France Spies on Lebanon’s Internet
Al-Manar | April 2, 2016
Al-Akhbar newspaper revealed that France has been involved in spying on the internet cable that transmits the cyber services from the French city of Marseille to Lebanon, passing through Egypt.
The Lebanese daily explained that the French intelligence services monitor all the telecommunications operated in Lebanon, knowing that Orange company that is very close to the Zionist entity also supervises the entire process.
Accordingly, the experts urged the Lebanese to take extreme cyber security measures to secure their telecommunication activities.
Report: 647 Palestinians arrested in March; 750 now held in administrative detention
samidoun – Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network | April 1, 2016
Four prisoners’ advocacy organizations in Palestine (Palestinian Prisoners’ Society, Addameer Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association, Prisoners Affairs Commission and Al Mezan Center for Human Rights – Gaza) issued a report on Israeli occupation arrests and imprisonment of Palestinians in March 2016. The following is a translation of their report:
647 Palestinians were arrested in the West Bank and Gaza in March 2016, including 128 children and 16 women and girls. This raises the number of arrests since the beginning of the popular uprising in October 2015 to more than 4,767 Palestinians arrested.
The highest number of arrests was in Jerusalem area, with 149 arrests, followed by 110 in Al-Khalil, 88 in Jenin, 87 in Ramallah, 63 in Bethlehem, 62 in Nablus, 30 in Qalqilya, 24 in Tulkarem, 10 in Jericho, 10 in Tubas, 9 in Salfit and 5 from the Gaza Strip.
192 administrative detention orders were issued in March; 95 of those were new orders and 97 of them were renewals of previous administrative detention orders. There are now over 750 Palestinians held without charge or trial under administrative detention in Israeli jails.
There are 68 women and girls imprisoned in Israeli jails, 18 of whom are girls under 18, including the youngest prisoner, Dima Wawi, who is 12 years old. There are over 400 child prisoners in Israeli jails, and 700 ill prisoners.
Repression of Journalists
Over seven Palestinian journalists have been arrested since the beginning of 2016; the offices of satellite channel Palestine Today and Trans Media company were closed by occupation soldiers at dawn in Ramallah on Friday, 11 March. Their equipment was confiscated and bureau chief Farouk Elayyat and journalist Mohammed Amer and camera operator Shabib Shabib were arrested; Amer and Shabib were released after interrogation. On 13 March, journalist Ibrahim Jaradat, also with Palestine Today, was arrested at a mobile military checkpoint. After 20 days of imprisonment, Elayyat and Jaradat were released on 31 March on bail of 2,000 NIS each. Journalist Musab Kufaisheh, 24, was arrested in March as was Mohammed Zaghloul, radio presenter.
Under pressure from the Occupying Power, the French satellite, Eutelsat, removed Palestinian channel Al-Aqsa TV from its broadcast on charges of “incitement.” Palestinian journalists inside Palestine received threats stating that they are under surveillance and threats to “Israeli security.”
The Israeli occupation in November 2015 closed Radio Al-Khalil and Radio Dreams; these closures by occupation forces against media organizations and the ongoing harassment of Palestinian journalists is a continuation of the occupation policy of repressing Palestinians’ expression of their cause and the crimes of the occupation before the world. The occupation is persecuting Palestinian human rights defenders and journalists in an attempt to empty the media and human rights organizations of experienced voices and silence their work, obscure the reality of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by occupation forces against Palestinian civilians.
Administrative and military actions by the occupation forces against Palestinian journalists and human rights defenders violate international humanitarian law and serve only the purpose of attempting to intimidate Palestinian civilians and pushing them to give up their rinalienable rights. The arrest of journalist violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. The organizations call on the international community to work and take action to stop these violations.
There are currently 16 Palestinian journalists imprisoned; the longest imprisoned journalist is Mahmoud Issa, serving a life sentence, who was a reporter before his arrest in 1993.
