Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

US increases outsourcing of its war in Iraq to private mercenaries

December 25, 2014

Mercenaries have been called the second oldest profession in the world. Some claim that they are just a special sub-set of the oldest profession since they sell their bodies and their skills. But the idea that mercenaries are only those fighting under a foreign flag has never really made sense to me. Any volunteer army is essentially a mercenary army using my definition of a mercenary being any one who sells military services.

Mercenaries were in common use by the time of the Romans 2,000 years ago. They were used by Hannibal and even by Alexander. They were in use in the Egypt of 5,000 years ago. We know little of the times earlier than the first civilizations some 6,000 years ago. But it is likely that some form of paid military specialists derived from those individuals who had specialised as hunters. They were probably in use from the time that human societies created the first settlements and where individuals had started specialising. That probably takes us back to times before the first cities and perhaps even to the time of semi-permanent, seasonal settlements (earlier than 12,000 years ago). Hunters became guards and then in due course became specialised soldiers.

From the Auxiliaries of the Romans or the Seljuks a thousand years later, mercenaries have always been around. Gallowglasses and the Irish Wild Geese operated – for pay – all over Europe. The Viking traditions lived on with the Varangians who operated around the Black Sea. The business of soldiering was very lucrative – especially for the survivors. Criminal piracy was converted to the legal and profitable trade of privateering. Europe was filled with military entrepreneurs with mercenary regiments available to the highest bidder. Even the national armies and navies of various countries were available for hire. The Swedish Foreign Legion consisted mainly of Poles, The Turks employed Swedish elite troops and the Swiss Guard took care of the Popes. The Dutch had their Foreign Legion, the British had the Gurkhas and the French had their Foreign Legion in Africa. American pilots flew in the  Lafayette Escadrille and American volunteers joined the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. Chennault’s Flying Tigers were American pilots flying in the Chinese Air Force. The Spanish had their Foreign Legion and the International Brigade fought in Spain.

In the last 50-60 years, the business of soldiering has become an industry in its own right. Mercenaries – of any nationality – are now known as “private contractors” or “defence contractors”. Governments are increasingly outsourcing the business of war. As with all outsourcing, the temporary hiring of military resources minimises the liability and cost that comes with the maintaining of permanent resources. Moreover it adds a layer of deniability when things go wrong and does not deprive the employer of any credit if things go well.

The US has been using private contractors in a big way for some 4 decades now. After all, private contractor presence does not count as “boots on the ground”. The war in Iraq is now being conducted for the US to a large extent by private contractors.

Reuters:

The U.S. government is preparing to boost the number of private contractors in Iraq as part of President Barack Obama’s growing effort to beat back Islamic State militants threatening the Baghdad government, a senior U.S. official said.

How many contractors will deploy to Iraq – beyond the roughly 1,800 now working there for the U.S. State Department – will depend in part, the official said, on how widely dispersed U.S. troops advising Iraqi security forces are, and how far they are from U.S. diplomatic facilities.

Still, the preparations to increase the number of contractors – who can be responsible for everything from security to vehicle repair and food service – underscores Obama’s growing commitment in Iraq. When U.S. troops and diplomats venture into war zones, contractors tend to follow, doing jobs once handled by the military itself. 

“It is certain that there will have to be some number of contractors brought in for additional support,” said the senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

After Islamic State seized large swaths ofIraqi territory and the major city of Mosul in June, Obama ordered U.S. troops back to Iraq. Last month, he authorized roughly doubling the number of troops, who will be in non-combat roles, to 3,100, but is keen not to let the troop commitment grow too much.

There are now about 1,750 U.S. troops in Iraq, and U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel last week ordered deployment of an additional 1,300.

The U.S. military’s reliance on civilians was on display during Hagel’s trip to Baghdad this month, when he and his delegation were flown over the Iraqi capital in helicopters operated by State Department contractors.

……… the State Department boosted from 39 to 57 the number of personnel protecting the U.S. consulate in Erbil that came under threat from Islamic State forces during its June offensive.

That team is provided by Triple Canopy, part of the Constellis Group conglomerate, which is the State Department’s largest security contractor. Constellis did not respond to a phone call seeking comment.

The presence of contractors in Iraq, particularly private security firms, has been controversial since a series of violent incidents during the U.S. occupation, culminating in the September 2007 killing of 14 unarmed Iraqis by guards from Blackwater security firm.

Three former guards were convicted in October of voluntary manslaughter charges and a fourth of murder in the case, which prompted reforms in U.S. government oversight of contractors. …….. 

MH17: Shot down by Ukrainian, Sukhoi-25, military jet

December 25, 2014

It is looking increasingly likely that MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian, military, attack plane (a Su-25) using R-60 air-to-air missiles and followed by cannon fire. The Sukhoi 25 may well have been flown by a Captain Voloshin.

