He noted:

Multilateral organizations like the Organization of American States (OAS) have a certain perceived impartiality because they are, in theory, controlled by a diverse group of nations. But sometimes a great power can wield a disproportionate influence. It could theoretically be a coincidence that both the Trump administration and the OAS have tried—without offering any evidence—to discredit Bolivia’s national election in the past couple of weeks. But it’s more likely that this dangerous, ugly, and destabilizing operation is being pushed by Washington.

This “destabilizing operation” came to a head yesterday when Morales resigned under pressure from the military amidst a wave of protests and violence. The situation is Bolivia is complicated, but one thing you can be sure of is anything you hear or read in U.S. mass media will be a heaping pile of lies and propaganda. Fortunately, I came across a really helpful thread courtesy of Kevin Cashman.

THREAD: If you haven't been following the situation in Bolivia here's a rundown. Briefly, the OAS, an emboldened opposition (which clearly is not the most popular party in the country), the media, and the Trump admin ousted a successful leftist leader. For the longer story:

— Kevin Cashman (@kevinmcashman) November 11, 2019

Morales was barred by the constitution from running for another term, but he attempted to override this with a referendum which he lost 51% to 49%. The Bolivian Supreme Court later ruled that term limits were unconstitutional, so he decided to run again. He then won this new election in the first round by the 10% spread required, but the Organization of American States (OAS) immediately called into question the validity of the result. This sparked weeks of protests and culminated in yesterday’s military coup. According to Mark Weisbot, the OAS has provided zero evidence of election fraud, and also notes that approximately 60% of the OAS budget comes from the U.S. government.

Personally, I think Morales should’ve accepted the referendum result and stepped aside, but the military deciding the situation (with likely assistance from the U.S. government/CIA) is not something anyone should cheer on.

Interesting to note that the military isn’t rising up to depose leaders in countries with big protests as long as the CIA likes the leaders in power.

See Chile and France. This couldn’t be more obvious. https://t.co/nIfUBPBQAi

— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) November 11, 2019

There are massive, widespread protests happening all over the world. Wanting the military/national security state to intervene is a bad idea under almost all circumstances. It’s a bad idea in the U.S. , and it’s a bad idea abroad.

— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) November 11, 2019

It seems likely what went down in Bolivia is part of the global proxy war the Trump administration is waging against countries like China and Russia in order to push back against the ongoing transition to a multi-polar geopolitical world. Natural resources always play a key role in such struggles, and Bolivia is no exception thanks to massive lithium reserves, some of which Morales agreed to develop with China earlier this year.

As Reuters reported back in February:

Bolivia has chosen a Chinese consortium to be its strategic partner on new $2.3 billion lithium projects, the government said on Wednesday, giving China a potential foothold in the country’s huge untapped reserves of the prized electric battery metal.

China’s Xinjiang TBEA Group Co Ltd will hold a 49 percent stake in a planned joint venture with Bolivia’s state lithium company YLB, the Bolivian firm said…

Bolivia has some of the world’s largest reserves of lithium – a key component in batteries that power electric cars – but has yet to produce the metal at a commercial scale.

It’s going to be very interesting to watch how things unfold in Bolivia from here. Although Morales lost the referendum to run for another term, my guess is a lot of those who voted against him at the time aren’t pleased with the military coming in to handle the situation. Although it’s not often highlighted in U.S. mass media, Morales achieved a great deal of success economically and socially during his presidency.

For instance, poverty plummeted dramatically:

Then there’s this.

Whether you love him, hate him, or feel indifference, there’s no denying Morales did a lot for many Bolivians who probably won’t take too kindly to what’s being done to him and his supporters by the opposition and military. Let’s not forget he was also the first indigenous president of Bolivia, a country with the largest proportion of indigenous people in Latin America. This story is far from over.

Bigger picture, the escalation in Bolivia is further evidence of the ongoing trend of political chaos around the world, which is likely get worse and spread to ever more corners of the globe. I continue to believe this unrest is largely symptomatic of the death throes of a dying geopolitical and financial paradigm that’s dominated the world for decades. Keep your seatbelts fastened; things can change, and change very quickly irrespective of where you reside. Such are the times we live in.

*  *  *

Liberty Blitzkrieg is now 100% ad free. To make this a successful, sustainable thing consider the following options. You can become a Patron. You can visit the Support Page to donate via PayPal, Bitcoin or send cash/check in the mail.

