April 18, 2015 "ICH" - "Euronews" - Isabelle Kumar:
“The world in 2015 seems a very unsettled place but if we take a big
picture view do you feel optimistic or pessimistic about the general
state of play?”
Noam Chomsky: “In the
global scene we are racing towards a precipice which we are determined
to fall over which will sharply reduce the prospects for decent
survival.”
Isabelle Kumar: “What precipice is that?”
Noam Chomsky: “There are
actually two, one is environmental catastrophe which is imminent and we
don’t have a lot of time to deal with it and we are going the wrong
way, and the other has been around for 70 years, the threat of nuclear
war, which is in fact increasing. If you look at the record it is a
miracle we have survived.”
Isabelle Kumar: “Let’s
look at the environmental issues, we have asked our social media
audience to send in questions and we have hordes of questions. We
received this question from Enoa Agoli who asks, when you look at this
issue of the environment and you look at it through a philosopher’s
lens, what do you think about climate change?”
Noam Chomsky: “The human
species has been around for maybe a 100,000 years and it is now facing a
unique moment in its history. This species is now in a position where
it will decide very soon, in the next few generations, whether the
experiment in so-called intelligent life will proceed or are we
determined to destroy it? I mean scientists overwhelmingly recognise
that most of the fossil fuels have to be left in the ground if our
grandchildren are going to have decent prospects. But the institutional
structures of our society are pressuring to try to extract every drop.
The effects, the human consequences, of the predicted effects of climate
change in the not very distant future, are catastrophic and we are
racing toward that precipice.”
Isabelle Kumar: “In
terms of nuclear war we see the prospect of this Iran deal has reached a
preliminary agreement. Does that provide you with a glimmer of hope
that the world could potentially be a safer place?”
Noam Chomsky: “I’m in
favour of the Iran negotiations but they are profoundly flawed. There
are two states that rampage in the middle east carrying out aggressions,
violence, terrorist acts, illegal acts, constantly. They’re both huge
nuclear weapon states and their nuclear armorments. And their nuclear weapons are not being considered.”
Isabelle Kumar: “And who exactly are you referring to?”
Noam Chomsky: “The United States and Israel.
The two major nuclear states in the world. I mean there’s a reason why,
in international polls, run by US polling agencies, the United States
is regarded as the greatest threat to world peace by an overwhelming
margin. No other country is even close. It’s kind of interesting that
the US media refused to publish this. But it doesn’t go away.”
Isabelle Kumar: “You
don’t hold US President Obama in very high esteem. But does this deal
make you think of him in slightly better terms? The fact that he is
trying to reduce the threat of nuclear war?”
Noam Chomsky: “ Well,
actually he isn’t. He’s just initiated a trillion dollar programme of
modernisation of the US nuclear weapon system, which means expanding the
nuclear weapon system. That’s one the reasons why the famous doomsday
clock, established by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has, just a
couple of weeks ago, been pushed two minutes closer to midnight.
Midnight is the end. It’s now three minutes from midnight. That’s the
closest it’s been in thirty years. Since the early Regan years when
there was a major war scare.”
Isabelle Kumar: “You
mentioned the US and Israel in terms of Iran. Now, Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu obviously doesn’t want the Iran nuclear deal
to work, and he says…”
Noam Chomsky: “That’s interesting. We should ask why.”
Isabelle Kumar: “Why?
Noam Chomsky: “We know
why. Iran has very low military expenditures, even by the standards of
the region, let alone the United States. Iran’s strategic doctrine is
defensive, it’s designed to hold off an attack long enough for diplomacy
to start, and the United States and Israel, the two rogue states, do
not want to tolerate a deterrent. No strategic analyst with a brain
function thinks that Iran would ever use a nuclear weapon. Even if it
were prepared to do so the country would simply be vaporised and there’s
no indication that the ruling clerics, whatever you think about the,
want to see everything they have destroyed.”
Isabelle Kumar: “Just
one more question on this issue and it’s via social media, from Morten
A. Andersen. He asks, “Do you believe that the US would ever strike a
deal that would be dangerous to Israel in the first place?”
