Connect with us

Latest

News

The Philippines’ pivot in action: Can “The Punisher” withstand America’s punishment?

As the Philippines under its popular new President Rodrigo Duterte pivots away from the US, the US is intensifying its media campaign that misrepresents his anti-drugs policy in order to miscast him as a ‘dictator’. This looks like the preparation of a hybrid war scenario aimed at overthrowing Duterte’s government, which as in Syria could involve the use of Jihadist terrorists.

Andrew Korybko

Published

on

8,557 Views

Rodrigo Duterte promised to wage a War on Drugs and return pride to the Philippines if his people elected him President, and with less than three months in office under his belt, he’s already making astounding progress on both interlinked fronts. More than 700,000 drug addicts and pushers have surrendered to the authorities, with around 3,000 being killed for violently resisting and endangering the arresting officers’ lives.

It’s thus evidently not for naught that Duterte earned the nickname “The Punisher” during his two-decade-long service as the mayor of Davao City, during which time he turned it round from being one of the most dangerous places in Asia to what is now one of the safest. 

On the foreign policy front, Duterte has stood up to the US to global applause, calling Obama a “son of a bitch” and the US Ambassador a “gay son of a whore”.

Moreover, his Foreign Minister powerfully reminded the US that the Philippines are not America’s “little brown brother”, in a moving statement that evoked memories of classic Cold War anti-imperialism.

In and of themselves, these words wouldn’t ordinarily mean much to the US and could easily be sucked up so long as Washington’s hegemony was left unchallenged.  The thing is however that Duterte is backing up his words with actions, and is rapidly moving the Philippines away from the US’ unipolar grasp and towards the open embrace of the multipolar world.

In the course of just one week Duterte’s government bravely announced that it wants the US to remove its Special Forces from the southern island of Mindanao, that the Philippines will no longer be conducting joint patrols with the US in the South China Sea, and that Manila is now looking to Beijing and Moscow for procuring its future military equipment.

All the while that this is going on, the Philippines ‘officially’ reassured the US that it was “not cutting ties” and that the authorities will respect the EDCA basing agreement that was signed under Duterte’s predecessor.

What the country however really wants is a “paradigm shift” in its relations with Washington. In fact the Philippines is pivoting away from the US at a quicker pace than even I had forecast in an earlier article for The Duran back in May, and the US’ so-called “Pivot to Asia” is direly threatened as a result.

The US for its part has moved forward with its Hybrid Warfare plans against the Philippines, beginning a nasty infowar which seeks to paint Duterte as a dictator for the way that his country is standing up to its narco-terrorists.

I spoke about all this in a recent edition of my Context Countdown radio show which was transcribed by GPolit into a stand-alone article

Just the other day a supposed ‘informant’ even alleged that the President personally ordered and took part in assassinations himself during his time as mayor. The individual has since been debunked as a fraud but the intent is clear – the US is pulling out all the stops to try to smear Duterte as a ‘rogue third-world dictator’ as the first step for preconditioning the public to his US-backed removal by any means.

The ‘problem’, however is that Duterte remains immensely popular in his country and boasted a sky-high approval rating of 91% in July during the last nationwide poll that was conducted – besting even President Putin in becoming the leader most beloved by his people.

Clearly, the US is not going to have any success at instigating a Colour Revolution in the Philippines.

However, the US has never let ‘democracy’ and the ‘people’s choice’ get in the way of regime change before, hence it is now moving past the point of mere Colour Revolution towards outright Unconventional Warfare.

Daesh-affiliated terrorist group Abu Sayyaf carried out a small-scale attack in Davao City at the beginning of the month during the same time as one of Duterte’s visits there, obviously with the intent of sending him a message that he is on their hit list.  This audacious act prompted the President to declare a state of emergency to allow the military to work more closely with local law enforcement bodies to protect the country from terrorism. 

It also led him to declare with his characteristic bravado that he “will eat [them] alive. Raw.”

It should be noted at this point that persistent rumors have abounded that the US military and intelligence services are linked to Abu Sayyaf, with reports first surfacing at the beginning of the millennium.

Duterte’s experience in governing the largest city in the violence-plagued and mineral-rich island of Mindanao might have exposed him to confidential information that confirmed these allegations, which would explain why he so confidently accused the US of “exporting terrorism” to the Middle East and why he urgently wants the US’s armed forces to leave the Abu Sayyaf-afflicted areas of the south.