Ukrainian Air Force Su-25UB Wikimedia

Ukrainian Air Force Su-25UB Wikimedia

MH17 crashed in eastern Ukraine on July 17. All 298 passengers and crewmembers on board the Boeing 777 were killed. The victims were from 10 nations, while most of the passengers – 193 in total – were from the Netherlands. The second-largest number of casualties, 43, was from Malaysia.

There are two theories about the shooting down of Malaysian Airlines MH17:

  1. that the aircraft was shot down by a BUK ground-to-air missile fired by Russian separatists in Ukraine and perhaps in the mistaken belief that they were shooting at a Ukrainian military transport plane. This is the theory that is favoured by the Ukrainian government, most western countries and by NATO, or
  2. that the aircraft was shot down mistakenly by a Ukrainian miltary jet using an air-to-air missile. This was followed by cannon fire perhaps because the mistake was realised and no survivors could be permitted. This theory is supported by the Russians and the Russian separatists.

The Russian theory was initially ridiculed by the Ukrainians, NATO countries and the western media. But a few weeks ago the Dutch investigators let slip the information that at least one oxygen mask had been deployed and this was much more consistent with a weaker air-to-air missile followed by cannon fire rather than the much more powerful BUK ground-to-air missile. A BUK ground-to-air missile would not have given any time for the oxygen mask to deploy. Moreover a multitude of regular holes were found in the remains of the fuselage. They were too regular to just be shrapnel and their size and regularity were consistent with high velocity cannon fire.

Now the Russian investigation claims that it has evidence from a Ukrainian citizen who witnessed a Ukrainian military Sukhoi 25 take off, before MH17 was shot down, from an airfield in the Ukrainian city of Dnipropetrovsk, fully armed and return without its missiles. The flight was flown by a Captain Voloshin and was armed with R-60 air-to-air missiles. The Ukrainians admit that a Captain Voloshin does exist but claim he did not fly that day.

This is not a truth that the US or NATO countries would like to be revealed. The Dutch investigation is probably under intense pressure to “manage” whatever is published. The Malaysians reeling from the loss of MH370 are also probably being pressured not to make waves. (Incidentally the latest theory about MH370, is now that it was remotely hijacked, was on its way to Diego Garcia and was shot down by US assets.) I note that the information about the oxygen mask deployed on MH17 was kept concealed for a long time and was only revealed by mistake.

I don’t expect that Dutch investigation will exchange information with the Russian investigation.

The Russian Defense Ministry made public radar data indicating that a Ukrainian military jet capable of taking down the airliner with an air-to-air missile was in the vicinity of MH17 at the time of the incident.

MH17 - Su-25 graphic RT news

MH17 – Su-25 graphic RT news

RT reports:

Russia’s Investigative Committee has confirmed the claims by a Ukrainian, who said he witnessed the deployment of a Ukrainian warplane armed with air-to-air missiles on the day the Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 was shot down.

The interview was conducted on Tuesday, spokesman for the committee Vladimir Markin told the media on Wednesday. This followed a report in a Russian newspaper, in which the Ukrainian citizen, who preferred to remain anonymous, voiced his allegations.

The investigators used a polygraph during the interview, which showed no evidence of the witness lying, he added. “The facts were reported by the witness clearly and with no inconsistencies. The investigators lean towards considering them truthful. A polygraph examination confirmed them too,” the official said.

“According to his account, he personally saw the plane piloted by Captain Voloshin armed with R-60 air-to-air missiles,” Markin said. “He added there was no need for such weapons during regular air missions of the Ukrainian Air Forces because the rebel forces had no military aircraft.”

Markin said that the Investigative Committee will continue gathering and analyzing evidence perpetrating to the downing of MH17 and will share the information with the Netherlands-led international probe into the incident, “if they really interested in establishing the truth and send an inquiry.”

The witness is likely to be taken into protective custody in Russia because his life may be threatened, Markin said.

The Ukrainian Security Service confirmed on Wednesday that a Captain Voloshin does serve as a military pilot in the country’s armed services. But it said he didn’t fly any missions on the day the Malaysian Airlines flight was shot down.

Farage can’t take schoolboy humour

December 23, 2014

Nigel Farage of UKIP is quite amusing at times. As with the Sweden Democrats in Sweden, the little parties have to accept support from many questionable individuals. Junkies, hooligans and general riff-raff keep popping up among their candidates. Both parties have an under-current of racism (more white-supremacy than simple racism). Nigel Farage like Jimmy Åkesson is eloquent, personable and each has some “style”. Both have had difficulty in keeping control of their hooligan element.