Noam Chomsky: “The
United States is carrying out constant actions which are dangerous to
Israel, very seriously. Namely supporting Israeli policy. For the last
40 years the greatest threat to Israel has been its own policies. If you
look back 40 years, say to 1970, Israel was one of the most respected
and admired countries in the world. There were lots of favorable
attitudes to it. Now, it’s one of the most disliked and feared countries
in the world. In the early 70s Israel made a decision. They had a
choice and they made a decision to prefer expansion to security and that
carries with it dangerous consequences. Consequences which were obvious
at the time – I wrote about them and other people did – if you prefer
expansion to security it is going to lead to internal degeneration,
anger, opposition, isolation and possibly ultimate destruction. And by
supporting those policies, the United States is contributing to the
threats that Israel faces.”
Isabelle Kumar: “That’s
brings me to the subject of terrorism then. Because that is really a
global blight and some people, I think including yourself, will say that
this is blowback for US terrorist policy around the world. How far is
the US and its allies responsible for what we’re seeing now in terms of
the terrorist attacks around the world?”
Noam Chomsky: “Remember
the worst terrorist campaign in the world by far is the one that’s being
orchestrated in Washington. That’s the global assassination campaign.
There’s never been a terrorist campaign of that scale.”
Isabelle Kumar: “When you say global assassination campaign…?”
Noam Chomsky: “The drone
campaign – that’s exactly what it is. Over large parts of the world,
the United States is systematically, publically, openly – there’s
nothing secret about what I’m saying, we all know it – it’s carrying out
regular campaigns to assassinated people who the US government suspects
of intending to harm it someday. And indeed it is, as you mentioned, a
terror generated campaign, and when you bomb a village in Yemen, say,
and you kill somebody – maybe the person you were aiming at maybe not –
and other people who happened to be in the neighbourhood – how do you
think they are going to react? They’re going to take revenge.”
Isabelle Kumar: “You describe the US as the leading terrorist state. Where does Europe fit into that picture then?”
Noam Chomsky: “Well,
that’s an interesting question. So for example there was recently a
study. I think it was done by the Open Society Foundation… the worst
form of torture is rendition. Rendition means you take somebody you
suspect of something, and you send them off to your favourite dictator,
maybe Assad or Gadaffi or Mubarak, to be tortured, hoping that maybe
something will come out of it. That’s extraordinary rendition. The study
reviewed the countries that participated in this, well obviously the
Middle East dictatorships because that’s where they were sent to be
tortured, and Europe. Most of Europe participated; England, Sweden,
other countries. In fact, there’s only one region in the world where
nobody participated: Latin America. Which is pretty dramatic. And first
of all Latin America has now become pretty much out of US control. When
it was controlled by the United States, not very long ago, it was the
world’s centre of torture. Now, it didn’t participate in the worst form
of torture, which is rendition. Europe participated. If the master
roars, the servants cower.”
Isabelle Kumar: “So Europe is the servant of the United States?”
Noam Chomsky: “ Definitely. They are too cowardly to take an independent position.”
Isabelle Kumar: “Where does Vladimir Putin fit into this picture? He’s painted as one of the greatest threats to security. Is he?”
Noam Chomsky: “Like most
leaders, he’s a threat to his own population. He’s taken illegal
actions, obviously. But to depict him as a crazed monster who is
suffering from brain disease and has Alzheimer’s, and is a rat-faced
evil creature, that’s standard Orwellian fanaticism. I mean, whatever
you think about his policies, they are understandable. The idea that
Ukraine might join a Western military alliance would be quite
unacceptable to any Russian leader. This goes back to 1990 when the
Soviet Union collapsed. There was a question about what would happen
with NATO. Now Gorbachov agreed to allow Germany to be unified and to join NATO. It was a pretty remarkable concession with a quid pro quo: that NATO would not expand one inch to the east. That was the phrase that was used.”
Isabelle Kumar: “So Russia has been provoked?”
Noam Chomsky: “Well, what happened? NATO instantly moved into East Germany and then Clinton came along and expanded NATO
right to the borders of Russia. Now, the new Ukrainian government, the
government established after the overthrow of the preceding one, now the
parliament voted 300 to 8 or something like that, to move to join NATO.”
Isabelle Kumar: “But you can understand why they would want to join NATO, you can see why Petro Porochenko’s government would probably see it as protecting their country?”
Noam Chomsky: “No, no,
no, no. That’s not protecting. Crimea was taken away after the overthrow
of the government, right. And this is not protecting Ukraine, it is
threatening Ukraine with major war. Now that’s not protection. The point
is, this is a serious strategic threat to Russia, which any Russian
leader would have to react to. That’s well understood.”