Duterte’s fears about an explosion of terrorism in this periphery of the country are not unfounded.  A Philippine expert at the 2015 Shangri-La Dialogue security forum in Singapore spoke about the dangers of Daesh triggering a regional crisis through the formation of a franchise caliphate in the Mindanao-Sulawesi Arc.

I expanded on this scenario in my 2016 Trends Forecast for The Saker at the end of last year, a detailed Hybrid War vulnerability assessment that I wrote for Oriental Review this summer, and one of my latest Context Countdown episodes, in which I showed how there is a very real threat that the Philippines, Malaysia, and Indonesia could get drawn into a convoluted mainland-maritime conflict if the terrorists are not snuffed out quickly enough.

This is precisely the type of scenario that the US hopes to engender, forecasting that it will provide the Pentagon with a convenient “anti-terror” ‘justification’ to undergird its ‘Pivot to Asia’.

In seeking to capitalise as much as possible off of this eventuality, the mainstream media in the West is already weaving a suggestive narrative to the rest of the world, hinting that any future uptick in terrorism might be attributable to ‘desperate democrats’ fighting against an ‘irredeemable dictator’.  Thereby Salafist terrorists are painted as ‘freedom fighters’ against Duterte in the same way as they were against President Assad in 2011.

The Colour Revolution infowar has failed within the Philippines itself.  However the reason it is still being viciously fought in the global media is to convince the international public that Duterte’s ‘despotic’ War on Drugs is breeding armed ‘democratic’ resistance, thus ‘legitimising’ the use of terror, and deliberately misleading the targeted foreign audience into supporting the incipient Hybrid War.

The US is unleashing Abu Sayyaf as punishment against “The Punisher”, but a War of Terror on the Philippines won’t be enough to defeat Duterte if he continues to maintain the support of his people, just as President Assad has been able to do in Syria.

Despite the dismal failure of the US’s regime change campaign in Syria, the divide-and-rule destruction that it wrought might cynically be the reason why some Brzezinski-indoctrinated ‘strategists’ are flirting with bringing it to the Philippines.

Just as the US “exported terrorism” to the Middle East, so too it might seek to do the same in Southeast Asia, which is why Duterte must be prepared break the pattern and defend his country from the oncoming onslaught whilst he still has the chance.

As things stands, the joint anti-piracy patrols between the Philippines, Malaysia, and Indonesia are a solid first step in preventing the maturation of the Mindanao-Sulawesi Arc into the transnational hotbed of terror that was first warned about during the 2015 Shangri-La Dialogue.  This multilateral initiative also serves the dual purpose of safeguarding against cross-border terrorist infiltration in one of Asia’s most hitherto unpoliced blind spots.

The latest state of emergency is also a helpful move in augmenting Duterte’s capabilities in fighting back against this threat.

However it is inevitable that the next step must eventually be the expulsion of all US military forces from the Philippines and the revocation of the EDCA on whatever grounds can plausibly be thought of – for example the typically outlandish behaviour of US servicemen or some similar scandal.

The US sees the writing on the wall and is fretful that this will happen sooner than later.  Thus the relentless mudslinging that the mainstream media is hurling against Duterte.  However its authors do not realise that it is precisely this Hybrid War activity which is inadvertently speeding up the scenario that they are so desperately trying to prevent.

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

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

US media suffers panic attack after Mueller fails to deliver on much-anticipated Trump indictment

Internet mogul Kim Dotcom said it all: “Mueller – The name that ended all mainstream media credibility.”

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT


Important pundits and news networks have served up an impressive display of denials, evasions and on-air strokes after learning that Robert Mueller has ended his probe without issuing a single collusion-related indictment.

The Special Counsel delivered his final report to Attorney General William Barr for review on Friday, with the Justice Department confirming that there will be no further indictments related to the probe. The news dealt a devastating blow to the sensational prophesies of journalists, analysts and entire news networks, who for nearly two years reported ad nauseam that President Donald Trump and his inner circle were just days away from being carted off to prison for conspiring with the Kremlin to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

Showing true integrity, journalists and television anchors took to Twitter and the airwaves on Friday night to acknowledge that the media severely misreported Donald Trump’s alleged ties to Russia, as well as what Mueller’s probe was likely to find. They are, after all, true professionals.

“How could they let Trump off the hook?” an inconsolable Chris Matthews asked NBC reporter Ken Dilanian during a segment on CNN’s ‘Hardball’.

