Onde vem escrito 'países muçulmanos'?

Apenas 12,5% da população islâmica vive nos sete países da lista de interdição temporária

Donald Trump (Twitter, 3/2/2017) “We must keep “evil” out of our country!”

O mesmo argumento que usei no passado dia 31/1 —Não há nenhuma referência islamofóbica no decreto que tem originado tanta agitação programada. Além do mais, os países objeto de prevenção reforçada foram definidos pelos seus antecessores, Obama incluído—foi esta sexta feira, 2 de fevereiro, invocado pelo juiz Nathaniel Gorton na decisão que anulou a tentativa de suspender a aplicação da ordem executiva do presidente dos Estados Unidos.

Early on Sunday, a magistrate judge in Boston issued an injunction that for seven days blocked enforcement of the order, which the White House has contended is necessary for national security.

“Where does it say Muslim countries?” U.S. District Judge Nathaniel Gorton on Friday asked Matthew Segal, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) representing the plaintiffs in the Boston case.

“If your honor’s question is, ‘Does the word ‘Muslim’ make a profound presence in this executive order?,’ my answer is that it doesn’t,” Segal said. “But the president described what he was going to do as a Muslim ban and then he proceeded to carry it out.”

Gorton shot back, “Am I to take the words of an executive at any point before or after election as a part of that executive order?”

- See more at: Zero Hedge

O abuso das metáforas por parte do actual presidente americano não faz mais do que responder na mesma moeda à linguagem arcaica usada nos comunicados dos fundamentalistas radicais islâmicos. Podemos não gostar, mas em si mesmo não passa de um estilo de comunicação. O que é mais intrigante e importa perceber é a nova estratégia que aparentemente se esconde detrás da nova retórica tática americana. E também o que move a reação epidérmica, mas violenta, das elites que acabaram e perder as eleições. A rapidez e a sucessão vertiginosa dos tweets de Trump, mais do que o estilo ordinário dos mesmos tem, apesar de tudo, uma vantagem: iremos perceber rapidamente se o homem é apenas um amador a quem saiu a presidência do mais poderoso país do planeta, ou se, pelo contrário, tenciona mesmo levar o seu anunciado programa até às últimas consequências. Os Estados Unidos poderão estar a caminho de uma encruzilhada fatal, cujas consequências poderão ir desde uma multiplicação e intensificação das guerras regionais, até ao surgimento de verdadeiros focos de separatismo e guerra civil no interior da América.

O simples facto de Donald Trump ter dividido o parlamento desmiolado que temos é prova da sua eficácia táctica inesperada, mas também, do amadorismo proverbial das pessoas que, sem as conhecermos, elegemos em nome de um ideal democrático que não controlamos.

Trump e a prevenção do terrorismo

O inimigo principal definido por Donal Trump

O decreto executivo e o que Donald Trump realmente disse

Os Estados Unidos têm uma política de entradas no seu território bem definida, ao contrário dos países europeus da União Europeia. Em vez de dar ouvidos à propaganda, o melhor mesmo é ler o mais recente decreto sobre prevenção do terrorismo nas entradas de estrangeiros nos Estados Unidos assinado por Donald Trump.

Não há nenhuma referência islamofóbica no decreto que tem originado tanta agitação programada. Além do mais, os países objeto de prevenção reforçada foram definidos pelos seus antecessores, Obama incluído.

Portugal recebeu 720 refugiados em 2016, dos quais pelo menos 30 'emigraram' para outros países.

O decreto de Donald Trump limita a 50 mil o número de refugiados que o país acolherá em 2017.

Se compararmos o rácio população/refugiados nos dois países, teríamos que ter recebido em 2016, 1640 refugiados, mais do dobro dos que efetivamente acolhemos, para sermos tão politicamente corretos quanto a América de Trump!

Veremos quantos novos refugiados chegarão em 2017 ao nosso país. O ministro do gado botou faladura sobre este tema. Veremos em que se traduz a sua hipócrita indignação.

A retórica e a propaganda fazem muito barulho, mas a informação serve para esclarecer.


