The Possible Impact of the Israel-Palestine War on the Philippines

 

The Israeli policy over recent years did not necessarily want to cultivate a Palestinian leadership... Many are in prison, and Israel's interest - because I repeat: it was not in their program or in Israel's interest at the time, or so they thought - was instead to divide the Palestinians and ensure that the Palestinian question fades. This Palestinian question will not fade. And so we must address it and find an answer. This is where we need courage. The use of force is a dead end. The moral condemnation of what Hamas did - and there's no "but" in my words regarding the moral condemnation of this horror - must not prevent us from moving forward politically and diplomatically in an enlightened manner. The law of retaliation is a never-ending cycle—Dominique De Villepin, former Prime Minister of France 

 

In this issue 

The Possible Impact of the Israel-Palestine War on the Philippines 

I. The Increasing Trend of Wars; Nakba 1.0: The Origin of the Israel-Palestine Conflict 

II. Nakba 2.0: The Israel-Palestine War: The Prison Revolt 

III. Divide and Conquer Rule: Israel Created, Nurtured and Fought the Hamas 

IV. The Global Sympathy War 

V. The Collective Punishment of The Palestinians 

VI. The Law of Large Numbers, Rising Risks of Direct World War 3 

VII. The Middle East Conflict as Symptom of the "Thucydides Trap" 

 

That's the outline.

Due to the risk of "community guideline" restrictions, please read the whole post at my substack.

Please press the following link:

https://open.substack.com/pub/theseenandunseenbybjte/p/the-possible-impact-of-the-israel?r=9066v&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Growing Imbalances at the Philippine Stock Exchange: Coincidences or Patterns? Will the Philippines Be Immune from an Escalation of the Middle East War?

Doubt isn't the opposite of faith; it is an element of faith—Paul Tillich, German theologian and historian

Growing Imbalances at the Philippine Stock Exchange: Coincidences or Patterns? Will the Philippines Be Immune from an Escalation of the Middle East War?

Stock market trading opened the second decade of the twenty-first century with a peculiar twist, both the headline index and broader market were in the red!

On January 2nd, when the PSYEi 30 tumbled below the 2% threshold, similar to December 20, the international business media outfit, the Bloomberg immediately released a tweet of an article that highlighted the market’s dilemma. 

Perhaps because of the abbreviated trading week due to the holidays, which many used to extend their vacation, attempts to push the index higher post-lunch break lacked vigor unlike December 20, and therefore, lost ground. 

The fizzling of the intraday day pump didn’t deter the rescue of the index, though. Similar to December 20th, a massive mark-the-close pump cut the index’s losses by almost half!

But unlike the historic December 20 pump*, the low volume activities limited the scale of the rescue.

*Plunge Protection Team Rescues Index with December 20’s HISTORIC Magical Pumping! BSP’s Consumer Survey versus the CPI December 22, 2019

Was the media’s article about the struggling PhiSYX a coincidence or a pattern? Was it a beacon signal for a rescue?

Was the gigantic (+2.7%) pump on January 2nd led by SM Prime a coincidence or a pattern?

After soaring by close to 2%, the second day of 2020 saw the index jump by only 1.26.

 

And have the strength of the index in the first two days of the last two years, backed by mark-the-close pumps, been a coincidence or a pattern?

But why the inferior performance of 2020? Because of the want of vim expressed by the low volume? 2020’s two-day return was significantly below the over 2% in 2018 and 2019.

Despite understanding that in interpreting statistical probabilities, the difference between case probability and the class probability matters, will 2020’s significant inaugural underperformance weigh on the month’s returns? Except for 2016, the two-day trading week led the headline index to return a paltry .31%, the lowest since 2011.  

Historically, less than 1% return on the first week have led to negative January returns.  The headline index posted negative returns in the first week only in 2016 and 2008 in the last 13-years.

As a reminder, the index composition and weight distribution have differed over the years.

Even as several index issues, like Ayala Corp, Megaworld, PLDT, Jollibee, Metro Pacific, LT Group, DM Consunji, and Semirara Mining have touched multi-year lows in the last month or two, shares of only the Sy Group of companies have carved either a milestone or have been within the ambit of fresh highs!

While BDO and SM closed the week 6.06% and 7.81% off their respective January 2018 zeniths, SMPH has vertically ascended to repeatedly carve fresh highs in December 2019 extending to the first week of 2020.  SM Prime’s September 2019 climb should be the steepest in history! And the headline index is at the 7,800 level only!

SMPH’s % share weight of the index jumped 65.2% from 6.12% in the first week of 2016 to a stunning 10.11% share in 2020!

Has the disproportionate accumulation of the share weight of the free-float index of Sy Group been a coincidence or pattern?

Is the mounting divergence between the Sy Group and most of the PSYEi issues a coincidence or a pattern? How sustainable is such an imbalance?

 

Has it been a coincidence or a pattern that 2019’s 4.68% returns had almost entirely accrued from the advances of the top 5 issues? And that such gains, which has magnified the lopsidedness of the index, came at the expense of the rest! The first quintile’s percentage share jumped by 14.9% in 2019 to 48.98% from 42.64% in 2018. Since Bloomberry replaced Petron Corporation in February 2019, the last quintile group has been excluded.

To what extent would such fundamental discrepancies from either coincidence or patterns persist?

Or should we just deny facts and economic precepts to blindly embrace with unquestioning faith what we have been programmed to believe?

Finally, have we not been repeatedly told that the Philippines would be immune from external events**?

Then why the sudden backpedaling of establishment experts with the likely escalation of the US-Iran conflict, following the assassination of Iran’s military commander Qassem Soleimani in Iraq by US President Trump, which may have likely been done under the implicit bidding of the US military-industrial complex, Israel's Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia?

**Are Philippine Stocks a Buy in 2020? December 30, 2019

And since Syria and Iran have a mutual defense cooperation deal, would the theater of war expand should Syria lend a helping hand to Iran?

And would this not drag members of the China-led Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) to an open conflict with the US-led NATO? Iran is an observer state of the SCO.

As Richard Haas, President of the politically connected Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) recently tweeted, “Make no mistake: any war with Iran will not look like the 1990 Gulf war or the 2003 Iraq wars. It will be fought throughout the region w a wide range of tools vs a wide range of civilian, economic, & military targets. The region (and possibly the world) will be the battlefield.”

And should the Middle East tinderbox be ignited, would the Philippines decouple from World War III????

For those who believe in this, good luck!

US-led Bombing of Syria: Donald Trump’s Mutt and Jeff Reality Show

In this issue

US-led Bombing of Syria: Donald Trump’s Mutt and Jeff Reality Show

-Events Leading to Syria’s Bombing

-Trump’s Bellicose Tweet: Reading Between the Lines

-Trump’s Militaristic PR: The Mutt and Jeff Foreign Policy

US-led Bombing of Syria: Donald Trump’s Mutt and Jeff Reality Show

Are we headed for World War 3?

The way most of the establishment media has projected unfolding developments in the Middle East, a buildup of such frightening impression can be irresistible

But nothing is what it seems.

Events Leading to Syria’s Bombing

Here is the back story.

Last March 17, RT.com warned of a possible false flag in chemical attacks, which would be blamed on Syria and Russia, could be in the works: “Russia’s Defense Ministry says “US instructors” are training militants to stage false flag chemical attacks in south Syria. The incidents are said to be a pretext for airstrikes on Syrian government troops and infrastructure. “We have reliable information at our disposal that US instructors have trained a number of militant groups in the vicinity of the town of At-Tanf, to stage provocations involving chemical warfare agents in southern Syria,” Russian General Staff spokesman General Sergey Rudskoy said at a news briefing on Saturday.”

Either the Russian’s government has smelled something cooking or they were telegraphing their moves intended to psychologically shift the blame to the West once they acted.

But why should the Russians do so when Mr. Trump even tinkered with the idea of a US troop pullout in Syria?

Last March 29, US President Donald Trump defied Pentagon’s desire to keep US troops in Syria and suggested a pullout. Mr. Trump said the US will "be coming out of Syria like very soon”.

In the next few days, Mr. Trump backpedaled; he reportedly had been “persuaded not to pull out immediately”.

For the recalcitrant Mr. “art of the deal” US President to have changed his mind would have entailed either a deal had been consummated or vested interest groups or “the deep state” may have overwhelmed Mr. Trump

And while Trump may be seen as de-escalating, the West continues to demonize and intensify their geopolitical strains with Russia.

The Russian government has been accused of meddling in US elections and for being instrumental in having Donald Trump as President

The Russian interference in domestic politics has supposedly spanned 27 nations since 2004.

Forget that as the policeman of the world, the US government has had more interventionist role in global affairs. For the establishment, the only government entitled to interfere with the domestic political concerns of ‘sovereign’ states would be the US.

And because Russia has been portrayed as evil, brinkmanship politics has only been mounting.

The British government accused its Russian counterpart of deliberating poisoning double spy agent Sergei Skripal his daughter Yulia Skripal with a deadly nerve ‘Novichok” agent, early March. While both parties have accused one another of responsibility, the government of United Kingdominitiated the expulsion of Russian diplomats. The governments of the US and other European nations followed (Independent March 26, 2018).More than 20 nations ejected Russian diplomats almost simultaneously. The Russian government retaliated on most of these countries tit-for-tat.

However, the US expanded actions against Russia. Aggravated by the Skripal episode, additional sanctions were slapped against Russian oligarchs and on government officials last week.  The Russian government reportedly has plans to restrict titanium sales to Boeing as part of the countermeasures on US sanctions.

Ironically, the Skripals survived what was supposedly an assassination attempt by the Russian government! Such incompetent Russians!

Why should the world be at risk of a war with merely the poisoning of a spy double agent?

Have talking and due process been passé?

Worst, an attack on non-combatants with chemical gas in the last held rebel town of Douma reportedly claimed 70 lives. Three days after Mr. Trump’s announcement that the US would keep its troop in Syria, the gas attack struck.  What a coincidence.

And the Syrian government, as well as Russia and Iran were impulsively and automatically blamed by the US President Trump and allies for such ghastly act.

From Trump’s Tweet: “Many dead, including women and children, in mindless CHEMICAL attack in Syria. Area of atrocity is in lockdown and encircled by Syrian Army, making it completely inaccessible to outside world. President Putin, Russia and Iran are responsible for backing Animal Assad. Big price.”

Again, have talking and due process been passé?

Since the Russian government pushed back on such accusations and warned that they would correspondingly respond to a military strike in Syria, US President Donald Trump responded in a tweet, “Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart!” You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!”

Wow. The prospects of World War 3 right at tweeter

Trump’s Bellicose Tweet: Reading Between the Lines

But I offer a different extended translation of Mr. Trump’s Tweet (A fictional message of Trump to Putin)

Hey Vladimir. You should know that I am a true friend.

You should also know I don’t just specialize in the “art of the deal”, I am an expert in managing media. I was a star in my own reality TV show. Let us use my expertise for us to gain an advantage on foreign policies and for entertainment

Let us do a Mutt and Jeff show. I, Donald, play the good cop, and you, Vladimir, the bad cop. That’s how the world wants to see it. So let us just give them one heck of a good time.

It should be a win-win for both of us.

Hey Vlad. You know that my trade war with Xi is connected to my sanctions against you. The world wants to see it as my “art of the deal”, so be it. Take a look. I pulled out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership in January of 2017, and now I am sending signals that I want back in!

Have you not been persuaded?

Let us go back to Syria. You, Mr. Rouhani and Mr. Assad have nearly beaten the rebels sponsored by the inner sanctums of my government. Though I publicly asserted that support for these rebels would end, you know that that’s not gonna happen.

And that’s just one of the reasons why a show of force was imperative. It was not about chemicals, or the collateral damage, but about both of our political survival.

We don’t want to end this world, do we?

Besides I am not permitted to end the war in Syria. There are many factions in my government and among my allies who want Assad out and the Iranians thrashed.

So my “art of the deal” foreign policy governance has been to seek a compromise among these groups.

Israel’s Bibi Netanyahu has been uncomfortable with Assad’s progress against the rebels. Israel has been apprehensive over losing out to Iran as the region’s key political power. Even more, Israel’s water supplies have been in peril.  That’s why they have been pressing on me. Since a large part of my voting base comes from them, I have to do something.

Saudi’s Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) has also been a key ally who shares Israel concerns about losing regional power to Iran. A critical foundation behind the US dollar status as the international reserve currency has been due to Saudi’s support of the Petrodollar system. Traded in US dollars, the excess oil revenues are plowed back to finance the US debt. In return for the seignorage privilege, the US government provides protection to the Saudis and other friendly oil producers.

For this reason, Saudi Arabia is almost an unexpendable ally. Most of the perpetrators of 9/11 came from Saudi. Perhaps even the previous Saudi government may have been involved. But we in the US government has opted to close our eyes on it. And as much as 10,000 civilians deaths in the civil war of Yemen have been due to the repressive Yemen coalition which continues to receive support from Saudi’s MBS. But instead of bombing MBS, we have to continue to sell them weapons!

Sorry for the bifurcations or policy inconsistencies. Our preference for Bibi and MBS is a matter of national security.

And to assuage these groups by assuring them continuity of their political privileges, I had to publicly brand your friends as “destabilizers”. 

And there is more to the relationship. The selling of weapons to MBS and Mr. Netanhayu will benefit my other benefactors, particularly, the military-industrial complex.

I have exhorted Congress to approve my proposed increase of their budget to $716 billion in 2019. Again, this is largely due to our Mutt and Jeff relationship. The justification for the increase in funds for the good cop comes from the projected menace of the bad cop! Thanks, Vlad.

We used about 100 missiles to hit some of the targets, which I signaled to you before we struck.  If each (tomahawk) missiles cost $1.4 million, the April 14 operations amounted to a cool $140 million. That’s for missiles alone. I am quite sure that you, Vlad, can ask your government for budget increases to defend against the good cop.

And there is the neoconservative group, who have been influenced by philosopher Leo Strauss. They believe in the Wolfowitz doctrine that the US hegemony is an entitlement. They believe that geopolitical challenges to the supremacy of the US have to be arrested at all cost, even if it means World War III.  And even among fellow Americans, neocons would do anything including employing “deception, religious fervor and perpetual war to control the ignorant masses”.

So far I have given you the national interest.

I have a significant personal stake in this too. Without uniting the divisive and fragmented political environment, I cannot muster support for a bigger defense fund.

Because rallying against the bad cop would unify our political climate, what better way for you to grant me this opportunity to achieve a personal goal. In return, I will limit our exposure to Assad’s kingdom

This year’s April 14th operations haven’t been the first. You previously accommodated my bombing of Assad’s airbase on April 6, 2017.

To show the world I meant power, I did this just right after I had dinner with China’s President Xi, who said he understood what I did. Of course, Xi can’t complain. He was in my HOUSE (Mar-a-Lago resort)! That is how to negotiate from a position of strength!

Thanks to you, last year’s air strike gave me a bipartisan support. Perhaps that may have helped seal my signature tax law, the Tax Cuts and Job Act of 2017. Although of course, party-based votes mainly determined its passage, Republicans may have been unified partly through my actions on Assad.

If there was an Oscar’s for politics, Assad deserves the lead supporting actor award!

Another factor why I had to bomb Assad for the second time is because of partisan politics. I had to show to America and to the world that I don’t owe my power to you.

Though Special Council Robert Mueller’s investigation of my ties to you have led nowhere, it produced a nasty side effect: my personal lawyer for years, Michael Cohen, has now been embroiled in possible cases of fraud, tax evasion or even money laundering. To keep my steamy relationship with a hot porn babe off the public, Michael may have said something unsuitable. The Mueller investigation could use Michael’s lapse as leverage to find fault with me.

Hence underneath my belligerent tweet is a message of mutuality, joint participation, personal appreciation and peace.

My actions will punctuate on it.

Trump’s Militaristic PR: The Mutt and Jeff Foreign Policy

Let us see how my interpretation of Trump’s tweet figured.

On April 14th early morning Saturday, the governments of the US, United Kingdom and France rained down on several Syrian targets over 100 missiles (CNN: 110, Business Insider 118).

Almost double the number of missiles had been used in 2018 compared to the bombing of a Syrian airfield (59 Tomahawks) on 6th of April 2017(or a year ago!). The alleged use by the Syrian government of chemical weapons on non-combatants incited both events. 

Though many reports allege that the Russians were not “pre-notified” this year, the US-led strike force carefully avoided any encounter with them.

Here’s the thing.  A Bloomberg report noted that the US-led strike force “didn’t enter airspace guarded by advanced systems above Russian bases”, targets were “limited” to a “few linked to Syria’s chemical-weapons program”, “targets were chosen to minimize the risk of accidentally hitting Russian forces” and the “US used a hotline” on Russia “to ensure the airspace was clear”.

And while the US may not have directly notified the Russians, it was the French who did; “France said Russia was warned in advance of the strikes to avoid direct confrontation”.

Thus, the US-led bombing was derisively labeled by a Russian official as done by “political thugs” for “some militaristic PR for their own political reasons but they’re scared of getting hit back”.

The Russia government claimed that Syria’s old defense weapons system downed 71 out of the 103 missiles launched by the allies. Russia’s vaunted S-400 surface-to-air defense system may not have been used as reports indicate. With the element of surprise out of the equation, even a third world country like Syria can put up a good showing.

And the Russian government’s caterwauling of the bombing “an act of aggression” has been the same today as was a year ago!

Perhaps the US bombing of Syria will become a yearly April Trump-Putin Two-to-Tango affair!

Here’s more. Donald Trump declared Syrian bombing as “Mission Accomplished” which intended to signal the culmination of the short campaign.  This declaration was echoed by the Pentagon who said that this was a "one-time shot" at Syria.

Donald Trump’s Mutt and Jeff Syrian Realty Show seems to have worked.

Mutt and Jeff should be better than risking the end of the world.

But the most optimal option wouldn’t be Mutt and Jeff.

And while it may be win-win for Trump and Putin, for pawns to suffer (collateral damage) from such political maneuverings signifies an act of obnoxious immorality 

And there's the financial aspect. The launching of the US-led airstrikes against Syria may have been timed coincidentally with closed financial markets. Could it be because Mr. Trump has owned the upside run of the US stock market, such an event would burden the queasy market and hit Trump’s popularity?

Finally, since sanctions imposed against Russia is just an extension of Trump’s “trade war” with China, the ensuing reduction in trade and investments and confiscations will translate to the diminishment of global liquidity. With global debt reported at $237 trillion in 2017, just how will the system cope with diminished commerce and liquidity?