Mikas blogg

05 April
2007

Revelations

The "Institut für Wirtschaftsrecherchen (IWR) GmbH" in Saarbrücken may not be world-famous. However, observers of international and financial affairs have been aware of its existence since 2003, when it was founded by the Swiss banker and lawyer André Strebel together with the former banker from Luxemburg, Ernest Backes.

The IWR sometimes has figured in connection with the news stories about the fate of the Russian Yukos Oil company and its (former) chiefs Mihail Chodorkovsky and Platon Lebedev. In case the IWR was mentioned, so was probably Menatep, the bank behind the Yukos company.

And the name of Ernest Backes is known to everybody who follows the development of the Clearstream affair. In 2001 Backes co-authored Révélation$ with French investigative journalist Denis Robert.

It was because of the revelations made by Backes and Robert about Clearstream and Menatep that the then CEO of Clearstream Mr André Lussi was sacked from Clearstream.

On 3 April, Stern, the German magazine, published an interesting story about The "Institut für Wirtschaftsrecherchen". Stern revealed that the Institut has been financed by BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst), the German intelligence service. And how did this leak out to the press? The reason is quite extraordinary: Mr Strebel wants to take the BND to court for having failed to comply to agreement. The BND has not payed the agreed salaries to the two Wirtschaftsforschern!

Let's hope that intelligence services all over follow the example of the BND and start sponsoring research into the world's most private finances! As the end result humanity may achieve a state called World Public Finances. On the condition, of course, that the researchers are paid their salaries throughout the duration of the research project.

06 April
2007

Krigets svarta orsak

Långfredag - en dag för läsning och begrundan. Men två artiklar påminner om en annan dag, som man gärna skulle vilja glömma: den 11 september 2001.

Lucy Komisar, den amerikanska ekonomijournalisten, gräver vidare i historien om en av historiens största finansiella tvättmaskiner dvs. banken BCCI . Hon konstaterar, att George W. Bush &Co egentligen hade alldeles rätt när de påstod sig ha funnit en förbindelse mellan Iraks diktator Saddam Hussein och Al Quaidas ledare Osama Bin Ladin.

There was a link, but not the one Bush was selling. The link between Hussein and Bin Laden was their banker, BCCI. But the link went beyond the dictator and the jihadist — it passed through Saudi Arabia and stretched all the way to George W. Bush and his father.

BCCI hjälpte CIA att finansiera Osama bin Ladens gudskrigare mot den sovjetstödda regimen i Afghanistan, Ronald Reagan att finansiera Saddam Husseins armé i kriget mot Iran och George W. Bush att finansiera sitt oljebolag Harken. Bland annat.

Lasse Karlsson kartlägger i artikeln Krigets svarta orsak hur USAs intresse av att kontrollera oljetillgångarna i Mellanöstern har styrt landets utrikespolitik ända sedan 1970-talet.

Att föra krig för att säkra USA:s oljeintressen i Mellanöstern är nämligen ingen idé som republikanerna har patent på. I själva verket lades den första gången fast i Carter-doktrinen redan 1980 när den demokratiske presidenten försäkrade kongressen i sitt State of the Union-tal att »alla nödvändiga medel, inklusive militär makt« skulle användas för att säkra oljeflödet från Persiska viken till USA. Under Carters styre började därför USA:s idag viktigaste militärkommando, Centcom i Tampa, Florida, att byggas upp.

Paul Wolfowitz, som i slutet av 1970-talet upptäckte att sovjetisk makt var viktigare i Persiska viken än i Europa, förkroppsligar genom sin karriär utvecklingen fram till den aktuella irakiska oljelagen och de utländska företagens överenskommelser med den irakiska vasallstaten (Production Sharing Agreements ).

10 April
2007

Puolustusmenoista

Eräs nuori taloustieteijlijä, jonka työtä kovasti arvostan, kirjoitti minulle jotakin tämän tapaista:

... pelkästään USAn rahoitus on noin 100 miljardia dollaria vuodessa Irakin sotaan, mutta ei puolustusmenoja voi suoraan verrata siihen mitä valtioilta jää keräämättä veroina tai mitä velkojen korkomaksut vievät budjettikehyksestä.

Voi olla näin - ja ekonomistin ajatusmaailmassa varmasti onkin näin - mutta kun sitten toisaalta pyrimme eliminoimaan talouden "vuotoja" kuten valtavat mittasuhteet saavuttaneen veronkierron ja rahanpesun (jotka toimivat omien hallitustemme myötävaikutuksella) on kyllä syytä ottaa puolustusmenotkin vertailevan tutkimuksen kohteeeksi.

Military spending on asia, joka jossain määrin ylittää parhaidenkin ekonomistien käsityskyvyn. Mitä KOKO MAAILMAN puolustusmenot edustavat ekonomistien ajattelussa? Miten he selittävät puolustusmenojen nykyisen kokonaissumman 1035 miljardia dollaria? [1] Miksei pikemminkin 2070 mrd, tai 517,5 mrd?

Vastaus on, etteivät he ymmärrä tätä kysymystä, sillä puolustusmenojen selittämiseen tarvitaan politiikan tiedettä pikemminkin kuin taloustiedettä. Kysymys on vallasta, ei niinkään rahasta.

Sitäpaitsi ekonomistit ovat pääomien muodostusta ja kaupan syklejä tutkiessaan lopultakin juuttuneet kansallisvaltioihin ja kansantalouksiin. He kuvittelevat nykyisiä valtioita ja nykyistä poliittista maailmanjärjestelmää ikuisiksi.

Mutta se, että puolustusmenot määräytyvät poliittisesti ei tietenkään tarkoita, että niiden kokonaissumma olisi (kansan)taloudellisesti merkityksetön. Maailman nykyiset poliittiset rakenteet epäilemättä muodostavat maailman kansoille raskaan taloudellisen riippakiven, josta on päästävä eroon.

Tämän näkemyksen tulee mielestäni heijastua voimakkaasti Attacin toimintaan. Attac kehottaa kapinaan nykyistä globaalia poliittista järjestelmää vastaan. Kapinan ei kuitenkaan tule suuntautua yhtä määrättyä valtiota tai valtioryhmää vastaan. Ei myöskään USA:ta vastaan, sillä USA:kin on vain nykykyisen, tilapäiseksi ja katoavaksi tuomitsemamme kansainvälispoliittisen järjestelmän osa.

Huomaan alkaneeni ajatella yhä enemmän "federalistisesti" ja olevani taipuvainen palaamaan yhteen 1980-luvun END-liikkeen ajatuskulkuun. END (European Nuclear Disarmament) perustui viime käsdessä näkemykseen "exterminismistä" (brittihistorijoitsija E.P.Thompsonin termi). Kylmän sodan kahden supervallan vastakkainasettelu ja varustelun logiikka oli kohtalokasta. Suunta näytti olevan vakaasti kohti katastrofia, jonka syytä juuri kukaan ei olisi jälkeenpäin osannut selittää, sillä se olisi johtunut "järjestelmästä".

Europan kansalaiset rautaesiriipun molemmin puolin ja osittain myös muun maailman kansalaiset kuitenkin tajusivat ajoissa mihin suuntaan oltiin menossa. Lopulta 1980-luvun rauhanliikkeet, ts. liikkeet, jotka hylkäsivät toisen maailmansodan seurauksena luodun, irrationaaliseksi muuttuneen järjestelmän - kahtia jaetun Euroopan - veivät voiton. Reaganit, thatcherit ja gorbatshovit joutuivat niin sanutusti ottamaan järjen käteen. Mutta se ei ollut heidän oma järkensä. Se oli meidän, liikkeelle lähteneiden kansalaisten, järki.

Näin meidän tulee tänäänkin suhtautua tulevaisuuteemme. Ekonomistien sekä kansallisiin etuihin juuttuneiden poliitikkojen ja diplomaatien on lopultakin toteltava nykyisten, maailman sosiaalifoorumeissa ilmenevien kansalaisliikkeiden järkeä. Poliittinen järjestelmä, joka jo maksaa yli 1000 miljardia pelkästään puolustusmenoissa mitattuna (ja yhä enemmän vuodesta toiseen) on kerta kaikkiaan kestämätön. Se on kumottava rauhanomaisen, gandhilaisen vallankumouksen keinoin.

"Ensin he vaikenevat meistä, sitten he nauravat meille, sitten he vastustavat meitä, sitten me voitamme." - Gandhi

- Mikael Böök

[1] SIPRI Yearbook 2004; lainattu teoksesta WARFARE OR WELFARE? Disarmament for Development in the 21st century. A Human Security Approach. The International Peace Bureau, Geneva, 2006., p. 31.

13 April
2007

Which force is the truth-force?

I agree with the proposal of Tord Björk, Luciana Castellina , Ramon Duran, Susan George and Thomas Wallgren - to choose 9/11 as our worldwide Day of Action.

However, in the present context of the WSF, the Day of Action is generally thought to be organised instead of the WSF event itself, and therefore preferably at the time when the WSF has previously been arranged, which means January 2008. So I think we need to have it then.

But why could not the WSF also decide to have 9/11 as a Day of Action?

I must admit that my very first, spontaneous reaction was negative, because 9/11 is to such an owerwhelming extent a negative date. But then, at closer sight, we find also that positive link to Gandhi and non-violence, which we can celebrate and be inspired of.

Permit me to add a few more words about 9/11 2001. Some, like Alexander Cockburn in "Le monde diplomatique", and Georges Monbiot in "The Guardian" seem to ask us to forget about digging into the inconsistencies of the official story about that past event in order to concentrate more intensely on the crimes that are being committed now. They have not convinced me. I do not pretend to know precisely what happened at the World Trade Center and at the Pentagon on that day, but I continue to be vexed by what has been said, and not said, about it.

But here, again, it is good to remember the birth of the Gandhian "movement of non-violent resistence and truth-force -- on 9/11 1906"!

What force is the truth-force? Is it power? And what power is that, if not the power of information and of communication?

At a certain point the New York Times ranked us as "The Second Superpower". But we were not what we were called. We were no more than a gesture, and so was that epithet. It was an empty word.

The WSF must become a strong and powerful "movement of non-violent resistence and truth-force", as was the Gandhian movement. The "form that the Forum was given" (Chico Whitaker) is the right one. Global democracy can grow out of it. But more than an open space (even if the forum would be much broader than it is) is needed to make the democracy possible. It cannot live for long without institutions and a constitution.

One of the pre-existing institutions, which history has created for the sake of the coming global democracy, is: The Library. Thus it was an event of some importance when the then chair of the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) participated in the WSF in Mumbai 2004. But it went almost unnoticed in the circles of the WSF. Again, in Nairobi, when about 70 East African librarians participated in the WSF in order to collect information about it and contribute to its own Memory Project, the International Council of the WSF paid no particular attention.

This situation has to be changed. The International Council of the WSF must recognise the need to achieve permanent links between the social forum and the libraries and librarians of the world. Therefore, I would like the representative of the Network Institute for Global Democratization (NIGD) to take up this subject at the next meeting of the IC in Berlin, and to explain, that the Memory Project and the Communication Plan must be extended to the Library.

The Memory Project of the WSF is not worth its name, if it does not extend the WSF to the libraries. What are we going to do with the memory of the Memory Project (the memory of the civil society!), and how shall we transmit it, if not via the institution of society which exists for precisely this purpose? - The Library, obviously, also should have a place in the Communication Plan of the Forum.

Individual librarians, mostly, are in favor of the social forum. However, as a group, the librarians, like engineers, economists, doctors, lawyers, journalists, scientists and other professional, intellectually highly educated groups, tend to be loyal, in the first place, to their national governments. But that loyalty, hopefully, shall fade away, and the professionals in the various countries shall become more loyal to the common causes of humanity than to the leaders of their nations. Are we not talking about a new political world-system? Global democracy? (All the professionals are needed to build it.)

The internet, too, is part of the library, and henceforward of prime importance for the construction of political power in so far as power consists of "truth-force". Let's build the public library system of the world together with the librarians, in the libraries and in that new extension of libraries, the internet. Both the librarians and the social activists need to be pushed in the right direction, though. The NIGD might have a positive role to play in this regard.

As a short-term goal, let's try to get the IFLA and the library associations on board. - The East African library Associations of Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda already activated themselves towards the WSF in Nairobi! (http://www.wsflibrary.org/)

The WSF-IC should be able to send out clear signals to the library community about the need to link the libraries to the civil society at the world level.

PS The above is a slightly amended version of a message which I posted to friends in the NIGD and the WSF earlier today. Only now, when I make it available on this blog, does it strike me that the points, which I touch upon - such as deciding on the date of the Day of Action, the symbolic meaning of 9/11 and the Memory Project of the WSF - are almost inedited (in the sense of 'not published'). This discussion only goes on in private and/or closed fora like the mailing list of the International Council (IC) of the WSF! And perhaps echoed on webpages such as the one I am writing. The very fact that the IC is soon to meet in Berlin is unknown to the public. Have you seen something about it in your newspaper? Or heard about it on the radio? No, the media silence around the process of the social forum is almost total. And perhaps rightly so, because what - one may ask - is the WSF actually doing?

24 April
2007

Founding a library

My writing "Founding a library - another report from the World Social Forum in Nairobi" is available here:

www.kaapeli.fi/book/founding-a-library.html

I should like professional librarians to become fully aware of the potential of their institution together with with the peoples of the social forum.

But I also intend this text as an intervention in the discussion(s) about the "Memory Project" and the "Communications Plan", which precede the next meeting of the International Council of the World Social Forum in Berlin, 28-30 May 2007.

26 April
2007

Be creative on World IP Day!

Remember dr Alan Story, who co-organized our WSF workshop "Unlocking the Global Information Fortress" in Nairobi last January?

I just read a message from Alan about The Copy/South Dossier, and then I went on to the website of Copy/South, and found a comment by Ghanaian librarian Emmanuel Mensah Darkey. The comment is about PHOTOCOPY AND EDUCATION IN GHANA. I believe it may be of particular interest to educational librarians, and of general interest to everybody. But I do not copy that one here. You have to go to www.copysouth.org and look for it yourself.

      --- Some years ago, the copyright term was extended from 50 to 70 years. I was reminded of this, again, when I read the notes from our Ghanaian colleague.

Why did WE let that happen?

Originally, there was no copyright at all. Then, at the moment of its invention under Queen Anne of England at the beginning of the 18th Century, the term was 14 years, which was later extended to 28 years.

I do not say that copyrights should be abolished altogether. What we have got now, however is totally absurd, especially so, in our age of the digital revolution and the internet.

The answer to the WHY is that WE have let ourselves be brainwashed and scared. Copyright does not belong to the basic human rights. It is like taxes, something which can and should be continually discussed and agreed upon in democratic ways. Let's have the term of copyrights shortened to 30 years for a change! And, in the case of educational textbooks, let's have textbooks which are Copyleft, that is, freely copyable. Copyrights and Author's rights are different matters. The Author's rights need to be respected, and in this case there should be no end to the terms. The Author of a work remains its author for ever.

Finally, let us not forget about Users' rights, because WE have a special responsibility to defend our own rights.

World Intellectual Property Day? See http://www.wipo.int/about-ip/en/world_ip/2007