Declaração de Donald Trump no acto de assinatura da ordem executiva (vídeo)

Executive order

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq., and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and to protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals admitted to the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Purpose. The visa-issuance process plays a crucial role in detecting individuals with terrorist ties and stopping them from entering the United States. Perhaps in no instance was that more apparent than the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, when State Department policy prevented consular officers from properly scrutinizing the visa applications of several of the 19 foreign nationals who went on to murder nearly 3,000 Americans. And while the visa-issuance process was reviewed and amended after the September 11 attacks to better detect would-be terrorists from receiving visas, these measures did not stop attacks by foreign nationals who were admitted to the United States.

Numerous foreign-born individuals have been convicted or implicated in terrorism-related crimes since September 11, 2001, including foreign nationals who entered the United States after receiving visitor, student, or employment visas, or who entered through the United States refugee resettlement program. Deteriorating conditions in certain countries due to war, strife, disaster, and civil unrest increase the likelihood that terrorists will use any means possible to enter the United States. The United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism.

In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles. The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including “honor” killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation.

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist attacks in the United States; and to prevent the admission of foreign nationals who intend to exploit United States immigration laws for malevolent purposes.

Sec. 3. Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern.

(a) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall immediately conduct a review to determine the information needed from any country to adjudicate any visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications) in order to determine that the individual seeking the benefit is who the individual claims to be and is not a security or public-safety threat.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit to the President a report on the results of the review described in subsection (a) of this section, including the Secretary of Homeland Security’s determination of the information needed for adjudications and a list of countries that do not provide adequate information, within 30 days of the date of this order. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a copy of the report to the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence.

(c) To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12)*, would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).

(d) Immediately upon receipt of the report described in subsection (b) of this section regarding the information needed for adjudications, the Secretary of State shall request all foreign governments that do not supply such information to start providing such information regarding their nationals within 60 days of notification.

(e) After the 60-day period described in subsection (d) of this section expires, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the President a list of countries recommended for inclusion on a Presidential proclamation that would prohibit the entry of foreign nationals (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas) from countries that do not provide the information requested pursuant to subsection (d) of this section until compliance occurs.

(f) At any point after submitting the list described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Homeland Security may submit to the President the names of any additional countries recommended for similar treatment.

(g) Notwithstanding a suspension pursuant to subsection (c) of this section or pursuant to a Presidential proclamation described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked.

(h) The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall submit to the President a joint report on the progress in implementing this order within 30 days of the date of this order, a second report within 60 days of the date of this order, a third report within 90 days of the date of this order, and a fourth report within 120 days of the date of this order.

Sec. 4. Implementing Uniform Screening Standards for All Immigration Programs.

(a) The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall implement a program, as part of the adjudication process for immigration benefits, to identify individuals seeking to enter the United States on a fraudulent basis with the intent to cause harm, or who are at risk of causing harm subsequent to their admission. This program will include the development of a uniform screening standard and procedure, such as in-person interviews; a database of identity documents proffered by applicants to ensure that duplicate documents are not used by multiple applicants; amended application forms that include questions aimed at identifying fraudulent answers and malicious intent; a mechanism to ensure that the applicant is who the applicant claims to be; a process to evaluate the applicant’s likelihood of becoming a positively contributing member of society and the applicant’s ability to make contributions to the national interest; and a mechanism to assess whether or not the applicant has the intent to commit criminal or terrorist acts after entering the United States.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary of State, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of this directive within 60 days of the date of this order, a second report within 100 days of the date of this order, and a third report within 200 days of the date of this order.

Sec. 5. Realignment of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for Fiscal Year 2017.

(a) The Secretary of State shall suspend the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for 120 days. During the 120-day period, the Secretary of State, in conjunction with the Secretary of Homeland Security and in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, shall review the USRAP application and adjudication process to determine what additional procedures should be taken to ensure that those approved for refugee admission do not pose a threat to the security and welfare of the United States, and shall implement such additional procedures. Refugee applicants who are already in the USRAP process may be admitted upon the initiation and completion of these revised procedures. Upon the date that is 120 days after the date of this order, the Secretary of State shall resume USRAP admissions only for nationals of countries for which the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence have jointly determined that such additional procedures are adequate to ensure the security and welfare of the United States.

(b) Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality. Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization.

(c) Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of nationals of Syria as refugees is detrimental to the interests of the United States and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I have determined that sufficient changes have been made to the USRAP to ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with the national interest.

(d) Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of more than 50,000 refugees in fiscal year 2017 would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I determine that additional admissions would be in the national interest.

(e) Notwithstanding the temporary suspension imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit individuals to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion, but only so long as they determine that the admission of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest — including when the person is a religious minority in his country of nationality facing religious persecution, when admitting the person would enable the United States to conform its conduct to a preexisting international agreement, or when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship — and it would not pose a risk to the security or welfare of the United States.

(f) The Secretary of State shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of the directive in subsection (b) of this section regarding prioritization of claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution within 100 days of the date of this order and shall submit a second report within 200 days of the date of this order.

(g) It is the policy of the executive branch that, to the extent permitted by law and as practicable, State and local jurisdictions be granted a role in the process of determining the placement or settlement in their jurisdictions of aliens eligible to be admitted to the United States as refugees. To that end, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall examine existing law to determine the extent to which, consistent with applicable law, State and local jurisdictions may have greater involvement in the process of determining the placement or resettlement of refugees in their jurisdictions, and shall devise a proposal to lawfully promote such involvement.

Sec. 6. Rescission of Exercise of Authority Relating to the Terrorism Grounds of Inadmissibility. The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall, in consultation with the Attorney General, consider rescinding the exercises of authority in section 212 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182, relating to the terrorism grounds of inadmissibility, as well as any related implementing memoranda.

Sec. 7. Expedited Completion of the Biometric Entry-Exit Tracking System. (a) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall expedite the completion and implementation of a biometric entry-exit tracking system for all travelers to the United States, as recommended by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the President periodic reports on the progress of the directive contained in subsection (a) of this section. The initial report shall be submitted within 100 days of the date of this order, a second report shall be submitted within 200 days of the date of this order, and a third report shall be submitted within 365 days of the date of this order. Further, the Secretary shall submit a report every 180 days thereafter until the system is fully deployed and operational.

Sec. 8. Visa Interview Security. (a) The Secretary of State shall immediately suspend the Visa Interview Waiver Program and ensure compliance with section 222 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1222, which requires that all individuals seeking a nonimmigrant visa undergo an in-person interview, subject to specific statutory exceptions.

(b) To the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary of State shall immediately expand the Consular Fellows Program, including by substantially increasing the number of Fellows, lengthening or making permanent the period of service, and making language training at the Foreign Service Institute available to Fellows for assignment to posts outside of their area of core linguistic ability, to ensure that non-immigrant visa-interview wait times are not unduly affected.

Sec. 9. Visa Validity Reciprocity. The Secretary of State shall review all nonimmigrant visa reciprocity agreements to ensure that they are, with respect to each visa classification, truly reciprocal insofar as practicable with respect to validity period and fees, as required by sections 221(c) and 281 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1201(c) and 1351, and other treatment. If a country does not treat United States nationals seeking nonimmigrant visas in a reciprocal manner, the Secretary of State shall adjust the visa validity period, fee schedule, or other treatment to match the treatment of United States nationals by the foreign country, to the extent practicable.

Sec. 10. Transparency and Data Collection. (a) To be more transparent with the American people, and to more effectively implement policies and practices that serve the national interest, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall, consistent with applicable law and national security, collect and make publicly available within 180 days, and every 180 days thereafter:

(i) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been charged with terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; convicted of terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; or removed from the United States based on terrorism-related activity, affiliation, or material support to a terrorism-related organization, or any other national security reasons since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later;
(ii) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been radicalized after entry into the United States and engaged in terrorism-related acts, or who have provided material support to terrorism-related organizations in countries that pose a threat to the United States, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and

(iii) information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including honor killings, in the United States by foreign nationals, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and

(iv) any other information relevant to public safety and security as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, including information on the immigration status of foreign nationals charged with major offenses.

(b) The Secretary of State shall, within one year of the date of this order, provide a report on the estimated long-term costs of the USRAP at the Federal, State, and local levels.

Sec. 11. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

<fim do documento>


* Legislação em vigor, anterior à presidência de Donal Trump

8 U.S. Code § 1187 - Visa waiver program for certain visitors

(a) Establishment of program The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State are authorized to establish a program (hereinafter in this section referred to as the “program”) under which the requirement of paragraph (7)(B)(i)(II) of section 1182(a) of this title may be waived by the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and in accordance with this section, in the case of an alien who meets the following requirements:

[...]

(12) Not present in Iraq, Syria, or any other country or area of concern

(A)In general Except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C)—

(i) the alien has not been present, at any time on or after March 1, 2011—

(I) 

in Iraq or Syria;

(II) 

in a country that is designated by the Secretary of State under section 4605(j) of title 50 (as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)), section 2780 of title 22, section 2371 of title 22, or any other provision of law, as a country, the government of which has repeatedly provided support of acts of international terrorism; or

(III) 

in any other country or area of concern designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security under subparagraph (D); and

(ii) regardless of whether the alien is a national of a program country, the alien is not a national of—

(I) 

Iraq or Syria;

(II) 

a country that is designated, at the time the alien applies for admission, by the Secretary of State under section 4605(j) of title 50 (as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)), section 2780 of title 22, section 2371 of title 22, or any other provision of law, as a country, the government of which has repeatedly provided support of acts of international terrorism; or

(III) 

any other country that is designated, at the time the alien applies for admission, by the Secretary of Homeland Security under subparagraph (D).

— in Legal Information Institute. URL (consultado em 31/1/2017): https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1187

A dúvida de Trump

Quem é o inimigo principal? A China, ou a Rússia?

Irá Donald Trump abandonar a teoria estratégica que dominou a diplomacia mundial desde 1904, ou, pelo contrário, o que está em causa, como sugere Immanuel Wallerstein, é saber se os Estados Unidos estarão finalmente preparados para ceder à China a missão estratégica de conter o expansionismo potencial da Rússia, esse famoso Coração da Terra descrito por Halford John Mackinder?

Most politicians, journalists, and academic analysts describe the relations of China and the United States as one of hostile competition, especially in East Asia. I disagree. I believe that the top of both countries' geopolitical agenda is reaching a long-term accord with the other. The major bone of contention is which of the two prospective partners will be the top dog.

—in “China and the United States: Partners?”
Immanuel Wallerstein. Commentary No. 441, Jan. 15, 2017

A verdade é que a Grande Rússia, czarista, soviética, ou putiniana é mesmo o coração da Eurásia, e é muito grande! Trata-se de um país continental com autonomia energética e alimentar, onde é possível ensaiar mísseis balísticos, bem como tentar aplicar a teoria do socialismo num só país. Ou seja, a sua inércia geopolítica é incomensurável, sendo que qualquer exercício de contenção sobre a elasticidade das suas fronteiras internas e próximas (Rimland) obriga a esforços económicos e humanos de incalculáveis custos, que sucessivas derrotas militares (Napoleão e Hitler, mas também Clinton, Bush e Obama) comprovaram tragicamente. A Alemanha tentou conquistar este Heartland e só não foi absorviva pela União Soviética porque os seus inimigos ocidentais da véspera lhe deitaram a mão imeditamente após a chegada das tropas russas a Berlim. O preço da ambição alemã foi, no entanto, a expansão da fronteira elástica da Mãe Rússia ao longo da chamada Cortina de Ferro e mesmo até ao interior da Alemanha, dividindo a sua capital em duas metades.

“From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic an iron curtain has descended across the Continent. Behind that line lie all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest and Sofia; all these famous cities and the populations around them lie in what I must call the Soviet sphere, and all are subject, in one form or another, not only to Soviet influence but to a very high and in some cases increasing measure of control from Moscow.”  

—Winston Churchill

A América e a Europa ocidental, apesar de serem as mais ricas regiões económicas do planeta não têm disponibilidades financeiras e anímicas suficientes para continuarem a suportar os custos de um cerco geopolítico cada vez mais caro e com perdas colaterais cada vez maiores, de que a crise migratória, a par da radicalização social e política de um e outro lado do Atlântico são as maiores ameaças recentes à sua estabilidade. Mas se assim é, porque pretende Donald Trump uma trégua com Moscovo, provocar a Alemanha, e atacar Pequim? Não seria mais lógico aproximar-se da China e encomendar-lhe parte dos custos de contenção da ameaça russa?

