Connect with us

Analysis

News

CONFIRMED: Foreign investors flock back to Russia

As economy strengthens Russia overtakes India as top pick for foreign investors and equity funds

Alexander Mercouris

Published

on

1,508 Views

This article was first published by RussiaFeed

Growing investor confidence in the Russia as its historically high inflation rate continues to fall, and as its economy leaves recession behind it, has received dramatic confirmation with the news that for the first time Russia has overtaken India as the preferred investment option of emerging market investors.

This confirmation comes from the most authoritative possible source, an article in the Financial Times, which in recent years has been intensely critical of Russia.

Russia has taken over from India as the largest overweight position for emerging market equity funds.

The move comes despite the imposition of ever-tighter sanctions on Moscow, still low oil prices and an economy now pulling out of bitter recession but still assailed by real, inflation-adjusted interest rates of 5.2 per cent.

In contrast, India has long been a darling of foreign investors licking their lips at the prospect of the world’s second-most populous country growing at a punchy rate, assisted by the reformist zeal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

“Russia is now the largest overweight position among emerging market managers for the first time since our records began in 2011, surpassing longstanding EM favourite India,” said Steven Holden, founder of Copley Fund Research, who compiled the data and confessed to “surprise” at Russia’s newfound popularity.

The average EM equity fund is now overweight Russia by 1.46 percentage points, surpassing the 1.4 percentage-point figure for India, where fund managers had an average overweight position of 4.4 per cent in early 2015, according to Copley’s numbers, as shown in the first chart.

The data are based on the holdings of 126 funds with combined assets of $300bn. Of these funds, 72.8 per cent are now overweight Russia, compared with only 60 per cent with an outsize position in India….

The article points out correctly that foreign investor interest in Russia starts from a very low base, and that Russia has overtaken India as much because of India’s recent loss of attractiveness as Russia’s rise in attractiveness.

However the article also makes it clear that the rise in investor interest in Russia is ultimately driven by Russia’s increasingly strong fundamentals

Mr Jain is among a group of investors with a genuine fervour for Russia now, which is striking given that he was “ultra bearish for 15 years”, while CIO of Switzerland’s Vontobel Asset Management, where he ran as much as $32bn. Yet now his GQG Partners Emerging Markets Equity fund has an exposure of 10.2 per cent to Russia, more than three times its index weight.

“I was publicly critical of investing in Russia. I have covered Russia for 25 years and this is the most I have had,” he said.

Nicholas Field, EM strategist at Schroders and co-manager of the group’s Global Emerging Market Opportunities fund, is another convert, with a punchier weighting of 14.2 per cent.

“A lot of the headlines one reads about Russia are about geopolitics and relations with the US and so on, but when you look at the economy you do see some things that are interesting to investors,” he said.

Mr Jain’s thesis is that the sanctions imposed on Russia by the US and EU, as well as the slide in oil prices, have been largely beneficial to foreign investors because they have forced Russian companies to delever and cut costs.

India is very expensive. It has gone from very cheap to one of the most expensive markets.  More specifically, he says Russian oil companies have been forced to develop complex drilling technology in-house, potentially helping them in the long term, while some domestic agricultural companies, such as cheesemakers, have benefited from reduced foreign competition amid Russian counter-sanctions on European food imports.

“Sanctions have been positive for the Russian corporate world. [Companies] were forced to get their act together and there was a massive cost-cutting effort,” said Mr Jain. “Because of this cost-cutting, operating profits are higher than people estimate. Corporate earnings have begun to recover after a long slump. You have to follow the corporate profits.”

He even sees positives in the travails of Otkritie and B&N Bank, two private banks that have been bailed out by the central bank and nationalised in recent weeks after running into financial difficulties.

About 4.2 per cent of Mr Jain’s fund is invested in Sberbank, Russia’s largest bank. He said: “The banking industry has seen massive consolidation. Now three banks control 70 per cent of the assets. “Sberbank is very well run, on six times earnings. How many banks make 20 per cent ROE [return on equity] in the middle of a recession? The position they have wouldn’t be allowed in many countries, and now there is tremendous credit growth and NPLs [non-performing loans] are coming off.”

Overall, he sees room for further top-line revenue growth, margin expansion and a market re-rating, given that Moscow currently trades on a price/earnings ratio of just 7.8 and has a chunky dividend yield of 4.7 per cent.