Hunger Strikes in Israeli Prisons
During March a number of prisons engaged in open hunger strikes for various periods against administrative detention without charge or trial, and against solitary confinement, including Yazan Hanani of Beit Furik, Nablus; Daoud Habboub of Ramallah; Mahmoud Al-Fasfous; Alaa Rayyan; and Karam Amer.
Other prisoners are continuing their hunger strikes against administrative detention: Sami Janazrah, Imad Batran, Abdel-Rahim Sawayfeh and Abdul-Ghani Safadi.
Abdullah al-Mughrabi, Nahar al-Saadi, Issam Zeineddine are on hunger strike against solitary confinement, as was Zaid Bseisi. Mohammed Daoud of Dheisheh refugee camp near Bethlehem has launched a hunger strike against his re-imprisonment after his release in the Wafa al-Ahrar prisoner exchange.
Arrest and imprisonment for Facebook posts
The Israeli government has, in recent months, formed a so called “cyber unit” in order to surveil, investigate and prosecute Palestinian social media use, in particular focusing on Facebook. Since October 2015 through mid-March, 148 Palestinians have been arrested due to Facebook posts, with many charged with “incitement;” others have been ordered to administrative detention without charge.
These arrests have focused especially on Jerusalem, and in many cases come in response to written statements of solidarity or support for Palestinian martyrs or prisoners, including publishing their photos. This attempt to suppress Palestinian expression on social media has not only been carried out through arrests and imprisonment, but also official attempts to force Palestinian youth, especially in Jerusalem and Occupied Palestine ’48, to be fired from their jobs over Facebook posts, or forcible transfer them from their homes, especially in Jerusalem.
Donya Musleh, 19, a student at Palestine National University, was arrested on 15 November 2015. Her home in Dheisheh camp was invaded by occupation soldiers and ransacked. She is a student activist, but the military court indictment against her was composed of three items, all of which related to Facebook postings, including comments on photos of wounded and killed Palestinians.
The Israeli indictment in the military courts stated that Musleh published a photo of a Palestinian demonstrator throwing stones with lines of Palestinian poetry about stones; the same indictment said that she published a photo of Moataz Zawahreh, Palestinian youth activist shot dead in Dheisheh while attending a demonstration, again with lines of poetry.
She was also accused of membership in a prohibited organization for posting photos of Palestinian martyrs who were part of the same political party, and on the basis of these postings accused of membership in the organization. The indictment also noted that she received numerous “Likes” on Facebook. The military court held that she “encouraged Palestinians to carry out operations against the security of Israel” by these facebook postings which “disturb public order.”
192 administrative detention orders in March
192 administrative detention orders were issued in March by the Israeli military, including 95 new orders, including orders against two women, six children, two members of the Palestinian Legislative Council and a journalist.
Among the most prominent cases of administrative detention in March were those of Mohammed Amarneh, 17 of Jenin, and Hamza Hammad, 15 of Silwad near Ramallah, ordered imprisoned without charge or trial.
Amarneh was interrogated and denied all accusations, yet administrative detention was used to arbitrarily imprison him. On 16 March 2016 an administrative detention order against him for three months was imposed by the occupation military court, alleging that he is a danger to the security of the area. When inquired as to the specifics by Amarneh’s lawyer, references were made to his Facebook account despite the admission of the prosecution that there was no evidence of any particular Facebook post.
Hammad, 15, was ordered to administrative detention for six months. He was earlier arrested in August 2015 and interrogated for 23 days, during which he was interrogated for lengthy periods and beaten, and was released without indictment. When he was arrested, the soldier arresting him told his mother that he “should be in prison” because his father, Mo’ayyad Hammad is serving a life sentence in Israeli jails, accused of participating in the Palestinian resistance and killing soldiers.
Arrests of Palestinians from Gaza
In March 2016, five Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, including three ill patients seeking treatment, were arrested. One of these was Fadi Al-Sharif, 28, a Palestinian football player with the Al-Hilal Football Club in Gaza City, arrested at Beit Hanoun crossing; he had been issued a permit for treatment at Al-Makassed hospital in East Jerusalem. He was then arrested when attempting to return to Gaza. These arrests came as part of the continuing land and sea blockade on Gaza imposed by the occupation, and its absolute authority over borders and the waters of Gaza, depriving the population of basic human rights. The Beit Hanoun/Erez crossing is used as a trap to arrest Palestinians, especially those who are ill. Palestinians’ need to travel through the crossing is exploited, including being issued a permit to pass and then being detained when arriving at the crossing. In addition, ill people in Gaza are vulnerable to deteriorating health conditions caused by procrastination and delays by occupation forces in requests for permits.
Photo: Tal King (Archive photo)
Russia, Turkey to Build Monuments Honoring Each Other’s Fallen Soldiers
Sputnik – April 2, 2016
The Turkish government has agreed to restore the historic San Stefano Russian monument in Istanbul, Hurriyet Daily News reported.
According to the newspaper, the Turkish parliament’s national defense commission said it would build the monument to commemorate fallen Russian soldiers in return for the construction of five similar monuments in Russia.
The agreement was initially discussed in 2012 and now it would be brought back up at the Turkish parliament. According to the 2012 document, the two countries decided to honor soldiers who died during historic wars on each other’s soil.
The San Stefano monument in Istanbul was initially built at the end of the 19th Century to commemorate 15,000 Russian soldiers who died on Turkish soil during the 1877-1878 Russo-Ottoman war.
However, in 1914 Turkey decided to demolish the monument, calling it a “national shame,” according to the source.
The demolition of the Russian commemorative monument in San Stefano in November 1914 © Wikipedia/ Fuat Uzkınay
Hurriyet also informed that a special joint commission will be set up to discover soldiers’ grave sites in both Turkey and Russia and to help oversee the application of the 2012 treaty.
Relations between Moscow and Ankara have been strained after the Turkish Air Force shot down a Russian bomber above Syria in November 2015, resulting in the death of a Russian pilot. Will the mutual agreement to commemorate each other’s soldiers be the first step to warm relations between the two countries?
The Disappearance of Hillary Clinton’s Healthcare Platform
By Benjamin Day | Common Dreams | March 30, 2016
What would happen if the media lifted the curtain on Clinton’s healthcare platform and introduced any level of scrutiny to her proposed improvements on the Affordable Care Act?
In an extraordinary magic trick, performed on a national scale, Hillary Clinton’s healthcare platform has been disappeared. While policy analysts, news anchors, and columnists have been engaged in an intense debate over Bernie Sanders’s “Medicare for All” proposal, Clinton’s incremental alternative has escaped almost all scrutiny – even among those who say they prefer it.
Combining the election-season writings of our most prolific, liberal-leaning columnists at the New York Times, Huffington Post, Vox, Mother Jones, Politico, The American Prospect, etc. you’ll find dozens of articles critiquing Sanders’s single-payer plan. None have mentioned a single Clinton healthcare proposal as a point of comparison – merely that she supports a philosphy of incremental reform.
Take Paul Krugman, a high-profile advocate of Clinton’s approach to healthcare reform. Krugman has published two op-eds in the New York Times and five additional blog posts arguing that “[progressives] should seek incremental change on health care… and focus their main efforts on other issues – that is… Bernie Sanders is wrong about this and Hillary Clinton is right.” In all seven pieces, Krugman focuses exclusively on Sanders’s single-payer proposal and fails to mention even a single Clinton policy.
The disappearance of the Clinton healthcare platform has even been carried out by pollsters. The Kaiser Health Tracking Survey included a bizarre question in its February 2016 poll, which was widely cited in the press. Respondents were asked to pick one of four possible directions for the future of U.S. healthcare. Among the choices were “The U.S. should establish guaranteed universal coverage through a single government plan” and “Lawmakers should build on the existing health care law to improve affordability and access to care.” Thirty-three percent of Democrats chose the single-payer option, while fifty-four percent chose the incremental option. The questions were clearly intended as stand-ins for the Sanders and Clinton healthcare proposals, but note that the single-payer option is a policy, whereas the incremental option mentions no actual policies, but asks respondents whether they support the (universally desirable) outcomes of improving affordability and access.
What would happen if the media lifted the curtain on Clinton’s healthcare platform and introduced any level of scrutiny to her proposed improvements on the Affordable Care Act? They would find two categories of Clinton proposals: some that are so vague they’re difficult to evaluate, and other more concrete plans that follow in the footsteps of one of Congress’s most practiced healthcare incrementalists: Senator Bernie Sanders.
For example, one of Clinton’s clearest incremental proposals is to repeal the Affordable Care Act’s poorly named “cadillac tax” on health plans with high premiums. She announced this proposal on September 29, drawing the ire of White House spokespeople. The move, however, followed in the footsteps of a Senate bill to repeal the Cadillac tax introduced by Bernie Sanders and seven Democratic Senators just a few days previously on September 24. Clinton’s position was correctly seen by reporters as necessary if she didn’t want to lose labor union support to Sanders.
“Because Clinton’s healthcare platform has received zero public scrutiny, she has had the luxury of floating other policy ideas in broad outlines, too vague to evaluate.”Many of Clinton’s well-defined healthcare proposals are rolled into a package of prescription drug reforms, which she released on September 22, 2015. They bear a striking resemblance to the Sanders prescription drug plan announced on September 1, filed as legislation on September 10. Both would legalize importation of prescription drugs from Canada, where costs for identical drugs are much lower due to Canada’s single-payer healthcare system. Sanders was a pioneer of importation, and in 1999 started driving busloads of American patients who couldn’t afford breast cancer drugs across the Canadian border. Both candidates call for empowering Medicare to negotiate drug prices – even Donald Trump jumped on board in January. Both would ban “pay-for-delay” deals between brand-name and generic drug makers, and increase prescription drug rebates for Medicaid and/or Medicare.
Because Clinton’s healthcare platform has received zero public scrutiny, she has had the luxury of floating other policy ideas in broad outlines, too vague to evaluate. Take the proposal to expand the use of Accountable Care Organizations. How? According to Clinton’s December policy brief: “In the coming months, [Clinton] will provide full detail on her plans for delivery system reforms that drive down costs.” With the primaries drawing to a close, no such details have been released. The same could be said of another proposal to “create a fallback process” to review insurance premium rate hikes in states that don’t already review rates. There has been no explanation of how such a plan would work, or whether it would require new legislation.
This is the double standard at work in almost all national coverage of Clinton and Sanders on healthcare reform: Clinton has been taken at her word that her incremental plans will be politically feasible, succeed in improving affordability and access to care, and are not shared by her opponent. Sanders on the other hand received intense public pressure to release details of his single-payer healthcare proposal, and when he did the proposal was subject to an avalanche of public analysis and scrutiny.
This double standard is all the more remarkable because single-payer healthcare is an established policy, practiced in one form or another in almost every developed nation in the world. Incremental reforms that work within the market-based healthcare system of the U.S. are far more uncertain, and deserve greater scrutiny. They are easier to enact but dramatically more likely to fall short of their goals. This is because incremental reforms in the United States usually focus on expanding access to care, without significant cost controls, in order to avoid opposition from the healthcare industry. The resulting policies are often unsustainable; make little headway against national trends of rising costs and eroding access; or simply move costs around (e.g. from premiums to deductibles and co-payments, or vice versa).
Previous national trends in incremental healthcare reform – from managed care through pharmacy benefit management, chronic disease management, narrow networks, and beyond – have often created lucrative new industries, but had dubious impacts on underlying healthcare costs or access to care. Most of Clinton’s healthcare platform falls exactly into these danger zones, and should be received with a critical eye.
The national discussion of single-payer healthcare reform is long overdue. However, when the full range of national media outlets force one candidate to run on real policies, while allowing another to run on values and aspirations, we aren’t having a real discussion of systemic vs. incremental reform, we are merely aiding the corrosion of informed democracy.
Benjamin Day is the Executive Director of Healthcare-NOW.
White House to Syrians: Don’t Dare Vote For Assad!
By Daniel McAdams | Ron Paul Institute | March 30, 2016
US backing for the overthrow of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad was supposed to be all about democracy. As Washington tells it, the people took to the street demanding democratic reforms and Assad did not listen, so he lost his legitimacy and needed to be overthrown. The US helped facilitate that overthrow by shipping in tons of weapons (much of which ended up in the hands of al-Qaeda and ISIS).
What Syrians were supposed to get in Assad’s place was a bright new future where they could vote for whoever they pleased to lead their government. That is what Washington told us was the noble goal of its regime change operation in Syria.
But just as in other US “democratization” operations overseas, that turns out to be not the case at all.
Syrians are free to choose their leaders as long as they choose the leaders Washington has chosen for them.
Over and over again the White House has reiterated its position that the Syrian people are forbidden from choosing Assad as their president after ISIS and al-Qaeda are defeated. The latest example of Washington’s anti-democratic “democracy promotion” came today, after Assad signaled his flexibility in forming a transitional government that might include the opposition, independents, and loyalists.
Obama’s spokesman flatly rejected any such proposal, saying, “I don’t know whether (Assad) envisioned himself being a part of that national unity government. Obviously that would be a non-starter for us.”
So Syrians, your “democracy” is being given to you by a United States deeply opposed to the idea of allowing any vote that is not pre-approved by Washington’s regime-changers.
Shorter Washington to Syrian people: “OK, you can vote, but we will hand you the approved candidate list.”
Hmmm…don’t they do that in US-condemned Iran?
Pakistan and Saudi Arabia: the Balance of Relations
By Natalya Zamarayeva – New Eastern Outlook – 01.04.2016
For the second time in 2016, Pakistani Prime Minister, Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, paid an official visit to Riyadh in March. He took part in the closing ceremony of the Northern Thunder military exercise in the Saudi desert. The intensity of the visits is dictated by the importance of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) in the foreign policy of Pakistan, as well as the need to maintain a balanced approach to the countries of the region as a whole, given the recent intensification of relations with Iran. It is noteworthy that it is also the second time that the Prime Minister was accompanied by Chief of Army Staff, General Raheel Sharif on a foreign trip to the KSA. Much remains yet to be clarified.
Military contacts between Islamabad and Riyadh have been maintained for several decades. The first bilateral agreements were signed back in the 60’s; in the 80’s, two teams of Pakistani ground troops were stationed in Saudi Arabia. In recent years, the commands of the two capitals hold annual joint military exercises, for example, Al Shihab-1 in 2015.
Despite the significant financial support from the KSA of social, economic, military and other projects in Pakistan, the relationship between the royal dynasty and the military and civil administration of Islamabad were not always smooth. The most recent failure occurred in March 2016. The royal family appealed to the Prime Minister, N. Sharif (and he publicly promised) to post part of the Pakistani army in the zone of military conflict in Yemen against Huthis Shiite in support of the KSA. But after ten days under the pretext of protecting only the holy places, the National Assembly of Pakistan (the lower house of parliament) refused. The Pakistani media wrote about a certain pressure the generals applied to parliamentarians.
The latest of Riyadh’s military appeals to Islamabad, announced in December 2015 as part of an alliance of 34 countries to combat the terrorist threat in the region, once again caused a lot of questions from the military leadership of Pakistan, as well as Malaysia and Lebanon about the goals and objectives of the new military campaign, the place and role of each participating country. For a long time, issues remained unclear related to the operational strategy, antiterrorist working methods, management, control and composition of the proposed cooperation. For two months, Islamabad did not comment. Sharif’s visit to Riyadh in March lifted the veil. According to the Pakistani media, Rawalpindi (the location of the Army headquarters) plans for its participation to include the exchange of intelligence information, the supply of military equipment and the development of counter-extremist propaganda.
Pakistan once again refused to participate in the armed conflict, putting forward several arguments: first, the reluctance to get involved in a so-called “foreign” war; secondly, the desire to avoid the explosion of separatist and sectarian movements within Pakistan; and thirdly, that new and promising markets (Iran) and possibilities are opening up, given the recent geopolitical developments in the region.
In the February issue of this year’s Pakistani military magazine Hilal, the author of the article entitled ‘Balanced Approach Towards the Middle East’ underlines the importance as never before, of the diplomatic efforts to solve the “raging” conflicts. It’s hard not to agree with Mr. Masood Khan and his statement: “it is not clear, in which direction the Middle East will move in 2016 … fine balancing is required … in order to prevent a major war in the region, protect our interests and save Pakistan from sectarian faults.” Thus, in contradiction to the centrifugal tendencies conducted by KSA in the vast region, Pakistan, on the contrary, promotes and supports centripetal forces. Its policy of non-participation in armed conflict puts obstacles in the way of splits, the formation of secessionist movements and / or fragmentation of its territory. Islamabad experienced the disease of separatism in 1971, allowing the separation of the Eastern Province and the proclamation of the independent Republic of Bangladesh on the territory in 1973.
At the same time, Pakistan is aware of the need to preserve traditional solidarity with the Saudi royal family, yet maintain that the time of its leadership in the region is in the past.
Islamabad is opening itself to radically new transnational projects of the 21st century in the region. Islamabad regards rapprochement with Tehran as a positive direction, despite the fact that, in general, Teheran’s step towards the Western world has made the region “feverish” (in the words of Mr. Masood Khan). In February 2016, Pakistan also lifted sanctions against Iran, supporting the decision of the “Six” (the permanent UN Security Council members and Germany). In addition to the prospective energy and hydrocarbon supplies to the country, Pakistan is set to earn a huge profit by using its strategic geographical position. The area will act as a transport bridge from the Chinese border and further to Central Asia, Iran, and then to the West under the revived China’s Silk Road project (one belt – one road). In February 2016, Beijing and Tehran signed a series of agreements.
Despite the fact that in January 2016 the Minister of Defense of the KSA rejected the mediation efforts of Pakistan in resolving the crisis with Iran (after the rift in diplomatic relations in early January 2016), Islamabad, for various reasons, remains one of Riyadh’s few opportunities to maintain civilized dialogue with Tehran and to stabilize the situation in the region.
The position of neutrality, which Pakistan upholds, and above all, the Army generals (given that the Pakistani army is one of the strongest in the region), is a guarantee their own security.
At the same time, the Northern Thunder military exercise (participated in by 21 states), led by the KSA, is a kind of demonstration of military force of the Sunni wing of Islam to the Shiites, in particular the leadership of Iran and the Yemeni Huthis.
The non-interference policy of a number of states in the region, in particular, Islamabad, is a deterrent to the further military ambitions of the new leaders of the Saudi dynasty and thus counteracts the emerging destabilization mechanisms. The Middle East will not sustain another armed conflict.
Natalia Zamaraeva, Ph.D (History), Senior Research Fellow, Pakistan section, Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Colombia: ‘Armed Strike’ Forced on Residents by Paramilitaries
teleSUR – April 1, 2016
As the possibility of a peace deal is becoming more certain, a surge of paramilitary violence in the country raises concerns of lasting peace.
In what’s being called an “armed strike” the Usuga Clan, a nacro-paramilitary outfit, ordered local residents in three northern departments in Colombia to stop all their activities for two days. Flyers distributed beforehand threatened them with retaliation if they dared to leave their homes.
They also forced local shops to shut down and intimidated children not to go to school, while blocking roads and rivers, said Colombia’s Ombudsman Alfonso Cajiao.
In the department of Sucre, education centers were shut down and two people were assassinated since the beginning of the forced strike, reported a local organization.
An assassination attempt on human rights activist and ex-senator Piedad Cordoba Friday is believed to be the work of paramilitaries. The Usuga Clan also killed a policeman and a military officer Thursday. Both officers were unarmed and dressed as civilians when they were killed.
President Juan Manuel Santos strongly condemned what he called a “criminal group” in a press conference.
“I insist that the Usuga Clan is a criminal organization, and will not be granted any political treatment. I can only recommend that they hand themselves over to the country’s justice,” he added, reporting that security forces arrested 56 members belonging to the armed group Friday, who were allegedly intimidating the local population on social media and in the streets.
The armed strike comes as various far-right sectors and paramilitary groups are calling for a national mobilization Saturday to protest against the peace deal currently being negotiated between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia in Havana.
On Thursday, far-right leader and ex-president Alvaro Uribe, criticized the peace deal, saying the deal was “not a peace deal, it is an impunity deal,” in an interview with the Spanish-based journal, ABC.
“The agreement could end up sending to prison all those who fought terrorism,” he dramatically warned, denying any form of state terrorism or paramilitary violence like the scandal of “false positives” carried out during his presidency.
As the agreement is gets closer, a surge of paramilitary violence has also raised concerns among progressive sectors and activists in the country who fear that the Colombian state will be unable to guarantee their security even after the peace deal is signed.
As Saudi and Allies Bombard Yemen US Clocks up $33 Billion Arms Sales in Eleven Months
By Felicity Arbuthnot | Dissident Voice | April 1, 2016
Sometimes even to the most towering cynic, American hypocrisy is more than breathtaking.
As they lambast their latest “despot”, Syria’s President al-Assad — a man so popular in his country and the region that the US Embassy in Damascu had, by the end of 2006, devised a plan to oust him — arms sales to countries where human rights are not even a glimmer on the horizon have for the US (and UK) become an eye watering bonanza.
The latest jaw dropper, as Saudi Arabia continues to bombard Yemen with US and UK armaments dropped by US and UK-made aircraft, is sales worth $33 Billion in just eleven months to the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) according to Defense News.
The GCC, a political and economic alliance of six Middle East countries, comprises of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman. It was established in the Saudi Capital, Riyadh, in May 1981.
Weapons sold to the alliance since May 2015 have included: “… ballistic missile defense capabilities, attack helicopters, advanced frigates and anti-armor missiles, according to David McKeeby, a spokesman for the State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs.”
“In addition, the U.S. government and industry also delivered 4,500 precision-guided munitions to the GCC countries in 2015, including 1,500 taken directly from U.S. military stocks – a significant action given our military’s own needs,” he added, stressing: “that the US government would like to continue to strengthen partnerships with Kuwait and Qatar through defense sales and other security cooperation activities.”
A metaphor for our times that “partnerships” are “strengthened” with lethal weapons, not in trade of goods, foods, medical, educational or intellectual exchanges.
A fly or two in the oil of the wheels of the US arms trade is the two year delay in approval of sales 40 F/A-18 Super Hornets to Kuwait and Qatar and also 72 F-15 Silent Eagles to Qatar.
Suspicion has been voiced that this has something to do with a pending US-Israel military financing deal, a suggestion emphatically denied by Washington.
In the meantime as Yemen continues to be blitzed, with the UN stating that eighty percent of the population are in need of humanitarian assistance, 2-4 million are displaced and approaching four thousand dead.
It seems Saudi and its allies have more than enough ordinance to continue the slaughter and more than enough US and UK military advisors to help them in the decimation.
Felicity Arbuthnot is a journalist with special knowledge of Iraq. Author, with Nikki van der Gaag, of Baghdad in the Great City series for World Almanac books, she has also been Senior Researcher for two Award winning documentaries on Iraq, John Pilger’s Paying the Price: Killing the Children of Iraq and Denis Halliday Returns for RTE (Ireland.)