Turkey reboots Arab Spring with Palestinian resistance
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | August 26, 2020
Turkey has made its first move on the regional chessboard after the recent deal between the UAE and Israel, when on August 22, President Recep Erdogan received in Istanbul a high-level delegation of the Palestinian resistance group Hamas, including its leader Ismail Haniyeh and deputy leader Saleh al-Arouri.
Also present at the meeting held behind closed doors at Istanbul’s Vahdettin Palace were the head of Turkey’s intelligence service, Hakan Fidan and two key aides of Erdogan — the communications director Fahrettin Altun and the presidential spokesman, Ibrahim Kalin.
The symbolism of the event is profound. The US state department has designated Ismail Haniyeh and Saleh al-Arouri as terrorists and has placed a $5 million bounty on their heads. And, of course, Turkey’s links with Hamas has been a sore point with Israel and it strained the traditionally close relations between the two countries to near breaking point in the recent decade.
Meanwhile, Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood with which Turkey’s ruling Islamist party has ideological affinity but which the Emirati regime regards as existential enemy.
To be sure, Erdogan has made a calculated move after reading the tea leaves that one of the objectives behind the US-sponsored deal between the UAE and Israel is the creation of a new regional order even as American retrenchment from the region may have already begun in the Middle East.
Erdogan estimates that the main target of the UAE-Israel deal is Turkey. He had spotted the UAE as an active participant in the US-led failed coup attempt in 2016 aimed at overthrowing his government. He is also acutely conscious that the US, Israel and the UAE are aligned with the separatist Kurdish groups.
Turkey and the UAE are promoting opposite sides in the Libyan conflict and recently, the UAE has begun cozying up to Greece against the backdrop of rising tensions between Greece and Turkey in the Eastern Mediterranean. (UAE fighter jets are currently participating in a training exercise in Greece.)
The US State Department has lashed out at Erdogan for his meeting with Hamas leaders. But within hours, Ankara hit back. In a furious rejoinder, the Turkish Foreign Ministry rebuked Washington for questioning the legitimacy of Hamas, “which has come to power in Gaza through democratic elections and which constitutes an important reality of the region.”
Alluding to the US policies, the Turkish statement went on to say, “Moreover, a country which openly supports the PKK, that features on their list of terrorist organisations and hosts the ringleader of the FETO (group led by Islamist preacher Fetullah Gulen) has no right whatsoever to say anything to third countries on this subject.”
Lamenting that the US “has isolated itself from the realities of our region,” the Turkish statement urged the US to change course and “sincerely work towards the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the basis of international law, justice and equity by pursuing balanced policies, instead of using its power and influence in the region to serve the interests of Israel rather exclusively.”
To be sure, Erdogan has a game plan in defiantly flaunting his relationship with Hamas at this juncture. In the Turkish reckoning, the UAE-Israel agreement, with US backing, aims to create new facts on the ground in the Middle East, which takes the form of unimpeded telecoms, travel and recognition between Israel and its richest Gulf neighbours, but completely bypassing the Palestinian problem and blithely assuming that it is a matter of time before the Palestinian leadership would wave the white flag of surrender.
On the contrary, Turkey shares the assessment of most independent regional observers (and perceptive western analysts) that the Palestinians who have held out for seven decades are in no mood to surrender abandoning their political rights. Indeed, the Palestinian popular resistance is showing no signs of fatigue. The Palestinian leaders have used very strong language to condemn the UAE regime. The wave of anger is fuelled by a deep sense of betrayal by prince Mohammed bin Zayed.
This anger is prompting Fatah and Hamas, who have been bitter rivals since the 2007 civil war in Gaza, to close ranks and discuss the need for joint political action. Mahmud Abbas who was unwilling to accept any partners in the governance of Palestine is today open to working with Hamas. Last week, Jibril Rajoub, general secretary of Fatah, shared a platform with Saleh Arouri, deputy head of Hamas, signalling that the rapprochement is gaining momentum.
If the Emirati calculation was to promote exiled Palestinian leader Mohammed Dahlan (who lives in Abu Dhabi) as the next Palestinian President in a near future with the backing of Arab states and Israel, that project has crash-landed. Dahlan can no longer exploit the rivalry between Fatah and Hamas. The effigies of Dahlan and Emirati crown prince bin Zayed were burned side by side in Ramallah last week.
Turkey senses a potential breakthrough in regional politics insofar as the Arab population at large shares the anger and resentment of the Palestinian people at the betrayal by bin Zayed. According to the Arab Opinion Index conducted by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies in Doha, if 84 percent of Arab opinion had opposed any diplomatic recognition of Israel in 2011, that has since increased to 87 percent by 2018.
In this turbulent regional milieu, Erdogan hopes to bring about a fusion between the Arab world’s sympathy and support for the demands of the Palestinians for sovereignty and their own search for democracy and liberation from their autocratic rulers. This has been his dream project all along — creation of a New Middle East that gets rid of the medieval oligarchies and replaces them with representative rule based on democratic principles and empowerment of the people.
In the downstream of the Emirati ruler’s deal with Israel, Erdogan strides like a Colossus on the Arab street and his meeting with the leadership of Hamas in Istanbul proclaims a common struggle against the despots and oligarchs who suppress democracy and have exercised cruel tyranny over their people across the region. In Erdogan’s calculus, bin Zayed’s contempt for Arab democracy and Netanyahu’s trampling of Palestinian rights are two sides of the same coin.
Erdogan visualises that the UAE-Israel agreement is built on sand and it is bound to crumble under the weight of the latent contradictions that are bound to surge in the wake of the expected decline in the US’ regional influence and prestige and amidst the birth pangs of the new-post-oil economy in the regional states.
Has Israel bitten off more than it could chew? David Hearst, editor-in-chief of the Middle East Eye wrote last week, “Whereas before, Israeli leaders could pretend to be bystanders to the turmoil of dictatorship in the Arab world, this (accord with UAE) now ties the Jewish state to maintaining the autocracy and repression around it. They cannot pretend to be the victims of a “tough neighbourhood”. They are its main pillar. This accord is virtual reality. It will be blown away by a new popular revolt not just in Palestine but across the Arab world. This revolt may already have started.”
Israel military plants booby trap explosives near Palestinian village
Mamoun Shtaiwi with a crate of stun grenades (C) with the child who found an explosive device (L) in Qaddum, August 25, 2020.
By Kathryn Shihadah | If Americans Knew | August 26, 2020
Ha’aretz reports that a Palestinian child discovered a box full of explosives near his home last week. It was one of at least three such boxes placed there by Israeli soldiers as a “deterrent.”
Last Wednesday night, Israeli soldiers entered the West Bank village of Qaddum around midnight to plant the explosives in the area, which sees a large amount of foot traffic. They were set to explode when touched, and camouflaged with stones and scraps of cloth.
The next day, a seven-year-old boy saw one of the boxes. He explained later, “I wanted to pick it up and play with it.” But his mother and other relatives were suspicious. They picked it up and shook it; it exploded, wounding one of them.
They found another similar box nearby and detonated it from a distance.
Another village resident reports finding a sign nearby, in Hebrew, reading, “Keep away or die; danger of death.”
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) admitted to placing the stun grenades, adding that they were planted as a deterrent in an area where “violent riots have regularly occurred for years.”
The military spokesman maintained that, “after it was discovered that this could lead to injuries, forces worked to remove them from the area.” An investigation has been opened.
It is against international law to place armed explosives in a civilian area.
Residents of the village also noticed that a Palestinian flag in the area had been removed.
Qaddum’s claim to fame
In recent months, videos have recorded an Israeli military bulldozer facing off against protesters; Israeli soldiers slashing tires of cars owned by Palestinians, and throwing tear gas canisters into a Palestinian home; they have also intentionally shot holes in water tanks (water is scarce for many Palestinians in the West Bank). Residents of Qaddum have been holding weekly demonstrations for nine years, protesting the closure of a main road, which had been closed to accommodate the expansion of a nearby settlement. The village has frequently made the news.
Reports of Israeli forces injuring Palestinian protesters are also numerous.
Most alarming of all is the story of nine-year-old Abdul Rahman Yasser Shteiwi, who was shot in the head during a protest last year. The bullet shattered into at least 100 pieces. The IDF at first denied using live ammunition, but it was later proven that they did, and were responsible for Abdul Rahman’s injury.
Another boy, age fifteen, was shot in the head by an Israeli soldier in January on a Thursday, when there was no protest. Experts say the shooter was only a few yards away. The IDF delayed the car taking him to the hospital for 25 minutes.
Kathryn Shihadah is staff writer for If Americans Knew. She also writes for MintPress News and blogs at Palestine Home.
CNN & Fox cut Rand Paul’s anti-war speech at RNC as he calls out Biden for backing wars in M. East, Serbia
RT | August 26, 2020
Senator Rand Paul’s (R-Kentucky) speech at the Republican National Convention was butchered by major cable networks, with CNN cutting it completely and Fox replacing the anti-war part with an interview.
Senator Paul, who frequently crossed swords with Donald Trump when both were vying to become the Republican presidential candidate in the 2016 race, admitted during his speech that he did not always agree with the president, but said that Trump’s desire to put an end to the “endless wars” far outweighs their differences.
“I’m supporting President Trump because he believes as I do, that a strong America cannot fight endless wars, we must not leave our blood and treasure in the Middle East quagmire,” Paul said.
Calling Trump “the first president in a generation to seek to end war rather than to start one,” Paul went on to attack what he called the “disastrous record of Joe Biden,” pointing out that as a senator, Biden voted to give then-President George W. Bush the authority to use force in Iraq.
“I fear Biden will choose war again. He supported the war in Serbia, Syria, Libya. Joe Biden will continue to spill our blood and treasure.”
Paul’s anti-war message, however, did not reach CNN viewers, with the cable network instead airing an interview with CNN political contributor and host Van Jones.
Fox News, which snubbed most of the first night of the convention, opting for its usual programming instead, replaced parts of Paul’s speech with host Tucker Carlson interviewing Donald Trump Jr. live on air.
MSNBC also interspersed Paul’s speech with insights from host Rachel Maddow, who attempted to fact-check Paul on his claim that Trump was “bringing our heroes home.”
Maddow claimed that the total number of personnel deployed overseas has even grown under Trump’s watch, although Paul appeared to refer primarily to deployments in hot spots in the conflict-ridden Middle East.
After he became the Democratic presidential candidate, Biden called his Iraq vote in October 2002 a “mistake,” arguing that by siding with the hawks, he wanted, not to launch a war, but rather “to prevent the war from happening.” Biden insists that, by untying Bush’s hands, he believed the administration would have been able to put more pressure on the UN Security Council and late Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
Despite being a strong advocate for the US bombing campaign in Yugoslavia in 1999, Biden also extended his condolences to the victims of the raids while visiting Belgrade, Serbia in August 2016.
US Sanctions Russian Defence Ministry Research Institute That Worked on COVID-19 Vaccine
Sputnik – 26.08.2020
The United States has added five Russian research institutes to its sanctions lists, including the Defence Ministry’s Research Institute, which was involved in work on the COVID-19 vaccine, the United States Department of Commerce statement says.
The US has gone as far as to claim that the listed institutions are working on chemical and biological weapons.
Listing by the US Department of Commerce means that the US authorities impose restrictions on the export, re-export and transfer of goods in accordance with the existing regulations to individuals and organisations that are deemed to pose risks to US national security and foreign policy interests.
Besides the 48th Central Scientific Research Institute, the US has sanctioned the Russian Defence Ministry’s 33rd Central Research and Testing Institute and the State Research Institute of Organic Chemistry and Technology.
According to official information, the 33rd Central Research and Testing Institute is a leading institution in the field of radiation, chemical and biological protection.
The Russian COVID-19 vaccine, dubbed Sputnik V, was developed by the Moscow-based Gamaleya Research Institute and the Russian Defence Ministry and officially registered by the Russian government on 11 August.
The Russian Ministry of Health said that Sputnik V had undergone all the necessary checks and had been proven to be capable of building immunity against the virus.
Despite the fact that the Russian Ministry of Health claimed that Sputnik V had undergone all the necessary checks and had been proven to be capable of building immunity against the virus, Western countries and mainstream media rushed to claim that the vaccine was unsafe and ineffective.
Russian Health Minister Mikhail Murashko stated that all the foreign criticism was provoked by the fear of fair competition and slammed the accusations as unfounded.
Last week, the Gamaleya Institute and the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), which has donated over $54 million towards coronavirus research, released information about the methodology of the vaccine. The data includes scientific publications on the history of vaccines based on the approach used in Sputnik V, clinical trials, the technological platform and the proven safety of this method.
Sudan PM to Pompeo: Government has no mandate to normalize with Israel
Press TV – August 26, 2020
Sudan’s Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok has dashed America’s hopes for quick normalization with Israel, saying his government has no mandate to establish ties with Tel Aviv and any such a decision should wait until after the transitional period ends in the African country.
During talks in the capital Khartoum on Tuesday, Hamdok “clarified” to US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that the country’s transitional period “is being led by a wide alliance with a specific agenda — to complete the transition, achieve peace and stability in the country and hold free elections,” Sudanese government spokesman Faisal Saleh said in a statement.
It “does not have a mandate beyond these tasks or to decide on normalization with Israel,” Hamdok was quoted as saying.
The Sudanese prime minister also reaffirmed the importance of separating normalization of ties from a US decision to remove Sudan’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism, Saleh pointed out.
Sudan’s interim government took power last year after longtime leader Omar al-Bashir was overthrown by the army following mass popular protests. It is set to remain in office until elections in 2022.
Pompeo arrived in Khartoum on Tuesday to push for Sudan’s normalization with Israel, two weeks after the US brokered a highly contentious peace deal between the regime and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
Following the talks, the US State Department said in a statement that Pompeo and Hamdok discussed “positive developments in the Sudan-Israel relationship.”
Sudan which has no formal relations with Israel has been cozying up to the regime over the past year.
In February, Sudan’s leader, General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the chairman of the ruling council in the country, met with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu in Uganda, sparking anger among politicians and the public at home, where anti-Israel and pro-Palestine sentiments run high.
After the US announced the UAE-Israel deal, Sudanese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Haidar Badawi Sadiq said in an interview with Sky News Arabic that “there is no reason for the hostility to continue between Sudan and Israel,” in comments that drew Netanyahu’s praise and raised speculation that Khartoum may be the next in line to normalize with Tel Aviv.
The Sudanese official was, however, sacked shortly afterwards over “unauthorized” comments, with Sudanese Foreign Minister Omer Ismail saying that his ministry “didn’t discuss the possibility of relations with Israel in any way.”
Palestinians have derided the UAE’s decision to normalize with Israel as “backstabbing,” with President Mahmoud Abbas warning other Arab countries against following Abu Dhabi’s lead.
Pompeo in Bahrain to talk normalization
Pompeo visited the Israeli-occupied territories before arrival in Sudan.
Later on Tuesday, Pompeo left Sudan for Bahrain as part of a tour aimed at getting more Arab countries to follow in the UAE’s footsteps.
Palestinians have denounced the agreement as a “betrayal” of their cause.
Meanwhile, there are reports that an Israeli delegation and top aides to US President Donald Trump will fly together on board an Israeli airliner directly from Tel Aviv to Abu Dhabi on Monday for talks on cementing UAE-Israel normalization deal.
Netanyahu said in a video statement that White House senior adviser Jared Kushner, national security adviser Robert O’Brien, US Middle East envoy Avi Berkowitz and other US officials will escort the Israeli delegation led by national security adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat.
A high-ranking US administration official confirmed the participation of Kushner, O’Brien and Berkowitz, and said former US Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook would also be on the flight.
Talks will focus on ways to promote Israeli-UAE cooperation in various sectors, Netanyahu added.
After Beirut blast, Israel revives tales of Hezbollah ammonium nitrate terror plots
By Gareth Porter | The Grayzone | August 26, 2020
Israeli officials have exploited the massive explosion at the Port of Beirut this August to revive a dormant propaganda campaign that had accused the Lebanese militia and political party Hezbollah of storing ammonium nitrate in several countries to wage terror attacks on Israelis.
The Israeli intelligence apparatus had planted a series of stories from 2012 to 2019 claiming Hezbollah sought out ammonium nitrate as the explosive of choice for terrorist operations. According to the narrative, Hezbollah planned to covertly store the explosive substance in locations from Southeast Asia to Europe and the US — only to be foiled repeatedly by Mossad. In each one of those cases, however, the factual record either contradicted the Israeli claims or revealed a complete dearth of evidence.
The narrative first debuted in the Israeli press after a June 2019 story in the British pro-Israel daily The Telegraph on alleged Hezbollah storage of the explosive around London. The Times of Israel introduced for the first time the much broader theme that Hezbollah planned to use the explosive for “huge, game-changing attacks on Israeli targets globally.”
Next, “new details” appeared in the Hebrew daily Yedioth Ahronoth from “unnamed Israeli intelligence officials,” disclosing how Israel had supposedly stymied ammonium nitrate-based terror plots by Hezbollah in London, Cyprus and Thailand.
Following the calamity of the Beirut explosion, the narrative story was opportunistically revived in the Israeli media, with The Times of Israel summarizing an Israeli Channel 13 report citing an “unsourced assessment” that Hezbollah “apparently planned to use the ammonium nitrate stockpile that caused a massive blast at Beirut’s port this week against Israel in a ‘Third Lebanon War’.”
A review of the supposedly open-and-shut cases in both Thailand and Cyprus, however, reveals serious questions about the evidence used to accuse Hezbollah suspects and the role of the Mossad in those cases. It also shows that an alleged Hezbollah plot involving ammonium nitrate in New York City was contrived by the FBI and Justice Department without any real evidence.
Thailand: Muddling the Issue, Bending the Law
The arrest of Hussein Atris, a dual Swedish-Lebanese citizen, in Bangkok on January 13, 2012 occurred after the Mossad received a report that a terrorist attack was due to occur in the middle of that month. The Israeli intelligence agency had given the Thai police a list of 14 or 15 suspects — all Iranian or Lebanese — to be placed under surveillance, including Atris.
But it was Atris who received the bulk of attention. After his arrest, he told police about goods he had stored in a commercial building in Bangkok. Shortly after his arrest, he was taken out of his cell to a house where he was interrogated by three Mossad agents, as was typical of Mossad operations in countries where Israel cultivated close relations with law enforcement. On January 17, Thai police visited the commercial building near Bangkok and reportedly found 4.8 tons of urea fertilizer and 40 liters (100 pounds) of ammonium nitrate.
Atris was immediately charged by the police with “possession of prohibited substances.” But in fact, the ammonium nitrate that Atris had stored in the building was not illegal; it was merely a component of frozen gel packs for sore muscles commonly bought and sold wholesale and retail all over the world.
The boxes of gel packs were stored along with electric fans, slippers and copy paper on the second floor of the building. And as Atris explained to his interrogators and to a reporter from the Swedish dailyAftonbladet who interviewed him in jail, he had been purchasing various goods in Asia and exporting them to other countries like Liberia. He had already arranged for a freighter to ship the goods he had stored there, as the chief of Bangkok metropolitan police confirmed in an interview with the New York Times.
The Mossad interrogators refused to accept the explanation by Atris and accused him of lying about his business. Further clouding the picture, police found two tons of urea fertilizer in bags labeled as cat litter on the same floor as the cold packs. But Atris told an interviewer he had never dealt with fertilizer in his business, and that he believed “it must have been placed in our storage facility by someone, probably Mossad.”
Mossad and its Thai allies were committed to the idea that Atris was a Hezbollah operative from the beginning, even though they apparently had no actual hard evidence to back it up. The claim of Hezbollah membership was nevertheless sold successfully to cooperative local and national news media. A Reuters story headlined “Thailand: Hezbollah man arrested in terror scare.” When he was brought to trial in 2013, Atris firmly denied any links to Hezbollah, and the court ultimately found that there was no evidence to support the contention by the police and Mossad that he was in any way involved with the Lebanese movement.
International press coverage of the case blurred details in a way that incorrectly suggested terrorist intent. When Atris’s case went to trial in July 2013, Agence-France Presse falsely reported that he and “unidentified accomplices” had “packed more than six tons of ammonium nitrate into bags,” thus confusing the already commercially-packaged cold packs with the urea fertilizer, which was not an illegal substance under Thai law and which he specifically denied owning. Time magazine distorted the case more seriously by referring to the bags of urea fertilizer as “chemicals being assembled into explosives… in bags labeled as kitty litter.”
In the end, Atris was convicted of “illegal possession” of ammonium nitrate, which was a banned substance under Thai law. However, the country had not intended for the provision to apply to frozen gel packs for pain relief, which are commonly traded in bulk internationally.
Despite the absence of any evidence that Atris was either a Hezbollah agent or a terrorist, the US State Department bowed to its Israeli allies and declared him to be “a member of Hezbollah’s overseas terrorist unit.”
Cyprus: The mysterious appearance of ammonium nitrate
In 2015, the Cypriot government’s prosecuted Canadian-Lebanese Hussein Bassam Abdallah for allegedly being part of a Hezbollah ammonium nitrate terrorist plot after police found 420 boxes of the fertilizer in the house where he was staying. Yet virtually no details about the case were ever released because the entire legal process took place behind closed doors. What’s more, Abdallah’s defense was never made public.
Furthermore, information from the Kuwaiti daily Al-Jarida, which Israelis have often used to disseminate propaganda into the Arab Middle East, raises serious questions about the origin of the ammonium nitrate found in the house where Abdallah was staying. The newspaper published a story citing a “private source” who said that Mossad agents had been tracking Abdallah, following his every movement and intercepting all his phone calls from Cyprus. The Mossad surveillance continued, according to the story, “until he obtained the materials and fertilizer, after which Cypriot authorities were informed [and] raided his place of residence and arrested him and seized two tons of [ammonium nitrate].…”
By reporting an apparent Mossad account that the ammonium nitrate was not at the house until just before Mossad tipped off the police, the Al-Jarida account obviously suggested that the timing of its appearance was not merely coincidental.
This was not the first time that Mossad-related evidence against one of its targets turned out to be highly suspect. Two Iranian men who were visiting Mombasa, Kenya in 2012 were charged with having buried 15 kg of the explosive RDX on a golf course. However, they had been interrogated — and one of them allegedly drugged — by three Mossad agents. Though Kenyan police had supposedly been carrying out constant surveillance on them for the entire length of their stay, no direct evidence of the Iranians ever possessing RDX came to light. That anomaly resulted in the case against the Iranians being thrown out by Kenya’s Court of Appeal , and suggested that Mossad itself had planted the explosive on the golf course.
In Abdallah’s case, the evidence also indicated the use of a classical prosecution tactic was employed to force him to admit to a Hezbollah ammonium nitrate terrorism plot: forcing a plea bargain on him by the threat of a much longer sentence if he refused to plead guilty.
After the first week of interrogation, a Cypriot security official told a journalist that Abdallah denied all charges against him and was not “cooperating” — meaning he was not admitting what both Israel and Cyprus wanted him to. Weeks later, however, following a trial closed to the public, Abdallah admitted to all eight charges against him. The semi-official Cyprus News Agency reported he had given the police a statement that the ammonium nitrate was to have been used for terrorist attacks against Jewish or Israeli interests in Cyprus. In return he was given a six-year sentence instead of the 14 years he would have received without the deal.
Abdallah’s defense lawyer, Savvas A. Angelides, pressed his client to accept the plea bargain, advancing the political interests of Cyprus as a close ally of Israel. For his part, Angelides had his eyes on a high-level national security posting in his country’s government. Sure enough, in early 2018, the lawyer was appointed Defense Minister of Cyprus.
The idea that Hezbollah obtained ammonium nitrate for use in New York City – another Israeli contention – was not supported by any evidence whatsoever. In this case, a Lebanese-American named Ali Kourani stood accused of hatching a Hezbollah terror plot. But the closest the US Justice Department could come to linking to ammonium nitrate was a statement in its criminal complaint against him.
It claimed that in May 2009, Kourani “entered China at an airport in Guangzhou, the location of Guangzhou Company-1, i.e., the manufacturer of the ammonium nitrate-based First Aid ice packs sized in connection with thwarted IJO attacks in Thailand and Cyprus.” The suggestion that a trip to Quangzhou somehow counted as evidence of an effort to procure ammonium nitrate for Hezbollah terrorism was patently absurd.
London and Germany: Mossad’s phantom Hezbollah explosives
The next apparent Israeli intel dump arrived in the form of a June 2019 story in the Telegraph UK, a right-wing Murdoch-owned daily which loyally follows Israeli propaganda lines. According to the report, in 2015, the UK MI5 intelligence service and London’s Metropolitan Police were tipped off by the Mossad about thousands of ice packs containing three tons of ammonium nitrate in warehouses in Northwest London. The Telegraph revealed that London police had arrested one man “on suspicion of plotting terrorism” but had eventually released him without charges. That detail was the giveaway that the British had come to realize that they had no evidence linking cold packs or their owner to any Hezbollah terrorist plot — contrary to the Israel narrative.
The Telegraph’s suggestion that MI5 decided not to prosecute to disrupt the threat isn’t credible, because no one was ever prosecuted. And its implication that the British government kept quiet about the episode because it was protecting the Iran nuclear deal did not apply once Trump tore up the agreement in 2018. The British government, which banned Hezbollah in February 2020, has never suggested that the Lebanese militia had been plotting to use ammonium nitrate from warehouses in the UK to carry out terrorist attacks.
According to a report this May by Israel’s Channel 12, days before Germany announced its banning of Hezbollah from the country, Mossad had gathered information on alleged Hezbollah terrorism-related activities in Germany. The supposed plotting consisted of the identification of warehouses in southern Germany where the Mossad said Hezbollah was storing ‘hundreds of kilograms” of ammonium nitrate.
After the information was presented to German intelligence and law enforcement agencies, according to the report, the German Interior Ministry announced in April 2020 that it was banning Hezbollah. It simultaneously raided four mosque associations accused of being close to Hezbollah. But German law enforcement never announced any action regarding warehouses supposedly holding ammonium nitrate, indicating that the German government found nothing that backed up the claims by Mossad.
Hoping to seize the Beirut explosion as a historic propaganda opportunity, the Israelis clearly believe they can fashion a new and more powerful narrative by knitting together false claims related to these episodes. Their objective is to achieve their longtime objective of forcing Hezbollah out of the Lebanese government by implicating it in the calamitous blast. So far, Western corporate media appears inclined to accept the baseless Israeli claims on face value. The day after the blast in Beirut, the Washington Post reported that Hezbollah “has long shown an interest in acquiring [ammonium nitrate] for use in a variety of terrorist plots.”
Lebanon to complain to UNSC about Israel border escalation
Press TV – August 2020
Lebanon says it will file a complaint with the United Nations Security Council about a recent Israeli attempt at escalation that saw the regime fire dozens of flares over the country’s border.
The country’s Supreme Defense Council announced the plan during a meeting chaired by Lebanese President Michel Aoun on Wednesday, Lebanon’s official National News Agency (NNA) reported.
Early in the day, Israel’s Channel 12 said the regime had fired more than 30 of the projectiles into Lebanon.
Lebanon’s al-Manar television network, however, described the projectiles as phosphorous shells and identified the targeted areas as the southern Lebanese towns of Houla and Mays al-Jabal.
The regime described the development as a “security-related incident.”
Israeli media initially said the firing came amid concerns over what they called a possible infiltration near Kibbutz Menara in the Upper Galilee area, located near the Lebanese border and the Israeli-occupied Syrian territory of the Golan Heights.
Neither the Lebanese army nor the country’s resistance movement of Hezbollah has, however, reported carrying out any such operation into the occupied territories.
Netanyahu’s threat
The escalation was followed by a vocal threat, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying in a statement, “We shall react forcefully to any attack against us.”
“I advise Hezbollah not to test Israel’s strength,” it added, alleging, “Hezbollah is once again endangering Lebanon due to its aggression.”
Hezbollah became an integral part of the Lebanese defensive structure after forcing the occupying regime into a retreat during two wars that Tel Aviv waged against Lebanon in the 2000s.
The Israeli military adventurism came as the occupied territories have been on alert over the possibility of a retaliatory attack by Hezbollah after one of its members was martyred in an Israeli act of aggression on the Syrian soil last month.
Ali Kamel Mohsen was killed during an Israeli attack near the Syrian capital of Damascus on July 20, according to a statement by Hezbollah.
Hezbollah said at the time that a response to the deadly aggression was “inevitable,” which led to the deployment of more troops by the Israeli regime to the north of the occupied territories.
Israel claimed a week later that the regime’s forces had thwarted an effort by Hezbollah resistance fighters to infiltrate into the occupied territories through Lebanon’s Tel Aviv-occupied Shebaa Farms.
The movement denied the claim. It said all Israeli reports about border clashes with the movement’s fighters were fake and served to boost the morale of Israeli forces by fabricating fictitious victories.
COVID-19 economic decline brings IMF back to Latin America
By Paul Antonopoulos | August 26, 2020
The economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic brought the International Monetary Fund (IMF) back to Latin America. In December 2005, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Argentine President Néstor Kirchner announced that they had paid the debts that South America’s two largest countries had with the IMF. At the time, Brazil paid $15.5 billion and Argentina about $9.81 billion, cancelling its debts. In addition to being historic, this transaction marked an era. The two South American powers freed themselves from the influence of the IMF and showed unprecedented political coordination, which was also complemented by political support from Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez.
The bloc also gave impetus to its neighbors: Uruguay, for example, cancelled its debt of $1.08 billion in 2006, while Bolivia freed itself from the fund that same year after an agreement allowed a $250 million debt to be forgiven.
However, everything seems to have changed 15 years later. Latin America is one of the world’s most affected regions from the COVID-19 pandemic – medically and economically. The IMF’s director, Kristalina Georgieva, predicts a 9.3% contraction for the region in 2020, compared to a 4.9% decline worldwide. Georgieva said that as a result of the new coronavirus pandemic, the organization has doubled access to emergency financing, disbursing a total of $25 billion to help 70 countries. Of those, about $5.5 billion went to 17 countries in South America, Central America and the Caribbean. The IMF director especially mentioned the cases of Chile, Peru and Colombia, which the IMF signed flexible credit line agreements totalling $107 billion.
An analysis by Teresa Morales, Nicolás Oliva and Guillermo Oglietti from the Latin American Strategic Center for Geopolitics (CELAG) shows that between April 17 and May 1, the IMF also helped Bolivia, Costa Rica, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Granada, Haiti, Panama, Paraguay and Saint Lucia with a total of $3.48 billion. CELAG researchers indicated at the end of May that “Latin American countries have started a new indebtedness process with the IMF.” In this sense, they warned that the IMF “will certainly mean short-term relief to face a very adverse external front, but that it certainly has its counterpart in the conditions of macroeconomic policies and their known consequences.”
However, we have not yet entered into a critical debt process. This is not so much because Latin American countries are not looking for it, but because of the very lukewarm response of multilateral organizations like the IMF to the pandemic. In this sense, the emergency financing lines provided by the organization have been of low magnitude and, for the time being, leave out the countries of the region with a low credit rating. Despite everything, this does not mean that the Fund has not returned to the region. The IMF has had a process of rapprochement with Latin America since the economic crisis of 2008 with loans of $57 billion to Argentina in 2018 and $4.5 billion to Ecuador.
It will depend on how much the countries in the region will need financing as a result of the pandemic to see if the IMF’s role as a financier in Latin America will be strengthened. One of the main changes is a nuance of the Washington Consensus, the traditional series of measures promoted by the IMF, the World Bank and the U.S. Treasury Department. The Washington Consensus pursues trade liberalization, fiscal adjustment, privatization policies and deregulation of the capital market, among others.
The Fund made a very strong self-criticism of the Washington Consensus. For example, now the reforms are not necessarily all implemented and, in some cases, the Fund recognized the importance of capital control by the State, the importance of counter-cyclical policies and the reduction of inequality through progressive fiscal policies. The organization is now more flexible and has started to allow government officials to participate in designing reform plans. It is likely this was allowed only after the IMF received massive criticism for choking Greece economically between 2008 and 2018 that tarnished the Fund’s image and reputation all around the world.
The Fund essentially has become more cunning and has learned that the same economic changes in all countries is counterproductive, not only in terms of economic results, but also in terms of the institution’s legitimacy. This change does not mean that it is a new institution, it still very much is the IMF with an orthodox bias, focused on liberalization policies. The IMF continues to have a preference for structural reforms, such as social security reform, tax reform, labor reform and, in some cases, trade reform.
In Georgieva’s address to the governments of Latin America and the Caribbean, the IMF will maintain its supposed solid commitment to the region in terms of capacity-building and economic policy advice. In this context, the IMF director asked Latin American countries to be able to reorient policies when the time comes to help workers get back to work and asked them to do so using fiscal stimulus with prudence. In her message, Georgieva said that as shocks dissipate, fiscal soundness and debt sustainability must become priorities for economic policy. However, it appears rather that Georgieva is attempting to prepare Latin America to once again be dominated by the IMF.
Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.