Category: Authors

SUPPORT JACK LANG & “LIBERTY FOR HISTORY”

(Note: My thanks to https://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2009/01/2729-armenian-tuggery-intimidation-in.html site for bringing this information to my knowledge. I am covering this issue as a gesture of support to Jack Lang, the courageous French politician who saw through the Armenian falsifications and bogus genocide claims and dared to change his position on the genocide claims. I believe his example will provide a most educational paradigm of how truth eventually wins over propaganda.)

Below, please find Jack Lang’s speech , 11 October 2008, Blois, France, which instantly attracted the poison arrows of a stunned Armenian lobby. Strident articles, nasty letters, and vitriolic internet posts poured from major Armenian lobbyists (and their ethocidal friends), quickly labeling this brave man a revisionist and a denialist, as well as calling him many choice names (some of which are not repeatable here but others like the following are: inconsistent, self-indulgent, felon, Judas, heinous negationist (?), scandalous, cynical, coward, shamed and dishonored France, insulted the values of humanism, etc., etc.)

It is interesting to note that Jack Lang had signed the preface to the book “the news of the genocide of Armenians” published by the CDCA in October 1999; one more reason not to trust the information presented in Armenian books.

Armenians questioned Lang’s alleged cynicism in his support of France’s Gayssot law which criminalizes denial of Jewish and Gypsy genocides. Armenian fail to understand the difference: the Jewish Holocaust is a fact supported by a court verdict (Nuremberg); Armenian genocide is an allegation, not supported by any court verdict and a much contested and discredited allegation at that. All Armenians have are a bunch of hearsay, forgeries, exaggerations, embellishments, and distortions, none of which help explain the Armenian propaganda, agitation, raids, terror, rebellions, treason, territorial demands, and the civil war all of this translated into causing half a million Muslim dead, mostly Turkish, in that order, between 1890 and 1921.

TERESET (temporary resettlement of 1915) is one frame in the 1890-1921 film. TERESET was a home security measure that was caused by the Armenian rebellions and treason during a time of war. None of this has anything to do with extermination of a people nor can it be explained by the term genocide. Genocide claims are political, not factual. Human suffering was universal and caused by all sides; selecting favorite victims out of this lot and ignoring the suffering of the rest is cruel, unethical, and inhuman.

Historians are best equipped to deal with the complexities of controversial history and they must be allowed full access to archives to do their jobs properly. Turkey opened her archives two decades ago and more than 80,000 scholars have used them since. The Republic of Armenia (Yerevan) , various Armenian churches (Istanbul, Etchimiadzin, Jerusalem, Mekhitarists, and more) and Armenian political associations (ARF, ANA, etc. in Boston, Glendale, etc.) and institutions (Zorian, Gomidas, etc.) need to open their archives and provide full access to scholars. Turkey propsed in 2005 establishment of a historians commission to study the matter but Armenian declined. The solution must be seen through more research, dialog, review, and debate; not less. Memory laws destroy freedom of speech on these issues and replace history scholarship with political partisanship.

Therefore, I salute jack Lang for his visionary and courageous stand in the matter of Turkish-Armenian conflict during WWI and for supporting more liberty, not less, for history.

SPEECH BY MR JACK LANG, 11 OCTOBER 2008, BLOIS, FRANCE

“I turn a word about who we meet, I do not at all exhausted in a few words, and I am surrounded at the moment of eminent specialists who have worked, and then in the room Similarly there are great historians intervene. Some words in bulk, I am not prepared to talk, a few words to say in bulk at the heart of this discussion is freedom, freedom of thought, freedom to seek, freedom to discover, freedom to ask questions. Freedom … and it is both a conviction and a temperament. I believe that in all matters relating to intelligence, art, creation, freedom must be the principle, sometimes even absolute, and we cannot make exceptions or conditions may, in certain circumstances perfectly defined, freedom of thought, including forgiveness may be politically incorrect, including think evil. If we do not recognize the right to think, think evil, then the point is freedom.

I will not think badly of course, everyone has their beliefs, values, but at the same time it should, except within certain limits, and unfortunately to propose a topic or question you are going to discuss, what we believe that by reasoning or by intuition or emotion or because we are citizens of that time, the law on the Holocaust and the denial of the Holocaust must be respected as such? Why, how? And why are we reserved, if not hostile to other acts of proclamation and especially to other criminal laws related to historical facts?