Dilanian tried to comfort the CNN host with some of his signature NBC punditry.

“My only conclusion is that the president transmitted to Mueller that he would take the Fifth. He would never talk to him and therefore, Mueller decided it wasn’t worth the subpoena fight,” he expertly mused.

Actually, there were several Serious Journalists who used their unsurpassed analytical abilities to conjure up a reason why Mueller didn’t throw the book at Trump, even though the president is clearly a Putin puppet.

“It’s certainly possible that Trump may emerge from this better than many anticipated. However! Consensus has been that Mueller would follow DOJ rules and not indict a sitting president. I.e. it’s also possible his report could be very bad for Trump, despite ‘no more indictments,'” concluded Mark Follman, national affairs editor at Mother Jones, who presumably, and very sadly, was not being facetious.

Revered news organs were quick to artfully modify their expectations regarding Mueller’s findings.

“What is collusion and why is Robert Mueller unlikely to mention it in his report on Trump and Russia?” a Newsweek headline asked following Friday’s tragic announcement.

Three months earlier, Newsweek had meticulously documented all the terrible “collusion” committed by Donald Trump and his inner circle.

But perhaps the most sobering reactions to the no-indictment news came from those who seemed completely unfazed by the fact that Mueller’s investigation, aimed at uncovering a criminal conspiracy between Trump and the Kremlin, ended without digging up a single case of “collusion.”

The denials, evasions and bizarre hot takes are made even more poignant by the fact that just days ago, there was still serious talk about Trump’s entire family being hauled off to prison.

“You can’t blame MSNBC viewers for being confused. They largely kept dissenters from their Trump/Russia spy tale off the air for 2 years. As recently as 2 weeks ago, they had @JohnBrennan strongly suggesting Mueller would indict Trump family members on collusion as his last act,” journalist Glenn Greenwald tweeted.

While the Mueller report has yet to be released to the public, the lack of indictments makes it clear that whatever was found, nothing came close to the vast criminal conspiracy alleged by virtually the entire American media establishment.

“You have been lied to for 2 years by the MSM. No Russian collusion by Trump or anyone else. Who lied? Head of the CIA, NSA,FBI,DOJ, every pundit every anchor. All lies,” wrote conservative activist Chuck Woolery.

Internet mogul Kim Dotcom was more blunt, but said it all: “Mueller – The name that ended all mainstream media credibility.”

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

Latest

Canadian Lawmaker Accuses Trudeau Of Being A “Fake Feminist” (Video)

Rempel segued to Trudeau’s push to quash an investigation into allegations that he once groped a young journalist early in his political career

Published

on

Via Zerohedge

Canada’s feminist-in-chief Justin Trudeau wants to support and empower women…but his support stops at the point where said women start creating problems for his political agenda.

That was the criticism levied against the prime minister on Friday by a conservative lawmaker, who took the PM to task for “muzzling strong, principled women” during a debate in the House of Commons.

“He asked for strong women, and this is what they look like!” said conservative MP Michelle Rempel, referring to the former justice minister and attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould, who has accused Trudeau and his cronies of pushing her out of the cabinet after she refused to grant a deferred prosecution agreement to a Quebec-based engineering firm.

She then accused Trudeau of being a “fake feminist”.

“That’s not what a feminist looks like…Every day that he refuses to allow the attorney general to testify and tell her story is another day he’s a fake feminist!”

Trudeau was so taken aback by Rempel’s tirade, that he apparently forgot which language he should respond in.

But Rempel wasn’t finished. She then segued to Trudeau’s push to quash an investigation into allegations that he once groped a young journalist early in his political career. This from a man who once objected to the continued use of the word “mankind” (suggesting we use “peoplekind” instead).

The conservative opposition then tried to summon Wilson-Raybould to appear before the Commons for another hearing (during her last appearance, she shared her account of how the PM and employees in the PM’s office and privy council barraged her with demands that she quash the government’s pursuit of SNC-Lavalin over charges that the firm bribed Libyan government officials). Wilson-Raybould left the Trudeau cabinet after she was abruptly moved to a different ministerial post – a move that was widely seen as a demotion.

Trudeau has acknowledged that he put in a good word on the firm’s behalf with Wilson-Raybould, but insists that he always maintained the final decision on the case was hers and hers alone.

Fortunately for Canadians who agree with Rempel, it’s very possible that Trudeau – who has so far resisted calls to resign – won’t be in power much longer, as the scandal has cost Trudeau’s liberals the lead in the polls for the October election.

 

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

Latest

Why Joe May be Courting Stacey

Joe Biden has a history on compulsory integration dating back to the 1970s that Sen. Jesse Helms called “enlightened.”

Patrick J. Buchanan

Published

on

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via The Unz Review:


Of 895 slots in the freshman class of Stuyvesant High in New York City, seven were offered this year to black students, down from 10 last year and 13 the year before.

In the freshman class of 803 at The Bronx High School of Science, 12 students are black, down from last year’s 25.

Of 303 students admitted to Staten Island Technical High School, one is African-American.

According to The New York Times, similar patterns of admission apply at the other five most elite high schools in the city.

Whites and Asians are 30 percent of middle school students, but 83 percent of the freshman at Bronx High School of Science, 88 percent at Staten Island Technical and 90 percent at Stuyvesant.

What do these numbers tell us?

They reveal the racial composition of the cohort of scientists and technicians who will lead America in the 21st century. And they tell us which races will not be well represented in that vanguard.

They identify a fault line that runs through the Democratic Party, separating leftists who believe in equality of results for all races and ethnic groups, and those who believe in a meritocracy.

Mayor Bill de Blasio has expressed anger and frustration at the under-representation of blacks and Hispanics in the elite schools. But Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the state legislature have ignored his pleas to change the way students are admitted.

Currently, the same test, of English and math, is given to middle school applicants. And admission to the elite eight is offered to those who get the highest scores.

Moreover, Asians, not whites, are predominant.

Though 15 percent of all middle school students, Asians make up two-thirds of the student body at Stuyvesant, with 80 times as many slots as their African-American classmates.

The egalitarian wing of the Democratic Party sees this as inherently unjust. And what gives this issue national import are these factors:

First, the recent scandal where rich parents paid huge bribes to criminal consultants to get their kids into elite colleges, by falsifying records of athletic achievement and cheating on Scholastic Aptitude Tests, has caused a wave of populist resentment.

Second, Harvard is being sued for systemic reverse racism, as black and Hispanic students are admitted with test scores hundreds of points below those that would disqualify Asians and whites.

Third, Joe Biden has a history on compulsory integration dating back to the 1970s that Sen. Jesse Helms called “enlightened.”

Here are Biden’s quotes, unearthed by The Washington Post, that reflect his beliefs about forced busing for racial balance in public schools:

“The new integration plans being offered are really just quota systems to assure a certain number of blacks, Chicanos, or whatever in each school. That, to me, is the most racist concept you can come up with.

“What it says is, ‘In order for your child with curly black hair, brown eyes, and dark skin to be able to learn anything, he needs to sit next to my blond-haired, blue-eyed son.’ That’s racist!

“Who the hell do we think we are, that the only way a black man or woman can learn is if they rub shoulders with my white child?

“I am philosophically opposed to quota systems. They insure mediocrity.”

That was 44 years ago. While those views were the thinking of many Democrats, and perhaps of most Americans, in the mid-’70s, they will be problematic in the 2020 primaries, where African-Americans could be decisive in the contests that follow Iowa and New Hampshire.

Biden knows that just as Bernie Sanders, another white male, fell short in crucial South Carolina because of a lack of support among black voters, he, too, has a problem with that most loyal element in the Democratic coalition.

In 1991, Biden failed to rise to the defense of Anita Hill when she charged future Justice Clarence Thomas with sexual harassment. In the Senate Judiciary Committee, he was a law-and-order champion responsible for tough anti-crime legislation that is now regarded as discriminatory.

And he has a record on busing for racial balance that made him a de facto ally of Louise Day Hicks of the Boston busing case fame.

How, with a record like this, does Biden inoculate himself against attacks by rival candidates, especially candidates of color, in his run for the nomination?

One way would be to signal to his party that he has grown, he has changed, and his 2020 running mate will be a person of color. Perhaps he’ll run with a woman of color such as Stacey Abrams, who narrowly lost the 2018 governor’s race in Georgia.

An ancillary benefit would be that Abrams on the ticket would help him carry Georgia, a state Donald Trump probably cannot lose and win re-election.

Wrote Axios this morning:

“Close advisers to former Vice President Joe Biden are debating the idea of packaging his presidential campaign announcement with a pledge to choose Stacey Abrams as his vice president.”


Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

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