Readers of RussiaFeed and of The Duran will already be familiar with much of this.  By way of example, here is a recent article I wrote for The Duran on the subject of Russia’s advances in oil drilling technology (one of the subjects touched on in the Financial Times article by Rajiv Jain), whilst the rapid advance of Russian agriculture, in part as a consequence of Russia’s counter-sanctions (a subject also touched on by Rajiv Jain) was recently discussed by me on RussiaFeed here.

As for the growing strength of the Russian financial and banking system – historically the Achilles heel of Russia’s post-Soviet economy – I have discussed it many times and in many places (see for example here and here).

What is finally happening is that the international investment community – and the Financial Times – are finally catching up with the truth of all of this.

Given the enormous amount of negative “noise” from which Russia suffers and the Financial Times’s longstanding hostility to the country and its government, the article about international investors coming to Russia nonetheless and entirely unsurprisingly comes with a sting in its tail.  The growing interest in Russia is supposedly not because its long term economic prospects are good.  It is only because of Russia’s recovery from recession

Mr Field’s optimism is fuelled by the country’s economic recovery, which he expects to continue until at least the middle of 2018. “Demand has been suppressed so the recovery should continue for a while. Inflation has dropped to 3.3 per cent, which is pretty unheard of in Russia. In the next 12-24 months there is room for quite a few interest rate cuts and that can certainly boost the economy. The one thing that can upset that is another major move in the oil price,” said Mr Field.

Nevertheless, he is not a long-term bull. “We don’t think long-term structural trend growth is very high, so as much as people are buying into Russia now it’s not because it has a glorious 10 or 20 years ahead, it’s because it’s recovering.”

We are likely to hear numerous such comments over the next few months as Russia’s renewed economic growth becomes impossible to deny even by those who previously said it would never happen.

Such comments are actually meaningless.  In what sense is an economy’s successful recovery from recession a reason for doubting its future growth?

Putting that aside, the article itself provides abundant examples of the ‘structural reasons’ why strong growth in the future is likely.  To repeat again the comments which appear in the article from Rajiv Jain

…….Russian oil companies have been forced to develop complex drilling technology in-house, potentially helping them in the long term, while some domestic agricultural companies, such as cheesemakers, have benefited from reduced foreign competition amid Russian counter-sanctions on European food imports.

“Sanctions have been positive for the Russian corporate world. [Companies] were forced to get their act together and there was a massive cost-cutting effort,” said Mr Jain. “Because of this cost-cutting, operating profits are higher than people estimate. Corporate earnings have begun to recover after a long slump. You have to follow the corporate profits.”

He even sees positives in the travails of Otkritie and B&N Bank, two private banks that have been bailed out by the central bank and nationalised in recent weeks after running into financial difficulties.

About 4.2 per cent of Mr Jain’s fund is invested in Sberbank, Russia’s largest bank. He said: “The banking industry has seen massive consolidation. Now three banks control 70 per cent of the assets. “Sberbank is very well run, on six times earnings. How many banks make 20 per cent ROE [return on equity] in the middle of a recession? The position they have wouldn’t be allowed in many countries, and now there is tremendous credit growth and NPLs [non-performing loans] are coming off.”

What is cost-cutting, greater efficiency, development of new products and new technologies, high operating profits and (within the banking system) successful industry consolidation if not evidence of the economy successfully addressing its structural problems, thereby ensuring its successful long term growth in the future?  No doubt there is much more still to do, but why go on pretending that nothing is happening when it obviously is?

One of the perennial problems discussion of Russia’s economy faces is that its Western critics insist on having it both ways.  They are forced to concede that the Russian economy has successfully adapted to the harsh post-2014 economic conditions in which it found itself (low oil prices and Western sanctions) and is now recovering from a recession that most of them thought would break it, but at the same time they refuse to admit that this successful adaption of the Russian economy to these same harsh economic conditions in any way undermines their deeply critical even at times apocalyptic picture of it.

In reality an economy that could adapt so quickly and so successfully to the challenges it faced in 2014 cannot be the inefficient, corrupt, badly managed, ‘kleptocratic’ and underdeveloped ‘Zaire with snow’ economy imagined by its Western critics.

The article in the Financial Times shows that increasing numbers of fund managers, including some like Rajiv Jain and Nicholas Field who had previously bought into this dark picture, are starting to see the truth of this.

