G7-Summit and the fake democracy of the west

Sendungstext
herunterladen

PDF (.pdf)

Word (.docx)

17.06.2015 | www.kla.tv/6103

Valued Viewers, in relateds programs we demonstrated that the leading G7 states are not really in-terested in dialog - concerning the annexation of Crimea - but in a one-sided condemnation of Rus-sia. So it was decided that because of the crisis in Ukraine, Russia should be shut out of the G7 cir-cle,. Even more severe sanctions were put into place against Russia. The Swiss national television correspondent Fredy Gsteiger answered the question of “whether this was the right strategy” - I quote: “There really wasn’t any convincing alternative to lifting the sanctions (...) It was also impor-tant to get the message across that the G7 is a club for democratic, economic powers and Russia just does not belong there at the moment”, so Gsteiger. In today’s broadcast we want to look into the question of what exactly is to be understood under the famous word “democratic” and who should belong in this category - or who not. First of all a “democracy” denotes political systems in which power and government stem from the people. In regards to this, Russia certainly cannot be accused of not belonging to the “democratic, economic powers. In a poll by the Russian public opinion research institute FOM in April 2015, the Russian President was more appreciated than ever before: 76% would vote for the President again in the next presidential elections. Further typical characteristics describing democracy are free elections, majority vote principle as well as acceptance of political opposition. Also in these areas Russia can hardly be accused. Ac-cording to the Russian constitution, Russia is a democratic, constitutional state in which the people are the highest power instance. Russia has a parliamentary governmental system. Since the trans-formation into a many party democracy in 1990, hundreds of political groups cover a wide political spectrum. Let us take a look at the international stage regarding democracy. If we address central democratic values like readiness for dialog or acceptance of political opposition, then it can hardly be claimed that the G7 countries’s leaders are good examples. Otherwise canceling Putin’s invitation would have been unimaginable. At the very least, Putin cannot be accused of unreadiness for dialog, whether concerning the Ukraine conflict, the Syria- Iran or other conflicts. On the occasion of his impending visit to Italy, on June 10th, Putin said, in an interview with an Italian newspaper - I qoute: “We are partners (with the western nations), for example by not propagating weapons of mass-destruction and also certainly in the fight against terrorism. (...) although America broke the missile defense contract, we are going ahead with a dialog concerning armament control.” So Putin. And exactly here, at this point we would like to ask the question: How is that with America’s readi-ness to dialog with opposition, when they broke the missile defense contract? The German Jürgen Todenhöfer gives us an explanation for this. Mr. Tödenhöfer is a former German parliament mem-ber, commentator on politics and current affairs and independent arbitrator in various conflicts, for example the Iran and Syrian conflicts. On the occasion of an interview he gave with the German Radio-broadcaster SWR, in November 2014, he reported about his meeting with Syrian President, Assad. He answered to the accusations against him that he had “spoken with Assad” this way: “We have to not only talk with our friends but also with our enemies, otherwise there will never be solution. Jimmy Carter, (former US President) once said that since George W. Bush the Americans have a fundamental dislike of speaking with their enemies. And that is ridiculous. One must talk with enemies and we can see the results of this for example now in the first contacts between Iran and America, which I helped to achieve. (...) I found out that the US government had not spoken to the Iranians for over 30 years. Because they did not speak with each other, in 2010 I transmitted the American government a negotiations suggestion from the Iranian government (...) and today they are negotiating. (...) Foreign ministries have to do the job of solving conflicts. (...) I could only con-vey this suggestion because politics had failed, they did not negotiate because they did not want to speak with their enemies. But, we have to talk with our enemies. Actually that is even a Christian rule: I don’t manage it myself either but, not only does it say;you should love your neighbor but also that you should love your enemies.” That was Mr. Jürgen Todeshöfer to the so-called democratic culture of readiness to dialog and the American government. Mr. Todenhöfer also criticized America’s strategy of demonizing opposition, in order to justify taking measures against them. Every war since the Vietnam war was based on lies. With this in mind let’s come back to the question of who should belong to this “club of democratic, economic powers”, and who should not belong. When we really take this accurately, then should not rather the USA be sanctioned? With this thought, I say good-bye and hope to greet you again next time on Kla.tv.

from dd.

Sources/Links: http://www.srf.ch/news/international/g7-die-entscheide
http://www.srf.ch/play/radio/popupaudioplayer?id=6a7f6781-9357-4996-bc56-d1e69fc44065#t=6
http://german.irib.ir/nachrichten/politik/item/279975-umfrage-putin-in-russland-so-beliebt-wie-nie
http://de.sputniknews.com/politik/20150424/302053459.html
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russland#Politisches_System
http://de.sputniknews.com/politik/20150607/302663900.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFy-xZxzDDU