Farage has been particularly good at mocking other politicians – especially those who tend to be sanctimonious or self-righteous or take themselves too seriously. One of his apparent strengths has been his “silicon skin” which has been impermeable to the taunts and abuse of his many opponents. But now it seems some schoolboys have managed to penetrate this skin and he seems very riled by what is rather simple, schoolboy humour. He can dish it out but he can’t take much of it.

The lesson that Farage’s opponents have to learn is that the way to penetrate his defences is by sinking low enough to get under his skin. They need to make their taunts against him particularly childish and crude. Being too sophisticated or clever does not work. But he can’t take banana skins and red noses and schoolboy humour. Probably toilet humour or vulgarity would also work.

The Guardian:

Nigel Farage attacks pupils’ Ukip parody app featuring Nicholas Fromage

App developed by sixth-formers at Canterbury Academy allows players to kick immigrants off white cliffs of Dover
Ukik app

Phone App with Fromage kicking immigrants off a cliff Photograph: FonGames

A phone app made by school students and featuring a character called Nicholas Fromage kicking immigrants off the white cliffs of Dover has been criticised by the Ukip leader, Nigel Farage.

Farage claimed the game, developed by a group of sixth-formers from Canterbury Academy, was “risible and pathetic” and that it had “crossed the line”, despite saying he welcomed the opinions of young people.

But the school’s principal, Phil Karnavas, has defended the app, which he says is a bit of fun to celebrate “brilliant, traditional British satire”.

He said: “Never has a British political party offered themselves so easily to satire.

“It’s a bit rich, bearing in mind some of the things the members of Ukip have said, for their leader to say they have crossed the line.

“Mr Farage can’t have it both ways. He cannot expect young people to engage in politics and then criticise what they say when they do.”

The Android app, called Ukik, has been developed by 18-year-olds John Brown, James Dupreez, Fraser Richardson, John Hutchinson and Joe Brown, who work under the name FonGames.

I am looking forward to schoolboy taunts from Ed Miliband and David Cameron.  But Ed is so full of his own worthiness he may have difficulty in getting his humour to be low enough. David Cameron may have a better chance of being able to use slapstick.

Sweden Democrats try to make nationality a matter of race

December 18, 2014

There is no “Swedish” race – though the Sweden Democrats (SD) would like to think there is.

I take “race” here to be an ethnic grouping based on ancestry. “Swedish” is not a recognised or recognisable ethnic grouping which has any historical basis. There is a loose ethnic grouping of common ancestry across Scandinavia (Norway and Sweden – mainly- and Denmark and to some extent across Finland). These are not the “Vikings” of old, descended directly from the Norse Gods, as the SD would like to think. The inhabitants of Iceland are closer to the SD vision than the Scandinavians. Even this loose Scandinavian ethnic grouping (based on ancestry) has been subject to large amounts of genetic admixing from all over Northern Europe (German, Dutch, Flemish, French, the British Isles) and even much further afield. De Geer and Hamilton and Bernadotte are not Viking in origin.

But the Sweden Democrats are taking advantage of the confusion that is so easy to generate when speaking about “race”, ethnic origins, religion and nationality. But this confusion is evident even in the official record. For example Sweden officially recognises 5 national minorities – mainly defined by language and ethnicity:

Sweden’s national minorities and minority languages

The five recognized national minorities in Sweden are Jews, Roma, the Sami people (which is also an indigenous people), Swedish Finns, and the Torne Valley Descendents (Tornedalians). The historical minority languages are Yiddish, Romani chib, Sami, Finnish and Meänkieli. What is common for the minority groups is that they have populated Sweden over a long period of time and that they constitute groups with a distinct affinity. They also have their own religious, linguistic or cultural affinity and a desire to retain their identity.

These are minorities based on ethnicity (which is a matter of ancestry and is loosely referred to as “race”). The Jews here represent both a religion and a recognised minority. The Samis once practised Shamanism but that has been wiped out by the ideological forefathers of the SD. So if an Ethiopian Jew were also a Swedish citizen, he would have the religion but he would not be part of this recognised minority. But all these minority cultures – while afforded some protection – are still subordinate to the overriding culture of the country. Samis, while maintaining their own sub-culture, are still compliant with the overriding Norwegian or Finnish or Swedish cultures (and laws, rules and regulations) when they happen to be in those countries. One of the failings of all those misguided “do-gooders” who have promoted “multiculturism”, is that they have forgotten to emphasise that sub-cultures in a multi-ethnic society must still – of necessity – be subordinate to an overriding culture (which itself must evolve to incorporate the sub-cultures). There has sometimes been a tendency in most of Europe to support sub-cultures at the expense of the dominant culture, and that has provided many of the right-wing, racist parties the environment in which to prosper.

The SD are now propagating the notion that while these minorities may be Swedish citizens they are not part of their imaginary “Swedish race”. They like to confuse the picture further by referring to their concept of the “Swedish race” as also being the “Swedish nation” and as being something different to “Swedish citizenship”. They are effectively trying to connect “nationality” to ethnicity and to hijack “nationalism” as being the exclusive characteristic of the imaginary “Swedish race”. (Of course all members of SD are naturally assumed to be of this, imaginary, superior “Swedish race” and burning nationalists!).

The Somalis or Syrians or other “new Swedes” who are Swedish citizens may not yet be “recognised minorities” – and may never be. Fundamentally the SD is built on a differentiation by race (ancestry and ethnicity). The unsaid, underlying sub-text of all they say and argue is for a differentiation based on skin colour. They want to promote the concept of the citizens of Sweden being either

  1. those of the “Swedish race” (obviously acceptable though imaginary and unidentifiable)
  2. recognised minorities who are “old Swedes” (and reluctantly acceptable), or
  3. “new Swedes” (who are the bad guys)

Among the SD supporters, the level of “Swedishness” follows this classification. For them, “new Swedes” is a derogatory term which carries the sub-text of skin colour. If they could they would prefer to split the third group on the basis of skin colour with the level of “Swedishness” decreasing with the darkness of skin color. But even they balk at such a blatant differentiation as that. It is quite clear that the SD would prefer to have these 3 groups as 3 classes of citizenship. “New Swedes” (especially those of the wrong skin colour) clearly – in their eyes – are lower class citizens – if at all. I note that the House of Bernadotte only goes back to 1818. (By the SD’s standards, the Royal family should be classified as “new Swedes” and third class citizens). It serves the SD’s cause to separate and isolate the “new Swedes” from the mainstream as much as possible. They would like, for example, ethnicity to be registered for all crimes to further the divide. But the fundamental flaws in the race politics that the SD is trying to promote is that first, there is no such thing as an identifiable “Swedish race” and second, nationality is not a matter of ethnicity. They forget that nationality and citizenship are a matter of residence and behaviour and not of distant ancestry. Immediate parentage can give citizenship but requires residence. And if behaviour is the arbiter, the SD is on shaky ground since it has had more than its fair share of junkies and hooligans.

It should be obvious by now that I am a “new Swede”. But I am a little surprised that so many are taken in by the SD’s view that nationality is a matter of ethnicity. Perhaps they are all supermen who chose their own parents and their ancestry.

A “dark gray” Monday for emerging market currencies

December 16, 2014

There is a gloom pervading global markets.  The gloom of the oil producers is not being offset by an optimism among the oil consumers. The Russians are feeling the effects of the sanctions. Chinese and Indian industrial growth – by their standards – are stagnant. Europe is stuck with its high energy price models and is not prepared – yet – to understand that price reductions by cost reductions (in real terms) is a good thing. The political leadership of the G8 or even the G20 are not – individually or jointly – communicating any convincing vision of a global economy and its recovery. The Middle East is in chaos and nobody has any clear notion of how order can be restored.

It was a dark grey – if not a completely black – Monday for emerging market currencies yesterday. The Indian Rupee slumped to a 13 month low. The Indonesian Rupiah hit a 16 year low. The Russian Ruble, Turkish Lira, Brazilian Real and South African Rand all hit new lows. There was no obvious single trigger but largely driven by sentiment and general gloom. The emerging markets are overly concerned about potential rate hikes in the US next year. But the real conflict lies in the mismatch between Japan and Europe planning rate cuts while the US plans rate hikes. A soaring Dollar is all very well and is fine for a while but it reduces the possibility of everybody else buying goods priced in Dollars.

One wonders why the G8 or the G20 counties bother with their summit meetings. Either the meetings are a particularly ineffective forum or the people attending are largely incompetent. I tend to think that without one or more showing real leadership, the G8 and G20 are just talking-shops and “whatever will be, will be”.

To get a turn-around and move upwards during a period of decline, it is necessary first to hit bottom. It seems to me that the bottom is near – unless we are again approaching a chasm where the bottom is not even visible.

Wall Street Journal:

Analysts say there was no specific catalyst for the selloff, but a number of factors converged to put downward pressure on emerging markets. Global oil prices continued to tumble, exacerbating problems for oil-exporting countries like Russia and Colombia. The Federal Reserve is also scheduled to issue a statement on Wednesday, which could signal that the central bank is closer to raising interest rates. That would deliver a blow to emerging markets that have benefited from years of easy money from the Fed. 

As investors scrambled to dump their risky assets, the selloff in emerging markets spread beyond oil exporters into countries like India and Indonesia, which had been relatively resilient in recent weeks.

“There’s just a lot going on in emerging markets, and investors are having some difficulty absorbing that information and figuring out what will happen next,” said Lucas Turton, chief investment officer of Windham Capital Management LLC in Boston, which manages $1.8 billion and cut back on its exposure to emerging-market stocks two months ago.