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

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

The ‘Gilets Jaunes’ Are Unstoppable: “Now, The Elites Are Afraid”

Now the elites are afraid. For the first time, there is a movement which cannot be controlled through the normal political mechanisms.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Christophe Guilluy via Spiked-Online.com:


The gilets jaunes (yellow vest) movement has rattled the French establishment. For several months, crowds ranging from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands have been taking to the streets every weekend across the whole of France. They have had enormous success, extracting major concessions from the government. They continue to march.

Back in 2014, geographer Christopher Guilluy’s study of la France périphérique (peripheral France) caused a media sensation. It drew attention to the economic, cultural and political exclusion of the working classes, most of whom now live outside the major cities. It highlighted the conditions that would later give rise to the yellow-vest phenomenon. Guilluy has developed on these themes in his recent books, No Society and The Twilight of the Elite: Prosperity, the Periphery and the Future of Francespiked caught up with Guilluy to get his view on the causes and consequences of the yellow-vest movement.

spiked: What exactly do you mean by ‘peripheral France’?

Christophe Guilluy: ‘Peripheral France’ is about the geographic distribution of the working classes across France. Fifteen years ago, I noticed that the majority of working-class people actually live very far away from the major globalised cities – far from Paris, Lyon and Toulouse, and also very far from London and New York.

Technically, our globalised economic model performs well. It produces a lot of wealth. But it doesn’t need the majority of the population to function. It has no real need for the manual workers, labourers and even small-business owners outside of the big cities. Paris creates enough wealth for the whole of France, and London does the same in Britain. But you cannot build a society around this. The gilets jaunes is a revolt of the working classes who live in these places.

They tend to be people in work, but who don’t earn very much, between 1000€ and 2000€ per month. Some of them are very poor if they are unemployed. Others were once middle-class. What they all have in common is that they live in areas where there is hardly any work left. They know that even if they have a job today, they could lose it tomorrow and they won’t find anything else.

spiked: What is the role of culture in the yellow-vest movement?

Guilluy: Not only does peripheral France fare badly in the modern economy, it is also culturally misunderstood by the elite. The yellow-vest movement is a truly 21st-century movement in that it is cultural as well as political. Cultural validation is extremely important in our era.

One illustration of this cultural divide is that most modern, progressive social movements and protests are quickly endorsed by celebrities, actors, the media and the intellectuals. But none of them approve of the gilets jaunes. Their emergence has caused a kind of psychological shock to the cultural establishment. It is exactly the same shock that the British elites experienced with the Brexit vote and that they are still experiencing now, three years later.

The Brexit vote had a lot to do with culture, too, I think. It was more than just the question of leaving the EU. Many voters wanted to remind the political class that they exist. That’s what French people are using the gilets jaunes for – to say we exist. We are seeing the same phenomenon in populist revolts across the world.

spiked: How have the working-classes come to be excluded?

Guilluy: All the growth and dynamism is in the major cities, but people cannot just move there. The cities are inaccessible, particularly thanks to mounting housing costs. The big cities today are like medieval citadels. It is like we are going back to the city-states of the Middle Ages. Funnily enough, Paris is going to start charging people for entry, just like the excise duties you used to have to pay to enter a town in the Middle Ages.

The cities themselves have become very unequal, too. The Parisian economy needs executives and qualified professionals. It also needs workers, predominantly immigrants, for the construction industry and catering et cetera. Business relies on this very specific demographic mix. The problem is that ‘the people’ outside of this still exist. In fact, ‘Peripheral France’ actually encompasses the majority of French people.

spiked: What role has the liberal metropolitan elite played in this?

Guilluy: We have a new bourgeoisie, but because they are very cool and progressive, it creates the impression that there is no class conflict anymore. It is really difficult to oppose the hipsters when they say they care about the poor and about minorities.

But actually, they are very much complicit in relegating the working classes to the sidelines. Not only do they benefit enormously from the globalised economy, but they have also produced a dominant cultural discourse which ostracises working-class people. Think of the ‘deplorables’ evoked by Hillary Clinton. There is a similar view of the working class in France and Britain. They are looked upon as if they are some kind of Amazonian tribe. The problem for the elites is that it is a very big tribe.

The middle-class reaction to the yellow vests has been telling. Immediately, the protesters were denounced as xenophobes, anti-Semites and homophobes. The elites present themselves as anti-fascist and anti-racist but this is merely a way of defending their class interests. It is the only argument they can muster to defend their status, but it is not working anymore.

