G20 Police violence and summary

Tord Björk | G20,global crisis,International action,police,Summits | Saturday, August 22nd, 2009

G20 protesters, Photo Vendela Procopé

You can find a summary of the G20 protests with many link at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_G-20_London_summit_protests

The Police violence at the G20 meeting became to obvious, at least when it was recorded on video. First the police claimed they had nothing to do with the death of Ian Tomlinson, a newspaper seller cought in a police kettle on his way home from work. Then when the facts about how Tomlinson died was kept secret a video filemd by a visiting North American banker was published by the Guardian showing how he was hit to the ground by a police offcier shortly before he died. Two weeks later a new video turned up showing how another police officer at a vigil for Tomlinson one day after he died slapped a woman in the face and the hit here legs with a baton. These two occasions are just two that happened to be recorded closely on video. There were a lot more. One can find the assault on the climate camp at the G20 protest on You tube and many more.

The two police officers guilty of hitting Tomlinson and the woman were suspended. Also many people normally supporting the police became offended by the way the polic behaved. Protests have grown not only criticizing single events and police offciers but the whole police strategy.

The documentation and protests against police attack on the Climate camp outside the EU climate exchange helped promoting a more far reaching debate. Above you see a climate camper being hit by the police, below you can find the Youtube video made by climate camp legal team; http://www.youtube.com/v/5dVmate9RGY&hl=en&fs=1&”

The way the claimed independent police watchdog IPCC handled the situation is less criticised. After the death of Tomlinson they immediatly backed the police version. They even criticises the Guardian for upsetting Tomlinson’s family when the newspaper started to publicize picture that questioned the police version. They also told other jporunalists that there is “nothing in the story” that he had been assaulted by an officer. When the video finally appeared IPCC had to give up their role as police PR agency and go back to its role as police watch dog.

IPCC have a criticized history. The Tomlinson story spread rapidly all over the world but especially in one country. In Brazil it reignited anger over the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian electrician who was shot dead with intent by police officers inside Stockwell underground station in London in 2005. At this occasion IPCC also backed the false police versions that claimed that Menezes had behaved in any way suspiscious, running etc. It became clear that in the age of War on terror anyone can get murdeed by the state anywhere without behaving in anyway wrong and nothing will really happen more than that so called independent police wathdogs will claim that the police did everything right until others do the wathdog job and they have to change opinion. In the case of Menezes the first IPCC inquiry came to the conclusion that no offcier involved in the shooting had done nothing wrong.  The second inquiry criticised the police command structure and communications to the public. The truth when came out out late and the impunity for the police remained intact.

For more details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

Obama’s Strategy and the Summits

Tord Björk | G20,global crisis,International action | Saturday, August 22nd, 2009

A new G20 meeting takes place. Here an analysis of the Summit this spring.

There has been a lot of comments and analysis on the G20 Summit in London in April 2009. This one from Statfor, a US think tank takes up some different angles quite uncommon in Europe. Its realistic assessment of how EU actually is divided and how key countries as Germany dominate in a struggle for stopping EU efforts to bail out CEE central banks. Instead Germany and EU countries that in fact controls much of the CEE economy and have gained much profit from bank operations in these copuntries now wants IMF to save them from loosing their money. Ruffly 80 per cent of current IMF laons have gone to CEE countries.

G20 protesters in London, Photo by Vendela Procopé

By George Friedman, April 6, 2009


Berlin, Washington and the G-20



Germany was not going to cooperate.


Agreement was reached on collaboration in detecting international tax fraud and on further collaboration in managing the international crisis, however. But what that means remains extremely vague — as it was meant to be, since there was no consensus on what was to be done. In fact, the actual guidelines will still have to be hashed out at the G-20 finance ministers’ meeting in Scotland in November. Intriguingly, after insisting on the creation of a global regulatory regime — and with the vague U.S. assent — the European Union failed to agree on European regulations. In a meeting in Prague on April 4, the United Kingdom rejected the regulatory regime being proposed by Germany and France, saying it would leave the British banking system at a disadvantage.
Overall, the G-20 and the NATO meetings did not produce significant breakthroughs. Rather than pushing hard on issues or trading concessions — such as accepting Germany’s unwillingness to increase its stimulus package in return for more troops in Afghanistan — the United States failed to press or bargain. It preferred to appear as part of a consensus rather than appear isolated. The United States systematically avoided any appearance of disagreement.


Turkey and Obama’s Deeper Game



G20 protesters, Photo by Vendela Procopé

The Russian Dimension

Let’s diverge to another dimension of these talks, which still concerns Turkey, but also concerns the Russians. While atmospherics after the last week’s meetings might have improved, there was certainly no fundamental shift in U.S.-Russian relations. The Russians have rejected the idea of pressuring Iran over its nuclear program in return for the United States abandoning its planned ballistic missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic. The United States simultaneously downplayed the importance of a Russian route to Afghanistan. Washington said there were sufficient supplies in Afghanistan and enough security on the Pakistani route such that the Russians weren’t essential for supplying Western operations in Afghanistan. At the same time, the United States reached an agreement with Ukraine for the transshipment of supplies — a mostly symbolic gesture, but one guaranteed to infuriate the Russians at both the United States and Ukraine. Moreover, the NATO communique did not abandon the idea of Ukraine and Georgia being admitted to NATO, although the German position on unspecified delays to such membership was there as well. When Obama looks at the chessboard, the key emerging challenge remains Russia.


Turkey is the key to all of this. If Ankara collaborates with Russia, Georgia’s position is precarious and Azerbaijan’s route to Europe is blocked. If it cooperates with the United States and also manages to reach a stable treaty with Armenia under U.S. auspices, the Russian position in the Caucasus is weakened and an alternative route for natural gas to Europe opens up, decreasing Russian leverage against Europe.


The key to sustaining the U.S.-German alliance is reducing Germany’s dependence on Russian natural gas and putting Russia on the defensive rather than the offensive. The key to that now is Turkey, since it is one of the only routes energy from new sources can cross to get to Europe from the Middle East, Central Asia or the Caucasus. If Turkey — which has deep influence in the Caucasus, Central Asia, Ukraine, the Middle East and the Balkans — is prepared to ally with the United States, Russia is on the defensive and a long-term solution to Germany’s energy problem can be found. On the other hand, if Turkey decides to take a defensive position and moves to cooperate with Russia instead, Russia retains the initiative and Germany is locked into Russian-controlled energy for a generation.


This is why Obama’s most important speech in Europe was his last one, following Turkey’s emergence as a major player in NATO’s political structure. In that speech, he sided with the Turks against Europe, and extracted some minor concessions from the Europeans on the process for considering Turkey’s accession to the European Union. Why Turkey wants to be an EU member is not always obvious to us, but they do want membership. Obama is trying to show the Turks that he can deliver for them. He reiterated — if not laid it on even more heavily — all of this in his speech in Ankara. Obama laid out the U.S. position as one that recognized the tough geopolitical position Turkey is in and the leader that Turkey is becoming, and also recognized the commonalities between Washington and Ankara. This was exactly what Turkey wanted to hear.


Obama gave the Europeans a pass for political reasons, and because arguing with the Europeans simply won’t yield benefits. But the key to the trip is what he gets out of Turkey — and whether in his speech to the civilizations, he can draw some of the venom out of the Islamic world by showing alignment with the largest economy among Muslim states, Turkey.

This report may be forwarded or republished on your website with attribution to www.stratfor.com

Alternative London Summit Press Release: Occupation at 4pm

Tord Björk | G20,global crisis,International action,popular movements,Repression | Wednesday, April 1st, 2009

Despite management efforts to shut down the Alternative London Summit on Wednesday 1st April organisers and speakers are committed to making sure the event goes ahead at the University of East London as planned.

Occupation commences at 4pm. At 6pm there will be a press conference held at University of East London in the East Building, room 1.12. Speeches commence at 6pm across two lecture theatres.

Organisers are appealing to the public to join academics, union representatives and students in the occupation of the university in order to ensure that prominent political, scientific, academic and activist speakers who have remained committed to the event will be free and able to speak as planned.

It is vital at this pivotal moment in British and world history that we, the people have a public platform to understand and act on alternative ideas and strategies for our political, environmental and economic future.

The inconvenient truth that the authorities are so anxious to suppress is the simple fact that another world is possible!

Despite New Labour’s best efforts to establish corporate control over our education system, like many other universities across the country the University of East London is proud of its diversity of ideas, its intellectual autonomy and freedom of expression.

Free speech still exists in our university and it is our duty to protect this.

The crucial battleground on April 1st is the Docklands Campus of the University of East London. Either we lose control to the corporate state or we defend our sovereignty and therefore defend our traditions of freedom and democracy across England and Beyond. This is a battle between language and violence. If armed police are permitted to break the sacred circle of academic and scientific autonomy England will be a police state.


We are the people. We are the power.

The Alternative London Summit 2009 program you find at: http://www.altg20.org.uk

Petition to open the university: http://www.petitiononline.com/openUEL/petition.html