In afternoon trading in New York, the dollar was up 3.1% against the lira, with the Turkish currency trading at 2.3706 to the greenback. The real was off more than 1% at 2.6884 to the dollar, while the ruble plunged by more than 10% to trade recently at 65.615 to the dollar. ……

….. The Fed is expected to raise interest rates next year as the economy improves, while central banks in Europe and Japan are pursuing strategies to stimulate growth and inflation. This divergence has caused the dollar to soar against currencies around the world in recent months. ….

Many investors are bracing for turmoil in emerging markets as the dollar strengthens, making it more expensive for these countries to pay back international debt, and as U.S. growth beats much of the rest of the world. For instance, Indonesian companies have issued $11.4 billion of foreign-currency debt so far this year, according to Dealogic, putting them at risk for what analysts call a “currency mismatch.” This means these companies could struggle to pay off their dollar debts as their local currency, the rupiah, weakens in value against the greenback.

The WSJ ends on a very pessimistic note.

Stephen Jen, founding partner of hedge fund SLJ Macro Partners, said emerging-market currencies could “melt down” as investors accelerate their selling.

“Nothing the [emerging market] economies can do will stop these potential outflows, as long as the U.S. economy recovers,” Mr. Jen said.

My simplistic view is that market sentiment – gloom or optimism – is the most critical factor. And, I believe, that sentiment is a direct consequence of perceived vision and leadership. Obama has demonstrated that he is something of an analyst but he is no leader. Europe has no leader (apart from a reluctant Merkel) who communicates any clear vision of Europe or the world. In the absence of political leadership I am looking to industry and industry leaders – who I know exist – to provide the resilience to hold the fort and keep going till political leadership appears again.

The political leadership I am looking for is that person or persons who can provide vision and some real leadership for the G8 or the G20 groupings. No doubt it will come, but it could take some time. It has to, I think, come from the US or Europe. It is possible but unlikely to come from China or India or S. America for some time. Jeb Bush or Hilary Clinton or Elizabeth Warren are unlikely to provide such leadership. It could come from an unlikely source in Europe.

“Cometh the hour, cometh the person”, one hopes.

Sweden Democrat’s deputy speaker sufficiently emboldened to show his xenophobic colours

December 15, 2014

The Sweden Democrats have been emboldened by the current political turbulence – more akin to a low farce – to speak out much more openly about their core agenda. The Sweden Democrats are a far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-immigration, xenophobic party with its roots in the neo-Nazi world. They have quite successfully managed to keep this agenda hidden under a cloak of pseudo-nationalism and have managed to get into a “balance of power” position. They are the 3rd largest party in the Swedish parliament and have even managed to get a member into the position of Deputy Speaker.

Of course it is the current situation where an extra election has been called which means that even the Deputy Speaker in a sitting Parliament is now focused on electioneering. And the current turbulence is due in no small part to the incompetence of the Red/Green coalition coalition government in putting forward a budget which could not be passed. They put together an extreme, leftist budget which gave the Sweden Democrats the wonderful opportunity to defeat it in parliament. SD members all over the country are both energised and emboldened. Yesterday another party member argued that water-boarding was not, in fact, torture and was perfectly acceptable as an interrogation technique.

Of course the Sweden Democrats are being opportunistic, but it was the farcical situation generated by Stefan Löfven and his Green partners which gave them the opportunity. Moreover the “rehabilitated”, somewhat cleaner image of the Sweden Democrats is primarily due to their personable leader, Jimmy Åkesson. But he is off sick due to stress and many of the Sweden Democrat “cowboys” have had no restraining influence to keep them in order.

There is one area however where the Sweden Democrats have put their finger on the pulse of the problem not just in Sweden but all over Europe. A society can be multi-ethnic but it cannot be multi-cultural. The treatment of “multi-culturism” as a god has been a major blunder. A new culture has to and does evolve if allowed and encouraged to. There is little doubt that most European countries have put too little effort in getting their immigrants to adapt to their new surroundings and instead have encouraged them to develop their own separate enclaves. Preserving cultures from other times and other spaces has been prioritised over encouraging the new culture to evolve. A fear of being labelled racist has led to many types of immigrant behaviour, which are incompatible with the new society, being permitted and preserved. As in Rotherham.

Where the Sweden Democrats go completely wrong is in thinking that a predominant culture can be frozen into a past image and can avoid evolution as necessary immigration occurs. And Björn Söder even though he is Deputy Speaker, has already started electioneering. In his latest interview with Dagens Nyheter he brings his xenophobic views into the open and has managed to bring both his own position and Parliament as a whole into disrepute. Some extracts follow:

Reduced immigration is just one of several means for SD to reach its main objectives: to reshape Sweden in to a more nationalistic country. Sami people, Kurds and Jews can live in Sweden – but they are not Swedes, according to SD’s party secretary Björn Söder. He wants to pay immigrants to leave the country: “It would be great with a repatriation grant.” …..

