Guzzanti, the Hudson Institute, the South Stream and Italian politics
One of the first "anti-Berlusconi" to speak openly to attack U.S. interests in the Italian government because of too much freedom that you are taking in energy policy, it was Paolo Guzzanti (1) that highlighted how the newspapers and international media campaigns (including those on the tissue, the "escort" and so on), are clearly driven and inspired by the U.S. administration's official position. Guzzanti also quotes the U.S. ambassador to Italy Spogli that says: "We are not sure that we Americans want to sell electricity to Italy, but we want an Italy that is not dependent on Russia as a colony and we do not want Russia to collect a sum of monstrous size, which then converts directly Moscow in military hardware. "
it is increasingly clear Washington's concern for the agreements that Italy is pursuing with countries and regions of the planet that does not like the U.S., as they represent a potential brake to today's U.S. world hegemony.
These concerns found in the document which is Guzzanti, both the "left" anti-Berlusconi, and all opponents of today's foreign policy of the Italian State, take their opinions (about the South Stream energy corridor), or essay titled "Security Aspects of the South Stream Project", by the Hudson Institute (2). It must be said at least two words for this institution: classic American conservative think-tank, with the statutory objective of spreading the free market and capitalism (ie American hegemony) in the world, is funded by the largest U.S. corporations, such as Monsanto, McDonald's, Microsoft, etc. .. As often happens (for example in the case of Freedom House or Reporters Without Borders (3)) a group of liberal intellectuals and capitalists, characterized politically, proudly stood for the export of democracy and globalization, is taken as a source of opinion impartial, although - as mentioned - the so-called left.
However, in this document already dall'incipit you understand the heart of the problem: "South Stream is a joint project of Russia's Gazprom and Italy's Eni to develop a gas pipeline that will transport energy to Europe." According to Hudson Institute that is a project that affects the competitor and sponsored (controlled) by the U.S. called "Nabucco", so it is extremely negative. The interests of Eurasian energy domain of the United States would be jeopardized, and then "recommend" the succubi European allies to fight it. Arriving to propose the integration European energy policy in NATO, as we know 'alliance' through which the U.S. military imposed its domination in Europe and beyond. We refer those who want to know these views (again, in part) to read the report in question, but it is interesting to note that in this there is a section devoted to Russia-Italy relations, citing discomfort with the closeness of the two states with particular Putin and Berlusconi's friendship on and even comes forward, so deliberately confused the connection of the death of light "anti-Putin" Litvinenko with the negotiations between the Russian President and Romano Prodi, who had first started working for the South Stream and that according to Litvinenko was a KGB man.
same position, incidentally, Paolo Guzzanti, and the Commission of Inquiry into the Mitrokhin dossier, which is investigating the relationship of the KGB, he was President and that is why Litvinenko collaborated with their own.
This makes us to focus on other claims Guzzanti: Berlusconi and Prodi after complaining of being "Russian", defines the same scheme Russia "fasciocomunista" likely to evoke an opposite of liberal capitalism, other words, the Anglo-American hegemony, much like a Guzzanti, after which he launches into historical reconstructions rather questionable, the Second World War and so on, fino a citare l’affare Moro ed affermare come in realtà non erano gli Usa a temere Moro, che anzi appoggiavano. Questo ci porta a riflettere su come gli Stati Uniti siano dal 1945 presenti nella politica italiana, non da ultimo grazie alla minaccia delle più di 100 (cento) basi militari sul nostro territorio, e su come abbiano coltivato intere classi politiche; infatti se già dagli anni 70 la “sinistra” era su posizioni filo-americane (pensiamo che addirittura il Partito Comunista accettò la NATO e si allontanò dalla Russia Sovietica, ossia dal campo geopolitico “orientale” verso la sottomissione agli USA), oggi troviamo quella stessa sinistra e quegli stessi ex-“comunisti” in posizioni anti-comuniste, liberal, but most avowedly pro-American (this in the Democratic Party, but also in other small parties of all the "left"). Indeed, the abandonment of the Italian Communist Party to transform the Democratic Party of the Left (PDS), was without pain, and this confirms that the metamorphosis of the leaders and many activists went on for a long time. Everything was formalized after the period of "clean hands", which beyond the notices of-performance that had to satisfy the desire to 'new' and 'fork' that dwells in the populace, consisted of a blatant assault on our U.S. country, both in its political class, both in its deep economic and financial structure and its development inherited from the (officially, for reasons of 'label') deprecated Fascism, both in his company, which then on was to move towards the model of the melting pot.
Please note that after the "collapse of the USSR," Italy was losing geopolitical importance, so a ruling class used to play with his feet in both camps (to obtain a minimum of sovereignty) was cut into pieces, thereby, thanks to the connivance of the new policy (compared to which the Giants seem to Andreotti and Craxi), privatization of large sectors of vital importance (which still proceed because not all al di là della facciata, sono d’accordo). Non è un caso che intorno a quegli anni sia avvenuta prima la nascita del citato PDS e, subito dopo, la trasformazione dell’MSI (già tentata a suo tempo con la “Destra Nazionale”) in Alleanza Nazionale: il Movimento Sociale Italiano, il partito del camaleontico Gianfranco Fini, che si è distinto nella storia d’Italia per essere collegato spesso ai progetti dei servizi segreti italiani e quindi americani; non c’è da stupirsi quindi se oggi Fini e la “sinistra” si ritrovino dalla stessa parte, dal momento che è la parte sostenuta dai loro padroni di sempre ovvero gli USA.
Se gli Stati Uniti non vedono di buon occhio le foreign policy moves of the Italian government, as dangerous to their hegemony (in decline), effective immediately, here in Italy who have always been linked to the Anglo-American powers ... Despite what they think, must without delay is to support cooperation with countries marching in different parts of the world, towards the achievement of its sovereignty, the establishment of a globalizing U.S. all'unipolarismo contrast to multipolarity; multipolarity that, in spite of ideological constructions as those of the Hudson Institute, is already under way, such as better and better relations between Venezuela, Iran, Russia, China have to prove, and as pointed out by its President Venezuela's Chavez in Russia by saying: "The future belongs to Venezuela, Syria, Belarus, Iran, Italy and Russia, confirming this with the importance that Italy can play in changing balances in place (4).
***
1) http://www.paologuzzanti.it/?p=1093
2) http://www.hudson.org/
3) http://www.cpeurasia.org /? read = 29564
4) Worthy of interest is the 'bridge' of the President of the Bolivarian Venice Film Festival, during which he issued statements of content as opposed to those which, at the same time, the new U.S. ambassador to dictate Thorne print 'Italian': http://www.cpeurasia.org/?read=33164 As for Italy to be said that the 'test' decisive will be its attitude towards the issue of "nuclear Iran".
http://www.cpeurasia.org/?read=33335
0 comments:
Post a Comment