Now the elites are afraid. For the first time, there is a movement which cannot be controlled through the normal political mechanisms. The gilets jaunes didn’t emerge from the trade unions or the political parties. It cannot be stopped. There is no ‘off’ button. Either the intelligentsia will be forced to properly acknowledge the existence of these people, or they will have to opt for a kind of soft totalitarianism.

A lot has been made of the fact that the yellow vests’ demands vary a great deal. But above all, it’s a demand for democracy. Fundamentally, they are democrats – they want to be taken seriously and they want to be integrated into the economic order.

spiked: How can we begin to address these demands?

Guilluy: First of all, the bourgeoisie needs a cultural revolution, particularly in universities and in the media. They need to stop insulting the working class, to stop thinking of all the gilets jaunes as imbeciles.

Cultural respect is fundamental: there will be no economic or political integration until there is cultural integration. Then, of course, we need to think differently about the economy. That means dispensing with neoliberal dogma. We need to think beyond Paris, London and New York.

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

Latest

US Blunders Have Made Russia The Global Trade Pivot

Even if Europe is somehow taken out of the trade equation, greater synergy between the RIC (Russia, India and China) nations may be enough to pull their nations through anticipated global volatilities ahead

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Mathew Maavak via ActivistPost.com:


The year 2019 had barely begun before news emerged that six Russian sailors were kidnapped by pirates off the coast of Benin. It was perhaps a foretaste of risks to come. As nations reel from deteriorating economic conditions, instances of piracy and other forms of supply chain disruptions are bound to increase.

According to the International Maritime Bureau (IMB), 107 cases of piracy were noted during the first half of 2018 vis-à-vis 87 throughout 2017.  The 2018 tally included 32 cases in Southeast Asian waters and 48 along African shores – representing 75% of the total. To put this figure into perspective, Asian behemoths India and China – despite their vast shorelines – recorded only 2 cases of piracy each during the study period. Russia had none. In terms of hostages taken, the IMB tally read 102 in H1 2018 vs 63 in H1 2017.

Piracy adds to shipping and retail costs worldwide as security, insurance and salaries are hiked to match associated risks in maritime transport. Merchant vessels will also take longer and costlier routes to avoid piracy hotspots.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) report in 2016 sums up the perils ahead:

As over 90% of global trade is carried out by sea, the economic effects of maritime crime can be crippling. Maritime crime includes not only criminal activity directed at vessels or maritime structures, but also the use of the high seas to perpetrate transnational organized crimes such as smuggling of persons or illicit substances.  These forms of maritime crime can have devastating human consequences.

Indeed, cases of human trafficking, organ harvesting, and the smuggling of illicit substances and counterfeit goods are proliferating worldwide in tandem with rising systemic debt and suspect international agendas.

Australia offers a case in point. While it fantasizes over a Quad of allies in the Indo-Pacific – to “save Asians from China” – criminal elements from Hong Kong, Malaysia to squeaky-clean Singapore have been routinely trafficking drugs, tobacco and people right into Sydney harbour for years,  swelling the local organised crime economy to as much as $47.4 billion (Australian dollars presumably) between 2016 and 2017.

With criminal elements expected to thrive during a severe recession, they will likely enjoy a degree of prosecutorial shielding from state actors and local politicians. But this is not a Southeast Asian problem alone; any superpower wishing to disrupt Asia-Europe trade arteries – the main engine of global growth – will have targets of opportunity across oceans and lands.  The US-led war against Syria had not only cratered one potential trans-Eurasia energy and trade node, it served as a boon for child traffickingorgan harvesting and slavery as well. Yet, it is President Bashar al-Assad who is repeatedly labelled a “butcher” by the Anglo-American media.

Ultimately, industries in Asia and Europe will seek safer transit routes for their products. The inference here is inevitable: the greatest logistical undertaking in history – China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) – will be highly dependent on Russian security umbrella, particularly in Central Asia. Russia also offers an alternative transit option via the Northern Sea Route, thereby avoiding any potential pan-Turkic ructions in Central Asia in the future.

Russo- and Sinophobia explained?

In retrospect, Washington’s reckless policies post-Sept 11 2001 seem aimed at disrupting growing synergies between Asia and Europe. This hypothesis helps explain the relentless US-led agitprops against Russia, China and Iran.

When the gilet jaunes (yellow vest) protests rocked France weeks ago, it was only a matter of time before some pundits blamed it on Russia. US President Donald J. Trump cheered on; just as “billionaire activist” George Soros celebrated the refugee invasion of Europe and the Arab Spring earlier.  If the yellow vest contagion spreads to the Western half of Europe, its economies will flounder. Cui bono? A Russia that can reap benefits from the two-way BRI or Arctic trade routes or a moribund United States that can no longer rule roost in an increasingly multipolar world?

Trump’s diplomatic downgrade of the European Union and his opposition to the Nord Stream 2gas pipeline matches this trade-disruption hypothesis, as do pressures applied on India and China to drop energy and trade ties with Iran.  Washington’s trade war with Beijing and recent charges against Huawei – arguably Asia’s most valuable company – seem to fit this grand strategy.

If China concedes to importing more US products, Europe will bear the consequences. Asians love European products ranging from German cars to Italian shoes and Europe remains the favourite vacation destination for its growing middle class. Eastern European products and institutions are also beginning to gain traction in Asia. However, these emerging economies will suffer if their leaders cave in to Washington’s bogeyman fetish.

Even if Europe is somehow taken out of the trade equation, greater synergy between the RIC (Russia, India and China) nations may be enough – at least theoretically – to pull their nations through anticipated global volatilities ahead.

In the meantime, as the US-led world crumbles, it looks like Russia is patiently biding its time to become the security guarantor and kingmaker of Asia-Europe trade.  A possible state of affairs wrought more by American inanity rather than Russian ingenuity…

Dr Mathew Maavak is a regular commentator on risk-related geostrategic issues.

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

Latest

Historic Eastern Christianity: An Uncertain Future

The survival of historic Eastern Christianity, particularly in Syria, is critical for several reasons.

Strategic Culture Foundation

Published

on

Authored by Elias Samo via The Strategic Culture Foundation:


The survival of historic Eastern Christianity has never been as urgent as it is today. Christianity saw its beginning in Greater Syria which was subdivided by France and Britain after WWI into modern day Syria, Lebanon, Palestian/Israel and Jordan. The land that housed, nurtured and spread the teachings of Jesus Christ for over two millenniums, now threatens children of that faith. The survival of historic Eastern Christianity, particularly in Syria, is critical for several reasons:

  1. Greater Syria is the homeland of Jesus and Christianity. Abraham was from modern day Iraq, Moses from Egypt, and Muhammad from Mecca; Jesus was from Syria.
  1. Paul converted to Christianity and saw the light while walking through ‘The Street Called Straight’ in Damascus.
  1. Jesus’ followers were called Christians for the first time in Antioch, formerly part of Syria.
  1. One of the earliest churches, perhaps the earliest, is in Syria.

The potential demise of historic Eastern Christianity is reflected in the key question Christians ask: should we stay or emigrate? The urgent question – in the face of the ongoing regional turmoil – precipitated with the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 and escalated since the Arab uprisings in 2011. Historic Eastern Christians’ fears were further magnified when Archbishop Yohanna Ibrahim of the Syriac Orthodox Church and Archbishop Paul Yazigi of the Greek Orthodox Church, both of metropolitan Aleppo, were kidnapped on April, 22, 2013; with no traces of their whereabouts, dead or alive, since. For many years, I was deputy, friend, and advisor to the Archbishop Ibrahim, which provided me an opportunity to meet many Christians. I have, over time, noticed the change in their sentiment, with more considering emigration after the uprising and the kidnapping of the two Archbishops. Historic Eastern Christians survived the Ottoman Genocide in 1915 and thereafter; they multiplied and thrived in the Fertile Crescent despite some atrocities until the start of the misnamed “Arab Spring” in early 2011. Prior to the “Arab Spring”, historic Eastern Christians were victims of violence on several occasions. In the mid-1930s, the historic Assyrian community in Iraq suffered violent onslaughts and were driven to Syria. In the 1970s and 1980s, during the Lebanese Civil War, Christians were victims of sectarian violence. During the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, Christians were victims of widespread sectarian violence which led to mass migration. The “Arab Spring” began with great hope for the right of the people to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. However, it was swiftly hijacked by Islamists and Salafists and turned into an “Islamic Spring, an Arab Fall and a Christian Winter”; bringing along with it a new massacre of Christians. Presently, Eastern Christianity is at the mercy of clear and identifiable domestic, regional, and international, historic and contemporary conflicts in the Fertile Crescent, namely:

  1. Jihad vs. Ijtihad: A long standing conflict amongst Muslims between the sword vs. the pen.
  2. Sunni vs. Shiite: A conflict which began following the death of the Prophet Muhammad.
  3. Arabism vs. Islamism: The former has territorial limitations, the later has no territorial limitations.
  4. Syria vs. Israel: It is an essential component of the Palestinian problem, not the presumed Arab- Israeli conflict.
  5. West vs. East: A throwback to the Cold War, or its revival.
  6. Historic Persian, Ottoman and Arab Empires animosities: Each seeking regional hegemony.