Segundo Immanuel Wallerstein, este é o caminho, mas tem um senão: implica que os Estados Unidos cedam o seu papel de potência dominante à China, como outrora os ingleses acabariam por fazer relativamente à sua antiga colónia. Uma tal cedência, porém, é o contrário do que diz a consigna Make America Great Again.

Nada disto faz sentido. Aparentemente. Salvo se estivermos em presença de uma manobra perversa por parte dos Estados Unidos, nomeadamente depois de constatarem que o seu declínio prossegue de forma imparável e a sua sociedade está cada vez mais dividida e violenta, ao contrário de uma União Europeia e de uma moeda, o euro, que parecem resistir a todas as tentativas (americana, inglesa e russa) de as destruirem. A manobra seria esta: criar atrito com a China, provocar a União Europeia, dar espaço de manobra à Rússia, e esperar que os temores da China comecem a aflorar nas conversas privadas entre Washngton e Pequim. É que a autonomia energética chinesa chegou virtualmente ao fim. Sem energia abundante e barata mais limpa que o carvão, até hoje usado, e sem o petróleo/ gás natural do Médio Oriente e da Ásia Central, o colapso ecológico, mas também económico de Pequim, poderá estar a menos de duas décadas de distância. O crescimento real do PIB chinês não ultrapassa hoje os 5%. Ou seja, mais do que a América, cuja suficiência energética e alimentar continua a ser evidente, é a China—a qual faz parte do famoso Rimland do Coração da Terra— que precisa de conter a Rússia! Chegados aqui, os americanos bem poderiam recolher a penates e lamber as feridas de um século de imperialismo violento.

Conclusão: os Estados Unidos desejam secretamente ceder a supremacia à China, mas sem perder a face.



REFERÊNCIAS À TEORIA GEOESTRATÉGICA DE MACKINDER

A modernidade pós-medieval começa em 1415 (tomada de Ceuta pelos portugueses), ou em 1453 (queda de Constantinopla), ou em 1492 e 1500 (descoberta do continente americano), ou em 1522 (conclusão da primeira viagem de circum-navegação), e termina, segundo H. J. Mackinder, pouco depois de 1900. Este foi o tempo que levou a conhecer e desenhar o mapa da Terra até às suas mais ínfimas paragens. Depois desta aventura, o mundo tornou-se uma realidade geopolítica fechada, não havendo mais nenhuma 'última fronteira' a descobrir ou conquistar, mas tão só territórios delimitados por nações e estados, compondo placas tectónicas e geopolíticas cujos movimentos e atritos marcam o pulsar, por vezes violento, entre as comunidades humanas que nelas habitam.

Como escreveu Harold John Mackinder na sua famosa conferência de 1904 (traduzo livremente),

Quando os historiadores num remoto futuro olharem para o grupo de séculos por que estamos a passar, com uma perspetiva comprimida como aquela que nos dá a ver as dinastias do Egito, poderá muito bem acontecer que descrevam os últimos 400 anos como a época colombiana, e digam que a mesma acabou pouco depois de 1900. 

CITAÇÕES

##

“Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; Who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; Who rules the World Island commands the World.”(Mackinder, Democratic Ideals and Reality, p. 150) 

Competition for gaining control over natural resources between Russia and the United States together with geopolitical and strategic factors characterized the geopolitics of Central Asia. Control over natural resources as well as market access is indeed the main motto of the foreign policy direction of both states. In fact, it may be said that outlined in 1904 through his speech, the “Heartland theory” was a founding moment for geopolitics. His argument regarding the control of the Eurasian landmass (Europe, Asia, and the Middle East), is still considered as the major geopolitical prize.  

—in “Heartland Theory” of Mackinder & its Relevancy in Central Asia Geopolitics
By Suban Kumar Chowdhury and Abdullah Hel Kafi
IndraStra. Saturday, June 25, 2016

##

In Europe, North America, South America, Africa, and Australasia there is scarcely a region left for the pegging out of a claim of ownership, unless as the result of a war between civilized or half-civilized powers. Even in Asia, we are probably witnessing the last moves of the game first played by the horsemen of Yermak the Cossack and the shipment of Vasco da Gama. Broadly speaking, we may contrast the Columbian epoch with the age which preceded it, describing its essential characteristic as the expansion of Europe against almost negligible resistances, whereas medieval Christendom was bent into a narrow region and threatened by external barbarism. From the present time forth, in the pos-Columbian age, we shall again have to deal with a closed political system, and none the less that it will be one of worldwide scope. [...] 

European civilization is, in a very real sense, the outcome of the secular struggle against Asiatic invasion. [...] 

...the settled peoples of Europe lay gripped between two pressures—that of the Asiatic nomads from the east, and on the other three sides that of the pirates from the sea. From its very nature, neither pressure was overwhelming, and both, therefore, were stimulative. [...] 

It is probably one of the most striking coincidences of history that the seaward and the landward expansion of Europe should, in a sense, continue the ancient opposition between Roman and Greek. Few great failures have had more far-reaching consequences tan the failure of Rome to Latinize the Greek. The Teuton was civilized and Christianized by the Roman, the Slav in the main by the Greek. It is the Romano-Teuton who in later times embarked upon the ocean; it was the Graeco-Slav who rode over the steppes, conquering the Turanian. Thus the modern land-power differs from the sea-power no less in the source of its ideals than in the material conditions of its mobility. [...] 

For a thousand years a series of horse-riding peoples emerged from Asia through the broad interval between the Ural mountains and the Caspian sea, [...] 

The all-important result of the discovery of the Cape road to the Indies was to connect the western and the eastern coastal navigations of Euro-Asia, even though by a circuitous route, and thus in some measure to neutralize the strategical advantage of the central position of the steppe nomads by pressing upon them in the rear. 

—in The Geographical Pivot of History
H. J. Mackinder
The Geographical Journal
Vol. 23, No. 4 (Apr. 1904), pp. 421-437

##

Mackinder’s article argued that the coming of steam power, electricity, and the railways were, at last, permitting continental nations to overcome the physical obstacles that had hampered their development in the past. 

In particular, the railway was enabling tsarist Russia to exploit its vast internal resources and to make strategic inroads in the far east and towards India that its imperial rival Great Britain could not counter. Land power was thus eroding the geopolitical advantages that had been enjoyed by the western sea powers. 

The rest of the 20th century bore witness to Mackinder’s thesis. The two world wars were struggles for control of what the author called the “rimlands”, that swathe of territories running from eastern Europe to the Himalayas and beyond, just outside the Asian “heartland” itself. Soviet domination of that region during the cold war caused many a US geopolitician (Nicholas Spykman, for example) to recall Mackinder’s theories. And the recent projection of US military power into Afghanistan and various central Asian republics has rekindled interest in the hypothesis. 

—in The pivot of history
Paul Kennedy
The Guardian, Saturday 19 June 2004 12.02 BST

American carnage

President Donald Trump speaks on tax reform during a meeting in the Oval Office on December 5, 2017. (Photo credit: SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)

Estado de negação

O mundo, sobretudo o mundo da burocracia, dos interesses que capturam sistematicamente os orçamentos públicos, a comunicação social endividada, e o demo-populismo partidário, continuam em estado de negação perante o que aconteceu nos Estados Unidos de Donald Trump, e que antes ocorrera (e continua!) na França de Le Pen, na Itália de Berlusconi e de Beppe Grillo, ou mais recentemente com o Brexit, e o que ainda irá acontecer até ao fim deste ano, na Alemanha, na França e na Holanda. A ilusão de que a colocação de mais um filtro de crítica politicamente correta na realidade agora escancarada nos livrará da desgraça é o maior perigo de todos. Estudar as causas do que torna a realidade política actual tão inconcebível é a nossa única opção racional para evitar o pior, e assim nos adaptarmos ao que aí vem.

Em 1972 foi escrito um livro fundamental: Os Limites do Crescimento. Curiosamente, 2030 aparece neste livro como uma das datas prováveis de um colapso do modelo de crescimento demográfico e económico que julgávamos eterno, e que assentou até hoje na ideia de que o PIB deve progredir todos os anos, a par dos salários e do consumo de bens e serviços. Este modelo está pura e simplesmente errado, e chegou mesmo ao fim. 2030 está bem mais perto do que parece, se é que não chegou já.

O modelo que o pensamento politicamente correto tanto criticou, a famosa globalização, está, enfim, a rebentar pelas costuras, tendo entretanto colocado no corredor da extinção uma espécie social conhecida como 'classe média', e atirado ainda dezenas de milhões de trabalhadores industriais e de serviços, americanos e europeus, para o desemprego permanente e a miséria.

Este problema começou, na realidade, no início dos anos 70 do século passado, com a primeira grande crise mundial do petróleo. Desde então, entalados pela perda de competitividade causada pela subida imparável dos preços do trabalho e da energia, os países ricos do Ocidente, a começar pelos EUA, não fizeram nada mais do que mitigar o problema: exportar as atividades produtivas para as regiões onde o trabalho era muito mais barato, distrair as suas comunidades com uma economia virada sobretudo para o entretenimento e o consumo, ou ocupar um número crescente de cidadãos numa espiral educativa sem fim, sabendo que fora dessa espiral haveria cada vez menos oportunidades de trabalho propriamente remunerado e estável.

Assim como o trabalho produtivo não parou de diminuir nos Estados Unidos, Canadá e Europa Ocidental, também o capital emigraria para onde era possível obter maiores graus de exploração do trabalho. O resultado só poderia ser um: Estados Unidos, Canadá e Europa Ocidental foram-se endividando para importar o que não produziam, e para subsidiar os direitos de uma população desempregada ou improdutiva que continuava a crescer, a consumnir cada vez mais, e a envelhecer.

Outra consequência desta distorção económica e social foi a globalização ter dado lugar ao maior processo de concentração capitalista que alguma vez existiu.

Porém, só o facto de a nova elite financeira nascida da globalização ter tido a capacidade e necessidade de corromper os governos e algumas elites intelectuais e profissionais dos seus países de origem permitiu esconder o empobrecimento real de 99% das populações americana e europeia ao mesmo tempo que os 1% iam ficando cada vez mais ricos e poderosos. Na realidade, só quando as dívidas públicas e externas americana e europeias explodiram é que nos apercebemos que algo ia efetivamente muito mal no reino das democracias.

Talvez, depois desta introdução, possamos ler o discurso de posse de Donald Trump sem sermos imediatamente assaltados pelo medo de pensar.

Discurso de posse de Donald Trump

“Chief Justice Roberts, President Carter, President Clinton, President Bush, President Obama, fellow Americans and people of the world, thank you.

We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great national effort to rebuild our country and restore its promise for all of our people.

Together, we will determine the course of America and the world for many, many years to come. We will face challenges. We will confront hardships. But we will get the job done.

Every four years we gather on these steps to carry out the orderly and peaceful transfer of power.

And we are grateful to President Obama and first lady Michelle Obama for their gracious aid throughout this transition.

They have been magnificent.

Thank you.

Today’s ceremony, however, has a very special meaning because today we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another or from one party to another, but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C., and giving it back to you, the people.

For too long, a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have bore the cost. Washington flourished, but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered but the jobs left and the factories closed.

The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories. Their triumphs have not been your triumphs. And while they celebrated in our nation’s capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land.

That all changes starting right here and right now because this moment is your moment.

It belongs to you.

It belongs to everyone gathered here today and everyone watching all across America.

This is your day.

This is your celebration.

And this, the United States of America, is your country.

What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people.

January 20th, 2017, will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again.

The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer. Everyone is listening to you now. You came by the tens of millions to become part of a historic movement, the likes of which the world has never seen before.

At the center of this movement is a crucial conviction that a nation exists to serve its citizens. Americans want great schools for their children, safe neighborhoods for their families and good jobs for themselves.

These are just and reasonable demands of righteous people and a righteous public.

But for too many of our citizens, a different reality exists.

Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner cities rusted out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation.

An education system flush with cash but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of all knowledge.

And the crime and the gangs and the drugs that have stolen too many lives and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential. This American carnage stops right here and stops right now.

We are one nation, and their pain is our pain.

Their dreams are our dreams, and their success will be our success. We share one heart, one home, and one glorious destiny.

The oath of office I take today is an oath of allegiance to all Americans.

For many decades we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry, subsidized the armies of other countries while allowing for the very sad depletion of our military.

We’ve defended other nations’ borders while refusing to defend our own. And we’ve spent trillions and trillions of dollars overseas while America’s infrastructure has fallen into disrepair and decay.

We’ve made other countries rich while the wealth, strength, and confidence of our country has dissipated over the horizon.

One by one, the factories shuttered and left our shores with not even a thought about the millions and millions of American workers that were left behind.

The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed all across the world. But that is the past, and now we are looking only to the future.

We assembled here today are issuing a new decree to be heard in every city, in every foreign capital and in every hall of power. From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land.

From this day forward, it’s going to be only America first, America first. Every decision on trade, on taxes, on immigration, on foreign affairs will be made to benefit American workers and American families. We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our product, stealing our companies and destroying our jobs.

Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength. I will fight for you with every breath in my body, and I will never ever let you down.

America will start winning again, winning like never before.

We will bring back our jobs.

We will bring back our borders.

We will bring back our wealth, and we will bring back our dreams.

We will build new roads and highways and bridges and airports and tunnels and railways all across our wonderful nation.

We will get our people off of welfare and back to work, rebuilding our country with American hands and American labor.

We will follow two simple rules: Buy American and hire American.

We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world, but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first.

We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example.

We will shine for everyone to follow.

We will re-enforce old alliances and form new ones and unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the earth.

At the bedrock of our politics will be a total allegiance to the United States of America, and through our loyalty to our country we will rediscover our loyalty to each other.

When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice.

The Bible tells us how good and pleasant it is when God’s people live together in unity. We must speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity. When America is united, America is totally unstoppable. There should be no fear. We are protected and we will always be protected. We will be protected by the great men and women of our military and law enforcement. And most importantly, we will be protected by God.

Finally, we must think big and dream even bigger. In America, we understand that a nation is only living as long as it is striving. We will no longer accept politicians who are all talk and no action, constantly complaining but never doing anything about it.

The time for empty talk is over. Now arrives the hour of action.

Do not allow anyone to tell you that it cannot be done. No challenge can match the heart and fight and spirit of America. We will not fail. Our country will thrive and prosper again.

We stand at the birth of a new millennium, ready to unlock the mysteries of space, to free the earth from the miseries of disease, and to harness the energies, industries, and technologies of tomorrow.

A new national pride will stir ourselves, lift our sights and heal our divisions. It’s time to remember that old wisdom our soldiers will never forget, that whether we are black or brown or white, we all bleed the same red blood of patriots.

We all enjoy the same glorious freedoms and we all salute the same great American flag.

And whether a child is born in the urban sprawl of Detroit or the windswept plains of Nebraska, they look up at the same night sky, they fill their heart with the same dreams and they are infused with the breath of life by the same almighty creator.

So to all Americans in every city near and far, small and large, from mountain to mountain, from ocean to ocean, hear these words: You will never be ignored again. Your voice, your hopes, and your dreams will define our American destiny. And your courage and goodness and love will forever guide us along the way.

Together we will make America strong again, we will make America wealthy again, we will make America proud again, we will make America safe again.

And, yes, together we will make America great again.

Thank you.

God bless you.


And God bless America.”

Hillary vs Trump

Venha o Diabo e escolha!

(CNN) Hillary Clinton was deemed the winner of Monday night's debate by 62% of voters who tuned in to watch, while just 27% said they thought Donald Trump had the better night, according to a CNN/ORC Poll of voters who watched the debate.

Debate inconclusivo? Ouvi-o esta madrugada. Hillary pareceu, para já, melhor treinada do que Trump. Trump é fanfarrão, não paga impostos e continua a exibir um peluche em cima do crânio, Hillary é uma falcoa perigosa, propensa às pneumonias, que ajudou a meter os Estados Unidos, o Leste Europeu e o Médio Oriente num inferno. A América precisa de uma pausa para lamber as feridas, se quiser retardar ou mesmo infletir a sua manifesta decadência económica, financeira, institucional e moral. Talvez por isto ser assim, os eleitores de um grande país onde prolifera a pobreza e o crime, acabem, no fim da campanha eleitoral, por dar a vitória a Donald Trump. Quem quer que venha a ser  o próximo boss americano, sê-lo-à depois de uma vitória tangencial sobre o adversário.