Assange mumbled, stuttered, and struggled to say his own name and date of birth when he appeared in court on October 21. The Wikileaks founder is being subjected to long drawn-out “psychological torture” as he battles to prevent his extradition to the United States where he faces a slew of espionage charges, warns Nils Melzer, the UN special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

“Unless the UK urgently changes course and alleviates his inhumane situation, Mr. Assange’s continued exposure to arbitrariness and abuse may soon end up costing his life,” Melzer said in a statement on Friday.

“His physical appearance was not as shocking as his mental deterioration,” writes former British ambassador Craig Murray, who was present at the October hearing. “When asked to give his name and date of birth, he struggled visibly over several seconds to recall both… his difficulty in making it was very evident; it was a real struggle for him to articulate the words and focus his train of thought… Until yesterday I had always been quietly skeptical of those who claimed that Julian’s treatment amounted to torture… and skeptical of those who suggested he may be subject to debilitating drug treatments. But having attended the trials in Uzbekistan of several victims of extreme torture, and having worked with survivors from Sierra Leone and elsewhere, I can tell you that … Julian exhibited exactly the symptoms of a torture victim brought blinking into the light, particularly in terms of disorientation, confusion, and the real struggle to assert free will through the fog of learned helplessness.”

“One of the greatest journalists and most important dissidents of our times is being tortured to death by the state, before our eyes. To see my friend, the most articulate man, the fastest thinker, I have ever known, reduced to that shambling and incoherent wreck, was unbearable,” writes Murray.

Melzer, who is not speaking on behalf of the UN, visited Belmarsh prison in May and conducted an extensive review of Assange’s physical and psychological condition. Melzer told the AFP news agency that his increased alarm is based on “new medically relevant information received from reliable sources” that indicate “Assange’s health has entered a downward spiral of progressively severe anxiety, stress and helplessness typical for persons exposed to prolonged isolation and constant arbitrariness.”

“While the precise evolution is difficult to predict with certainty, this pattern of symptoms can quickly develop into a life-threatening situation involving cardiovascular breakdown or nervous collapse,” he told AFP.

Assange is kept in complete isolation for 23 hours a day, and permitted 45 minutes exercise. When he has to be moved, guards clear the corridors and lock all cells to guarantee he has no contact with any other prisoner outside the exercise period.

Assange “continues to be detained under oppressive conditions of isolation and surveillance, not justified by his detention status,” said Melzer, who pointed out that Assange completed his prison sentence for violating his British bail terms and is “being held exclusively in relation to the pending extradition request from the United States.”

The US charges that Assange, an Australian citizen, violated the U.S. Espionage Act in 2010 when he published a series of leaks provided by Chelsea Manning. Those leaks include the Afghanistan war logs, the Iraq war logs, the Collateral Murder video, and classified U.S. State Department cables. For her role, Manning was court martialed and sentenced to 35 years in prison. After serving seven and a half years in prison, Manning had her sentence commuted by President Obama, but she has since been jailed again for her refusal to testify against Assange.

The U.S. has claimed that Wikileaks’ publications have caused the deaths of Americans serving overseas. But no evidence has ever surfaced to prove this, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in 2010 that such claims were “significantly overwrought.”

Nevertheless, the U.S. wants Assange because the information he published was deeply embarrassing to the government. The British courts have already signed off on an extradition order and he will remain behind bars until the hearing, which isn’t until early next year, according to The New York Times.

And curiously, even though mainstream media once heralded Assange’s publications, there is substantially less coverage of his current plight, former CIA officer Raymond McGovern told The American Conservative.

To McGovern, the timing of the U.S. decision to press charges is particularly suspect; charges were announced right after Assange published that the CIA has cyber-tools that can leave a false digital footprint. McGovern, who had visited Assange during his seven-year asylum in the the Ecuadoran embassy, has been a vocal supporter since the beginning.

“The CIA can hack into a system and make it look like the Russians did it,” said McGovern. This challenges the official narrative that Russians hacked the DNC server, exposing Hillary Clinton’s emails. “Imagine that.”

The October hearing was Assange’s first public appearance since May. Illness has prevented him from attending previous hearings.

The UK ignored earlier pleas that to protect Assange’s health and dignity, Melzer said, and his condition has progressed to the point where “his life was now at risk.”

In fact, when Melzer tried to raise the alarm in the media, The Guardian, The Times, the Financial Times, the Sydney Morning Herald, The Australian, The Canberra Times, The Telegraph, The New York Times,The Washington Post, Thomson Reuters Foundation, and Newsweek all refused to publish his op-ed.

Instead of addressing Assange’s health, “what we have seen from the UK government is outright contempt for Mr. Assange’s rights and integrity,” said Melzer. “Despite the medical urgency of my appeal, and the seriousness of the alleged violations, the UK has not undertaken any measures of investigation, prevention and redress required under international law.”

Assange has lost 33 pounds during his imprisonment, according to Australian filmmaker John Pilger. He attended the hearing and has visited Assange in Belmarsh prison.

“To see him in court struggling to say his name, and his date of birth, was really very moving,” said Pilger. “When Julian did try to speak, and to say that basically he was being denied the very tools with which to prepare his case, he was denied the right to call his American lawyer. He was denied the right to have any kind of word processor or laptop. He was denied… his own notes and manuscripts.”

Assange’s “access to legal counsel and documents has been severely obstructed” undermining “his most fundamental right to prepare his defense,” charged Melzer.

The judge refused to grant Assange’s request to delay the February trial.

The lack of legal process in the hearing was “profoundly upsetting,” to watch unfold, writes Murray, because it is “a naked demonstration of the power of the state.”

“Unless Julian is released shortly he will be destroyed,” writes Murray. “If the state can do this, then who is next?”

On the day Erdogan received Trump's letter, the Turkish military launched a cross-border assault against Kurdish-led forces.

Erdogan's response to the letter, confirmed by BBC News Turkey (on Thursday morning), is that he "thoroughly rejected it, threw it in the bin." 

#Turkey President's office confirms to @bbcturkce that when President #Erdogan received #Trump's letter, he "thoroughly rejected it, threw it in the bin" and launched the #Syria operation the same day. His mind was already made up to move in; letter was reportedly the final straw pic.twitter.com/pHaiyF5skG

— Mark Lowen (@marklowen) October 17, 2019

Trump has been criticized for the withdrawal of special operations troops in Northern Syria, which his critics have said gave Erdogan the ability to launch attacks on the Kurds.

About 129 members of Trump's party joined Democrats on Wednesday to formally denounce the move in a vote. The measure, which passed, 354 to 60, has called for Erdogan to halt military operations in Syria. 

* * *

President Trump shot off a very direct letter to Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Wednesday, according to Fox News's Trish Regan, who obtained a copy.

Trump warned the Turkish president doesn't want to be responsible "for slaughtering thousands of people," and that Trump - consequently, doesn't "want to be responsible for destroying the Turkish economy," adding "and I will." 

"I have worked hard to solve some of your problems," Trump continues. 

"Don't let the world down. You can make a great deal. General Mazloum is willing to negotiate with you, and he is willing to make concessions that they never would have made in the past."

"History will look upon you favorably if you get this done the right and humane way," Trump said, adding "It will look upon you forever as the devil if good things don't happen." 

"Don't be a tough guy. Don't be a fool! 

I will call you later." 

EXCLUSIVE: I have obtained a copy of ⁦@realDonaldTrump⁩’s letter to #Erdogan. ⁦@POTUS⁩ warns him to not “be a tough guy! Don’t be a fool!” Says he could destroy Turkey’s economy if #Syria is not resolved in a humane way. Details tonight at 8pm #TrishRegan #FoxBusiness pic.twitter.com/9BoSGlbRyt

— Trish Regan (@trish_regan) October 16, 2019

The letter follows Erdogan's Wednesday refusal to speak with Vice President Mike Pence regarding a cease-fire agreement in Syria, after Trump said he would send Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to negotiate.  

Erdogan told Sky News, "I'm not going to talk to them. They will be talking to their counterparts. When Trump comes here, I'll be talking." National security advisor Robert O’Brien and the special representative for Syria, James Jeffrey, are also slated to be on the trip. 

Turkey's president @RTErdogan tells @AlexCrawfordSky he will not speak with the US Vice President about a ceasefire in Syria during his visit - adding that he will only talk to President @realDonaldTrump.


Follow the latest world news here: https://t.co/l50mLoSc4w pic.twitter.com/o5NjsNzt2r

— Sky News (@SkyNews) October 16, 2019

Perhaps the NSA / CIA / NSC and FBI will fill us in on the details of Trump's next call with the Turkish leader, which the White House will have to correct with a transcript. 

But alas on Monday the EU proved once again its position is too weak to act: "European Union countries committed on Monday to suspending arms exports to Turkey, but stopped short of the EU-wide arms embargo that France and Germany had sought," Reuters reported. “Member states commit to strong national positions regarding their arms export policy to Turkey,” EU foreign ministers said, stopping short of a Europe-wide weapons embargo.

Speaking to Deutsche Welle on Germany's imposed ban which took effect Saturday, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said any such move would “just strengthen us.” Not only does Ankara appear unfazed, also as Europe is likely to do nothing really of substance to halt the Turkish operation, it clearly has all the leverage. 

As one op-ed commented related to German Chancellor Angela Merkel's Sunday phone call demanding that Erdogan put an “immediate end” to 'Operation Peace Spring', why would he listen?... "After all, he has 3.6 million reasons not to."

Erdogan threatened last week, not for the first time: "Hey EU, wake up. I say it again: if you try to frame our operation there as an invasion, our task is simple: we will open the doors and send 3.6 million migrants to you," he said. 

Comparing even the tone of each side's rhetoric, European leaders are treating Erdogan with kid gloves, while his is full of bravado and very specific extreme threat of action. 

“We have a common desire that this offensive ends," French President Emmanuel Macron said alongside Merkel. "This offensive risks creating an unsustainable humanitarian situation.” And EU Council President Donald Tusk on Friday: “Turkey must understand that our main concern is that their actions may lead to another humanitarian catastrophe, which would be unacceptable.”

With 'threatening' words like "unacceptable" and empty threats of "dramatic consequences" with no follow through — no wonder Turkish leaders feel free to positively boast "this will just strengthen us". 

Erdogan's response strikes a tone of one who is holding all the cards:

“Are we allies in NATO or have you taken a terrorist organization into NATO, but we don’t know about it?” he told local channel NTV on Sunday. “Very weird approach. Are you with us or with the terrorists?”

But like with the migrant crisis which previously hit a peak in 2015, it is the right-wing and nationalist European parties that have picked up on Erdogan's blackmail attempts, and could stand to benefit, by perhaps being the only to fiercely push back. 

For example, the Foreign Policy Spokesman of Alternative for Germany party (AfD), Petr Bystron said Monday: “The EU pays Turkey €3 billion every year for the so-called Refugee Pact, while Recep Tayyip Erdogan still sends thousands of illegal migrants to the Greek isles and threatens to swamp Europe with even more.”

The AfD statement continued, “In addition, the EU will pay Turkey €9 billion between 2007 and 2020 for an EU accession nobody wants, while Turkey turns away ever more from the Western community and values.”

“The German taxpayer largely has to pay these astronomical sums, so the Turkish tyrant can maintain the largest military in Europe, make territorial claims against Greece, Syria and Iraq, and now wage a brutal war of aggression against Kurdish civilians in Northern Syria,” the statement added. “Germany and the EU must immediately halt all payments to Turkey and instead invest in our own border protection, or we will be guilty of supporting Turkey’s war crimes against the Kurds.”

However, we doubt EU leadership will do little more than impose a temporary arms embargo merely threaten "dramatic consequences" which will have little to no actual impact on NATO second largest military.  

But what's certain is that the trade war is in the beginning innings and nowhere near being resolved. Yes, there's a Phase 1 deal being floated around, but that's only for President Trump to save Midwest farmers and to create positive sentiment ahead of the 2020 election to pump the stock market. 

In reality, the trade war is a winner take all game, it's really about empire, and how Washington is attempting to prevent China from becoming the next global superpower. Hence the reason for tariffs, which is an attempt by President Trump, the Pentagon, and US corporate elites to limit China's ascension. 

The decoupling will be slow at first, then rapid. We're already seeing small to medium-sized Chinese companies being denied IPOs on Nasdaq. President Trump has already banned Haweui access to key US markets. And now, the next evidence that the decoupling is gaining momentum comes from the US Department Of The Interior. 

The Department has grounded its entire fleet of 800 drones for fear that Chinese hackers could spy on critical infrastructure, reported The Wall Street Journal.

"Secretary Bernhardt is reviewing the Department of the Interior's drone program. Until this review is completed, the Secretary has directed that drones manufactured in China or made from Chinese components be grounded unless they are currently being utilized for emergency purposes, such as fighting wildfires, search and rescue, and dealing with natural disasters that may threaten life or property," the Department told The Verge via an email statement. 

US officials worry that the Department is relying too heavily on Chinese drones and has put critical infrastructure at risk of being spied on by the Chinese. 

Last month a bipartisan bill was introduced that would limit federal agencies from purchasing Chinese drones. 

Several years ago, the Department of Homeland Security warned federal agencies from purchasing Chinese drones, specifically ones made by Shenzhen-based SZ DJI Technology Co., Ltd.

A DJI spokesperson told The Verge in a statement that the latest grounding of their drones by the Department Of The Interior is rather "disappointing." 

"We are aware the Department of Interior has decided to ground its entire drone program and are disappointed to learn of this development...As the leader in commercial drone technology, we have worked with the Department of Interior to create a safe and secure drone solution that meets their rigorous requirements, which was developed over the course of 15 months with DOI officials, independent cybersecurity professionals, and experts at NASA. We will continue to support the Department of Interior and provide assistance as it reviews its drone fleet so the agency can quickly resume the use of drones to help federal workers conduct vital operations," the DJI spokesperson said.

The Department's decision to ground Chinese drones is a clear trend of what's to come in the year ahead: more groundings across a wide array of agencies. 

Just wait until the groundings start hitting state and local municipalities and lower-level agencies. It's going to be a nightmare. 

Nevertheless, when the government starts banning certain Chinese products from consumers, you'll know the great decoupling between the US and China is imminent. 

For this to all happen, the Trump administration will need to ramp up Sinophobia propaganda to convince the American people that decoupling is the right move. 

Al-Tanf military base is strategically located in southeastern Syria on the border between Syria, Iraq and Jordan, and it straddles on a critically important Damascus-Baghdad highway, which serves as a lifeline for Damascus. Washington has illegally occupied 55-kilometer area around al-Tanf since 2016, and several hundred US Marines have trained several Syrian militant groups there.

It’s worth noting that rather than fighting the Islamic State, the purpose of continued presence of the US forces at al-Tanf military base is to address Israel’s concerns regarding the expansion of Iran’s influence in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

Regarding the oil- and natural gas-rich Deir al-Zor governorate, it’s worth pointing out that Syria used to produce modest quantities of oil for domestic needs before the war – roughly 400,000 barrels per day, which isn’t much compared to tens of millions barrels daily oil production in the Gulf states.

Although Donald Trump crowed in a characteristic blunt manner in a tweet after the withdrawal of 1,000 American troops from northern Syria that Washington had deployed forces in eastern Syria where there was oil, the purpose of exercising control over Syria’s oil is neither to smuggle oil out of Syria nor to deny the valuable source of revenue to the Islamic State.

There is no denying the fact that the remnants of the Islamic State militants are still found in Syria and Iraq but its emirate has been completely dismantled in the region and its leadership is on the run. So much so that the fugitive caliph of the terrorist organization was killed in the bastion of a rival jihadist outfit, al-Nusra Front in Idlib, hundreds of kilometers away from the Islamic State strongholds in eastern Syria.

Much like the “scorched earth” battle strategy of medieval warlords – as in the case of the Islamic State which early in the year burned crops of local farmers while retreating from its former strongholds in eastern Syria – Washington’s basic purpose in deploying the US forces in oil and natural gas fields of Deir al-Zor governorate is to deny the valuable source of income to its other main rival in the region, Damascus.

After the devastation caused by eight years of proxy war, the Syrian government is in dire need of tens of billions dollars international assistance to rebuild the country. Not only is Washington hampering efforts to provide international aid to the hapless country, it is in fact squatting over Syria’s own resources with the help of its only ally in the region, the Kurds.

Although Donald Trump claimed credit for expropriating Syria’s oil wealth, it bears mentioning that “scorched earth” policy is not a business strategy, it is the institutional logic of the deep state. President Trump is known to be a businessman and at least ostensibly follows a non-interventionist ideology; being a novice in the craft of international diplomacy, however, he has time and again been misled by the Pentagon and Washington’s national security establishment.

Regarding Washington’s interest in propping up the Gulf’s autocrats and fighting their wars in regional conflicts, it bears mentioning that in April 2016, the Saudi foreign minister threatened that the Saudi kingdom would sell up to $750 billion in treasury securities and other assets if the US Congress passed a bill that would allow Americans to sue the Saudi government in the United States courts for its role in the September 11, 2001 terror attack – though the bill was eventually passed, Saudi authorities have not been held accountable; even though 15 out of 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals.

Moreover, $750 billion is only the Saudi investment in the United States, if we add its investment in Western Europe and the investments of UAE, Kuwait and Qatar in the Western economies, the sum total would amount to trillions of dollars of Gulf’s investments in North America and Western Europe.

Furthermore, in order to bring home the significance of the Persian Gulf’s oil in the energy-starved industrialized world, here are a few stats from the OPEC data: Saudi Arabia has the world’s largest proven crude oil reserves of 265 billion barrels and its daily oil production exceeds 10 million barrels; Iran and Iraq, each, has 150 billion barrels reserves and has the capacity to produce 5 million barrels per day, each; while UAE and Kuwait, each, has 100 billion barrels reserves and produces 3 million barrels per day, each; thus, all the littoral states of the Persian Gulf, together, hold 788 billion barrels, more than half of world’s 1477 billion barrels of proven oil reserves.

No wonder then, 36,000 United States troops have currently been deployed in their numerous military bases and aircraft carriers in the oil-rich Persian Gulf in accordance with the Carter Doctrine of 1980, which states: “Let our position be absolutely clear: an attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.”

Additionally, regarding the Western defense production industry’s sales of arms to the Gulf Arab States, a report authored by William Hartung of the US-based Center for International Policy found that the Obama administration had offered Saudi Arabia more than $115 billion in weapons, military equipment and training during its eight-year tenure.

Similarly, the top items in Trump’s agenda for his maiden visit to Saudi Arabia in May 2017 were: firstly, he threw his weight behind the idea of the Saudi-led “Arab NATO” to counter Iran’s influence in the region; and secondly, he announced an unprecedented arms package for Saudi Arabia. The package included between $98 billion and $128 billion in arms sales.

Therefore, keeping the economic dependence of the Western countries on the Gulf Arab States in mind, during the times of global recession when most of manufacturing has been outsourced to China, it is not surprising that when the late King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia decided to provide training and arms to the Islamic jihadists in the border regions of Turkey and Jordan against the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, the Obama administration was left with no other choice but to toe the destructive policy of its regional Middle Eastern allies, despite the sectarian nature of the proxy war and its attendant consequences of breeding a new generation of Islamic jihadists who would become a long-term security risk not only to the Middle East but to the Western countries, as well.

Similarly, when King Abdullah’s successor King Salman decided, on the whim of the Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, to invade Yemen in March 2015, once again the Obama administration had to yield to the dictates of Saudi Arabia and UAE by fully coordinating the Gulf-led military campaign in Yemen not only by providing intelligence, planning and logistical support but also by selling billions of dollars’ worth of arms and ammunition to the Gulf Arab States during the conflict.

In this reciprocal relationship, the US provides security to the ruling families of the Gulf Arab states by providing weapons and troops; and in return, the Gulf’s petro-sheikhs contribute substantial investments to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars to the Western economies.

Regarding the Pax Americana which is the reality of the contemporary neocolonial order, according to a January 2017 infographic by the New York Times, 210,000 US military personnel were stationed all over the world, including 79,000 in Europe, 45,000 in Japan, 28,500 in South Korea and 36,000 in the Middle East.

Although Donald Trump keeps complaining that NATO must share the cost of deployment of US troops, particularly in Europe where 47,000 American troops are stationed in Germany since the end of the Second World War, 15,000 in Italy and 8,000 in the United Kingdom, fact of the matter is that the cost is already shared between Washington and host countries.

Roughly, European countries pay one-third of the cost for maintaining US military bases in Europe whereas Washington chips in the remaining two-third. In the Far Eastern countries, 75% of the cost for the deployment of American troops is shared by Japan and the remaining 25% by Washington, and in South Korea, 40% cost is shared by the host country and the US contributes the remaining 60%.

Whereas the oil-rich Gulf Cooperation Countries (GCC) – Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait and Qatar – pay two-third of the cost for maintaining 36,000 US troops in the Persian Gulf where more than half of world’s proven oil reserves are located and Washington contributes the remaining one-third.

*  *  *

Nauman Sadiq is an Islamabad-based attorney, columnist and geopolitical analyst focused on the politics of Af-Pak and Middle East regions, neocolonialism and petro-imperialism.