One is reminded of the proverbial saying, “When the elephants fight, the grass suffers.” Certainly, Eastern Christianity is suffering and threatened with extinction.

Syria was a model of religious tolerance, common living and peaceful interaction amongst its religious, sectarian, cultural and ethnic components. Seven years of turmoil, in which various international and regional powers manipulated segments of Syrian society by supplying them with an abundance of weapons, money and sectarian ideologies, has heightened Eastern Christians’ fears. During the seven-year turmoil in Syria, the entire society has suffered; Sunnis, Shiites, Alawites, Yazidis, Kurds, Christians and others. Christians, being a weak and peaceful component of the society, have suffered immensely. Ma’aloula; a religious treasure for Christians globally, and the only city in the world where Aramaic – the language of Jesus Christ – is spoken, was attacked and besieged by ISIS. Numerous historic Churches were damaged, and many destroyed. Christians in Raqqa were forced by ISIS into one of three options: 1. Pay a penalty in pure gold – known as a ‘Jizya’ to keep their life and practice their faith – albeit in secret only; 2. Convert into Islam; or 3. Face immediate death. To top their pain, the kidnap of the two prominent Archbishops meant no Eastern Christian believer was safe.

Amidst all the doom and gloom, however, there remains hope. The survival of Christianity depends on the actions and reactions of three parties:

Eastern Christians: During the last hundred years, 1915-2015, since the Ottoman Genocide, Eastern Christians have been victims of a history of massacres, which meant that every Eastern Christian was a martyr, a potential martyr or a witness of martyrdom; if you fool me once, shame on you, if you fool me twice, shame on me. The ongoing regional turmoil has heightened their sense of insecurity. The answer to an age-old question Eastern Christians had on their mind: To flee Westwards or remain in their land, in the face of death, is increasingly becoming the former.

Eastern Muslims: There is a difference in perceptions between Eastern Christians and mainstream Muslims regarding the massacres committed against Christians. When certain violent groups or individuals kill Christians, while shouting a traditional Islamic profession: “No God but one God and Muhammad is God’s messenger”, it is reasonable for Christians to assume the killers are Muslims. However, for mainstream Muslims, the killers do not represent Islam; they are extremists, violating basic Islamic norms such as Muhammad’s sayings, “Whoever hurts a Thummy – Christian or Jew – has hurt me”, “no compulsion in religion” and other Islamic norms regarding just treatment of people of the Book; Christians and Jews. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the Muslim elites to impress upon their fellow Muslims that:

a. The three monotheistic religions believe in one God and all ‘faithfuls’ are equal in citizenship, rights and duties.

b. Christians participated in the rise of Arab Islamic civilization. They were pioneers in the modern Arab renaissance and they joined their Muslim brethren in resisting the Crusades, the Ottomans and Western colonialism.

c. Christians are natives of the land and they provide cultural, religious, educational, and economic, diversity.

d. Christians are a positive link between the Muslims and the Christian West, particularly in view of the rise of Islamophobia. Massacres of Christians and their migration provide a pretext for the further precipitation of Islamophobia.

e. Civilization is measured by the way it treats its minorities.

The Christian West: The Crusades, Western colonialism, creation and continued support of Israel, support of authoritarian Arab political systems, military interventions, regime change, and the destabilization of Arab states made Muslims view Eastern Christians ‘guilty by association’. The Christian West helped Jews come to Palestine to establish Israel. Shouldn’t the same Christian West also help Eastern Christians remain in their homeland, rather than facilitate their emigration? Western Christians, particularly Christian Zionists, believe that the existence of Israel is necessary for the return of Jesus to his homeland. However, it would be a great disappointment for Jesus to return to his homeland, Syria and not find any of his followers.

Prior to 2011, Eastern Christian religious leaders were encouraging Syrian Christians in the diaspora to return to Syria, their homeland, where life was safe and secure with great potential. Now, the same leaders are desperately trying to slow down Christian emigration. Eastern Christians’ loud cries for help to remain are blowing in the wind.

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