Who is it that does not fit in to SD’s vision of Sweden?

– We stand for an inclusive society, so anyone who wants to fit. We have an open Swedishness which also includes people with roots abroad. But one must adapt to the Swedish and be assimilated to become Swedish.

Do you have to be a nationalist to be part of the Sweden you want to see?

– Absolutely not. I certainly have a lot in common with a liberal who grew up in Sweden – although we have different political views. But we have a unity, we celebrate the same festivals and also has some basic values in common, that the belief in democracy and the rights of women. Therefore, we have a sense of community.

The Swedes who have multiple identities, then? You say that we have people from “other nations” living in Sweden.

– Yes. There are, for example, people belonging to the Sami or the Jewish nation in Sweden.

Can one not be both a Jew and Swedish, at the same time?

– I think most of Jewish origin that have become Swedes leave their Jewish identity. But if they do not do it need not be a problem. One must distinguish between citizenship and nationhood. They can still be Swedish citizens and live in Sweden. Samer and Jews have lived in Sweden for a long time.

The comedian Soran Ismail used to say that he is 100 percent Swedish and 100 percent Kurds. Can not it be so?

– I do not think you can, to belong to two nations that way. However, Kurds could be Swedish citizens. The problem is if there will be too many in Sweden who belong to other nations.

This summer, you shared an article from the SD newspaper Samtiden on your Facebook page. “Swedes in the minority in Malmö,” read the headline. The article wrote that people of foreign origin – at least one parent born abroad – were more than 50 percent of the population in Malmö. You also wrote that in your FB post: “Swedes are now in the minority in Sweden’s third largest city.” Do you mean that everyone with a foreign-born mother or father is not Swedish?

– Wasn’t it that  Swedes were in the minority in the age group under 18?

No, I do not think so [I check later and the article is about all the people of Malmö].

– Anyway many living in Malmo are not Swedish, they are representatives of other nations. Not least, the Arab nation.

Which country is the “Arab nation”?

– No, there’s no country of that name. Arabs coming from several states. It is in any case desirable that a States’ geographical boundaries should coincide with the spread of its people.

It sounds like the argument Putin uses when he activates the Russian minorities in Ukraine, Estonia and Latvia.

– The problem there is that the Soviet Union placed great Russian nations in the Baltic States, it was a strategy of taking over. It is an imperial, chauvinistic nationalism that has nothing to to do with SD’s ideology 

If many residents of Malmö are not a part of the national community that you and your party want to build – what do you do with them?

– They must adapt and become a part of the Swedish nation. We have an open Swedishness, an individual can become Swedish regardless of background. But it requires that they be assimilated. And the problem with Malmö is that we have brought in too many. If very many from other nations live together in Sweden, it creates foreign enclaves in Sweden.

When I listen to you, it sounds as if all who come from an Arab country are alike. But the people of Malmö I know are very different among themselves, even those whose families originated from the same country.

– Sure, it might be so. You and I are also different from each other. But some fundamental value elements unite us. We both grew up in Sweden and it has shaped us. If you have a different cultural background there are other values that unite.

Malmo is multicultural and much of the city’s identity lies in that it is an immigrant city. Those who grow up in Malmö today speak a different dialect of Skånska than those who grew up here a few decades ago. More like Zlatan. They grow up in an environment where different cultures mixed together. Is that bad?

– I think many of them will lose their identities eventually. They will ask: what country do I belong to? It becomes an identity-less society. And obviously there is a problem in Malmo because the economy is so lousy. The rest of the country must prop up Malmo with fiscal equalization. If Malmö had been so good its problems would not have been so great and so obvious.

Söder is rather simplistic and superficial in his views. But he does have a point. The future of Europe is irrevocably multi-ethnic (and that is a comment only on ancestry). But the multi-ethnic Europe has to develop a new, vibrant, inclusive culture and that can neither be the old culture nor a multitude of separated cultures. You have as many societies as you have distinct cultures. It has to be one, new culture which assimilates the best part of the contributing cultures.

When the Pope meets with the Mufti of Istanbul but lacks the courage to meet the Dalai Lama

December 15, 2014

Though I have fond memories of the Jesuits who ran my school, I have not a very high regard for the courage of the Catholic Church. Pope Francis has apparently been a breath of fresh air but I am having second thoughts. All his apparent actions on trying to combat the paedophilia that is inherent in the celibate church and his apparent attempt to be inclusive of homosexuals and even gay marriage, now seem to me to be more concerned with damage control and of improving the image of the church rather than with effecting any real change.