I take a concrete example to move forward, so I do not answer the question that I ask, it will be in the debates. To move forward a little in my question, I take the example of Armenia. It is that myself, so I have to say the truth as it should, I passed the first resolution of the National Assembly on the recognition, in quotes, can we say, because it is also necessary that historians do their work, the Armenian genocide. I voted because I thought it was an act of moral and repair history, and given the absolute refusal of the Turkish government to accept any discussion, any debate on this subject, it seemed to me the French National Assembly could perform this act. I do not know if I react the same way today, but in any case I have voted. And at the time, I was chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly, so I am doubly guilty, if I may say, MP and chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee. However, I am prepared with force against the second law on Armenia, already at that time I committed a crime, vis a vis the instructions of my own group, I refused to vote as a text monstrous.

It allows the prosecution against historians, against persons, against citizens, against journalists, who would undertake to discuss, reflect on the magnitude, the reality on the forms of killing (there were massacres ) of Armenians committed by the Turkish armed. Yes, he must speak clearly, those who voted it did not at all a kind of moral commiseration, not at all a kind of attachment to a story. They did so simply by electoral concerns, thinking and raise the voice of the Armenian community of France, who deserves our respect. But at the same time, the duty of a senior politician, a member of Parliament, a minister, is to carry out its mandate with courage and conviction, and to resist any pressure whatsoever. And the consequence of this vote absurd, unacceptable to the National Assembly, was in Turkey itself, I participated as a guest professor of the Bilgi University in Istanbul, we were able to convene a committee of Historians mixed Turkish and Armenian, was a first, which had agreed to meet, discuss, think to compare their views, discuss their assessments. And this vote was such that it echoes blocked temporarily, this work is essential to understand, to know the historical reality in the region.

***

SUPPORT JACK LANG AGAINST ARMENIAN INTIMIDATION AND THREATS

Please send your message of encouragement in English to Jack Lang via email at:

jlang@assemblee-nationale.fr

and/or

jacklang62@wanadoo.fr

or by Fax to: + 03 21 30 91 22

Your support is not only for a politician who is intimidated and terrorized by Armenians, but also, perhaps even more so, for an idea: “liberty for history”…

***

February 2, 2009
AMERICAN INTERESTS IN TURKEY

President Obama requested that we, the citizens, suggest ideas of change for him to consider. This is a response to that request.

Former president George W. Bush made many decisions based on religious considerations. His faith-based politics at home are a good example. These were perfectly unconstitutional decisions. His premise in foreign policy was the same. He said he invaded Iraq after consulting with God and he wanted to subdue a Middle Eastern group of countries with Turkey as a model. In this process, he wanted to convert Ataturk’s laic (Secular) Turkey to a mildly Islamic country. Arabs don’t like Turks and did not want to have any part of it. Besides they were not ready for democracy. But in Turkey he found an ally in Recep Tayyip Erdogan who under the guise of abiding by the laic laws, wanted to Islamize Turkey. Ataturk’ political philosophy in respect to religion was very close to that of our Thomas Jefferson [“Jefferson & Ataturk, Political Philosophies” G.W.Sheldon, 2000 Peter Lang Publishing] Ataturk had made a revolution, among other things, llto separate State from Islam because Islam had been part of the problem in the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Thus the U.S. was returning a westernized Turkey to where Ottoman Empire had failed. While we were fighting Islamic radicals in Afghanistan and elsewhere, it makes no sense to convert a state like us to an Islamic republic, mildly or not.

Former president Bush proved to be an irrational man. In stead of consulting with his father, his Secretary of State, with the Pentagon, and with the CIA, he decided to make war on Iraq just by himself, by appealing to a “higher Father” for strength [Bob Woodward in Washington Post, 1-18-09] We know the result. His plans for Turkey were similarly flawed, irrational decisions.

There were, and there still are, two possibilities of dealing with Turkey.

1) Support the “laic” republic founded by Ataturk, that aimed at converting Turks to Westerners, culturally, technologically, educationally, and every which way. Such a government has been a truly friendly ally, politically, and culturally, was reliable, and would cooperate in our fight in Afghanistan against the Taliban and other Islamic radicals. An Ataturkist regime would be perfectly democratic, since they have practiced it for the last 89 years.

2) Support the government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, that would Islamize Turkey to a weaker, unreliable, in-name only ally, that would be easier for the United States to manage as a “Puppet Regime” [Remember Brave New World!]. However, in time, it would slide to full Islamic policies, that would be anti-U.S., anti-Israel, pro-Russian, and pro-Iranian. This is now happening before our eyes. Mr. Erdogan is taking sides with Hamas in the Gaza conflict and alienating Turkey’s long time ally Israel. In his fury, he is now taking it from Turkish Jews. After his very public argument with President Perez at Davos, he said that he considers anti-Semitism a crime against humanity. Thus, Mr. Erdogan incriminated himself by what he is doing at home.

Which policies are more in the basic interests of the United States and of the world? Obviously, it is the first.

President Obama made a wise decision: The U.S. will not take sides in Turkish politics which also creates domestic unrest. I hope, this means, he will no longer push for a mildly Islamic Republic. But this would mean that he walked half-way in the right direction. In my opinion, real American interest would dictate that he should walk the whole way and help Turks getting rid of the dangerous anti-U.S. Islamic regime. The U.S. should not push Turkey into the laps of Putin and the Mullahs. We should instead help Turkey restore the modern Ataturkist principles and values..

I congratulate President Obama for his election with such a high percentage of the American vote and wish him much success in his programs, especially in straightening up our relations with Turkey.

R E A D ER’ S C O M M E N T O N P U B L I C E D U C A T I O N

Can Korman sent my article on Public Education to an American friend who stayed many years outside the U.S. Below is her comments. She seems to be happy with the Dewey system.

Hi Can,

…The education article is some thing I know a little more about and therefore have stronger opinion about. I thought grades1,2,6,and 7th grade history and geography. In summer sessions I thought grades 3 .and 4. I also was administrator of schools in Sofia, Yaounde, and Jakarta. From the teaching perspective I have been exposed to and practiced many techniques of teaching. My training/education was at UCLA and taught in Beverly Hills, CA. My own education, primary through university was in Los Angeles. Background. As an elementary school kid you might say I was exposed to the John Dewey System and for that I am so thankful! Why? I’ll give a little example. In grade 6 we studied Westward expansion. Our studies included building a log cabin furnished with stuff we made and items donated by our families who had relevant antiques at home. We also made a covered wagon, dressed in pioneer clothes, churned butter, made powder horns from horns obtained by our teacher from a slaughter house, trekked through some vacant land near our school. We studied routes followed by settlers and explorers, wars, treaties…. Now when I study history which I learned to love through that teaching method, I always want to know much more than a few memorized names and dates. I’m able to put myself in the shoes of people I can never know. We did memorize the multiplication tables and spelling words. We also enjoyed real music and art instruction…. The Ayn Rand admirers and other conservatives would have us “learn” a national set of “facts” and be tested on successful memorization at least once a year. Hello, No Child Left Behind in its present adaptation. Yes, learning is an individual mental process, but there are many techniques which are successful in teaching and not all of those techniques work for each individual child/person. There are many reasons for “failing” schools. Closing them does not cure them. Oh, Can, we/I could go on and on. Let’s talk about one day….But ,one more example of the fallacy, in my opinion, of Mr.Tarhan’s premise… . The state Department decided some years ago to adopt just one method of teaching foreign languages. That method was to listen and repeat. At least that’s what my Czech teacher said. I dropped the class after several weeks, because I cannot learn language that way. I must be able to see what is being said/taught. Same with Arabic. One size never fits all. Using some of the elements of the John Dewey system enable many of us to develop a life long love of learning and appreciation of the learning process.

An Anonymous Reader

W R I T E R’ S R E S P O N S E

I thank the Anonymous lady for her comments.

It is obvious that what John Dewey called “class projects” such a Westward expansion is a lot of fun , both for people who teach it and those who learn it. A great deal of details is learned about a subject that covers at least several months time and the child misses to learn a systematic history of America during that time. In the boarding school in Istanbul (Galatasaray) a French physics teacher had led a project to build a glider. Participation was voluntary, and work was done evening. After two years he had tried to fly it. I did participate and we learned how to build structured wings, how to construct the whole thing as light as possible. But that was not done in stead of the physics courses, but in addition to. The regular physics course was still given. That school project was great fun too. Yes, learning must be fun, but the purpose of education does not consist of fun alone. There are so many things to learn and there is no question that our schools do not measure up to European and Japanese schools where kids are taught to think. In our schools still some one may ask “Does in your country the sun set from the East or from the West?”

I have no premise to learn foreign languages by hearing and repeating. I learned three foreign languages by immersing myself in environments where every one was speaking that language.

Ayn Rand is being misquoted. All she required was that kids learn by understanding. Once that happens there is no need to memorize. One remembers what one understands.

No Child Left Behind is a lousy program that would lower the knowledge level of the class to the level of the dumbest kid.

………………………………………………………………………………………….

To Readers’ Attention: Any one who wishes to receive THE ORHAN TARHAN LETTER should sent an e-mail to orhant@verizon.net with his/her full name, e-mail address , and PLEASE phone number, in case there is an interruption caused by the server, or in case of e-mail address change. It is free. Comments are welcome. These LETTERs are also published in AmericanChronicle.com

February 2, 2009
Poor Richard’s Report

Geopolitical Diary: The World’s Pivot
January 30, 2009Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan created a stir at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Thursday with a lengthy condemnation of Israel’s recent actions in the Gaza Strip.

Erdogan’s speech was clearly prepared beforehand — read directly from papers he was holding — so this was no off-the-cuff comment that could be written off. And sitting right next to the Turkish prime minister the whole time was none other than Israeli President Shimon Peres. After Peres delivered a counterpoint, Erdogan went on what detractors would probably label a rant, which ended with a brief argument with the moderator about time limits before he abruptly walked off the stage, having said, “I do not think I will return to Davos.”

Back in Turkey, the response was mixed: Some were surprised by their leader’s actions, and some were thrilled to see him lambaste both Israel and the European elites at Davos. Indeed, it is a matter for debate both within and outside Turkey just where Erdogan and his Justice and Development Party are taking Turkish policy in the near future. There are those who see his bold criticisms of Israel as a clear bid to seize a leadership position for Islamic sentiment throughout the Middle East. Others see Turkey asserting itself in order to counter, or perhaps collaborate with, a resurgent Russia. Still others see Turkey pushing to join, or perhaps utterly reject, the European Union. The one thing that is clear is that Turkey is moving more assertively than it has in decades.

It has been almost 90 years since the world has seen Turkey as a place that projects any power on its own. Since the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the Turks have been extremely insular, dabbling only rarely in events beyond their borders. Granted, Turkey was a key participant in the NATO alliance during the Cold War, given that it shared borders with the Middle East, Iran, the Soviet bloc (Bulgaria) and the Soviet Union itself. It has been a long time, however, since Turkey pursued an activist foreign policy — and most of the world has forgotten just what that means.

Turkey occupies on some of the most valuable real estate in the world. The Anatolian plateau is high and easily defensible, and as a peninsula it also supports a thriving maritime culture. Both are excellent assets for growing a successful state. But Turkey’s most important feature is its critical location. It sits astride the land routes connecting Europe, the former Soviet Union and the Middle East — not to mention the straits connecting the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. It is the only country in the world that is positioned to project influence readily into all of these regions.

A deeper look reveals that the territory that comprises modern-day Turkey has been at or near the center of the human story for thousands of years. It was the home of the Hittite empire some 3,300 years ago, and afterward its Aegean coast was part of Classical Greece. Not only was Anatolia a key component of the Roman Empire, but Byzantium — based in what is now Istanbul — was Rome’s immediate political, cultural, religious and economic successor. That entity in turn was succeeded by the Ottomans, who crafted what was at the time the world’s greatest empire — which almost unilaterally enabled humanity to emerge from the Dark Ages, even at times conquering a good portion of what would eventually become Western civilization. For about half of the past two millennia, Anatolia has commanded the world’s most powerful economic and military forces.

The bottom line is this: Any time in human history that the Anatolian Peninsula has not been a leading force in geopolitics has been an aberration. The land that links Europe to the Eurasian steppe to the mountains of Asia to the Mediterranean basin and the deserts of Arabia is geographically destined to play a major role on the global stage. If the world has a pivot, it lies in Turkey.

And although the direction of its movement remains up for debate, Turkey — after more than 90 years of quiescence — is moving again.

Tell Stratfor What You Think

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
© Copyright 2009 Stratfor. All rights reserved.

January 31, 2009
New Resist of Turkish Outlook

After the Belfour Declaration Turkey shared a new strong hand on Middle East.

Turkish Prime Minister R. Tayyip Erdogan told Peres that “you must feel guilty to be so strong in your words,” referring to the president having raised his voice loudly during his address.

For first time a man told about Israeli realities : “You killed babies and women. God says that “don’t kill” in Torah.”

It is original access to share Middle Eastern fortune as referring to massacre mind of Shimon Peres, Ariel Sharon and other Israeli person in charge who are originally military base. “You have prime ministers who had said they felt quite happy when they entered in Palestine on tanks.”

Today Menahem Begin and Ariel Sharon can not see new balances which are made by Muslim Turkey. Israel must understand that Muslim people can create riots if Turkey wants. Also they know Ottoman resist against to Jewish invasion on Middle East. New Hava Nagila sing will appear for Muslims as happiness in region.

Turkey’s historical feelings will keep situations among Muslim nations.

In 1901 the Jewish representatives of Ottoman parliament went to Sultan Abdulhamid the II and offered to pay tremendous amount of money to keep the Islamic State for Palestine. Sultan Abdulhamid the II replied:

I am not going to give one inch of Palestine to the jews as Palestine is not mine give but it belongs to the Ummah and Ummah have shed blood to defend this land but if one day the Islamic State falls apart then you can have Palestine for free but as long as I am alive I would rather have my flesh be cut up then cut out Palestine from the Muslim land I will not allow any carving up while we are alive!

Turkey says to stop Israeli massacre and invasion today with its empire heritage.

The premier then walked out saying Peres had spoken for more than twice as long as he was given.Also Turkey understand that western world will not give right to speak for Turkey. Peres received 25 minutes, Erdogan 12.

Western world created a cold diplomatical, academical feelings. And their demands are about opposition of other’s interest.

Today Greeks are defending their Cyprus massacres, but they sued Atilla Olgac because of war actions. But Greek side don’t talk about Israeli slaughter.

We will see new political attacks by big powers about just and unjust states.

Mehmet Fatih ÖZTARSU

January 31, 2009
The Furious Passage of Tayyip Erdogan

From PoliGazette January 30, 2009. “The furious passage of Tayyip Erdogan,” by Robert Ellis.

The Furious Passage of Tayyip Erdogan

By Robert Ellis

Turkey’s prime minister, Tayyip Erdogan, is not a man who brooks being contradicted and a panel debate on the Gaza war at the World Economic Forum was no exception. What was hoped to be a bridge-building exercise to ameliorate Erdogan’s harsh criticisms of Israel’s incursion into Gaza and support for Hamas has turned out to be a public relations disaster.

Erdogan delivered his own presentation in a forceful tone, calling for Hamas to be included in the solution and expressing Turkey’s willingness to be included in the process. However, after Israel’s president, Shimon Peres, had made his presentation, Erdogan responded with a tirade against Peres but was reminded by the moderator of a time limit. Erdogan pushed the moderator away, rose to his feet and left the stage, declaring he did not think he would be coming back to Davos, because he had not been allowed to speak.

The reaction has not been long coming. This morning AJC, the American Jewish Committee, issued a statement calling Tayyip Erdogan’s attack “a public disgrace” and “gasoline on the fire of surging anti-Semitism”. Furthermore, last week AJC and four other American Jewish organizations sent a letter to Erdogan, expressing concern over the current wave of anti-Semitism in Turkey, and Erdogan’s outburst has done nothing to allay these fears.

Unfortunately the Turkish prime mnister has a track record of shooting himself in the foot, which, if the sport became an Olympic discipline, would guarantee him a number of gold medals. (more…)

January 30, 2009
Poor Richard’s Report

Annual Forecast 2009: War, Recession and Resurgence
January 29, 2009 | 1730 GMT Editor’s Note: Below is the introduction to Stratfor’s Annual Forecast for 2009. There also is a printable PDF of the report in its entirety and a report card of our 2008 forecasts highlighting where we were right and where we were wrong. All sections of the forecast are available on our homepage under the 2009 Annual Forecast Special Reports page.

The year 2009 will be complicated. A new U.S. administration is dealing with a politically and militarily complex war. Russia has stopped merely flexing its muscles and is working to secure its position in the spotlight on the global stage. An economic recession is casting a pall over much of the world. These three trends, which will dominate events in 2009, are related to the three broad forecasts Stratfor made at the beginning of 2008.

Full Print Version
Annual Forecast 2009 PDF
2008 Examined
2008 Annual Forecast Report Card
Annual Forecast 2009: Hindsight and Errors
2009 Annual Forecast Sections
Annual Forecast 2009: Major Global Trends: Recession, Russia, The Jihadist War
Annual Forecast 2009: The Middle East
Annual Forecast 2009: Europe
Annual Forecast 2009: East Asia
Annual Forecast 2009: Latin America
Annual Forecast 2009: Sub-Saharan Africa
Related Special Topic Page
2009 Annual Forecast
In our 2008 Annual Forecast, we predicted that the U.S.-jihadist war would wind down and the groundwork would be laid for a drawdown of American forces from Iraq. As 2009 begins, there is the U.S.-Iraqi Status of Forces Agreement that enables the United States to first reduce its visible presence and ultimately remove most of its forces. Furthermore, the American focus on the jihadist conflict has shifted from Iraq to the Afghan-Pakistani border region, but the conflict itself has become far more diffused.

Though the war in Iraq is over in a strategic sense, it is still sufficiently unsettled to allow Iran to stir up violence in Iraq. Tehran would do this not merely to twist the lion’s tail, but to reap sizable security concessions from the new American administration; the only way Washington could avoid making such concessions would be to leave more troops in Iraq longer. Part of Iran’s confidence stems from the U.S. focus on the Indo-Pakistani conflict next door. India is convinced, and rightly so, that the Pakistanis have failed to contain their own radical Islamists. Yet the war in Afghanistan requires Pakistani supply lines and cooperation. Which puts the Americans in a quadruple bind: The United States needs the Iranians not to demand more from it in Iraq, the Indians not to seek revenge for the Mumbai attacks and so destroy any hope of Pakistani cooperation, the Russians to help establish an alternative supply route for NATO troo ps in Afghanistan to pressure the Pakistanis, and the Pakistanis to break with 30 years of policy and go after their own. It is a Gordian knot, and in 2009, it is part of a single interconnected conflict.

Within the Russian element of the jihadist conflict is the second aspect of our forecasts, again both for 2008 and 2009. In 2008, Stratfor predicted that Russia would take advantage of the U.S. preoccupation in Iraq to reassert power throughout its near abroad. It did this in all of Russia’s border regions, using a mix of financial, economic, military, political, social and — above all else — intelligence tools. The event of the year for this prediction was Russia’s August invasion of the former Soviet state — and U.S. ally — Georgia, amply demonstrating Moscow’s resurrected military power.

As 2009 begins, Russia’s window of opportunity remains fully open, despite the change in American administrations. The Obama administration is not making the U.S. military more capable of resisting Russia’s surges in 2009, but instead is shifting forces from one theater (Iraq) to another (Afghanistan). Russia’s focus for the year is clear: use a variety of less overt measures to consolidate its control of the most valuable piece of the former Soviet empire — Ukraine.

Finally, against these two building — and in part interlocking — crises, the global backdrop is remarkably different from 2008.

In 2008, we explained how strong oil prices and Asian exports were creating a new pool of global capital located in the Gulf Arab states and China. This was most certainly the case — China and Saudi Arabia had amassed cash reserves of approximately US$2 trillion each. But as we explained in the 2008 forecast, this generation of wealth was not a transfer of economic power. Rather than go their own way, these states invested nearly all of their money back into the United States, both dollarizing the broader economy and greatly supporting the American financial architecture. All that cash certainly helped mitigate the damage of the global recession that boiled forth in September.

And boil forth it certainly did. As 2009 begins, the world is experiencing its first truly global recession in a generation, and the coming year will be riddled with its ancillary effects. For example, credit crunches will greatly constrain economic activity the world over, banking collapses will be a key feature in European developments, mass protests due to closing factories could plague East Asia, and weak commodity prices will threaten economic and political stability in a host of resource-exporting countries.

Underlining all aspects of the recession will be a single, undeniable fact. The dollarization of the global economy that began so torrentially in 2008 will reach a fever pitch in 2009 as a variety of investors — private, government, American and foreign — pour their resources into the American market. They will do this first to escape the volatility that resides elsewhere in the world, and later to ride the U.S. recovery out of the recession.

Tell Stratfor What You Think

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
© Copyright 2009 Stratfor. All rights reserved.

January 30, 2009