Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

SDF ‘frustrated’ with US silence over repeated Turkish attacks

The Cradle | August 8, 2023

The US-backed Kurdish militia, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), has become increasingly frustrated with Washington over its failure to condemn continued Turkish attacks against the group, Al-Akhbar daily reported on 8 August.

The Kurdish group has released several statements this month “denouncing the silence” of the US coalition in Syria, and “holding them responsible” for the surge in attacks against their leaders. 

According to the newspaper, Kurdish officials held a recent interview in which they, for the first time, explicitly condemned US silence on Ankara’s strikes. 

The widening of the gap between Washington and its Kurdish proxy can be attributed to three factors, Kurdish sources told Al-Akhbar. 

The first is that some in the SDF continue to see Washington as a permanent partner, while the US wishes to “limit” its relationship with the Kurdish group. The report explains it as Washington’s “keenness not to disturb its relationship with Turkiye.” 

The second is the US failure to help the SDF implement its goal of full self-determination and autonomy in northern Syria. 

The third factor is viewed by the SDF as the “most dangerous,” and is the US plan to forge new alliances with the Arab tribes of the region – which, according to earlier reports, may include merging SDF forces with Arab tribal troops organized by Washington. 

The SDF has long viewed such a plan as a threat to its Kurdish identity. 

According to the Al-Akhbar report, a leader in the Deir Ezzor Military Council – a council of Arab tribesmen organized by the US – recently launched a rebellion against the SDF with support from Washington. 

The Arab tribal leader, Abu Khawla, “would not have dared to rebel against the SDF had it not been for the implicit support of the US,” the report adds. 

On 3 August, a Turkish drone strike resulted in the killing of four SDF members. 

The following day, the SDF released a statement urging Washington to take a clear and final stance on Ankara’s continued strikes against its Kurdish ally. 

With this distance from the US, some have suggested that the SDF has been torn on who to depend on for its future in the country. 

As a result, it has recently held several rounds of talks with Damascus. While failing to reach any agreements regarding its wish to maintain autonomy, the SDF remains on the same page as Bashar al-Assad’s government when it comes to the Turkish occupation of Syria. 

In the past, the two sides have coordinated against the Turkish presence in Syria. 

SDF chief Mazloum Abdi in April expressed openness to potentially merging his forces with the Syrian army at some point in the future. 

August 8, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

A Recent Survey Shows How Significantly Young Poles’ Views Towards Ukraine Have Changed

BY ANDREW KORYBKO | AUGUST 7, 2023

The Conversation, which is a global collaboration platform between academics and journalists that’s funded by a wide range of international research institutions, published the results from a recent survey of 2,000 young Poles aged 16-34 showing how significantly their views towards Ukraine have changed since early 2022. It can be read in full here, but the present piece will share the most interesting highlights before analyzing them in the latest context of newly complicated Polish-Ukrainian ties.

Before doing so, it’s important to briefly draw attention to the credentials of the researchers involved, Felix Krawatzek and Piotr Goldstein. The first is a Senior Researcher at the Centre for East European and International Studies in Berlin and Associate Member of Nuffield College at University of Oxford while the second is a Research Fellow at that same German institution. Both are therefore established Western experts who can’t be accused of being “Russian propagandists” by any stretch of the imagination.

Having preemptively debunked the ad hominem attacks that’ll predictably form the bulk of Western social media’s reaction to their findings, it’s now time to share the highlights from their survey:

———-

* Over half of young Poles don’t want Ukrainian refugees to permanently reside in their country

– “Our analysis found that between 2022 and 2023, increasing numbers of young Poles – now 52%, up from 42% a year ago – believe that refugees should be offered temporary status, with the assumption that they return to Ukraine as soon as it becomes safely possible.”

* Young Catholic & conservative Poles feel stronger about this than others

– “Those young people who self-identify as Catholic in our survey are 10% more likely than others to desire their return to Ukraine when this becomes possible. This is also true of those who support the far-right Konfederacja, a party that has opposed the Polish response to the war in Ukraine, who are 13% more likely to express that view than others.”

* Over one-third of young Poles want their government to become neutral towards Ukraine

– “In 2022, an overwhelming majority of 83% argued that the government should support Ukraine – but this number has changed drastically. Now, 65% of respondents back continuous support for Ukraine, whereas the remaining 34% wish for Poland to stay neutral.”

* Older young Poles and those living outside of big cities feel stronger about this than others

– “In particular, the oldest people in our sample of young Poles (those aged 25-34) express the strongest wish for political neutrality, as do those from cities with fewer than 500,000 inhabitants and young people who have not engaged in helping Ukrainians over the last 18 months.”

* Young Poles, and especially conservative ones, are increasingly embracing peace and neutrality

– “Asked about the type of support that people consider appropriate for Ukraine, our most recent (2023) data shows that only 2% of young Poles want the national army to be involved in the Ukraine war. And while 60% support offering humanitarian aid, only 28% want Poland to offer weapons. Those supporting the far-right (roughly 20% of our respondents) are most likely to oppose the sending of weapons.”

———-

Quite clearly, the rapid rise of the anti-establishment Confederation party played a pivotal role in shaping young Poles’ views towards the NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine and their attitudes towards refugees from that battleground state. They’re a political force to be reckoned with and might even become their country’s kingmakers after this fall’s national elections, though that’s precisely why there’s a credible fear that the ruling party might brand them with the scarlet letter of being “Russian agents” before then.

About that, they formed a so-called “Russian influence commission” earlier this summer that many at the time interpreted as an attempt to discredit the liberal–globalist “Civic Platform” opposition party that’s regarded by many as being German proxies. That prediction still stands but can now be expanded to include the Confederation party as possible targets too due to the socio-political influence that they now wield as proven by this latest survey.

Another factor that certainly played a role in shaping young Poles’ views towards this conflict but which wasn’t addressed in The Conversation’s survey was Kiev trying to trick Warsaw into starting World War III after Ukraine accidentally bombed Poland last November then lied that Russia was allegedly responsible. This incident vindicated those like the Confederation party who hitherto claimed that the Ukrainian leadership can’t be trusted, thus further fueling their rise and the associated popularity of their views.