It may be that even this “superficial” behaviour by an “outsider” in the Vatican shows a level of personal courage that is unusual and commendable. But I now begin to think that Pope Francis too is more concerned with being seen as politically correct. The Nobel peace prize winners have been at a congress in Rome and the Dalai Lama requested a meeting with the Pope only to be rejected.

BBC: Pope Francis will not meet the exiled Tibetan leader the Dalai Lama because of the “delicate situation” with China, the Vatican says. The Dalai Lama, who is visiting Rome, had requested a meeting. A Vatican spokesman said that although the Pope held him “in very high regard”, the request had been declined “for obvious reasons“.

The “obvious reasons” had everything to do with political appeasement of the Chinese government and nothing to do with ethics or spirituality or even any sense of right or wrong. There are almost 100 million Catholics and 25 million Muslims in China. The Chinese government sees terrorists among their Muslim minorities but the Catholics mainly as being deluded but not as subversive. The Pope has no problem in visiting mosques and meeting Muftis. The rejection of the Dalai Lama must be put into the perspective of his other meetings. I’m quite sure that in both these cases he is following the instructions of the Cardinal bureaucrats of the Vatican.

Pope Francis prays with Rahmi Yaran, Mufti of Istanbul (right) during a visit to the Sultan Ahmet mosque, popularly known as the Blue Mosque, in Istanbul, on Nov. 29, 2014. REUTERS/ Osservatore Romano

 

Farce continues as trade unions force the Swedish Social Democrats to dump the Greens

December 11, 2014

Just a week ago the Swedish Social Democratic Prime Minister, Stefan Löfven, lost a budget vote in parliament. The whole process was one of low farce. The budget was one his party and their Green (Environment Party) partners in government and supported by the far Left party had put forward. After the loss he announced that he would call an “extra” election as soon as it was permitted on 29th December and to be held on 22nd March 2015. He was quite belligerent and adamant that the joint budget with the Greens (the one defeated) was the very best for Sweden and that they would go to the hustings on the basis of the joint budget. The Greens were quite happy to ride his coattails for it gave them an exposure and a position at the High Table that they could never otherwise have commanded.

In the next day or two it became pretty obvious that it was the Social Democrats shift far to the left with the Greens and the Left party which effectively blocked any possible cooperation with parties further on the right. But Löfven was not prepared to give up his new found friends on the left. Even though it meant that his government was now required to administer the opposition’s alternate budget which had won in parliament until the new elections. Effectively income tax levels would continue throughout 2015 at the levels of the opposition’s budget. Even some expenditure items would have to remain static for the best part of 2015. He kept repeating the self-contradictory mantra that his party would contest the elections as a separate party but on the basis of the joint budget with the Greens. His propping up of the Greens and his obsession with the goodness of his Red/Green budget was becoming untenable.

Many voices within the Social Democrats pointed out the inconsistencies of this position but he stuck to his partnership. But the final straw came when the head of the Landsorganisation (representing the trade unions of Sweden) came out publicly  with the advice to abandon the Greens and fight the election on their own strengths – not least because any coalition agreements could only be negotiated later if they were not encumbered by the Greens and the Left party.

Dagens Nyheter(1):

Stefan Löfven should go to elections without the Green Party. So says a deeply concerned LO chairman Karl-Petter Thorwaldsson.

“Sweden is in a dangerous position, we are no longer seen as a politically stable country, we risk investment and jobs. The image of Sweden as stable, pragmatic and growth-friendly gave us investment and more jobs”, says LO’s chairman. He now sees this threatened on several fronts.

Mainly because of the parliamentary mess. But also because of the Green Party’s influence,  which he has criticized strongly several times in recent months. Among other things their requirements for nuclear decommissioning, the decision to close Bromma airport and postpone the Stockholm Bypass.

The Social Democrats ignore the trade unions at their peril. And Löfven has now been forced to back down and throw the Greens under the bus. But his contortions to keep his position today in touch with his position a week ago are also a little farcical.

Dagens Nyheter (2):

On Thursday the LO boss Karl-Petter Thorwaldsson put it plainly to DN: “Stefan Löfven should throw MP overboard and go to the polls alone”.

So on Thursday Löfven gave a number of bizarre answers. On the one hand, he had intended to do just that (dump the Greens) all the time – even though his press conference with Gustav Fridolin last week clearly showed that this cooperation was firm and fixed. “We like thecooperation we have and we have a very strong budget,” said Löfven.

Dagens Nyheter is scathing:

  • The Social Democrats are going to go to the polls alone, 
  • but together with the MP (Green Party),
  • with a budget that does not apply anymore
  • but which will anyway form the basis for future policy.

The show goes on. At least farces and pantomimes are quite suited to the festive season.

Swedish House Rules (for the next coalition)

December 9, 2014
  1. No party may cooperate with, or take the support of, the Sweden Democrats 
  2. Without the Sweden Democrats no minority coalition can survive.
  3. Any coalition must command a majority (175 seats)
  4. If the Left Party is included in any way then no party from the right of the divide will participate
  5. The Moderates or any parties to the right of the Moderates, will not participate if the Environmental Party (MP) is included
  6. The Centre Party may participate with a mildly left coalition provided it does not include the Left party

Currently the Swedish Parliament has 349 members from 8 parties.

Social Democrats – 113, Moderates – 84, Sweden Democrats – 49, Environment Party – 25, Centre Party – 22, Left Party – 21, Peoples Party – 19, Christian Democrats – 16.

Swedish political landscape 2014

Swedish political landscape 2014

Following these rules and assuming that the current composition of parliament is not much changed after the extra election in March 2015, only two possible majority coalitions are arithmetically possible:

  1. A Grand Coalition of the Social Democrats and the Alliance group of parties, or
  2. A grand coalition of the Social Democrats and the Moderates

The simple rule is that it has to be a coalition of the middle ground. That excludes the Sweden Democrats on the extreme right and the Left and the Environmental parties on the extreme left.

One consequence is that no matter what majority coalition is formed, the Sweden Democrats will be the largest party in opposition.

 

Swedish political crisis follows a failure of leadership

December 6, 2014

Leadership and courage do not result from administering a set of rules.  Changing the rules will not produce them either. But even a bad set of rules can be made to work if courage and leadership are present. Minority governments work when the leaders of the minority have the courage and the imagination and the leadership to maintain the temporary majorities necessary and sufficient to govern.

 Contrary to what is being taken as fact, a new general election in Sweden has not yet been called. While the current Red/Green government has had its budget rejected by the parliament and the current Prime Minister, Stefan Löfven, has announced his intention to call a new election, he cannot actually do so until 29th December. The laws require that a new election cannot be called until 3 months after this parliament first met on 29th September. In fact it is perfectly possible – instead – for a no-confidence motion against the government to be called in parliament (10% of members have to call for such a vote) and a simple majority of the vote can shift power from the PM and his government to the speaker of the house. If that happens before 22nd December (Christmas holidays intervening) then Löfven will not be around to call a new election as he intends to do on 29th December. It would then be up to the speaker or any other government which is established to make such a call. In practice Swedish parliaments have never before taken such a bold step and it would take a level of political courage that members of this parliament do not seem to have.

In municipalities all over Sweden a variety of coalitions between the different parties have been formed to create working majorities so that the business of government can continue. It always needs the leader of the largest local party to show some imagination and courage and not a little skill to create these coalitions. Some coalitions sometimes fail on contentious issues which the parties cannot overcome, but then a new coalition emerges so that the business of government continues.

It is this leadership – to first imagine and then to constitute a working majority – which is visible in abundance at local government level which has been absent at the national level. At national level there is now much talk about changing the rules of voting to enable a minority government to govern. This is a red herring. There is much talk also blaming the Sweden Democrat Party of breaking the “Swedish Model”. This, too, is another red herring. The Sweden Democrats may not have followed practice but they certainly broke no rules. 

The Prime Minister, the Social Democrats, their Environmental Party partners and their far Left supporters are all screeching about a failure of the rules and the malicious nature of the Sweden Democrats. Even the opposition is calling for a change of rules. But this is not a case of the failure of the rules. It has been a case of a failure of leadership, a failure of the ability to see what is required to govern and ultimately the skill to govern.

Löfven has not had the imagination to visualise a manner of cooperation with the other parties (whether jointly or separately) which would have given a working majority. He has taken the easy path of not crossing the Left/Right divide. He brought the Greens into government and took the support of the far Left. He effectively raised and strengthened the wall between Left and Right. He missed the first rule of building consensus by allying too closely with small and extreme groups, which immediately alienated all others. As soon as he had allied with one party on the left he made no real efforts to balance that with an ally on the right. Starting from a minority position on the left he only achieved another minority but extreme position which only hardened the position of his opponents. He judged that the opposition would be too fractured to defeat his grouping and that was a strategic blunder. He was reduced later to arguing why the opposition should remain fractured and not come together! But even after the blunder led to the defeat in parliament, he had not the vision or the skill to put together a new working majority. Instead he seems to have abdicated his responsibility to look for a solution and announced his intention to dump the problem back on to the electorate.

Though there are a few voices calling for parliamentarians to table a no-confidence motion, I am not expecting any group of 35 members to show the necessary courage. That will lead to another election on March 22nd. But the issue which should be the deciding issue and which should transcend all others should be that of leadership and the courage to govern.