

Were George Washington and Thomas Jefferson lacking in patriotism?

When Woodrow Wilson, after being re-elected in 1916 on the slogan “He Kept Us Out of War,” took us into World War I, he did so as an “associate,” not as an Allied power. American troops fought under American command.

After that war, the U.S. Senate rejected an alliance with France. Under Franklin Roosevelt, Congress formally voted for neutrality in any future European war.

The U.S. emerged from World War II as the least bloodied and least damaged nation because we stayed out for more than two years after it had begun.

We did not invade France until four years after it was occupied, the British had been thrown off the Continent, and Josef Stalin’s Soviet Union had been fighting and dying for three years.

The leaders who kept us out of the two world wars as long as they did—did they not serve our nation well, given that America’s total losses were just over 500,000 dead, compared with the millions that other nations lost?

At the Armistice Day ceremony, Macron declared, “By saying we put ourselves first and the others don’t matter, we erase what a nation holds dearest…its moral values.”

But Trump did not say that other countries don’t matter. He only said we should put our own country first.

What country does Emmanuel Macron put first?

Does the president of France see himself as a citizen of the world with responsibility for all of Europe and all of mankind?

Charles de Gaulle was perhaps the greatest French patriot of the 20th century. Yet he spoke of a Europe of nation-states, built a national nuclear arsenal, ordered NATO out of France in 1966, and, in Montreal in 1967, declared, “Long live a free Quebec”—inciting French Canadians to rise up against “les Anglo-Saxons” and create their own nation.

Was de Gaulle lacking in patriotism?

By declaring American nationalists anti-patriotic, Macron has asserted a claim to the soon-to-be-vacant chair of Angela Merkel.

But is Macron really addressing the realities of the new Europe and world in which we now live? Or is he simply assuming a heroic liberal posture to win the applause of Western corporate and media elites?

The realities: in Britain, Scots are seeking secession, and the English have voted to get out of the European Union. Many Basques and Catalans wish to secede from Spain. Czechs and Slovaks have split the blanket and parted ways.

Anti-EU sentiment is rampant in populist-dominated Italy.

A nationalism their peoples regard as deeply patriotic has triumphed in Poland and Hungary and is making gains even in Germany.

The leaders of the world’s three greatest military powers—Trump in the U.S., Vladimir Putin in Russia, and Xi Jinping in China—are all nationalists.

Turkish nationalist Recep Tayyip Erdogan rules in Ankara; Hindu nationalist Narendra Modi is head of India. Jair Bolsonaro, a Trumpian nationalist, is the incoming president of Brazil. Is not Benjamin Netanyahu an Israeli nationalist?

In France, a poll of voters last week showed that Marine Le Pen’s renamed party, Rassemblement National, has moved ahead of Macron’s party for the May 2019 European Parliament elections.

If there is a valid criticism of Trump’s foreign policy, it is not that he has failed to recognize the new realities of the 21st century. It’s that he has not moved expeditiously to dissolve old alliances that put America at risk of war in faraway lands where no vital U.S. interests exist.

Why are we still committed to fight for a South Korea far richer and more populous than the nuclear-armed North? Why are U.S. planes and ships still bumping into Russian planes and ships in the Baltic and Black seas?

Why are we still involved in the half-dozen wars into which Bush II and Barack Obama got us in the Middle East?

Why do we not have the “America first” foreign policy we voted for?


Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever. To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending