VIRTUAL UNIVERSITY

JEFF J. BROWN—This is Jeff’s most recent conversation with the well-known geopolitical analyst and (genuine) journalist Pepe Escobar. The focus is on the tug of war between the US epire and its vassals in the EU and elsewhere, and the emrging bloc of truly independent powers led by Russia, China and Iran. The world is watching the birth of a new order. American global hegemony, enforced by lies, hypocrisy, economic blackmail and military power is on the way out, largely victim of its own arrogance and excess. Meanwhile, Moscow and Beijing are busy constructing a multilateral order based on mutual benefit and respect.

MIKE PRYSNER—So, we went to these houses and informed the families that those homes were no longer their homes. We provided them no alternative, nowhere to go, no compensation. And they were very confused and very scared and did not know what to do, would not leave, so we had to remove them from those houses. One family in particular, a woman with two small girls, very elderly man and two middle-aged men, we dragged them out of their house and threw them onto the street and arrested the men because they refused to leave. We arrested the old man and sent them off to prison. And, at that time I didn’t know what happened to people when we tied their hands behind their back and put a sandbag over their head.

None of this went unnoticed in Pyongyang. Kim Yo Jong, Vice Department Director of the Central Committee of the Workers’ Party of Korea, dismissed South Korean claims that the military exercises are defensive. While no details of the drilled scenarios have been publicly released, past war games customarily practiced the bombing and invasion of North Korea as well as sending commando teams into the north to assassinate government officials. There is no reason to suppose that the latest exercises pose a unique exception. Kim called the “launching of a war game against” her nation “a serious challenge” and pointed out that the “essence and nature of the drills” never changes, regardless of what form they take.

ERIC ZUESSE—Biden has the same holier-than-thou ‘policy’ on Iran: he demands that though the U.S. — under Trump — broke the Iran deal, America won’t even negotiate for a return to it unless Iran will first come back into full compliance with it and (in addition) reduce its missile forces (which weren’t part of that deal). On March 19th, the Washington Post headlined “Biden’s window with Iran is starting to close”.

The big bully, the U.S., under its new President, is having a big tantrum. So: What’s new? How will he respond when the nations that he hates and demands to conquer reject what he ‘offers’ for their capitulation? Will it be yet more invasions by the U.S.? Whom will that benefit, except, perhaps, corporations such as Lockheed Martin?

As regards Putin’s offer to have a live telecast debate with Biden, the White House promptly said that the U.S. President is too busy to do that.

Hua Chunying: The Canadian side, by ganging up on China with a few individuals from some embassies in China to point fingers at China’s lawful handling of relevant cases involving Canadian citizens, has grossly interfered in China’s judicial sovereignty. We deplore and reject that.
Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor are suspected of crimes endangering China’s national security. The Chinese judicial authorities try cases in strict accordance with law and fully protect the two individual’s litigation rights. As relevant cases involve state secrets, relevant courts didn’t hear them in open court, which is in compliance with law and thus beyond reproach. The Criminal Law of Canada also has clear provisions that Canadian judges have the right to decide if cases should be heard in private for the purpose of safeguarding national security. It is hypocritical and unjustifiable for Canada, a self-styled champion of the rule of law, to make wanton comments on China’s judicial authorities’ lawful handling of cases and practice “double standards” on legal issues.
Here is a piece of advice: it is a fool’s errand that serves no purpose at all to resort to “megaphone diplomacy” or to gang up on China.