It can accordingly be argued that Kiev’s blatant lies also account for why one-third of young Poles now want their government to become neutral towards Ukraine and only 28% are in favor of continuing to send it weapons. After all, their lives likely flashed before their eyes during the brief period when it was unclear exactly who was responsible for the unprecedented bombing of NATO territory, and this could have left a strong impression that might have made them more pragmatic towards this conflict.

Another constructive critique that can be made about The Conversation’s survey is that it didn’t attempt to determine the possible role that Ukraine’s recent criticisms of Poland might have played in shaping young Poles’ views. Their research was carried out from May-June 2023, which coincided with  Zelensky’s rage from early May that he directed at Poland and neighboring EU countries for their unilateral ban of most Ukrainian agricultural imports that was imposed to protect their farmers.

In hindsight, this was the start of a new trend that began to manifest itself more fully late last month when Kiev once again verbally attacked Poland after Warsaw said that it’ll unilaterally continue this ban even after the European Commission’s temporary deal expires in mid-September. That prompted a quickly escalating tit-for-tat that led to each side summoning the other’s ambassadors, after which their leaders tweeted about this scandal and expressed polar opposite views about who’s responsible.

The Polish Deputy Foreign Minister then expanded the scope of their disagreements to include the World War II-era genocide of Poles in Volhynia by Hitler’s Ukrainian collaborators, which in turn led to Zelensky’s senior advisor predicting that post-conflict bilateral ties will be characterized by competition. Intrepid readers can learn more about this here since the details are beyond the scope of the present piece, but the rest should simply be aware of how complicated their relations have since become.

Keeping in mind the highlights of this latest survey as well as the corresponding analysis thereof, it’s undeniable that young Poles’ views towards Ukraine have significantly changed, which will likely influence the outcome of this fall’s national elections. Kiev is losing the hearts and minds of this important demographic, many of whom are now embracing the anti-establishment Confederation party, and Poland’s ruling party must properly respond to this trend if it wants to remain in power.

August 7, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Helping Palestinians in need is not ‘terrorism’; they are the victims of Israeli terrorism

By Ibrahim Hewitt | MEMO | August 6, 2023

I know none of the details of the arrest of Palestinian Amin Abu Rashid and his daughter Israa in Holland recently. I do know, however, that the track record of European governments in levelling allegations of “funding terrorism” against Palestinian-European organisations over the past twenty years or so has been abysmal. In almost every case, when taken to court the authorities have lost the legal argument.

Will this happen again with Abu Rashid and Israa? Time will tell, but what is interesting is that it introduces to the world another no doubt well-funded “Israeli activist group”, Ad Kan.

It is well known, of course, that all allegations of “terrorism” and “funding Hamas” arise from “intelligence” shared by Israel and its propaganda groups in Israel and abroad. When the charity of which I was chair of trustees for almost 25 years, Interpal, was declared to be a “specially designated global terrorist entity” by the US Treasury in 2003, our name was simply one of a number of organisations and individuals on a list supplied by the Israeli foreign ministry for George W Bush to rubber stamp. The then US president announced to the world 20 years ago this month that our assets in the US were being frozen. I only found out from the BBC website. Interpal has never had any assets in the US, so Bush was simply involved in gesture politics at Israel’s instigation. When the British charity regulator asked the US treasury to provide the evidence for the “terrorist” designation of Interpal, none was forthcoming aside from half a dozen press cuttings.

Post-designation, $120,000 donated to Interpal was taken by a major US bank because all transactions in dollars have to pass through New York. The bank grabbed the $120,000 and still has it.

So when I read that, “Abu Rashid leads the Israa Foundation… which is part of a network known as the Union of [sic] Good.” and that, “The US Department of the Treasury labelled the Union of Good [as] a terrorist group in 2008,” any credibility that these Israeli “investigations” might have had disintegrated. We know how these things work, and credible evidence has little or no role to play.

A number of things have to be borne in mind with such “news”, the first of which is that just because the US Treasury puts an organisation or individual on a “terrorist list”, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the group or person in question is actually a “terrorist”. It simply means that Israel is trying yet again — it’s never really stopped — to prevent any humanitarian aid from getting through to the Palestinians living under its brutal military occupation and siege in the Gaza Strip.

After a number of years trying to have Interpal removed from the same list, our New York lawyer was told by Treasury officials “off the record” that our designation was a “political decision” and State Department intervention would be needed to remove the charity from the list. It wasn’t due to any proven criminal activity; if it was, we would surely have been closed down once the British authorities were presented with the evidence, neither of which happened. Furthermore, a senior Metropolitan Police officer said: “The absence of any police involvement is hugely significant.” I once asked a very senior British Army officer who was showing me around a major military base in the south of England if he was aware of the allegations against Interpal and, by implication, myself as its chairman. “Of course,” he replied, “Interpal; terrorist entity; we know it’s all a load of rubbish.”

When Wikileaks released a transcript of a conversation between US and UK officials about Interpal, the phrase “absent a smoking gun” was mentioned in the discussion about closing Interpal down. In other words, the Americans had no evidence. And the British security authorities, we know, were clear that Israeli “intelligence” claims would not stand up in open court.

What’s more, let us not forget that Abu Rashid and his family are Palestinians who are prevented by Israel from exercising their legitimate right of return to their homeland. Israeli “intelligence” — now there’s a thought — is, therefore, hardly likely to be objective. Israel under Benjamin Netanyahu has been trying for years to get the definition of a “Palestinian refugee” changed so that if the apartheid state allows a few thousand to return it will be seen as having fulfilled its duty. Allowing the 750,000 Palestinian refugees ethnically cleansed in 1948 or their descendants to return to their homes remains a condition of Israel’s membership of the UN that has never been fulfilled. Netanyahu has even been putting pressure on successive US presidents to close down the UN agency set up specifically to help “Palestine refugees”, UNRWA. No UNRWA, no refugees, is his warped Zionist logic.

The article in The National Interest covering Abu Rashid’s arrest is straight from the Israeli propaganda playbook — to use a term from the article — in that it is taken as read that allegations of terrorism are true, without any due legal process, without any evidence being presented in court, and without anyone being found guilty. It does mention the Holy Land Foundation in the US, whose senior officials are in prison and are likely to be for many more years, but it is silent on the fact that the “trial has been criticised by some NGOs, including Human Rights Watch” and was described as a “grave miscarriage of justice” which “capitalised on post-9/11 Islamophobic hysteria” in order to get a conviction. Indeed, “Civil rights attorney Emily Ratner wrote that the use of anonymous and hearsay evidence by the prosecutors was ‘constitutionally questionable’ at best.”

There is also the simple fact to consider that Hamas is a national resistance movement, and resistance against a military occupation is legitimate under international law. That is undeniable, and yet the level of propaganda put out by Israel and its Zionist allies in the West, including media outlets, is such that this is ignored, deliberately. Demonise the victims of Israel’s state terrorism — and the state was founded on terrorism against the British and the Palestinians, remember — and it is an easy next step to demonise those who seek to support the victims with humanitarian aid.

Zionist pressure and threats led to Interpal’s bank accounts being closed down, making it impossible for the charity to operate. Nevertheless, when it was distributing a relatively meagre average of £5 million per annum to Palestinians in desperate need and local community groups trying to fill gaps in healthcare and education provision caused by decades of Israel’s brutal military occupation, it did so with total impartiality. There was never any question of the charity asking individuals or organisations if they were Hamas supporters or Fatah supporters, or supporters of any other Palestinian faction; to do so would have broken Britain’s charity laws, which insist, rightly, that aid must be given solely on the basis of need, and nothing else.

I must confess that I have never Googled to see how much one surface to air missile, for example, might cost; or one AK47 assault rifle. To do so would provide the sort of “evidence” of evil intent that the Zionists and their lackeys in the West would jump on with glee. However, I guess that £5m a year is hardly going to fill anyone’s arsenal, especially when every Interpal penny has been accounted for on charitable expenditure in any case.

The argument of terrorist funding is, therefore, unsustainable, and always has been as far as Interpal is concerned. Whether it will be the same for Amin Abu Rashid and his daughter Israa will no doubt come out as their case proceeds through the courts, if it actually gets that far. On past experience, though, I wouldn’t trust the “evidence” presented against them one iota, especially if it comes from Israeli sources. Israel has too much invested in trying to block all humanitarian aid from getting to the Palestinians, and thus making life as miserable as possible for them in the hope that they will give up and leave their homeland.

In Zionist terminology this is called “silent transfer”. It is an evil concept with an evil objective, which is hardly surprising given the racist nature of Zionism and the state it underpins. Helping Palestinians in desperate need is not “terrorism”; they are the victims of Israel’s state terrorism.

August 6, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

The Jeddah Talks Backfired On Zelensky

BY ANDREW KORYBKO | AUGUST 6, 2023

The latest Western-centric Ukrainian peace talks in Jeddah were intended to sway the Global South towards Kiev’s side in the NATO-Russian proxy war by pressuring these countries to support Zelensky’s so-called “peace formula”. That goal was always doomed to fail from the get-go, however, since this event also provided the representatives of neutral countries like China and India with the opportunity to share their own envisaged endgame to the conflict as well as their shared Russian partner’s.

This resultant dialogue led to the meeting being a double-edged sword for Zelensky. On the one hand, he had yet another high-profile opportunity to repeat his talking points about why Russia needs to be punished for its special operation, but this time with all of that country’s BRICS partners in attendance. On the other hand, however, China and India ensured that his demands weren’t the only scenario on the table. Just like Zelensky, they too were able to share these views with a diverse international audience.

As was expected, no consensus was reached on the way forward, but Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Rybkov revealed on Sunday that Russia’s BRICS partners plan to brief it about the event. This is much more significant than the simple courtesy that it might appear to be at first glance since Moscow will be able to obtain a better understanding of all the attendees’ positions, which will in turn enable it to fine-tune its diplomacy towards those countries that might be interested in a compromise solution.

About that, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov debunked the speculation swirling around the Mainstream Media and even among some in the Alt-Media Community alleging that Russia wants to control more than the four former Ukrainian territories that united with it last September. He reaffirmed on the same day as Ryabkov’s earlier statement that “We just want to control all the land we have now written into our Constitution as ours”, which aligns with what President Putin strongly suggested in June.

This position was already known to Russia’s BRICS partners with whom it’s candidly discussed the special operation, particularly the Chinese and Indian representatives who attended the Jeddah talks. Special Representative on Eurasian Affairs Li Hui and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval each visited Moscow several months back, during which time they met with President Putin. Considering this context, it’s likely that they brought up his stance during the Jeddah talks when explaining their countries’.

Via Special Representative Li and National Security Advisor Doval, President Putin was therefore able to convey his country’s pragmatic position towards this conflict’s endgame to the largest international audience so far, thus breaking through the West’s information blockade. Upon learning that he doesn’t have any maximalist goals unlike Zelensky, those other representatives whose countries truly want peace as soon as possible might be in favor of tacitly recognizing Russia’s gains in exchange for a ceasefire.

August 6, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Washington ‘Terrified’ Trump May Defeat Biden in 2024 Election

By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 04.08.2023

The indictment of Donald Trump indicates that the Biden administration is trying to prevent the 45th US president from effectively campaigning in the 2024 election race, analysts have told Sputnik.

Former US President Donald Trump pleaded not guilty on Thursday to four federal charges related to his alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The first hearing for the trial is expected on August 28.

The ex-POTUS was indicted earlier this week as part of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into Trump’s purported push to reverse the results of the election, which was followed by the January 6, 2021 US Capitol breach.

“The case brought against Trump on Thursday is another example of judicial intervention in the electoral process,” Dr. Harvey Schantz, professor of political science at the State University of New York at Plattsburgh, said.

He added that the 45th US president’s indictment “goes to the core of the American political system because it involves the transfer of power” from a Republican Party president to a Democratic Party president. According to Schantz, such a change is “more momentous than ever because the two parties have very alternative views of public policy and markedly different supporters.”

The political scientist argued that the Trump indictment “divides people along party affiliations, exacerbating differences between Democrats and Republicans and between Trump and [US President Joe] Biden voters.”

Schantz pointed out that “the multiple cases” against the former American president “have strengthened his hold on the Republican presidential nomination, and contrary to conventional wisdom, have not as yet hurt Trump in the 2024 general election contest, in which polls have Trump and Biden running neck and neck.”

Dr. Nicholas Waddy, political analyst and Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred State College, for his part, told Sputnik that Thursday’s arraignment of Trump “[…] represents a new low for the Biden Administration, progressives, and the Deep State,” who he said “are, in effect, trying to criminalize dissent, criticism, differences of opinion, and political opposition.”

Waddy insisted that ex-US president “isn’t being charged because of his actions, or his words, but because of who he is and what he represents.”

“The Deep State, including [Attorney General] Merrick Garland and [Special Counsel] Jack Smith, hates Trump with every fiber of its being. They are terrified that he might be able to defeat [President] Joe Biden in the 2024 election and win a second term as president, and thus they, and numerous other state and federal prosecutors, have decided on a strategy of ‘lawfare’ to kneecap him as a candidate,” the political analyst claimed.

According to him, these officials “would love to imprison Trump for the rest of his life, but their primary aim is to tie him up in legal knots throughout 2024 so that he cannot campaign effectively, and so that the entire election revolves around a debate about Donald Trump’s criminality, rather than Joe Biden’s performance in office.”

“The goal here – to interfere with the electoral process itself – is so transparent that no fair-minded person could deny it,” Waddy added. He claimed that “It isn’t Trump that poses an ‘existential’ threat to Democrats, It’s democracy itself, and that’s what they are trying to snuff out.”

August 4, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | Leave a comment

France Declared That It Won’t Let The Nigerien Junta Kick It Out Of The Country

BY ANDREW KORYBKO | AUGUST 3, 2023

Speculation is swirling about whether Niger’s patriotic military junta will follow its reported ban on uranium and gold exports to France with a demand for that country’s troops to leave the country after the example that was recently set by the de facto Burkinabe-Malian federation. That would be a risky move to make, however, since France just declared that it won’t take orders from them. Here’s what PBS reported about this on Thursday:

“Even if Niger’s military rulers demand the withdrawal of French troops — as happened in neighboring Mali and Burkina Faso — it wouldn’t make a difference, said Anne-Claire Legendre, a spokesperson for the French foreign minister during a press briefing on Wednesday. ‘We don’t answer to the putschists. We recognize one constitutional order and one legitimacy only, that of President Bazoum,’ she said.”

Considering this, the junta would either discredit itself by making a major demand that France confirmed it will defy or risk being ousted from power by its former colonizer in the event that it tries to impose its will, both scenarios of which aren’t in their objective interests. French President Emmanuel Macron warned last week that “The President will not tolerate any attack against France and its interests”, hence the reason to expect it to resolutely respond in the second-mentioned scenario.

Nevertheless, not directly addressing the issue of French troops in Niger will likely prove impossible for the junta since these forces will eventually require supplies once their existing ones at their air base in the capital start running low, which will lead to them breaking the closed border regime unless it’s lifted before then. They already did so on at least one occasion so far as admitted by the junta shortly after they seized power and issued that decree, but repeated violations would prompt a dilemma.

On the one hand, letting them flout this rule would deprive Paris of the pretext that it might be trying to provoke for directly attacking the junta in the unlikely event that the planned NATO-backed Nigerian-led ECOWAS invasion of Niger is called off, but its new military rulers would be discredited. On the other hand, while firing on them would be a strong reaffirmation of Niger’s sovereignty, it would also almost certainly lead to an overwhelming French response that could escalate to a Libyan-like regime change.

Unlike in Syria where the US’ military forces are based in far-flung but still strategically positioned parts of the country, France’s military forces in Niger are located in the capital, which means that they can’t be ignored. The junta also recently accused them of plotting airstrikes on the presidential palace in order to free ousted President Mohamed Bazoum who’s being held there, thus making their continued presence a potentially imminent threat to national security.

France’s preemptive refusal to withdraw from Niger if the junta demands that it do so on the pretext that they’re illegitimate putschists contrasts with its compliance with Mali’s and Burkina Faso’s earlier such demands that were made by their own military-led interim governments. This suggests that France has decided to draw a line in the sand signaling that it’ll fight to preserve its last regional bastion, which bodes ill for the future of the Nigerien junta.

August 3, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

French invasion of Niger could turn into all-out Franco-African war

By Drago Bosnic | August 3, 2023

Ever since the Nigerien military under the command of General Abdourahamane Tchiani took power on July 26, there has been an exponential increase in tensions between Niamey and its former colonial masters in Paris. This has gone to the point where France is now seriously considering invading the West African country. The exploitation of “former” French colonies has continued unabated for over half a century even after they were granted a semblance of independence and Paris has been the main beneficiary of this one-sided relationship. Combined with France’s inability to deal with various terrorist insurgencies in the region, this unadulterated neocolonial theft has been the primary reason behind a series of popular uprisings in the Sahel.

Paris is now faced with a strategic dilemma. If it lets Niger continue its path toward actual independence, France will be unable to continue exploiting the country’s natural resources. Namely, several of its former colonies have served as a source of massive wealth extraction and given the recent troubles Paris is facing, these resources might be more important than ever. On the other hand, recent geopolitical changes in the area have left France largely impuissant. After the defeat of its nearly decade-long intervention in Chad last year, Paris has been left with bases in Ivory Coast, Senegal and Gabon. Neither of these can be used effectively as a staging ground for an invasion due to the limited number of troops stationed there.

However, even if France was to somehow find enough soldiers to launch the invasion, none of the three countries border Niger. Gabon is the least logical option, as Cameroon and Nigeria stand between it and Niger, leaving only bases in Senegal and Ivory Coast as viable possibilities. And yet, this is where the issues of basic geography for Paris stop and actual geopolitical ones start. Namely, in order to effectively use its forces from both countries to reach Niger, France needs to go through Mali and Burkina Faso, both of which have already stated that any military action against Niamey will be tantamount to aggression against them. In other words, if France wants to attack Niger, it will also need to attack two more African countries.

A possible alternative for Paris could be the use of its neocolonial influence in the ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States, also known as CEDEAO in French and Portuguese). However, this leaves its members at risk of more anti-Western uprisings, as the belligerent power pole is deeply unpopular in the area. Some members of the ECOWAS, such as Nigeria, might be the best geographical option, but given the fact that Paris has little to no influence in Abuja, this is extremely unlikely. Not to mention the fact that Nigeria has more than enough problems of its own and the last thing it needs is to serve as the staging ground for a neocolonial invasion. Logically, this leaves Chad as the only option, but this too is a very long shot.

To make matters worse for France, Algeria has joined the chorus of Niger’s allies. The French archrival that spearheaded the independence of many of its “former” colonies in the 1960s is effectively an African superpower, heavily armed and highly motivated to never allow Paris or any other Western (neo)colonial power to establish a firm foothold in the region. This still leaves Chad as the only viable option for an invasion, as the country was an instrumental staging ground for virtually all French military operations in the area, including the illegal invasion of Libya. However, reaching Chad at this point is easier said than done and this still leaves most of the geopolitical issues unresolved. Also, all geographical considerations remain.

Namely, the Nigerien capital of Niamey is located in the southwestern corner of the country, close to the border with Burkina Faso. Thus, even in the unlikely case that none of its neighbors intervene, Niger is still left with a comfortable window of opportunity to resist the invasion. This could end in a disaster for France, as yet another military defeat in the area would inevitably lead to a complete collapse of the neocolonial system it left in place in the 1960s. On the other hand, if Paris doesn’t intervene, this will happen anyway, albeit at a somewhat slower pace. Either way, the dilemma inevitably results in a geopolitical catch-22, as leaving things as they are could also encourage others to revolt against Western neocolonialism elsewhere in Africa and possibly beyond.

As for France’s NATO allies, they’ve been largely quiet and non-militant, including the United States (a rather uncommon feature in their usually belligerent foreign policy). Washington DC has a military base in the central part of the country, the Niger Air Base 201, run by US AFRICOM (African Command), but its operational capabilities are mostly limited to drone strikes, with the troops deployed there largely composed of a skeleton crew that provides basic security. Coupled with the recent cooling of US-French relations, this makes it highly unlikely that the Pentagon would give the go-ahead for any sort of American involvement in a possible French invasion, even though it’s in Washington DC’s interest to keep Western neocolonialism in Africa alive for as long as possible.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

August 3, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

It’s Likely That Algeria Will Play An Important Role If West Africa Descends Into War

BY ANDREW KORYBKO | AUGUST 1, 2023

“West Africa Is Gearing Up For A Regional War” as it bifurcates into two clearly defined blocs over whether to invade or defend Niger, which experienced a potentially game-changing patriotic military coup last week. The preceding hyperlinked analysis explains the rapidly emerging military-strategic dynamics more in detail, but they can be summarized as setting the stage for what might soon become the next proxy battleground in the New Cold War.

NATO supports a Nigerian-led ECOWAS invasion to reinstall Niger’s ousted leader while Russia backs Burkina Faso and Mali, which have de facto merged into a federation and jointly announced that any attack on that neighboring nation will be regarded as a declaration of war against both of them. Those two are trilaterally cooperating with Guinea, which is also under military rule like they are and just threw its political weight behind the Nigerien junta, but it’s unclear whether it’ll militarily defend it too.

The Interim President of regional military powerhouse Chad earlier traveled to Niamey in an attempt to broker a compromise that could avert war, but he appears to have been unsuccessful, though his country also hasn’t yet committed to supporting either side of this potentially coming conflict. This places Chad in a kingmaker position since its decision whether and when to intervene could greatly determine the outcome.

Amidst these fast-moving developments, Russian publicly financed international media flagship TASS confirmed on Tuesday that the Algerian Chief of Staff arrived in Moscow the day prior to meet with his host’s Defense Minister. They also added that the President visited St. Petersburg in June to attend the International Economic Forum there, during which time he met with President Putin to clinch an enhanced strategic partnership deal, while the Prime Minister was there last week for the Africa Summit.

It deserves mentioning that Russia is Algeria’s top military partner and has remained so for decades, with this relationship persisting in spite of Moscow neglecting most of Africa until just a few years ago. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) confirmed in this spring’s “Trends In International Arms Transfers” report that a whopping 73% of Algeria’s military imports from 2018-2022 were from Russia, which testifies to the enduring strength of their military ties.

Accordingly, Algeria has one of the largest, best-equipped, and most modern militaries anywhere in Africa, which is why it’s rightly regarded as among the continent’s most powerful countries. For that reason, its Chief of Staff’s latest visit to Russia in the current regional context isn’t any small matter since it suggests that Algiers intends to coordinate with Moscow regarding the wider war that might be about to break out upon the expiry of ECOWAS’ ultimatum this Sunday to reinstall Niger’s ousted leader.

Although Algeria and Russia both condemned the Nigerien coup late last week, each of their respective statements were shared prior to ECOWAS making its ultimatum that was subsequently supported by France and the US, both of which have troops in that country. The previously mentioned Burkinabe-Malian joint statement importantly warned that an invasion of Niger risks repeating the Libyan scenario by destabilizing the entire region and thus exacerbating terrorist threats to everyone.

This is an accurate assessment that justifies Russia and Algeria working together to avert that worst-case scenario and jointly coordinating their response to it if this conflict ends up becoming inevitable, thus explaining why the Algerian Chief of Staff decided to visit Russia right after his Prime Minister just did. The reason for his visit is clearly to discuss the planned NATO-backed Nigerian-led ECOWAS invasion of Niger, which also happens to border Algeria for those readers who aren’t aware.

It’s likely that Algeria will play an important role if West Africa descends into war by virtue of its geography and military prowess. At the very least, Algiers might refuse to allow French warplanes to transit through its airspace, thus forcing them to risk being fired at if they violate this possible order or find another route to Niger via Libya (which might also be formally closed off to them) or somewhere else. The point is that Algeria can greatly complicate France’s military logistics in any upcoming conflict.

Not only that, but this North African nation could allow Russia to transit through its airspace (provided that NATO doesn’t impede this through dangerous brinksmanship over the Mediterranean) to reliably supply the de facto Burkinabe-Malian federation with arms, food, and whatever else it might need. In a sense, this would be spiritually similar to the erstwhile Soviet Union’s intervention in support of Ethiopia during the Ogaden War when it was invaded by Somalia, though of course key differences exist.

Moving along, the other role that Algeria could play is a direct one, though it can’t be taken for granted that its leadership will feel comfortable with this since it could fear that any significant deployment towards or into Niger could be taken advantage of by its long-time Moroccan nemesis. If it decides to do so, however, then moving its forces – including air defense systems – closer to the frontier could possibly deter France and Nigeria. Should those two still attack Niger, then Algeria might intervene in its support.

The Burkinabe-Malian joint statement warning about a repeat of the Libyan scenario scares Algeria since it struggled against terrorism during what’s regarded as its “Black Decade” from 1991-2002, not to mention more recently but to a much lesser extent since the NATO War on Libya in 2011. Its objective national interests are therefore served by at the very least complicating France’s military logistics in any upcoming conflict even if it ultimately decides not to get directly involved like Burkina Faso and Mali will.

Additionally, many might not know that Algeria has consistently espoused a revolutionary ideology throughout the decades despite the radical changes in the world order since its independence. This explains why it retained ties with Russia despite the latter’s difficult decade after the USSR’s dissolution and also didn’t cut off relations with Syria over the past decade either even though the Arab League did. Algeria’s leadership thus also has an ideological interest in complicating an imperialist invasion of Niger.

Taken together, these security and ideological interests account for why the Algerian Chief of Staff just flew to Moscow. His country wants to coordinate with its strategic partner in responding to this regional crisis as well as the wider war that might soon break out. While Algeria’s role isn’t as important as Nigeria’s could be in leading the NATO-backed ECOWAS invasion of Niger nor Chad’s in possibly being the kingmaker, it’s still pretty significant and shouldn’t be ignored or downplayed.

August 1, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

Niger junta says France plotting to ‘intervene militarily’

AFP | July 31, 2023

Niger’s new junta on Monday accused France of seeking to “intervene militarily” to reinstate deposed President Mohamed Bazoum as tension mounted with the former colonial power and neighbours.

Bazoum, a western ally whose election just over two years ago was a watershed in Niger’s troubled history, was toppled on July 26 by the elite Presidential Guard.

Guards chief General Abdourahamane Tiani declared himself leader — but his claim has been shunned internationally and the West African bloc ECOWAS has given him a week to hand back power.

Bazoum’s PNDS party on Monday warned Niger risked becoming a “dictatorial and totalitarian regime” after a series of arrests.

On Monday morning, Oil Minister Mahamane Sani Mahamadou — the son of influential former president Mahamadou Issoufou — and Mining Minister Ousseini Hadizatou were arrested, the party charged.

The head of the PNDS’s national executive committee, Fourmakoye Gado, was also arrested, it said.

The junta had previously arrested the interior minister, the transport minister and a former defence minister, the party said.

On Sunday, French President Emmanuel Macron vowed “immediate and uncompromising” action if French citizens or interests were attacked after thousands rallied outside the French embassy.

Some tried to enter the compound but were dispersed by tear gas.

‘Plotting intervention’

The junta on Monday accused France of plotting an intervention.

“In its search for ways and means to intervene militarily in Niger, France with the complicity of some Nigeriens, held a meeting with the chief of staff of the Nigerien National Guard to obtain the necessary political and military authorisation,” the putschists said on national TV.

They also said six people needed hospitalisation after the embassy security services fired tear gas against the rally.

A demonstration in support of the junta was also held in Zinder, eastern Niger, on Monday.

Tough ECOWAS warning

On Sunday, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) sounded a tough warning.

The bloc demanded that Bazoum be reinstated within a week, failing which it would take “all measures” to restore constitutional order, which “may include the use of force”.

“No more time for us to send a warning signal… It’s time for action,” said ECOWAS chairman Bola Tinubu, president of Nigeria — Niger’s neighbour to the southeast and the regional superpower.

Russia called for the swift return of “the rule of law” and “restraint from all parties so that this doesn’t result in human casualties”.

Niger became the third Sahel country in less than three years, following neighbours Mali and Burkina Faso, to be shaken by a military coup.

In all three nations, a jihadist insurgency strained fragile governments, stoked anger in the military and rained economic blows on some of the world’s poorest countries.

The overthrow of elected presidents has been accompanied by anti-French, pro-Russian demonstrations.

Crucial ally

Protesters say France, the country’s traditional ally, has failed to shield them against the jihadists, whereas Russia would be a stronger ally.

In Mali, a 2020 putsch led to a bust-up with France which last year withdrew its troops as the junta brought in Russian paramilitaries.

France also quit Burkina Faso after two coups last year brought in a junta that adopted a nationalist line.

The withdrawals prompted France to reconfigure its decade-long anti-jihadist strategy in the Sahel, concentrating on Niger, where it fields 1,500 troops with a major air base near Niamey.

The latest coup, according to the putschists, was a response to “the degradation of the security situation” linked to the jihadist conflict, as well as corruption and economic woes.

International critics have ratcheted up pressure, targeting trade and development aid.

ECOWAS has suspended all commercial and financial transactions, while France, the European Union and the United States, which has 1,100 troops in Niger, have either cut off support or threatened to do so.

Germany suspended financial aid and development cooperation on Monday, and UN humanitarian operations have also been put on hold.

Niger has seen four coups since independence from France in 1960 and numerous other attempts, including two previously against Bazoum.

The 63-year-old is a former interior minister whose elections marked Niger’s first peaceful transition of power since independence.

August 1, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Al Jazeera & Politico Shed Light On The Real Reasons Why Nigeria Might Invade Niger

By ANDREW KORYBKO | AUGUST 1, 2023

The fast-moving developments since last week’s patriotic military coup in Niger strongly suggest that “West Africa Is Gearing Up For A Regional War” between NATO-backed Nigerian-led ECOWAS and the Russian-backed de facto Burkinabe-Malian federation over that country’s future government. Those readers who aren’t aware of what’s been happening should reference the preceding hyperlinked analysis for background before proceeding with the rest of this piece, which assumes familiarity with the subject.

Al Jazeera and Politico likely didn’t intend to, but two of their articles on recent events shed light on the real reasons why Nigeria might invade Niger. Respectively titled “A test of wills: Can ECOWAS reverse Niger coup and establish a new order?” and “What Niger’s coup means for Nigeria”, they both suggest that ulterior motives are at play beyond restoring that country’s ousted leader just for the supposedly principled sake of defending democracy.

Beginning with Al Jazeera’s piece, it starts off by quoting the speech that newly inaugurated Nigerian President Bola Tinubu gave at ECOWAS early last month after he was elected chairman of this regional bloc. He said that “We must stand firm on democracy. There is no governance, freedom and rule of law without democracy.” This outlet noted that his words were soon put to the test two weeks later, hinting that he’s pressured to make good on rhetoric about something that he didn’t expect would happen.

They then cite the opinion of a former director of political affairs at the ECOWAS Commission who declared that “With Tinubu’s posture, we can see that Nigeria is back on stage.” This person’s position makes them biased towards that group and its regional role, but their particular quote inadvertently reveals that Tinubu is talking tough towards Niger for the sake of boosting his country’s prestige. To their credit, Al Jazeera seemed to have picked up on this as well as evidenced by what they later wrote:

“Within Nigeria, Tinubu’s assertiveness is being perceived as an intent to shore up popularity abroad while he is increasingly unpopular at home. His victory in the February presidential election is being contested by the two largest opposition parties who cite widespread electoral malpractice and claim he was ineligible to run. A string of early reforms – including the removal of a popular fuel subsidy – intended to overhaul Africa’s biggest economy has also led to spiralling costs of living.”

This is a damning explanation of the ulterior domestic motives behind the ultimatum that Tinubu gave Niger on behalf of the bloc that he now chairs. It’s basically a risky distraction from problems at home that’s being justified on the pretext of defending democracy, which uncoincidentally aligns with one of the mantras of the West’s so-called ‘rules-based order’. Al Jazeera also cited an Africa expert at Oxford Analytica who alleged that reversing the recent regime change could help thwart terrorist threats.

On the other hand, a Nigeria expert at the International Crisis Group told them that “Military interventions could also be unpopular in Nigeria and possibly lead to protests.” They also warned that this could “reduce pressure on jihadists and bandits in the Lake Chad area and create room for the expansion of their operation.” All things considered, Al Jazeera’s article on this subject was surprisingly critical of Nigeria’s potential invasion of Niger, thus making it a refreshing read.

The same can be said for Politico’s, which is much shorter but still contains some similarly damning explanations of what’s really driving events behind the scenes. They started off by quoting a senior fellow at the influential Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) who fearmongered that “Not only will failure to act send a signal that Tinubu and ECOWAS can only bark, but not bite, it will embolden military adventurers in other West African countries as well as the Russia-backed Wagner Group.”

The reality is corrupt Western puppets’ neglect of their countries’ objective national interests led to deteriorating economic and security situations that prompted the region’s spree of military coups, not anything else. Regarding Wagner, these juntas then tend to turn towards this group (whose post-mutiny ties with the Kremlin are clarified here) since it specializes in “Democratic Security”, or counter-Hybrid Warfare tactics and strategies that readers can learn about in the foregoing hyperlinked analyses.

Russia’s interest in securing their national models of democracy from (mostly Western-emanating) hybrid threats is twofold since it sincerely wants to empower them to become sovereign subjects in the Multipolar World Order but it also benefits by stopping the West from exploiting their resources. If the West treated African states as truly equal partners like Russia does, then it would stamp out terrorism and stop subjugating them as vassals so that they wouldn’t have a reason to consider switching partners.

With this fact-check in mind, it’s clear that Politico’s cited CFR expert explained the reasons why the West wants Nigeria to invade Niger instead of even attempting to put forth a reason why it would allegedly be in that country’s national interests to do so. This New Cold War bloc fears that the region’s newest junta will ally with Russia via Wagner and thus further accelerate the collapse of their influence across the continent, though this might be averted if Nigeria forcibly reinstalls the old regime.

Just like Al Jazeera, Politico also deserves credit for implying that Tinubu has ulterior domestic motives behind doing the West’s bidding when writing that “Nigeria’s influence has been slipping in recent years, as it grapples with economic malaise and security challenges that festered under the prior president, Muhammadu Buhari. Since succeeding Buhari, Tinubu has been trying to placate different religious and ethnic groups at home upset over the February election results, which the opposition has disputed.”

What these two outlets’ pieces on this subject show is that newly inaugurated Nigerian President Tinubu might invade Niger out of desperation to distract from economic and political problems at home despite telling the world that this is to defend democracy in that neighboring nation. The corrupt confluence of his domestic interests and the West’s geopolitical ones greatly raises the odds that this could soon happen, though it remains to be seen whether it’ll succeed and how strong the blowback might be.

August 1, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

One Pfizer jab, 20 months of battling to keep hope alive

By Brian Howard | TCW Defending Freedom | January 23, 2023

It has been a very long 20 months since my one and only Pfizer vaccine. I was hesitant but seeing friends and family seemingly OK I decided to ‘do the right thing’ as we were told. The regret still lives on, of course, although over time you do begin to forgive yourself and recognise the huge pressures we were all under.

Within ten days it started. Pins and needles in the hands at night. Then numbness down the whole right side of my body. Then the constant muscle twitches all over the legs. Within a month the tremors started. By this stage I’d already been fobbed off by my GP and a private neurologist. They didn’t want to know or simply didn’t have a clue how to help. I’ll never forget another neurologist suggesting I even take the second jab. Trust in the system had gone at that point. The symptoms continued. Random jolty movements of the body, intense dizziness, headaches and head pressure, brain-shaking sensations, adrenaline rushes, some elevated heart rate episodes. By the six-month point I was rapidly losing hope. You try to stay positive but it really can be a battle. I was fortunate enough to be self-employed and able to work from home but I had to let jobs go as it became far too much, and the money spent on finding alternative therapies and supplements to fix the problem wiped out any savings I had left.

Eventually I started to see some glimmers of improvement, finding certain things that seemed to at least provide relief. It was slow but bit by bit I could sense some progress. At the 20-month point many of the symptoms are still there and I still have a daily battle with them but generally they are at a far more manageable level. The relapses send you backwards, but you get used to them. It feels odd sometimes to say I’ve got used to any of this. I was perfectly healthy before. Never had any prior issues but when this happens you are forced to adapt pretty quickly. You start to forget what it felt like before all of this.

Beyond the physical, all of us have experienced the gaslighting from the medical profession, the online hatred of the vaccine-injured, the censorship by Big Tech. Whether you like it or not it forces you to see the world very differently.

There are positives. For me that comes from the amazing communities of vaccine-injured who have united to help each other, to listen to each other with an openness and compassion that gives me a great deal of hope for the future. To see what a group of people from all over the country and all over the world can do when they simply come together is quite something. The connections you make and communities you become a part of are like a beacon of light.

That’s why we must keep talking. We know there are more of us out there and they need to know that they are not alone.

Brian is a member of UK CV Family, a vaccine injured support group, that can be contacted here. https://www.ukcvfamily.org

August 1, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Interpreting Russia’s Official Response To The Nigerien Coup

BY ANDREW KORYBKO | JULY 31, 2023

Last week’s patriotic military coup in Niger could be a game-changer in the New Cold War as was explained here, though this analysis here argues that it might be nipped in the bud if Nigeria ultimately does the West’s bidding by leading an ECOWAS invasion force aimed at reinstalling the ousted president. Those who aren’t already aware of the insight shared in those analyses should at least skim them in order to be brought up to speed and thus better understand Russia’s official response to this event.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on 27 July that “We believe the coup is an anti-constitutional act. We always occupy a clear position in such cases…We reaffirm our position that it is necessary to restore the constitutional order in Niger.” One day later on 28 July, his country joined its fellow permanent UNSC members in issuing a joint statement that “strongly condemned the efforts to unconstitutionally change the legitimate Government of the Republic of Niger on 26 July 2023.”

They also “expressed support for the efforts of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union…(and) underscored the urgent need for the restoration of constitutional order in Niger in accordance with the ECOWAS Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance and expressed their support for regional and continental mediation efforts.” Two days later on 30 July, the AU and ECOWAS gave the junta a two-week and one-week ultimatum respectively.

If President Mohamed Bazoum isn’t reinstalled by then, they warned of “punitive measures” that could include the “use of force”. This sequence of events shows that the AU-ECOWAS duopoly is exploiting the UNSC joint statement as the pretext for invading Niger in order to secure their Western patrons’ interests there. None of this is surprising, however, which is why some might wonder why Russia agreed to the same statement that’s being taken advantage of to legitimize its rivals’ regional power play.

For starters, Russia always officially condemns anti-constitutional seizures of power, with this being more symbolically important than ever after Ukraine’s Western-backed and fascist-driven “EuroMaidan” coup in spring 2014. That said, this stance and its associated support of peaceful means for restoring the constitutional order in countries that experience these sorts of regime changes don’t automatically equate to it endorsing Western-encouraged invasions to this end.

It’s important to note that neither the AU nor its West African-Sahel ECOWAS enforcers put forth their ominous ultimatums by the time that Russia agreed to the UNSC joint statement on Niger. Even though it should have been foreseeable that these threats would follow, the fact that they hadn’t yet officially been made meant that there wasn’t any diplomatic pretext for Russia to break with precedent. For that reason, it supported the UNSC joint statement, which promoted mediation efforts.

The next point to make is that the West has been fearmongering that the Kremlin had a hidden hand in previous military coups in the West Africa-Sahel Region so it would have come off as very suspicious if Russia was reluctant to condemn this latest coup. That approach would have likely fueled an even more intense round of information warfare falsely alleging that Moscow was behind this regime change, thus justifying the planned Western-encouraged ECOWAS-led invasion on an urgent anti-Russian pretext.

And finally, since it can’t be taken for granted that the Nigerien junta will successfully repel this invasion in the likely scenario that it’s commenced sometime after the AU’s two-week ultimatum expires, it doesn’t make sense for Russia to signal support for what might very well be a doomed cause. Doing so would be detrimental to its soft power interests since the collapse of that junta could then be spun as a joint Western-African victory over Russia in the New Cold War.

None of this is to suggest that Russia is seriously opposed to the junta becoming an interim/transitional government, however, since precedent shows that it has no problem cultivating mutually beneficial relations with military rulers in the region like Mali’s and Burkina Faso’s. If the likely scenario of a French-backed ECOWAS-led invasion doesn’t materialize, yet without the coup leaders capitulating to pressure to reinstall Bazoum, then Niger will probably become Russia’s next strategic partner in the region.

July 31, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »