Sorry, this entry is only available in Bulgarian.
On April 9, 2018 president Trump will have a new national security adviser named John Bolton. While he is fairly well-known in America, he remains largely unknown outside of it, but this will change quickly. The reason for this is his staunch conservatism that has already driven the traditionally left-wing, American foreign-policy establishment apoplectic since Trump’s announcement of his appointment and he has already been called everything from ‘war monger’ to ‘dangerous’ on the pages of the New York Times and elsewhere. His main sin seems to be his preference for straight talk and unapologetic defense of American national interests, as well as his dismissal of Obama’s policies as “weak and feckless.” Apart from that, he is taken to task by the establishment’s bien pensants for calling the
Here is a short press release on PPF Group’s acquisitions in the Telcos on Monte Negro, Serbia, Hungary and Bulgaria – to be followed by subsequent acquisitions in media. All of these 4 countries are https://www.ppf.eu/en/press-releases/ppf-group-buys-telenors-telecommunications-assets-in-cee-countries It takes only few clicks on the net to ascertain the close relationship between Petr Kellner and the pro-Russian president Zeman, as well as the Czech businessman’s exposure in and with Russian firms, including to vet ties to VTB (Home Credit). There is a 100 per cent proven lithmus test – anyone doing business in Russia at the moment in strategic sectors has a rubber stamp of loyalty to Kremlin. Vladimir Putin raises the stakes and elevates his game against the West to new heights. US and EU sanctions have severly
A quick snap analysis on the likely outcome of the UK’s National Security Council meeting, presided by British PM Theresa May, today regarding sanctions on Russia, leads to grim conclusion and more than a wartime rhetoric. This is probably the most evident proof of the weakened geopolitical posture of Britain following the Brexit. While NATO’s coordinated response – Britain can still invoke article 5 – is still the first and preferred option – EU’s coordination is essential as effective responses lie beyond the military spectrum – in what hurts Putin most – money and image. A boycott of the Moscow World Cup seems almost inevitable. I can’t simply see England’s team playing soccer at the Luzhniki pretending business is as usual. If they leave – other’s will follow
– What is fundamentally new with the new round of US sanctions – scope or impact? How far are secondary sanctions likely to reach given the less than warm welcome for US sanctions in parts of the EU? – Politically and psychologically the most fundamental is Section 242 – personal sanctions against top Russian political/business figures. As for secondary sanctions European companies will be bound to take them into account, otherwise they will be automatically punished financially by losing their contracts. – We understand apart from Russian companies and individuals, there are Ukrainian and Polish companies? How likely is that more CEE partners of Russian companies could join the list notably if they continue business as usual with Russian state companies? What will be the effect on Nord
The article first published in americanthinker.com on 01/15/2018. President Trump’s threat to cut US assistance to Pakistan because of its duplicitous policies has elicited relatively few angry denunciations from the normally unhinged Trump haters in the foreign-policy establishment. They have been limited to accusations of endangering American soldiers in Afghanistan because of lack of logistic alternatives to Pakistan. This essentially implies that the current failed and counter-productive policies are preferable to Trump’s calls for change. To understand why this is a recipe for continued failure in which the Pakistani people are the main victims some history is in order. Ever since its violent separation from India in 1947, Pakistan has been an army with a state attached to it. Its quarrel with India, a vastly more powerful state, became a
In 1974, economist Arthur Laffer in making the argument for cutting taxes to top Ford Administration officials (Dick Chaney and Donald Rumsfeld) drew on a restaurant napkin a curve showing that at low rates of taxation the government could receive greater revenues, while at higher rates it received progressively less going to zero at a 100% tax rate. This then became famous as the basis of President Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts when he slashed taxes from a top marginal rate of 70% to 28%. True to the Laffer Curve, government revenues increased from $517 billion in 1980 to $909 billion in 1988, even though the population had grown by only 10%. Laffer also popularized what became known as ‘dynamic’ scoring, which took into account changes in taxpayer and business