Isabelle Kumar: “If we
look at the situation in Europe though, there’s also another interesting
phenomenon that’s taking place. We’re seeing Greece moving towards the
East, potentially, with the Syriza government. We’re also seeing
Podemos, which is gaining power in Spain, also in Hungary. Do you see
that there is a potential for Europe to start shirting and aligning
itself more with Russian interests?”
Noam Chomsky: “Take a
look at what’s happening. Hungary is a different situation entirely.
Syriza came into office on the basis of a popular wave which said that
Greece should no longer subject itself to policies from Brussels and the
German banks which are destroying the country. The effect of these
policies has been actually to increase Greece’s debt relative to its
wealth production; probably a half of young people are unemployed,
probably 40% of the population is living under the poverty line, Greece
is being destroyed.”
Isabelle Kumar: “So should their debt be written off?”
Noam Chomsky: “Yes, just
like Germany’s was. In 1953, when Europe wrote off most of Germany’s
debt. Just like that, so that Germany would be able to reconstruct from
wartime damage.”
Isabelle Kumar: “But then what about all the other European countries…?”
Noam Chomsky: “ Same story.”
Isabelle Kumar: “So Portugal should have its debt written off, Spain should have its debt written off…?”
Noam Chomsky: “Who
incurred this debt? And who is the debt owed to? In part, the debt was
incurred by dictators. So in Greece it was the fascist dictatorship,
which the US supported, that incurred a large part of the debt. The debt
I think was more brutal than the dictatorship, and that’s what’s called
in international law, “odious debt” which need not be paid, and that’s a
principal introduced into international law by the United States, when
it was in their interest to do so. Much of the rest of the debt, what is
called payments to Greece are in fact payments to banks, German and
French banks, which had decided to make extremely risky loans with not
very high interest and are now being faced with the fact that they can’t
be paid back.”
Isabelle Kumar: “I’d
like to ask this question now, from Gil Gribaudo, who asks, “How will
Europe transform then, versus the existential challenges it’s facing?”
Because yes there’s the economic crisis, and there’s also a rise in
nationalism, and you’ve also described some cultural fault lines which
have been created across Europe. How do you see Europe transforming
itself?”
Noam Chomsky: “ Europe
has serious problems. Some of the problems are the result of economic
policies designed by the bureaucrats in Brussels, the European
Commission and so on, under the pressure of NATO
and the big banks, mostly German ones. These policies make some sense
from the point of view of the designers. For one thing they want to be
paid back for their risky and hazardous loans and investments, and the
other thing is that these policies are eroding the welfare state, which
they’ve never liked. But the welfare state is one of Europe’s major
contributions to modern society, but the rich and powerful have never
liked it and the fact that these policies are eroding it is good from
their point of view. There’s another problem in Europe, it’s extremely
racist. I’ve always felt that Europe is probably more racist than the
United States. It wasn’t as visible in Europe because the European
populations in the past tended to be pretty homogeneous. So if everybody
is blonde and blue-eyed, then you don’t seem racist, but as soon as the
population begins to change racism comes out of the woodwork. Very
fast. And that’s a serious cultural problem in Europe.”
Isabelle Kumar: “I’d
like to end, because we’re very short of time, with a question from
Robert Light on a more positive note. He asks, “What gives you hope?”
Noam Chomsky: “ What
gives me hope is a couple of things we’ve talked about. Latin American
independence for example. That’s of historic significance. We’re going
to see it right now, in the Summit of Americas meeting in Panama. In the
recent hemispheric meetings, the United States has been completely
isolated. It’s a radical change from 10 or 20 years ago, when the United
States ran [Latin American affairs]. In fact the reason why Obama made
his gestures towards Cuba was to try to overcome American, US isolation.
It’s the US that’s isolated, not Cuba. And probably it will fail. We
will see. The signs for optimism in Europe are Syriza and Podemos.
Hopefully there is finally a popular uprising against the the crushing,
destructive economic and social policies that come from the bureaucracy
and the banks, and that’s very hopeful. Should be.”
Isabelle Kumar: “Noam Chomsky, many thanks for being with us.”
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article41598.htm
Monday, April 20, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment