THIS DELEGADATION WILL GET IT FIXED FAST!
We Are Change | June 18, 2023
Saying anything about Israel’s misbehavior can send you to jail
BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • JUNE 20, 2023
There have recently been a number of incidents that would be of interest if one has concerns about the sorry state of free speech in Europe and the United States, the so-called “democracies” who tend to boast about their freedoms and the rights of their citizens. The chosen weapon in the US and elsewhere in the Anglo-sphere has been the designation “hate speech” which also covers “hate writing,” “possessing hate literature or films,” and even “hate thinking.” In Europe, where “hate speech” is often referred to using the English words, the expression is often preceded by the word “illegal” to make sure that the point about consequences is made and the potential penalty is clearly understood. Some Europeans have in fact been convicted and sent to prison when they have falsely believed they were exercising free speech.
Though the “hate” designation was originally coined to discourage racist language and other forms of expression it has increasingly been exploited by Israel and its associated Jewish support groups to criminalize any criticism of Israel or of Jewish group behavior. It has extended its reach by moving into subsets, notably “holocaust denial” and “antisemitism” which are also regarded ipso facto as hate crimes in a context in which Jews are always regarded as victims, never as perpetrators of violence.
Much of what is going on might be described in fairly simple terms: Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians and its unprovoked lethal attacks on its neighbors might reasonably be described as “deplorable” or even genocidal in the case of the Palestinians. Beyond that, Israel, which pretends to be a democracy, operates a system of control over the Christian and Muslim minority within its own borders and also in the area it illegally occupies that is describable as “apartheid,” where the minority is compelled to accept limited resources and consistently harsh treatment from the dominant Jewish population. More to the point, the extremist government coalition headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made the situation even worse for those non-Jews that it controls, with talk of introducing mass expulsions and imprisonments. The death toll of Palestinians at the hands of the Israel Defense Forces has also been going up, with more than 150 Palestinians killed this year, including 26 children.
To be sure, Israel has become a home for Jews that can no longer tolerate anyone else. Some ministers in the new government are particularly vile in their views but it is to be assumed that Netanyahu and others in his administration are genuinely supportive of turning Israel into a truly and even exclusively Jewish state, which is in fact how it legally defines itself. The one minister most cited for his cruelty and racism is Itamar Ben-Gvir of the Jewish Power party. Ben-Gvir has been charged with crimes 50 times, and convicted on eight occasions, including once for support of a Jewish terrorist group. He is a former supporter of the now deceased right wing fanatic Meir Kahane, and, like Kahane, envisions an Israel that is as Palestinian free as possible and centered exclusively on Jewish interests. He has called for deporting Arabs who aren’t loyal to a Jewish Israel, annexing all of the West Bank and exercising full Israeli sovereignty over the Temple Mount, where the Muslim venerated Al-Aqsa mosque is located. He supports legislation defying international agreements to “divide” the Al-Aqsa site to permit regular Jewish worshippers and there have even been suggestions that the Israeli government will seek to rebuild the so-called Biblical Second Temple, destroyed in the First Century by the Romans, in that location.

MK Itamar Ben Gvir at a ceremony honoring late Jewish extremist leader Rabbi Meir Kahane in Jerusalem on November 10, 2022. Photo by Olivier Fitoussi/Flash90
Ben-Gvir is notorious for his provocations directed against Palestinian Muslims and Christians. He has led marches of armed settlers flaunting Israeli flags through Arab quarters of cities and towns and has even brought settlers and other extremists to the al-Aqsa mosque during Ramadan and to interrupt Friday prayers. To cap the irony, he has been since November 2022 the National Security Minister, which gives him authority over the police, to include the so-called Border Police as well as the police forces located on the illegally occupied West Bank. Indeed, as a practical matter, Ben-Gvir is seeking to have the Knesset pass legislation explicitly conferring legal immunity on all Israeli soldiers for any and all killings of Palestinians. He has also pressed the parliament to institute a formal, judicially administered death penalty for “terrorists”, which would mean any Palestinian who physically resists the Israeli occupation.
Another extremist who has obtained a major ministry in the Netanyahu government is Bezalel Yoel Smotrich who has served as the Minister of Finance since 2022. He has recently completed a controversial trip to the United States where he met with American Zionist leaders. Smotrich is the leader of the Religious Zionist Party, and lives in an illegal settlement in a house within the Israeli occupied West Bank that was also built doubly illegally outside the settlement proper. Smotrich supports expanding Israeli settlements in the West Bank, opposes any form of Palestinian statehood, and even denies the existence of the Palestinian people. He demands a state judiciary that relies only on Torah and Jewish traditional law. Accused of inciting hatred against Arab Israelis, he told Arab Israeli lawmakers in October 2021, that “it’s a mistake that David Ben-Gurion didn’t finish the job and didn’t throw all of you out in 1948.”
The increasing brutality of the Israeli government and its security forces have produced a reaction among many observers worldwide, so the supporters of Israel have engaged in their own first strike frequently using the “hate crime” weapon. They have basically turned the hate crime legislation to their advantage by convincing many nations to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of the “hate crime” antisemitism to automatically include criticism of Israel as being equivalent to hatred of Jews. When that doesn’t work the powerful Israel lobby can also resort to much more brutal threats. When Iceland sought to make illegal infant circumcision five years ago, regarding it as genital mutilation performed on an unconsenting child, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) threatened to unleash Jewish power to destroy their economy and international reputation as punishment for making their country “inhospitable to Jews.”
Now that the “hate crime” genie together with the associated links to holocaust denial and antisemitism have been released from the bottle, they are being used regularly to silence anyone who even indirectly criticizes prominent Jews like George Soros. Conservatives including Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk have recently been on the receiving end of the antisemitism label after referring to Soros and his “Globalist” agenda. It is my belief that Tucker was fired at least in part due to Jewish pressure on FOX as he had been very critical of groups like the hysterical ADL and its hideous director Jonathan Greenblatt.
Roger Waters, the former lead singer of Pink Floyd, has emerged as a powerful critic of Israeli treatment of the Palestinians. As a consequence, he has been hounded by authorities in Europe, has had his concerts canceled, and has been threatened with legal action to make him shut up. The Biden Administration’s antisemitism Czar Deborah Lipstadt has also attacked him, saying “I wholeheartedly concur with [an online] condemnation of Roger Waters and his despicable Holocaust distortion.” She was referring to a tweet stating that “I am sick & disgusted by Roger Waters’ obsession to belittle and trivialize the Shoah & the sarcastic way in which he delights in trampling on the victims, systematically murdered by the Nazis. In Germany. Enough is enough. Holocaust trivialization is criminalized across the EU.” The State Department, speaking for the White House, then piled on adding that Waters has “a long track record of using antisemitic tropes” and a concert he gave late last month in Germany “contained imagery that is deeply offensive to Jewish people and minimized the Holocaust… The artist in question has a long track record of using antisemitic tropes to denigrate Jewish people.”
One might observe that the depiction of Waters is basically untrue – he is a critic of Israeli crimes against humanity but does not hate Jews. One might also add how the fact that the United States State Department actually has a Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism speaks for itself and tells you exactly who is in charge in Washington. I wonder how much it costs to run Lipstadt’s mouth from a no doubt well-appointed office in Foggy Bottom each year? Maybe someone should do a cost/benefit analysis and give Debbie her walking papers.
Beyond that, several other recent stories show how it all often works in practice to confront and silence critics. Swedish pop star Zara Larsson is facing what is obviously a coordinated backlash on social media after criticizing Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. In an Instagram message to her 6.3 million followers, the 23-year-old declared the ongoing cross-border violence, which is killing mostly Arabs, was a “crime” against Palestinians. Her effort to be somewhat even handed was ignored, in the message, which she later deleted, where she wrote “We have to stand up for Jewish people all over the world facing anti-Semitic violence and threats, but we must also call out a state upholding apartheid and KILLING civilians, funded by American dollars.” She ended the message with the hashtag “#freepalestine.”
Larsson was hardly calling for targeting Jews or anything like that, but the reaction to her comment was symptomatic of the typical overkill response engaged in by Israel and its friends whenever anyone challenges the standard narrative of Israeli perpetual victimhood. Two other instances of comments about Israel leading to an overwhelming response to punish the perpetrators took place during the past month in the United States at college commencement ceremonies. The first was on May 12th, at a graduation ceremony for the law school of the City University of New York (CUNY), where Fatima Mousa Mohammed, a Queens native who was selected by the graduating 2023 class to speak during the May 12 ceremony, praised CUNY for supporting student activism, citing in particular the acceptance of student groups protesting against Israel’s brutality towards the Palestinians. She said “Israel continues to indiscriminately rain bullets and bombs on worshippers, murdering the old, the young and even attacking funerals and graveyards, as it encourages lynch mobs to target Palestinians homes and businesses. As it imprisons its children, as it continues its project of settler colonialism, expelling Palestinians from their homes. Silence is no longer acceptable.”
The response to Mohammed was immediate, including a scathing news report in the New York Post, a call by several Jewish groups to cut funding to CUNY and demands that the law school dean be fired. And the controversy again made news when a second student spoke out at a commencement at El Camino community college in Torrance California. Jana Abulaban, 18, strongly criticized Israeli government policies during her speech on June 9th.
Abulaban, who was born in Jordan in a family of Palestinian refugees, reportedly felt “inspired” by the speech of Fatima Mousa Mohammed and she told the audience “I gift my graduation to all Palestinians who have lost their life and those who continue to lose their lives every day due to the oppressive apartheid state of Israel killing and torturing Palestinians as we speak.’’
There was, of course an immediate reaction to the Abulaban speech coming from a variety of West Coast and New York pro-Israel sources. Brooke Goldstein, a claimed human-rights lawyer founder of The Lawfare Project, said, “This is yet one more example of the systemic Jew-hatred we’re seeing on our college campuses. When a student gives a commencement speech targeting Jews, trafficking in modern tropes of antisemitism, it’s clear that there has been a complete failure in that school to promote social justice for the Jewish people. If any other minority group were targeted like this, there would be consequences for the bigot. The Jewish community deserves no less.”
Of course, both women only spoke the truth about what is happening in the Middle East. Neither attacked the Jewish religion or Jews per se and only criticized Israel’s appalling behavior. When I last checked, Israel was a foreign country with both foreign and domestic policies that are considered very questionable by most of the world, so why should it be protected from being challenged in the United States? The two women were brave to speak up as they did, surely knowing that they would be targeted by the Jewish state’s many friends and supporters. Those of us who continue to speak out on Israel’s genocidal policies can likewise expect no less, particularly as both the federal as well as many state governments and also the media are now on a witch hunt directed against those who seek to speak the truth. But we must persevere. As Fatima Mousa Mohammed put it, “Silence is no longer acceptable.”
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.
The Cradle | June 20, 2023
An overwhelming majority of Jordanians say they oppose “all sorts of cooperation” with Israel, including receiving humanitarian aid in the case of a natural disaster, according to a public opinion poll commissioned by the Washington Institute and conducted between March and April.
While 84 percent of respondents say they oppose “having business deals with Israeli companies,” 76 percent agreed with the following statement: “In case of an earthquake or other natural disaster … Arab countries should refuse any humanitarian aid from Israel.”
Furthermore, at least 60 percent of Jordanians have a favorable view of Palestinian resistance factions firing missiles at Israel. In comparison, only 12 percent expressed a positive opinion of the Abraham Accords.

While a sizable minority of Jordanians (42 percent) see Iran as an “enemy,” over half of the respondents (53 percent) positively welcomed the Iran-Saudi rapprochement, while 58 percent say Arab normalization with Syria is a positive development for the region.
Jordanians also vehemently oppose US or Israeli attacks against Iran, with 65 percent of respondents agreeing that such a move “would be too dangerous and a bad idea.”

In addition, only 13 percent believe Washington should do “more to help counter the threats we face from Iran,” while 59 percent oppose the idea of an Arab country developing a nuclear weapon “to counter Iran.”
While Jordan was among the first nations to normalize relations with neighboring Israel, a large majority of the country’s population has historically stood against the occupation of Palestine and in support of a free Palestinian state.
This is a reality widely shared across West Asia, as earlier this year the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies (ACRPS) released the findings of the largest opinion survey conducted in the Arab world, showing that 84 percent of Arabs reject recognizing Israel for political and cultural reasons.
A similar poll conducted in September revealed that the Arab youth also prefer building ties with Russia and China over the US.
US analytics and advisory firm Gallup in April of this year released a poll that shows an overwhelming majority of citizens in 13 countries across West Asia and North Africa do not trust US claims about “encouraging the development of democracy” or about “improving the economic lot of people.”
By Ramona Wadi | MEMO | June 20, 2023
A recent poll by the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research detailed how Palestinians are largely in favour of armed resistance against Israel’s settler-colonialism. More importantly, Palestinians have again asserted that they no longer need to take their cues from the main Palestinian political factions, indicating a sharp detachment from the politics of the previous years that monopolised resistance depending on factions and geographical territory.
In the poll, 71 per cent of Palestinians favoured the forming of armed resistance groups such as the Lions’ Den and the Jenin Battalion. The Palestinian Authority continued to lose favour among the people of occupied Palestine, with 80 per cent of survey participants against the surrender of members from resistance groups to the PA. In relation to this, 86 per cent of Palestinian respondents declared themselves to be against the PA’s persecution of resistance group members.
Juxtaposed against these findings is the statement of Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s former foreign minister and current head of the Yisrael Beiteinu party, who has called for a targeted assassination policy against Hamas leaders in Gaza. “We cannot accept the ‘rules of the game’ in which they can inflame Judea and Samaria while being immune in Gaza,” said Lieberman, referring to Palestinian resistance in the occupied West Bank. He also called for a large-scale military operation in the occupied Palestinian territory to quash the resistance.
The current Palestinian resistance — which is legitimate under international law — does not follow the politics of Palestinian factions, preferring instead to maintain a unified front encompassing all groups. Moreover, support for Hamas in the occupied West Bank is not a recent phenomenon, but the result of the Fatah-led PA’s corrupt existence.
Referring to the Israeli raid of the Jenin refugee camp in which five Palestinians were killed (a sixth has since died of his wounds), Hamas spokesman Hazem Qassem pointed out that, “The resistance fighters from all factions were united on the battlefield. It shows that the resistance still exists in the West Bank cities.”
Two narratives are at play here. One is the unified front which Palestinians are moving towards and embracing in their anti-colonial struggle. The other portrays Hamas as the epitome of Palestinian resistance and the reason why Palestinian resistance exists. Much of this is attributed to the discrepancy between Gaza and the occupied West Bank in terms of their portrayal, as well as the different reactions to their unique socio-economic and political realities. Now that the PA has lost much of its grip over the occupied West Bank, Hamas is looming as a bigger threat in the official narrative, despite Palestinians clearly veering towards a unified resistance that encompasses all factions and which remains independent.
Lieberman’s call for targeted assassinations exploits the image of Hamas as synonymous with Palestinian resistance. The movement is being used to promote Israel’s policy of targeted assassinations, a purportedly rational objective in the settler-colonial narrative. The impact, however, is not restricted to Gaza. A growing independent Palestinian resistance which is out of the PA’s control is an uncontained reality which Israel currently faces. Maintaining the narrative of Hamas as the exclusive source of resistance can ultimately be used as a facade for Israel and the PA to normalise extrajudicial killings of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank.
Read also: Israel forces assassinate Palestinian Authority officer in West Bank
The Cradle | June 20, 2023
China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) and QatarEnergy are expected to sign a 27-year agreement, which will allow China to purchase 4 million metric tons of liquefied natural gas (LNG) a year, Reuters reported today, 20 June.
Sources familiar with the deal told Reuters that CNPC also will take an equity stake in the eastern expansion of Qatar’s North Field LNG project. The stake is the equivalent of 5 percent of one LNG train with a capacity of 8 million tonnes per year.
Despite selling equity shares in the North Field expansion to foreign firms, QatarEnergy plans to retain a 75 percent stake in the project, which will cost at least $30 billion, including the construction of liquefaction export facilities.
In April, China’s Sinopec signed a deal to become a “value-added” partner in Qatar’s North Field expansion project.
The project, with a total investment cost of $28.75 billion, aims to raise Qatar’s LNG export capacity from the current 77 million metric tonnes per annum (MTPA) to 110 MTPA, making it one of the largest LNG projects in the world, Sinopec said in a statement.
“The cooperation will help Sinopec optimize the energy consumption mix in China and secure a long-term and reliable clean energy supply to the nation. The partnership represents another model of bilateral cooperation between China and Qatar,” Sinopec said.
China is seeking increased imports of LNG from Qatar, the world’s top LNG supplier, in part to reduce dependence on LNG imports from the United States, the world’s second-largest supplier.
Some US lawmakers have touted Chinese reliance on US-produced LNG as an opportunity to exert influence over the nation with the world’s second-largest economy.
“If you want to think of it geopolitically, why wouldn’t we want China dependent on our natural gas for their own economy?” House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said in an interview reported by Politico. “Would the world not be safer, and would we not be stronger? Why wouldn’t we create more American jobs at the same time?”
However, Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana explained that Chinese purchases of US-produced LNG are mutually beneficial, stating that “China gets guaranteed shipments at a certain price by providing upfront capital. That, in turn, helps U.S. companies build export terminals, which drives demand for more US drilling in places like Louisiana and Texas.”
“Right now, China is a frenemy,” he said. “If they – just like India, South Korea, Japan, the EU – are purchasing or buying, helping to pay for the capitalization of LNG export terminals, well, that’s a good thing.”
Competition for LNG has intensified since the start of the Ukraine war in February 2022. Europe needs new sources of natural gas to help replace the Russian pipeline gas that used to make up almost 40 percent of the continent’s imports. Europe cut off its own supply of Russian gas by imposing sanctions against Moscow after the start of the war.
By Batoul Suleiman | The Cradle | June 20 2023
In an unforeseen development, the US initiated indirect talks with Iran in May, signaling Washington’s desire to de-escalate tensions between the two adversary states – even while publicly acting otherwise.
Hosted by the Sultanate of Oman, the indirect talks were attended by delegations of US and Iranian diplomats, but it is unclear whether any final agreement was reached, or, for that matter, what topic occupied the negotiations.
Despite countless rumors of nuclear negotiations being on the agenda in Muscat, Tehran has point-blank denied this. The Iranians have held firm that they will not entertain any temporary fixes to the 2015 nuclear agreement, which was unilaterally abandoned by the US in 2018.
While the secret negotiations may not directly pertain to Iran’s nuclear program, a potential formula for a deal has reportedly emerged, involving the mutual release of prisoners and the unfreezing of up to $10 billion held in South Korean banks and in Iraq, currently blocked by US sanctions.
But why would Washington offer up a slate of “rewards” to Iran for no obvious price? Especially given that the US has been the primary spoiler in prisoner exchange deals and the release of Iranian funds for years?
Washington’s two faces on Iran
On the surface, the US is assisting in the release of Iranian funds at the same time as the Pentagon escalates its threats against the Islamic Republic and stirs maritime tensions between their respective navies.
This kicked off in February, when Bloomberg published an unverified news report quoting two unnamed “senior diplomats” saying that Tehran had enriched uranium to 84 percent – “the highest level found by inspectors in the country to date, and a concentration just 6 percent below what’s needed for a weapon.” A nuclear bomb requires a 90-95 percent enrichment purity of 25 kilograms.
Iran immediately dismissed these reports, confirming through a senior official that Tehran had not carried out any uranium enrichment procedure to more than 60 percent.
In an unusual show of support for Tehran’s position, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in late May shut down the “84 percent” rumors by declaring its investigation of those allegations to be closed.
But as likely intended, the anonymously-sourced Bloomberg story spawned months of “Iran is close to a nuclear bomb” narratives, which has conveniently provided an excuse for increased US and Israeli threats against the Islamic Republic to gain leverage at the negotiating table.
‘Two weeks away’
In March, US Army Chief of Staff Mark Milley testified before a Congressional committee that Iran could potentially produce sufficient material for a nuclear bomb within a span of two weeks, requiring only a few additional months to complete the construction of the weapon.
Milley’s statement, it appears, was the start of a leverage-building campaign against Iran on the ground.
First, the US Navy in the Arabian Sea seized Iranian oil aboard a tanker en route to China. In response to the move, Iran detained in the Gulf of Oman a tanker carrying American oil en route from Kuwait to the United States. Less than a week later, Iran also detained an oil tanker as it transited the Strait of Hormuz towards the port of Fujairah in the United Arab Emirates.
This comes after statements by White House Spokesman John Kirby in which he claimed that his country has detected repeated Iranian threats to commercial shipping in the Gulf, and that the US Department of Defense will begin to strengthen its defense position in the region.
That round was like a field test to increase pressure before returning to the negotiating table, but the Iranian response, according to political sources in Tehran, thwarted American pressure.
After this public escalation, Washington secretly requested – via Oman – to open communications with Iran. US sources familiar with the indirect talks told Axios that “the goal of the negotiation is to reach an understanding on ways to de-escalate Iran’s nuclear program, its behavior in the region, as well as its intervention in the conflict in Ukraine.”
But actual US aims are far less ambitious than what is stated for public consumption, Iranian analyst Amin Berto tells The Cradle:
“The only thing the US wants now is to stop the increase in uranium enrichment in Iran, without military conflict, because the US is involved in the crisis of Russia and Ukraine and tension with China.”
The US is reluctant to engage in further conflicts in West Asia, as it recognizes the potential consequences of an Israeli aggression against Iran, which could escalate into a larger war in the geostrategic Persian Gulf.
Additionally, the US is not interested in allowing Iran to become a “nuclear threshold” state, where it possesses the capability to produce a nuclear bomb at any given time without actually taking that final step.
Turning things up a notch
Presupposing Tehran reaches 90 percent enrichment, both Israel and the US would find themselves with limited options.
They would either have to resort to war or accept the new reality, wherein they could attempt to disrupt Iran’s nuclear program, impose stricter sanctions, or incite internal unrest within Iran. However, it is important to note that all of these options have been previously explored without causing a significant shift in Tehran’s “behavior.”
Confronted with this reality, Washington is compelled to engage in negotiations with Iran and strive to reach an agreement that curbs the enrichment rate. The objective is to avert a war that would detrimentally impact American and Israeli interests in the region.
Furthermore, it aims to prevent the emergence of a “nuclear threshold” state in Iran, which could have far-reaching regional deterrent effects. It is important to note that tightening sanctions could potentially push Iran towards strengthening its alliances with counterweights Russia and China.
Sources familiar with the ongoing negotiations in Muscat suggest that the current discussions revolve around a new, partial agreement rather than a comprehensive one similar to the 2015 deal.
The proposed understanding requires the US to take the initial step of releasing Iran’s funds held abroad, reportedly in exchange for Iran not enriching uranium past 60 percent purity. The process of releasing Iranian funds has already commenced, including the transfer of over $6 billion in Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and more than $3 billion in Iranian funds from Iraq.
While the coming days are expected to witness the mutual release of prisoners, the sources indicate that what hinders reaching a final solution is determining the maximum enrichment level to which Iran is willing to adhere. The negotiation revolves around whether it will be set at 60 percent or 20 percent, in exchange for freezing the sanctions imposed on Iran.
What does Iran want?
Iran has shown openness to reaching a new understanding that would lead to the lifting of sanctions, the release of seized funds, and enhanced economic opportunities. The understanding would serve as a placeholder for the defunct Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal and not a replacement.
And Iran’s willingness to negotiate does not by any means imply acceptance of all US conditions. Tehran’s end goal will require the complete, verifiable lifting of US sanctions in exchange for establishing parameters on the country’s enrichment rate and nuclear activities.
This has been explained by recent statements of the Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei, who said that “There is nothing wrong with the agreement (with the west), but the infrastructure of our nuclear industry should not be touched.”
The comments were made during a meeting with a group of Iranian nuclear experts on 11 June, during which Khamenei also explained that:
“We were dealt blows because of these misplaced trusts. It is very important that a nation and the officials of a country know and understand where they should trust and where not. We have understood it over the past twenty years. We understood who is trustworthy and who is not.”
Notably, Khamenei’s statements came shortly after the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Mohammad Eslami, stated that Iran’s objective in enriching uranium is to lift US sanctions. Observing the historical context, it becomes apparent that Iran has increased its enrichment levels in response to persistent Israeli hostilities, often with US support, targeting its nuclear infrastructure. These escalations have also been prompted by incidents like the assassination of nuclear scientists, exemplified by the case of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in 2020.
Where does this leave Israel?
Only Israel, who incidentally views a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat, maintains that a US-Iran backroom agreement is imminent.
While Tehran and Washington have denied making any significant progress in reviving the nuclear agreement, Israel expresses doubts over these claims. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated during a phone call with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, after his visit to Saudi Arabia, that Israel opposes any US agreement with Iran, and that “No deal with Iran will oblige Israel, which will do everything to defend itself.”
According to a report by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, any new nuclear agreement between Washington and Tehran will reflect a danger to Israel through several factors, most notably that “Iran is likely to continue to develop nuclear weapons technology and ballistic missile programs”; and that the agreement will provide Iran with tens of billions of dollars, which will enable it to enhance its military capabilities and the capabilities of its allies in West Asia.
The Israeli think-tank also noted the great concern experienced by the entity’s officials in terms of their inability to influence the Biden administration and Congress:
“However, some senior officials in the Israeli security establishment believe that a new temporary nuclear agreement between Iran and the major powers might be the lesser of two evils compared to the current situation, where Iran continues to pursue its nuclear ambitions unchecked.”
The last point about Iran’s unchecked pursuit of nuclear ambitions is a key driver for Washington to seek an understanding with Tehran – mainly so that it can placate Tel Aviv and turn its geopolitical attentions to more pressing matters elsewhere.
By Andrei Dergalin – Sputnik – 20.06.2023
While the long-anticipated Ukrainian counteroffensive has been going on for more than two weeks already, one thing has become increasingly apparent: Kiev’s troops’ have stalled while they continue to suffer heavy casualties, a security analyst told Sputnik.
Ukraine essentially continues to be sending all its troops at the Russian defenses, sacrificing hundreds, if not thousands, of Ukrainian soldiers and still failing to produce any result that Zelensky and his NATO sponsors could sell as at least a tactical victory.
Speaking to Sputnik, international relations and security analyst Mark Sleboda noted that “there has been essentially no progress by the Kiev regime’s offensive.”
“It is effectively stalled and they continue to take heavy casualties, heavy attrition,” Sleboda said, adding that, in most cases, Ukrainian troops bleed and die “still ten, fifteen kilometers” away from “Russia’s first defensive line.”
According to Sleboda, all this fighting is taking place in what he described as the “throwaway zone”: an area before the actual Russian defensive lines, which the Russian troops deemed unsuitable for “static, heavy defenses, defensive lines with trenches and fortifications.”
Noting how Institute for the Study of War said in a statement that Ukrainian forces may be temporarily pausing counter offensive operations to reevaluate tactics, the analyst suggested it essentially means that the architects of the counteroffensive realized that their approach is not working.
While he did admit that this statement could be a deception, Sleboda argued that it “largely reflects what we’re seeing,” with Ukrainian forces managing to seize into a “string of farm hamlets” at a cost of “so much blood and steel,” only to find themselves the lowlands, with Russian forces raining rockets and shells upon them from fortified positions located on the high ground.
He also stressed that, while resorting to “human wave attacks” allowed Ukrainian forces to drive back some of the Russian screening squads deployed ahead of the actual Russian defensive lines, most of the Kiev regime’s troops who perished in this counteroffensive “died without ever really seeing the enemy,” not to mention that they lost a lot more men than the Russian defenders.
On Tuesday, June 20, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced that Kiev regime forces lost over 400 militants dead during the past 24 hours alone while unsuccessfully attempting to simultaneously advance on several fronts.
RT | June 20, 2023
The European Commission wants member states to cough up €50 billion ($55 billion) to bankroll the Ukrainian government, so it can pay wages and pensions, and commence reconstruction projects, sources cited by Bloomberg have said.
The terms of the proposed bailout are subject to change pending an official announcement on Tuesday, the outlet reported on Tuesday. The package will be financed by direct contributions from member states, as opposed to borrowing from the market.
The aid will be provided in the form of grants, concessional loans and guarantees rather than some “burdensome reconstruction instrument,” the outlet said, adding that the money would be provided between 2024 and 2027.
The Ukrainian budget has been receiving cash injections from Western sponsors to keep it running. Washington and its allies have pledged to help Kiev “for as long as it takes” to defeat Russia, including through the provision of non-military support.
The US alone provided $26.4 billion in budgetary aid between January 2022 and February 2023, according to the Council on Foreign Relations think tank. The aid package announced by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) on February 24 was worth $9.9 billion.
Critics of the policy have claimed Ukraine has a lengthy record of grafting and argued that the money could have been spent by Western nations at home to solve their own immediate problems. Bloomberg sources suggested that the EU funding would be made conditional on Kiev delivering reforms “to improve the rule of law and address corruption.”
According to Reuters, the European Commission is set to publish a report this week about Kiev’s effort, which will state that it has met two of the seven conditions to start membership negotiations. The milestones reportedly relate to judicial reform and media regulation.
Sputnik – 20.06.2023
The trend of non-return to Kiev of representatives of the Ukrainian interior, foreign and defense ministries and special services, who are completing long-term business trips abroad, is gaining momentum, the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) said on Tuesday.
“Along with the mass exodus of the working age population from Ukraine, the trend towards non-return to Kiev of representatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Defense, special services and the Ministry of Internal Affairs is gaining momentum,” the SVR said in a statement.
“This is what many employees of Ukrainian diplomatic institutions accredited in the EU countries do. After completing a long-term business trip, they remain in the host countries, changing their diplomatic status to refugee status,” the SVR said, adding that employees of foreign missions of Ukraine in the countries of the Asia-Pacific region do the same.
Additionally, the SVR said that “mop-ups” are underway in the foreign institutions of Ukraine as Kiev seeks to identify disloyal employees and ensure their early return to their homeland.
By Ahmed Adel | June 20, 2023
The UK has passed legislation that will allow sanctions against Russia to remain in effect until Moscow pays compensation to Ukraine, the British Foreign Office said on June 19. The British Foreign Office also stated that the European country’s law allows sanctioned Russians to transfer their frozen assets for Ukrainian reconstruction.
“The Government is taking powers to maintain Russian sanctions until compensation is paid to Ukraine and is introducing a route for frozen Russian assets to be donated for Ukrainian reconstruction, under new legislation announced by Foreign Secretary James Cleverly today,” the British Foreign Office announced.
In addition, the ministry pointed out that the UK will create a fund that will allow sanctioned Russians to transfer their frozen assets to the reconstruction of Ukraine.
“This will be a voluntary process whereby sanctioned individuals may apply for funds to be released for the express purpose of supporting Ukraine’s recovery and reconstruction. There will be no coercion of individuals to encourage them to transfer funds, nor any offer of sanctions relief in return for making a donation,” the Office audaciously added, although it does highlight the British entitlement of wanting Russians to release their funds for a purpose but without guarantees.
On June 18, the Daily Mail reported that the UK government and Russian businessman Roman Abramovich, who owned the English Premier League football club Chelsea until 2022 when he was forced to sell it due to the British sanctions campaign against Russia, could not agree on the distribution of funds received from the sale of the club as the billionaire wanted the funds to be sent not only to Ukrainians but also to Russians affected by the conflict. The UK government and the European Commission opposed Abramovich’s desire to send funds to Russians.
At the time of the forced sale, Abramovich’s press office said he “wanted the proceeds to be transferred to a charitable foundation for the needs of the victims on both sides of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.”
This latest provocation by Britain comes as the country’s Ministry of Defence released a video on June 14 revealing the advanced long-range drones that will be sent to Ukraine in the coming weeks. The video shows several types of drones, including one firing a torpedo over water and another being catapulted from the deck of a vessel.
“We announced a £92m air defence package, to be provided through the second procurement round,” the video’s caption said.
Despite the publication of the video, the British authorities did not provide details about the equipment. However, it is speculated that autonomous aircraft with a range of more than 200 kilometres will be sent to Kiev. It is worth noting that the UK recently supplied Storm Shadow cruise missiles to Ukraine with a range of over 250 kilometres.
Western countries imposed comprehensive sanctions on Russia after it started a special military operation in Ukraine in February 2022, and provided constant support packages to Kiev in the conflict. However, it has been their economies, especially the British, that have suffered from these sanctions.
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was warned that the UK could be in recession next year as high inflation pushes interest rates to more than 5% before the next general election. With rising borrowing costs on mortgages and loans for millions of households, economists believe the Bank of England could be forced to drive Britain’s economy into a recession to deal with inflation.
Former IMF deputy director Mohamed El-Erian said the Bank of England would be forced to raise interest rates for longer, leading to a recession or near zero growth.
“The risk we now have, you put all that together – sticky inflation, the Bank having to go higher, borrowing costs going up – all that translates into a higher threat of stagflation. I use stag as shorthand for insufficient economic growth. It can be recession, it can be zero growth. This is not about abstract numbers; it’s about something that hits the poor particularly hard,” El-Erian said.
Yet, despite these significant economic problems, the UK establishment continues its centuries-long policy of opposing and challenging Russia, this time in the context of Ukraine. Already having imposed self-detrimental sanctions and funded Ukraine with billions of pounds, the UK will now roll out a major expansion to its cyber defence programme in Ukraine. It will be boosted by an injection of up to £25 million and a two-year expansion.
As demonstrated, London is concocting all sorts of methods, with endless money streams, to challenge Russia despite British citizens facing a once-in-a-lifetime economic crisis. Not only does this prolong the war and suffering, but it also shows Britain’s obsession with challenging Russia, so much so that it cannot even tolerate Russians affected by the war being supported with the frozen funds of Russian billionaires.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.