SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1450564)4/5/2024 8:26:43 PM
From: Broken_Clock  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1574491
 
So if Orban is an "autocrat" then what is Biden? After all, they both play the same tune.

theguardian.com

Viktor Orbán wins fourth consecutive term as Hungary’s prime minister
This article is more than 2 years old

Rightwinger and Putin ally aims dig at Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskiy after Fidesz party claims another super majority

Robert Tait and Flora Garamvolgyi in Budapest
Sun 3 Apr 2022 18.19 EDTFirst published on Sun 3 Apr 2022 15.00 EDT

Viktor Orbán has won a fourth successive term as Hungary’s prime minister, capping a campaign dominated by his controversial stance on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine with a speech that appeared to mock Volodymyr Zelenskiy, the Ukrainian leader.

Ecstatic chants of “Viktor, Viktor” greeted Orbán as he addressed supporters of his Fidesz party outside its election headquarters on the banks of the Danube in Budapest as results made the scale of his victory apparent.

With nearly 86% of the vote counted on Sunday night, Fidesz was on course to increase its parliamentary majority by winning 135 seats in the 199-member parliament, crushing a six-party opposition bloc that united to form a common front aimed at unseating Orbán.

Instead, the ruling party has retained its two-thirds super majority, which has enabled it to reshape Hungarian politics and social policy during its 12 years in power.

The popular vote margin was 53.7% for Fidesz to 34.4% for the United for Hungary opposition grouping, fronted by Péter Márki-Zay, who conceded defeat on Sunday night.

“The entire world can see that our brand of Christian democratic, conservative, patriotic politics has won,” a smiling, swaggering Orbán – with members of his cabinet behind him – told the crowd, standing in frigid temperatures. “We are sending Europe a message that this is not the past – this is the future.”

Orbán also made reference to criticism directed at him by Zelenskiy, who has repeatedly challenged the Hungarian leader over a perceived lack of support and an unwillingness to condemn his close ally Vladimir Putin in person for the invasion of Ukraine.

“This victory is one to remember, maybe even for the rest of our lives, because we had the biggest [range of opponents to] overpower. The left at home, the international left, the bureaucrats in Brussels, the money of the Soros empire, the international media and even the Ukrainian president in the end,” he said to laughter from the crowd.



The opposition bloc led by Péter Márki-Zay has complained about a huge imbalance in election spending and communication. Photograph: Márton Mónus/ReutersConceding defeat, Márki-Zay said he was “devastated” and attributed its scale to Fidesz’s gerrymandering methods and other changes to the voting system while in office.

“I don’t want to hide my disappointment and my sadness. We never expected this to be the result,” he said.

“We knew beforehand that this was going to be an imbalanced fight. Yes, they’ve cheated too. But we’ve also said that since there is no democracy in Hungary and they’ve changed the whole system, the districts.”




Hungary votes in general election as Viktor Orbán seeks fourth term




Read more


Orbán’s party has strengthened its hold on office through a favourable media ownership structure and changes to the voting system that critics say renders elections unfair.

Márki-Zay, a 49-year-old economist, has complained bitterly that he was given only five minutes of airtime on public TV to state his case.

The opposition has also complained that Fidesz has a huge advantage in election spending and communication. It said it had about 2,000 election advertising billboards throughout the country to 20,000 for the governing party.

Akos Hadhazy, an opposition MP, said: “Orbán can get any of his lies to Hungarian people. Even if we hire the best communication experts, the government will always win these races because they can get their messages to much more people than we can.”

Even before polls closed, opponents called attention to possible voter fraud – the possibility of which prompted the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to dispatch a 200-strong team of election observers.

The OSCE’s office for democratic institutions and human rights has criticised what it said was blatant gerrymandering in several constituencies. Analysts predicted that gerrymandering would mean United for Hungary needed to win about 5% more of the popular vote than Fidesz to stand a chance of gaining a parliamentary majority.

The Clean Vote Coalition – a grouping of four Hungarian NGOs – said it had received numerous complaints of irregularities. They included electors being offered 10,000 Hungarian forints (£23) for their vote and, in another location, meat being on offer as an inducement. There were also reports of illegal bussing of voters.

Fears of fraud had been fuelled before polling day after a large number of election ballots – most of them said to be for opposition candidates – were reportedly found partly burned in a sack at a landfill site last week in the Romanian region of Transylvania, where many ethnic Hungarians have dual citizenship and voting rights.

Fidesz’s victory came after high voter turnout – a factor experts assessed would help the governing party – despite frigid temperatures and wintery weather.

