Articolo Originale: https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2019/07/13/2052095/europe-s-decline-inevitable-unless-it-resists-us-unilateralism-italian-author TEHRAN (Tasnim) – An Italian author and geopolitical analyst hailed the “successful” strategy of resistance adopted by countries like Iran, Venezuela, and Syria against the US, and warned that if Europe does not liberate itself from US unilateralism, its decline is inevitable. “There is no doubt that Iran, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen have been successful in their strategy of resistance…,” Stefano Vernole, the head of External Relations at the Eurasia Mediterranean Study Center, said in an interview with the Tasnim News Agency. “What Europe needs is a process of military, economic and cultural liberation (from US) on a continental scale, otherwise its decline and disintegration appear practically inevitable,” he added. Vernole, a graduate in contemporary history and analysis of conflicts, ideologies, and politics in the contemporary world, has worked in the field of bibliographic cataloging and in the field of public administration. He is the head of external relations at the Eurasia Mediterranean Study Center and Deputy Director of “Eurasia”, a journal of geopolitical studies. He is the author of Ex-Yugoslavia: Dirty Game in the Balkans, National Fragmentation and Geopolitical Risk of Kosovo (2013), The Serbian Question and the Kosovo Crisis (2008), as well as co-author of The struggle for Kosovo (2007), Tibet Crossroads between Past and Future (2014), Discovering Tibet (2015), and Lo Xizang (Tibet) and the New Silk Road (2016). International developments are full of examples of how regional and trans-regional countries have successfully adopted strategies of resistance against oppression and unilateralism that have borne good results. As you know, countries like Iran, Syria, Yemen, Venezuela, and Palestine have protected their national sovereignty against foreign threats and have achieved many gains through this strategy. In contrast, some countries have adopted a strategy of appeasement or reconciliation when being hectored and bullied by world powers. Given the experiences of these resistance countries, what do you think about their approach and the concept of resistance? there is no doubt that Iran, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen have been successful in their strategy of resistance but these are sovereign states, the situation is different for the Palestinians who in reality are still struggling to have real recognition. It is equally clear that not only their condition of national sovereignty was essential for the purpose, in fact the support of a part of the anti-imperialist powers proved decisive. Syria has obtained decisive help precisely from the Iranian and Russian military intervention, Venezuela has nevertheless obtained economic and diplomatic support from Moscow and Beijing, Yemen has been helped by Iran and other countries. The cause of Palestine in recent decades, however, inflamed the hearts of millions of people around the world, unfortunately the internal differences and some strategic errors of the leadership of the PLO (including Hamas) in recent years have seriously damaged the image, alienating a part of the likes he enjoyed. To sum up, there are at least two conditions necessary for victorious resistance: an independent territorial base and important international friendships. Do you think that countries...
Mese: Luglio 2019
Probabilmente nella storia recente nessuna profezia geopolitica si è rivelata più erronea de la fine della storia prospettata da Fukuyama all’indomani della caduta dei sistemi socialisti dell’Europa orientalei. Quello che si profilava come il secolo americanoii si sta rivelando invece come il secolo multilaterale, se non addirittura il secolo cinese.iii Quello che è certo, è che l’accelerazione dei processi di globalizzazione economica presenta oggi aspetti meno scontati del previsto. In questo contesto, capire il progetto della Nuova Via della Seta significa capire in larga parte i nuovi equilibri geopolitici planetari e, per il nostro paese, sapere affrontare nuove questioni nonché scorgere nuove opportunità. D’altra parte già nel 2006 Christopher Pehrson intuì il progetto della Nuova via della Seta definendolo come “strategia del filo di perle”; con questo concetto, l’alto ufficiale statunitense anticipava la strategia cinese di realizzare nei paesi esteri infrastrutture autonome in aree geostrategiche del pianeta, avvalendosi della compartecipazione di capitali o aziende cinesi secondo un rapporto di costi e benefici.iv Risulta infatti evidente che la Nuova Via della Seta rappresenta un ambizioso progetto economico, culturale e politico, una manovra strategica epocale che viene proposta per connettere i paesi coinvolti in modo da ampliare gli scambi commerciali e culturali tra i popoli. Questo perché, contrariamente al modello di globalizzazione predatoria proposto – anzi imposto – da parte statunitense e Occidentale, che ha ricalcato e ricalca ancora tutti i crismi dell’imperialismo novecentesco, le élite cinesi non sono orientate a logiche di puro profitto ma tendono principalmente ad assicurare l’ordine sociale, attraverso un pensiero che subordina l’istinto egoistico individualista a quello dell’interesse collettivo. E questa è stata l’impostazione che ha guidato finanche lo sviluppo delle multinazionali cinesi che, in gran parte di proprietà pubblica, hanno acquisito molti asset fondamentali dell’Occidente. Protagonisti di queste azioni sono, per esempio, la ChemChina gigante mondiale della chimica, o la Cosco Shipping Line, la più grande compagnia di navigazione del pianeta. Ma cos’è esattamente la Belt and Road Initiative (Bri), il programma cinese di investimenti infrastrutturali che riuscirebbe ad oscurare il Piano Marshall, mettendo sul piatto mille miliardi di dollari, ovvero sette volte tanto quanto stanziato dagli americani alla fine della Seconda guerra mondiale? C’è subito da chiarire che non esiste una definizione ufficiale. La Bri è stata lanciata dal presidente cinese Xi Jinping nel 2013, ma molto spesso vengono fatti rientrare al suo interno progetti che sono partiti anche diversi anni prima. Basti ricordare che al settembre del 2018 erano stati finanziati 173 progetti nominalmente collegati alla Bri in 45 Paesi. Secondo i funzionari cinesi, la Nuova via della Seta dovrebbe reggersi su sei grandi corridoi internazionali. Il primo è quello con il Pakistan (la sigla ufficiale è Cpec), poi c’è quello che attraversa Bangladesh, India e Myanmar (Bcimec). Il terzo prevede la partecipazione di Iran, Kazakistan, Kirghizistan, Tagikistan, Turchia, Turkmenistan e Uzbekistan (Ccwaec). Il progetto che coinvolge Cambogia, Laos, Malesia, Thailandia, Myanmar e Vietnam è il Cicpec. Il quinto asse è con Russia e Mongolia (Cmrec), mentre la sesta colonna è quella che...
Articolo originale pubblicato sul sito internet Young Diplomats Tony Benn said “War is the ultimate failure of diplomacy” and waging a war is mean to be failed. Yuval Noah Harari, in his book “21 Lessons for the 21st Century” also notes that “if somebody finds a formula to wage a successful wars in the twenty-first century conditions, that gates of hell might open […] Tony Benn said “War is the ultimate failure of diplomacy” and waging a war is mean to be failed. Yuval Noah Harari, in his book “21 Lessons for the 21st Century” also notes that “if somebody finds a formula to wage a successful wars in the twenty-first century conditions, that gates of hell might open with rush”. In the era when the world has Mass Destruction weapons (MDW), thinking to wage a war is to destroy the life on planet. If we look at the statistics, there are today more jihadi terrorist fighting in more countries than there were before the September 11, 2001. According to a report of Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), as of January 31, 2018, 43.7 per cent of the afghan territory is still under the control of Taliban. What we have done is quite simple. We have applied the formula of exporting Extremism and importing Terrorism. By tracing the history, without going in detail, we find that the United Stated and the Kingdom Saudi Arabia have been the larger exporters of Extremism in the Muslim World during the Afghan War (1979-1989). Crown Prince, Muhammad bin Salman, in March 2018, himself admitted that Wahhabism was spread at behest of West during the Cold War. The fact is, in the eve of 9/11, USA turned aggressive, radical and racial. The country ultimately changed her way to see and perceive the world particularly the Muslim. Taking her allies on a side, United States, under the leadership of late and ex-President George W. Bush started bloodiest military actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and then the entire region of Middle East which resulted in millions of innocent casualties, worst humanitarian crisis, and gave birth to century’s most radical terrorist organisations like Al-Qaida, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and so on. Afghan Taliban, instead of eighteen years of armed engagement, have grown rapidly. If we critically analyse the origin of Talibanism in Afghanistan, the finger rises against the USA itself and her so-called allies in the Muslim World. Unlike Francis Fukuyama, I also feel incomplete without discussing History. During the Cold war, in 1979, when the USSR launched the communist campaign of territorial expansion in Afghanistan that United Stated couldn’t digest and felt it against her interest. So, to fight against communism in Afghanistan, USA with the assistance of her Muslim allies started producing Jihadis. And the USA won the ground, but wait, wait. Soon after the fall of communism when USA left the reigns of Mujahidin (Jihadi Fighters), they turned more radical and aggressive, but with a little difference. The former Jihadi were against the communism, and the later are against...