Orbán’s fourth term, which will become his fifth overall, may also pose a possible conundrum for Nato and the EU amid mounting concerns over Hungary’s attitude to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and whether it is a reliable alliance partner.

Although Orbán has so far not attempted to block sanctions and military responses to the attack, he signalled an unwillingness to contemplate measures that would cut supplies of Russian oil and gas.

He has also refused to allow the supply of weapons to Ukraine or permit military aid to pass through Hungarian territory, angering Nato allies and Zelenskiy, who has branded him Putin’s sole European supporter.




Hungary: where editors tell reporters to disregard facts before their eyes




Read more


Orbán, who has forged a close relationship with the Russian leader and met him 12 times, retooled his election campaign after the outbreak of war on 24 February to position Fidesz as the “peace” party, vowing to stay out of a conflict that he insisted had nothing to do with Hungary.

He said reducing energy dependency on Russia – which provides an estimated 90% of its gas and 65% of its oil – would wreck Hungary’s economy.

At the same time, he cast Márki-Zay’s opposition bloc, which has called for closer cooperation with the EU and Nato, as “warmongers” who strove to send weapons and Hungarian troops to Ukraine.

There has been speculation that Orbán – who has consistently forged bonds with Russia and China, cast the EU as an enemy, and styled himself in recent years as “illiberal” leader – would pivot to a more pro-western stance after securing his re-election.

However, Daniel Hegedus, a Hungarian analyst with the German Marshall Fund, played down such expectations.

“There may be some realignment towards the west, but in general what he is seeking is a return to business as usual with Russia – both in terms of energy cooperation and economic cooperation,” he said.

Orbán’s stance on the war has left Hungary increasingly isolated among its western allies but has proved popular among voters, especially those in rural areas.



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1450564)4/5/2024 8:40:08 PM
From: Broken_Clock1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1574491
 
US shocked that when it trains terrorists they actually become terrorists.

Like a pit bull owner when his fight dog attacks his "owner"....

Niger to US: Pack Up Your Forever War
April 3, 2024



Save

Nick Turse on the the latest in a series of stalemates, fiascos, or outright defeats in Washington’s Global War on Terror.


U.S. Air Force members setting up a communication antenna for use by deployed service members and contractors at Nigerien Air Base 201 in Agadez, September 2017. (U.S. Air Force, Joshua R. M. Dewberry)

By Nick Turse
TomDispatch.com

Dressed in green military fatigues and a blue garrison cap, Colonel Major Amadou Abdramane, a spokesperson for Niger’s ruling junta, took to local television last month to criticize the United States and sever the long-standing military partnership between the two countries.

“The government of Niger, taking into account the aspirations and interests of its people, revokes, with immediate effect, the agreement concerning the status of United States military personnel and civilian Defense Department employees,” he said, insisting that their 12-year-old security pact violated Niger’s constitution.

Another sometime Nigerien spokesperson, Insa Garba Saidou, put it in blunter terms:

“The American bases and civilian personnel cannot stay on Nigerien soil any longer.”

The announcements came as terrorism in the West African Sahel has spiked and in the wake of a visit to Niger by a high-level American delegation, including Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Molly Phee and General Michael Langley, chief of U.S. Africa Command, or AFRICOM.

Niger’s repudiation of its ally is just the latest blow to Washington’s sputtering counterterrorism efforts in the region. In recent years, longstanding U.S. military partnerships with Burkina Faso and Mali have also been curtailed following coups by U.S.-trained officers. Niger was, in fact, the last major bastion of American military influence in the West African Sahel.

Such setbacks there are just the latest in a series of stalemates, fiascos, or outright defeats that have come to typify America’s Global War on Terror.

During 20-plus years of armed interventions, U.S. military missions have been repeatedly upended across Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia, including a sputtering stalemate in Somalia, an intervention-turned-blowback-engine in Libya, and outright implosions in Afghanistan and Iraq.

This maelstrom of U.S. defeat and retreat has left at least 4.5 million people dead, including an estimated 940,000 from direct violence, more than 432,000 of them civilians, according to Brown University’s Costs of War Project. As many as 60 million people have also been displaced due to the violence stoked by America’s “forever wars.”

President Joe Biden has both claimed that he’s ended those wars and that the United States will continue to fight them for the foreseeable future — possibly forever — “to protect the people and interests of the United States.” The toll has been devastating, particularly in the Sahel, but Washington has largely ignored the costs borne by the people most affected by its failing counterterrorism efforts.

‘Reducing Terrorism’


Langley, left, in September 2022, on his first visit to the Sahel as commander. (DoD, Alexandra Longfellow)

Roughly 1,000 U.S. military personnel and civilian contractors are deployed to Niger, most of them near the town of Agadez at Air Base 201 on the southern edge of the Sahara desert. Known to locals as “ Base Americaine,” that outpost has been the cornerstone of an archipelago of U.S. military bases in the region and is the key to America’s military power projection and surveillance efforts in North and West Africa. Since the 2010s, the U.S. has sunk roughly a quarter-billion dollars into that outpost alone.

Washington has been focused on Niger and its neighbors since the opening days of the Global War on Terror, pouring military aid into the nations of West Africa through dozens of “security cooperation” efforts, among them the Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Partnership, a program designed to “counter and prevent violent extremism” in the region. Training and assistance to local militaries offered through that partnership has alone cost America more than $1 billion.

Just prior to his recent visit to Niger, AFRICOM’s General Langley went before the Senate Armed Services Committee to rebuke America’s longtime West African partners. “During the past three years, national defense forces turned their guns against their own elected governments in Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mali, and Niger,” he said. “These juntas avoid accountability to the peoples they claim to serve.”

Langley did not mention, however, that at least 15 officers who benefited from American security cooperation have been involved in 12 coups in West Africa and the greater Sahel during the Global War on Terror. They include the very nations he named: Burkina Faso (2014, 2015, and twice in 2022); Guinea (2021); Mali (2012, 2020, and 2021); and Niger (2023).

In fact, at least five leaders of a July coup in Niger received U.S. assistance, according to an American official. When they overthrew that country’s democratically elected president, they, in turn, appointed five U.S.-trained members of the Nigerien security forces to serve as governors.


Niger Armed Forces training on U.S. Air Base 201 in Agadez, Niger, July 10, 2019. (U.S. Air Force, Devin Boyer)

Langley went on to lament that, while coup leaders invariably promise to defeat terrorist threats, they fail to do so and then “turn to partners who lack restrictions in dealing with coup governments… particularly Russia.” But he also failed to lay out America’s direct responsibility for the security freefall in the Sahel, despite more than a decade of expensive efforts to remedy the situation.

“We came, we saw, he died,” then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton joked after a U.S.-led NATO air campaign helped overthrow Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi, the longtime Libyan dictator, in 2011.

President Barack Obama hailed the intervention as a success, even as Libya began to slip into near-failed-state status. Obama would later admit that “failing to plan for the day after” Qaddafi’s defeat was the “ worst mistake” of his presidency.

As the Libyan leader fell, Tuareg fighters in his service looted his regime’s weapons caches, returned to their native Mali, and began to take over the northern part of that nation.


March 28, 2011: Obama delivering an address in Washington, D.C., to update the American people on the situation in Libya, including the transition to NATO command and control. (National Defense University, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 2.0)

Anger in Mali’s armed forces over the government’s ineffective response resulted in a 2012 military coup led by Amadou Sanogo, an officer who learned English in Texas, and underwent infantry-officer basic training in Georgia, military-intelligence instruction in Arizona, and mentorship by Marines in Virginia.

Having overthrown Mali’s democratic government, Sanogo proved hapless in battling local militants who had also benefited from the arms flowing out of Libya.

With Mali in chaos, those Tuareg fighters declared their own independent state, only to be pushed aside by heavily armed Islamist militants who instituted a harsh brand of Shariah law, causing a humanitarian crisis. A joint French, American, and African mission prevented Mali’s complete collapse but pushed the Islamists to the borders of both Burkina Faso and Niger, spreading terror and chaos to those countries.


Touareg fighters in Mali, Jan. 26, 2012. (Magharebia, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 2.0)

Since then, the nations of the West African Sahel have been plagued by terrorist groups that have evolved, splintered, and reconstituted themselves. Under the black banners of jihadist militancy, men on motorcycles armed with Kalashnikov rifles regularly roar into villages to impose zakat (an Islamic tax) and terrorize and kill civilians.

Relentless attacks by such armed groups have not only destabilized Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, prompting coups and political instability, but have spread south to countries along the Gulf of Guinea. Violence has, for example, spiked in Togo (633 percent) and Benin (718 percent), according to Pentagon statistics.

American officials have often turned a blind eye to the carnage. Asked about the devolving situation in Niger, for instance, State Department spokesperson Vedant Patel recently insisted that security partnerships in West Africa “are mutually beneficial and are intended to achieve what we believe to be shared goals of detecting, deterring, and reducing terrorist violence.” His pronouncement is either an outright lie or a total fantasy.

After 20 years, it’s clear that America’s Sahelian partnerships aren’t “reducing terrorist violence” at all.

Even the Pentagon tacitly admits this. Despite U.S. troop strength in Niger growing by more than 900 percent in the last decade and American commandos training local counterparts, while fighting and even dying there; despite hundreds of millions of dollars flowing into Burkina Faso in the form of training as well as equipment like armored personnel carriers, body armor, communications gear, machine guns, night-vision equipment, and rifles; and despite U.S. security assistance pouring into Mali and its military officers receiving training from the United States, terrorist violence in the Sahel has in no way been reduced.

In 2002 and 2003, according to State Department statistics, terrorists caused 23 casualties in all of Africa. Last year, according to the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, a Pentagon research institution, attacks by Islamist militants in the Sahel alone resulted in 11,643 deaths – an increase of more than 50,000 percent.

Pack Up Your War

In January 2021, President Joe Biden entered the White House promising to end his country’s forever wars. He quickly claimed to have kept his pledge. “I stand here today for the first time in 20 years with the United States not at war,” Biden announced months later. “We’ve turned the page.”

Late last year, however, in one of his periodic “ war powers”missives to Congress, detailing publicly acknowledged U.S. military operations around the world, Biden said just the opposite. In fact, he left open the possibility that America’s forever wars might, indeed, go on forever.

“It is not possible,” he wrote, “to know at this time the precise scope or the duration of the deployments of United States Armed Forces that are or will be necessary to counter terrorist threats to the United States.”

Niger’s U.S.-trained junta has made it clear that it wants America’s forever war there to end. That would presumably mean the closing of Air Base 201 and the withdrawal of about 1,000 American military personnel and contractors.

So far, however, Washington shows no signs of acceding to their wishes. “We are aware of the March 16th statement… announcing an end to the status of forces agreement between Niger and the United States,” said Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh. “We are working through diplomatic channels to seek clarification… I don’t have a timeframe of any withdrawal of forces.”


Singh addressing a briefing, November 2023. (DoD, Alexander Kubitza)

“The U.S. military is in Niger at the request of the Government of Niger,” said AFRICOM spokesperson Kelly Cahalan last year. Now that the junta has told AFRICOM to leave, the command has little to say.

Email return receipts show that TomDispatch’s questions about developments in Niger sent to AFRICOM’s press office were read by a raft of personnel including Cahalan, Zack Frank, Joshua Frey, Yvonne Levardi, Rebekah Clark Mattes, Christopher Meade, Takisha Miller, Alvin Phillips, Robert Dixon, Lennea Montandon, and Courtney Dock, AFRICOM’s deputy director of public affairs, but none of them answered any of the questions posed.

Cahalan instead referred TomDispatch to the State Department. The State Department, in turn, directed TomDispatch to the transcript of a press conference dealing primarily with U.S. diplomatic efforts in the Philippines.

“USAFRICOM needs to stay in West Africa… to limit the spread of terrorism across the region and beyond,” General Langley told the Senate Armed Services Committee in March.

But Niger’s junta insists that AFRICOM needs to go and U.S. failures to “limit the spread of terrorism” in Niger and beyond are a key reason why.

“This security cooperation did not live up to the expectations of Nigeriens — all the massacres committed by the jihadists were carried out while the Americans were here,” said a Nigerien security analyst who has worked with U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

America’s forever wars, including the battle for the Sahel, have ground on through the presidencies of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden with failure the defining storyline and catastrophic results the norm.

From the Islamic State routing the U.S.-trained Iraqi army in 2014 to the Taliban’s victory in Afghanistan in 2021, from the forever stalemate in Somalia to the 2011 destabilization of Libya that plunged the Sahel into chaos and now threatens the littoral states along the Gulf of Guinea, the Global War on Terror has been responsible for the deaths, wounding, or displacement of tens of millions of people.

Carnage, stalemate, and failure seem to have had remarkably little effect on Washington’s desire to continue funding and fighting such wars, but facts on the ground like the Taliban’s triumph in Afghanistan have sometimes forced Washington’s hand.

Niger’s junta is pursuing another such path, attempting to end an American forever war in one small corner of the world — doing what Biden pledged but failed to do.

Still, the question remains: Will the Biden administration reverse a course that the U.S. has been on since the early 2000s? Will it agree to set a date for withdrawal? Will Washington finally pack up its disastrous war and go home?

Nick Turse is the managing editor of TomDispatch and a fellow at the Type Media Center. He is the author most recently of Next Time They’ll Come to Count the Dead: War and Survival in South Sudan and of the bestselling Kill Anything That Moves.

This article is from TomDispatch.com.