Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Iran confirms it released Greek tankers after Athens did same

Press TV – November 16, 2022

Iran has confirmed reports it released two Greek-flagged tankers that had been confiscated in the country’s waters in the Persian Gulf in May after an Iranian-flagged tanker was allowed to leave Greece.

In a statement issued on Wednesday, the Iranian Foreign Ministry said the Greek tankers had left Iranian waters earlier in the day based on an understanding reached between maritime authorities of Iran and Greece.

The statement indicated that Iranian-flagged tanker Lana had set sail from Greece hours earlier and seven months after it was seized in the country because of US pressure.

Tanker tracking services said on Wednesday that Lana was underway from Greece and Istanbul was listed as its destination.

Data from those services showed Greek tankers Delta Poseidon and Prudent Warrior were underway from Iran and were sailing to ports in the United Arab Emirates for inspections before returning to Greece.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry said in its statement that Iranian and Greek maritime authorities had signed a memorandum of understanding to increase their cooperation in order to improve maritime security.

It said the agreement came following months of intensive negotiations between the two countries and allowed the confiscated vessels to leave on the same day.

The statement highlighted the fact that the United States had sought to confiscate an oil cargo on Lana under false accusations that it violated the unilateral American sanctions on Iran.

It described the move as a piracy and said it was in line with previous US attempts to confiscate Iranian oil in international or territorial waters.

November 17, 2022 Posted by | Economics, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

UN reparations decision is ‘plunder’ – Kremlin

RT | November 15, 2022

A Resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly, which urges Moscow to compensate for losses inflicted on Ukraine, aims to enshrine the theft of Russian funds blocked by the West, Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday.

Peskov said that “organizers of this process are trying to complete the plundering of our gold and foreign currency reserves,” which he said were illegally frozen by Western countries over the Ukraine conflict.

“This is a formalization of this plundering under the guise of the United Nations,” he reiterated, adding that “Russia is categorically opposed to this.”

The official also reminded reporters that the resolution “is not legally binding.” “This is the way we are going to regard it,” he stated.

According to Peskov, Moscow will also “do its best” to thwart the confiscation of the assets that have been frozen by the West.

The comments come after the UN General Assembly on Monday adopted a resolution calling for Russia to pay “war reparations to Ukraine.” The document was supported by 94 countries, with 73 UN members abstaining and another 14 voting against.

Commenting on the resolution, Russia’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, claimed that its provisions “cannot stand up to any criticism” from a legal point of view. “They are legally void – nothing more than an attempt to legalize what cannot be legalized in terms of effective international law,” he said, warning the document’s co-sponsors that it could trigger consequences that “may boomerang against themselves.”

After Russia launched its military operation against Ukraine in late February, the West has significantly ratcheted up sanctions against Moscow. Western countries have frozen around half of Russia’s gold and foreign exchange reserves, which amounted to around $640 billion before the large-scale hostilities broke out. Moscow has repeatedly claimed that these funds have been “essentially stolen” from Russia.

In recent months, various Western officials have spoken in favor of outright confiscating these Russian assets and for them to be used for the reconstruction of Ukraine.

November 15, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

French elites privately fear the US and new research explains why

By Felix Livshitz | RT | November 15, 2022

New research published by France’s Ecole de Guerre Economique has revealed some extraordinary findings about who and what the French intelligence services fear most when it comes to threats to the country’s economy.

The findings are based on extensive research and interviews with French intelligence experts, including representatives of spy agencies, and so reflect the positions and thinking of specialists in the under-researched field of economic warfare. Their collective view is very clear – 97 percent consider the US to be the foreign power that “most threatens” the “economic interests” of Paris.

Who is your true enemy?

The research was conducted to answer the question, “what will become of France in an increasingly exacerbated context of economic war?” This query has become increasingly urgent for the EU as Western sanctions on Moscow’s exports, in particular energy, have had a catastrophic effect on European countries, but have not had the predicted effect Russia. Nor have they hurt the US, the country pushing most aggressively for these measures.

Yet, the question is not being asked in other EU capitals. It is precisely the continent-wide failure, or unwillingness at least, to consider the “negative repercussions on the daily lives” of European citizens that inspired the Ecole de Guerre Economique report.

As the report’s lead author Christian Harbulot explains, ever since the end of World War II, France has “lived in a state of the unspoken,” as have other European countries.

At the conclusion of that conflict, “manifest fear” among French elites of the Communist Party taking power in France “strongly incited a part of the political class to place our security in the hands of the US, in particular by calling for the establishment of permanent military bases in France.”

“It goes without saying that everything has its price. The compensation for this aid from across the Atlantic was to make us enter into a state of global dependence – monetary, financial, technological – with regard to the US,” Harbulot says. And aside from 1958 – 1965 when General Charles de Gaulle attempted to increase the autonomy of Paris from Washington and NATO, French leaders have “fallen into line.”

This acceptance means aside from rare public scandals such as the sale of French assets to US companies, or Australia canceling its purchase of French-made submarines in favor of a controversial deal with the US and UK (AUKUS), there is little recognition – let alone discussion – in the mainstream as to how Washington exerts a significant degree of control over France’s economy, and therefore politics.

As a result, politicians and the public alike struggle to identify “who their enemy” truly is. “In spheres of power” across Europe, Harbulot says, “it is customary to keep this kind of problem silent,” and economic warfare remains an “underground confrontation which precedes, accompanies and then takes over from classic military conflicts.”

This in turn means any debate about “hostility or harmfulness” in Europe’s relations with Washington misses the underlying point that “the US seeks to ensure its supremacy over the world, without displaying itself as a traditional empire.”

The EU might have a trade surplus of 150 billion euros with the US, but the latter would never willingly allow this economic advantage to translate to “strategic autonomy” from it. And this gain is achieved against the constant backdrop of – and more than offset by – “strong geopolitical and military pressure” from the US at all times.

I spy with my Five Eyes

Harbulot believes the “state of the unspoken” to be even more pronounced in Germany, as Berlin “seeks to establish a new form of supremacy within Europe” based on its dependency on the US.

As France “is not in a phase of power building but rather in a search to preserve its power” – a “very different” state of affairs – this should mean the French can more easily recognize and admit to toxic dependency on Washington, and see it as a problem that must be resolved.

It is certainly hard to imagine such an illuminating and honest report being produced by a Berlin-based academic institute, despite the country being the most badly affected by anti-Russian sanctions. Some analysts have spoken of a possible deindustrialization of Germany, as its inability to power energy-intensive economic sectors has destroyed its 30-year-long trade surplus – maybe forever.

But aside from France’s “dependency” on Washington being different to that of Germany, Paris has other reasons for cultivating a “culture of economic combat,” and keeping very close track of the “foreign interests” that are harming the country’s economy and companies.

A US National Security Agency spying order sent to other members of the Five Eyes global spying network – Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the UK – released by WikiLeaks, shows that since at least 2002 Washington has issued its English-speaking allies annual “information need” requests, seeking any and all information they can dig up on the economic activities of French companies, the economic and trade policies of France’s government, and the views of Paris on the yearly G8 and G20 summits.

Whatever is unearthed is shared with key US economic decision-makers and departments, including the Federal Reserve and Treasury, as well as intelligence agencies, such as the CIA. Another classified WikiLeaks release shows that the latter – between November 2011 and July 2012 – employed spies from across the Five Eyes (OREA) to infiltrate and monitor the campaigns of parties and candidates in France’s presidential election.

Washington was particularly worried about a Socialist Party victory, and so sought information on a variety of topics, “to prepare key US policymakers for the post-election French political landscape and the potential impact on US-France relations.” Of particular interest was “the presidential candidates’ views on the French economy, what current economic policies…they see as not working, and what policies… they promote to help boost France’s economic growth prospects[.]”

The CIA was also very interested in the “views and characterization” of the US on the part of presidential candidates, and any efforts by them and the parties they represented to “reach out to leaders of other countries,” including some of the states that form the Five Eyes network itself.

Naturally, those members would be unaware that their friends in Washington, and other Five Eyes capitals, would be spying on them while they spied on France.

It was clearly not for nothing that veteran US grand strategist and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once remarked, “to be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal.”

November 15, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Washington Attempts To Bully India Into Cutting Ties With Russia

By Conor Gallagher | naked capitalism | November 13, 2022

For months the US has repeatedly tried to coerce India into cutting ties with Russia, thereby abandoning its national interests. New Delhi, however, continues to spurn American attempts to subject its economy to Washington’s dictates.

The latest fuss concerns the G7 price cap on Russian oil and EU and UK bans on shipping and related services for Russian crude. India continues to have no interest in joining the US-led initiative as it gets a steep discount on oil from Russia and wants to maintain the relationship with a long-time strategic partner. Indian Foreign Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar was just in Moscow on Nov. 8 to discuss continued sales of oil. From the South China Morning Post :

India’s foreign minister hailed New Delhi’s “strong and steady” relationship with Moscow on Tuesday, during his first visit there since Russia invaded Ukraine in February.

Subrahmanyam Jaishankar also declared India’s intention to continue to buy Russian oil, again disregarding the US appeal to allies and partners to isolate Russia from the global markets.

The G-7 plans are likely to send oil prices higher (despite US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen claiming the opposite) and reduce tanker availability, both of which will threaten India’s energy security and hurt its economy as India is the third-largest consumer and importer of oil worldwide.

Russia has said it will not sell to any countries that participate in the price cap scheme, and Jaishankar has repeatedly stated that India cannot afford to buy oil at high prices – at least not without undermining its economic growth, which is forecast to be 6.1 percent in 2023, the fastest-growing major economy in the world. According to Energy Intelligence :

Russia emerged as India’s top crude supplier in October, shipping over 900,000 barrels per day or roughly a fifth of India’s demand. The two countries’ biggest concern is ensuring that Russian oil continues to flow after the Dec. 5 EU and UK bans and related G7 price cap.

But despite Jaishankar’s bullish stance in Moscow, India’s state refiners have not placed orders for crude lifting beyond Dec. 5 due to uncertainties about whether shipping and insurance will be available, Energy Intelligence understands. And a recent attempt by an Indian buyer to use the price cap in negotiations with a Russian seller prompted the latter to abandon the deal, market sources said.

The ongoing lack of clarity on the G-7 could be by design. Russian oil exports have already begun to dip, and Bruce Paulsen, a sanctions expert and partner at law firm Seward & Kissel, told American Shipper, “ If guidance on [price cap] compliance doesn’t come soon, some industry players may sit on the sidelines until they can determine that shipments under the price cap are safe.”

The US, in a neat sleight of hand, quit pressuring India to adhere to the price cap, and Yellen now says Washington is “happy” for New Delhi to continue buying as much Russian oil as it wants, including at prices above a G7-imposed price cap. But there are just a few caveats: India wouldn’t be able to use western insurance, finance, or maritime services to transport the oil.

“Russia is going to find it very difficult to continue shipping as much oil as they have done when the EU stops buying Russian oil,” Yellen told Reuters on Friday. “They’re going to be heavily in search of buyers, and many buyers are reliant on Western services.”

More from Energy Intelligence on why this amounts to a de facto price cap:

Indian refiners have the capacity to soak up another 600,000 b/d of Russian crude, provided it outcompetes the staple Mideast grades that are the lifeline of the country’s 5 million b/d refining base. But the availability of shipping and insurance — and payment channels — is key. From Dec. 5, tankers and shipping insurance linked to EU and G7 countries — which dominate oil shipping globally — will be barred from trading Russian crude unless those volumes are sold under the price cap, as yet undetermined.

About 90% of India’s liquids trade is shipped by foreign tankers, presenting challenges, independent energy analyst Narendra Taneja said. Insurance does not appear as problematic, and analysts say that Russian and Chinese firms can handle it.

This could leave Russia reliant on a shadow fleet of older tankers with opaque ownership that do not transact in dollars. According to Freight Waves :

Brokerage Braemar reported that 33 tankers previously handling Iranian or Venezuelan exports have carried Russian exports since April, mostly to China and secondarily to India.

Braemar defined the dark fleet as tankers that have carried Iranian or Venezuelan crude at least once in the past year. It put the current total at 240 tankers, mostly smaller and midsized, with 74% 19 years or older. Eighty of those vessels are very large crude carriers (VLCCs, tankers that carry 2 million barrels) that won’t fit in Russian ports but could be used for ship-to-ship transfers for Russian cargoes.

If the entire dark fleet switched to Russian service and were as efficient as the “mainstream fleet,” it would be more than enough to keep Russian exports flowing, but “vessels engaged in illicit trading are highly inefficient,” Braemar emphasized.

At the same time Washington is pressuring New Delhi to comply with the price cap, it is importing from India more vacuum gasoil, which is mostly used at refineries to produce other products such as gasoline and diesel. From Reuters :

Russia used to be a key VGO supplier to U.S. refiners before the Ukraine war broke out.

“Given that the U.S. is not buying Russian oil, they are looking for any and all alternatives,” said Roslan Khasawneh, senior fuel oil analyst at Vortexa…

U.S. and EU sanctions do not apply to refined products produced from Russian crude exported from a third country as they are not of Russian origin. In India, refiners boosted imports of discounted Russian oil to 793,000 barrels per day between April and October, up from just 38,000 bpd in the same period a year ago, trade data showed.

India joins a list of countries – including Saudi Arabia, Serbia, and Turkey – that are causing heads to explode in Washington for refusing to be bullied into submission.

This all must be coming as a shock in Washington as its Indo-Pacific strategy in recent years has always included a “like-minded” India helping to counter China and do the US’ bidding in southeast Asia. The possibility that India might pursue its own national interests didn’t seem to factor into the strategy.

The tension over the Russian price cap is just the latest in a series of disagreements between New Delhi and Washington. US sanctions on Iran’s oil exports deprive India of cheap Iranian oil, and force it to buy more expensive US energy exports. India is now the largest oil export destination for the US.

Similar to the way Washington is arming Greece and Cyprus in an effort to bully Turkey into breaking off its friendly ties with Russia, the US is doing the same in Pakistan to pressure India. The US has begun to accommodate Pakistan again after the ouster of former Pakistani prime minister Imran Khan, who blames his loss of power in a no-confidence vote on the US.

In September, the U.S. State Department enraged India when it approved a $450 million deal to upgrade Pakistan’s F-16 fleet. Shortly after, the US ambassador to Pakistan created more tension during a visit to the Pakistani-held part of Kashmir, which he called by its Pakistani name instead of the United Nations-approved name “Pakistan-administered Kashmir.”

On Nov. 8 US State Department spokesman Ned Price lectured India on what are in its best interests:

We’ve also been clear that now is not the time for business as usual with Russia, and it’s incumbent on countries around the world to do what they can to lessen those economic ties with Russia. That’s something that’s in the collective interest, but it’s also in the bilateral interest of countries around the world to end and certainly over the course of time to wean their dependence on Russian energy. There have been a number of countries that have learned the hard way of the fact that Russia is not a reliable source of energy. Russia is not a reliable supplier of security assistance. Russia is far from reliable in any realm. So it is not only in the interest of Ukraine, it is not only in the interest of the region, of the collective interests that India decrease its dependence on Russia over time, but it’s also in India’s own bilateral interest, given what we’ve seen from Russia.

We’ll have to wait and see if the Indian people get the message because as of now the opposite is true. India’s Observer Research Foundation released poll results on Nov. 2 that showed that 43 percent of Indians regarded Russia as their country’s most reliable partner, which was far ahead of the US at 27 percent.

Washington would be hard pressed to explain how New Delhi scaling back its economic ties with Russia would be a good thing for India.

Fuelled by a surge in import of oil and fertilizers, India’s bilateral trade with Russia has soared to an all-time high of $18.2 billion over the April-August period of this financial year, according to the latest data available with the Department of Commerce. That makes Russia India’s seventh biggest trading partner — up from its 25th position last year. The US, China, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Indonesia remain ahead of Russia.

India, Iran, and Russia have also spent the past twenty years developing the International North-South Transport Corridor to increase trade between the countries, and it took on increased importance with the western sanctions on Moscow. From The LoadStar :

RZD Logistics, a subsidiary of Russian railway monopoly RZD, has begun regular container train services from Moscow to Iran to serve growing trade with India by transloading.

This is aimed at maximizing use of the alternative International North South Transport Corridor (INSTC), a Central Asia cross-border multimodal freight network helping the two strategic partners work around supply chain challenges created by western sanctions on Russia.

The inland-ocean leg involves an estimated transit time of 35 days, compared with about 40 with previous traditional shipping, according to industry sources.

©Peter Hermes Furian

In much the same way that US heavy-handedness is backfiring elsewhere, the pressure applied on India seems to only be encouraging New Delhi to find a way around the dollar. The Loadstar adds that the Reserve Bank of India is also implementing new regulatory guidelines to help exporters settle shipments in rupees, instead of US dollars that had run into sanctions-related bottlenecks:

The Federation of Indian Export Organizations has also been pressing government leaders to extend the alternative currency method beyond Russian markets.

“While the Russia-Ukraine war is a setback to our exports in the short run, we are looking to increase our exports to Russia once the rupee payment mechanism gets operationalised,” FIEO noted.

While India has been benefitting from the discounted Russian crude, it also wants to maintain good ties with Moscow to avoid pushing Russia closer to China and potentially Pakistan, India’s biggest rivals in Asia.

Pakistan is also now asking the Russian Trade Ministry to introduce a currency swap arrangement to strengthen economic ties between the two countries.

November 14, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Is the Anglo-Russian Fisheries Agreement about to end?

By Drago Bosnic | November 14, 2022

During the early (First) Cold War era, particularly the 1950-1970 timeframe, Soviet diplomacy tried easing tensions with the political West. This greatly contributed to the development of Anglo-Soviet relations in many areas, despite the overall geopolitical rivalry. It was at this time that a number of agreements were inked between Moscow and London, including the 1956 Fisheries Agreement, which is still in effect. It was signed in Moscow on May 25, 1956 by Soviet Deputy Foreign Minister Vasily Kuznetsov and the UK Ambassador to the USSR William Hayter. On August 31, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR ratified the agreement.

The document contained only three articles. Article 1 read: “The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics agrees to grant fishing vessels assigned to the ports of the United Kingdom the right to fish in the waters of the Barents Sea along the coast of the Kola Peninsula between the meridians 36° and 37° 50′ E. along the mainland east of Cape Kanin Nos between meridians 43° 17′ and 51° E, as well as along the coast of Kolguev Island, outside three nautical miles from the low tide line both on the mainland and on the islands; these vessels are also granted the right to navigate and anchor freely in these waters.”

Additionally, the Protocol to Article 1 of the Agreement stated: “The permission given by the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to fishing vessels assigned to the ports of the United Kingdom to fish, sail freely and anchor in the waters specified in Article I of the Agreement, shall not be regarded as granting to such fishing vessels the right to fish, navigate and anchor in prohibited zones which may be established by the competent Soviet authorities within the waters covered by the Agreement.”

In turn, Article 2 stated: “When fishing vessels of the United Kingdom enter Soviet ports and protected waters in case of emergency, these vessels will be guided by the rules established by the competent Soviet authorities.”

The Fisheries Agreement was signed for a period of five years and entered into force on the date of the exchange of instruments of ratification, which took place at the end of 1956 in London. It was automatically renewed every five years and is still valid, since neither party announced its withdrawal. As per a special clause, Moscow or London are obligated to declare this no later than one year before the expiration of the specified term of the Agreement.

It should be noted that the UK was a fairly large player in the international fishing industry at the time, particularly in the cod and haddock fisheries. Obviously, having concluded the agreement with the Soviet Union, the UK intended to expand its fishing industry to the Soviet part of the Barents Sea. At the same time, it should be noted that the 1956 Fisheries Agreement did not affect the rights of Soviet fishing vessels in UK waters.

In this regard, on September 30, 1964 Moscow and London exchanged notes on the issue of Soviet fishing vessels’ presence and floating bases within the fishing borders. As per these notes, Soviet fishing vessels and floating bases were allowed to anchor, sail, transship fish and carry out other work that is auxiliary to fishing operations within the zone between 3 and 12 miles from the baseline, from which UK territorial waters are measured around the Shetland Islands north of a line drawn west from Ash Ness Lighthouse and a line drawn east from the southern tip of Bressay Point.

Over the years, the so-called “Khrushchev euphoria” resulting from possible closer cooperation with the political West, particularly the UK, was starting to die down, and Moscow then fully realized that UK ships, extracting a significant part of the marine life resources available in the Barents Sea, seriously undermined Russian reserves. However, for some reason, the USSR (later the Russian Federation) showed no intention of ending the 1956 Fisheries Agreement. Although there might be serious reasons for this that were never made public, the fact is that the UK continues to fish freely and virtually unchecked in the waters of the Barents Sea.

And yet, the economic consequences fade in comparison to possible security challenges for Russia, as foreign vessels fishing in the area of the Barents Sea could easily be working for UK intelligence services, collecting and passing sensitive information which could undermine the Russian military in the area. Given the current extremely tense relations between Moscow and London, this is completely unacceptable for Russia, as the UK is one of the most adamant supporters of the Neo-Nazi junta in Kiev. As Russian fishermen have long had little interest in fishing off the UK coast, Moscow will likely need to reassess the benefits of the agreement for itself, especially as waters around the Arctic are of prime strategic importance.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

November 14, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

Russia strategises with Iran for the long haul in Ukraine

Ali Shamkhani (L), representative of Supreme Leader and Secretary of Supreme National Security Council, met Nikolai Patrushev, Secretary of Russia’s Security Council, Tehran, Nov. 9, 2022
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | NOVEMBER 14, 2022

Ignoring the hype in the US media about White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s Kissingerian diplomacy over Ukraine, the secretary of Russia’s Security Council Nikolai Patrushev, former KGB counterintelligence officer and longstanding associate of President Putin, travelled to Tehran last Wednesday in the equivalent of a knockout punch in geopolitics. 

Patrushev called on President Ebrahim Raisi and held detailed discussions with Admiral Ali Shamkhani, the representative of the Supreme leader and secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. The visit marks a defining moment in the Russia-Iran partnership and plants a signpost on the trajectory of the war in Ukraine. 

The Iranian state media quoted Raisi as saying, “The development of the extent and expansion of the scale of war [in Ukraine] causes concern for all countries.” That said, Raisi also remarked that Tehran and Moscow are upgrading relations to a “strategic” level, which is “the most decisive response to the policy of sanctions and destabilisation by the United States and its allies.” 

The US State Department reacted swiftly on the very next day with spokesman Ned Price warning that “This is a deepening alliance that the entire world should view as a profound threat… this is a relationship that would have implications, could have implications beyond any single country.” Price said Washington will work with allies to counter Russian-Iranian military ties. 

Patrushev’s talks in Tehran touched on highly sensitive issues that prompted President Vladimir Putin to follow up with Raisi on Saturday. The Kremlin readout said the two leaders “discussed a number of current issues on the bilateral agenda with an emphasis on the continued building up of interaction in politics, trade and the economy, including transport and logistics. They agreed to step up contacts between respective Russian and Iranian agencies.” 

In this connection, Patrushev’s exceptionally strong support for Iran over the current disturbances in that country must be understood properly. Patrushev stated: “We note the key role of Western secret services in organising mass riots in Iran and the subsequent spread of disinformation about the situation in the country via Persian-language Western media existing under their control. We see this as overt interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state.” 

Russian security agencies share information with Iranian counterparts on hostile activities of western intelligence agencies. Notably, Patrushev sidestepped Iran’s suspicions regarding involvement of Saudi Arabia. Separately, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also publicly offered to mediate between Tehran and Riyadh. 

All this is driving Washington insane. On the one hand, it is not getting anywhere, including at President Biden’s level, to raise the spectre of Iran threat and rally the Arab regimes of the Persian Gulf all over again. 

Most recently, Washington resorted to theatrics following up an unsubstantiated report by Wall Street Journal about an imminent Iranian attack on Saudi Arabia in the coming days. The US forces in the West Asian region increased their alert level and Washington vowed to be ready for any eventuality. But, curiously, Riyadh was unmoved and showed no interest in the US offer of protection to ward off threat from Iran.

Clearly, the Saudi-Iranian normalisation process, which has been front-loaded with sensitive exchanges on their mutual security concerns, has gained traction neither side gets provoked into knee-jerk reaction.

This paradigm shift works to Russia’s advantage. Alongside its highly strategic oil alliance with Saudi Arabia, Russia is now deepening its strategic partnership with Iran.

The panic in spokesman Price’s remarks suggests that Washington has inferred that the cooperation between the security and defence agencies of Russia and Iran is set to intensify.  

What alarms Washington most is that Tehran is adopting a joint strategy with Moscow to go on the offensive and defeat the weaponisation of sanctions by the collective West. Despite decades of sanctions, Iran has built up a world class defence industry on its own steam that will put countries like India or Israel to shame. 

Shamkhani underscored the creation of “joint and synergistic institutions to deal with sanctions and the activation of the capacity of international institutions against sanctions and sanctioning countries.” Patrushev concurred by recalling the earlier agreements between the national security agencies of the two countries to chart out the roadmap for strategic cooperation, especially in regard of countering western economic and technological sanctions.

Shamkhani added that Tehran regards the expansion of bilateral and regional cooperation with Russia in the economic field as one of its strategic priorities in the conditions of US sanctions, which both countries are facing. Patrushev responded, “The most important goal of mine and my delegation in traveling to Tehran is to exchange opinions to speed up the implementation of joint projects along with providing dynamic mechanisms to start new activities in the economic, commercial, energy and technology fields.” 

Patrushev noted, “Creating synergy in transit capacities, especially the rapid completion of the North-South corridor, is an effective step to improve the quality of bilateral and international economic and commercial cooperation.” 

Patrushev and Shamkhani discussed a joint plan by Russia and Iran “to establish a friendship group of defenders of the United Nations Charter” comprising countries that bear the brunt of illegal western sanctions. 

With regard to the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, Shamkhani said the two countries should “intelligently use the exchangeable capacities” of the member countries. He said the danger of terrorism and extremism continues to threaten the security of the region and stressed the need to increase regional and international cooperation. 

Patrushev’s visit to Tehran was scheduled in the run-up to the conference on Afghanistan being hosted by Moscow on November 16. Iran and Russia have common concerns over Afghanistan. They are concerned over the western attempts to (re)fuel the civil war in Afghanistan. 

In a recent op-ed in Nezavisimaya Gazeta, Russian Special Presidential Envoy for Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov alleged that Britain is financing a so-called “Afghan resistance”  against the Taliban (which is reportedly operating out of Panjshir.) Kabulov wrote that the US is baiting two Central Asian states by offering them helicopters and aircraft in lieu of cooperation in covert activities against the Taliban. 

Kabulov made a sensational disclosure that the US is blackmailing the Taliban leaders by threatening them with a drone attack unless they broke off contacts with Russia and China. He said, specifically, that the US and Britain are demanding that Kabul should refrain from restricting the activities of Afghanistan-based Uyghur terrorists. 

Interestingly, Moscow is exploring the creation of a compact group of five regional states who are stakeholders in Afghanistan’s stabilisation and could work together. Kabulov mentioned Iran, Pakistan, India and China as Russia’s partners. 

Iran is a “force multiplier” for Russia in a way no other country — except China, perhaps — can be in the present difficult conditions of sanctions. Patrushev’s visit to Tehran at the present juncture, on the day after the midterms in the US, can only mean that the Kremlin has seen through the Biden administration’s dissimulation of peacemaking in Ukraine to actually derail the momentum of the Russian mobilisation and creation of new defence lines in the Kherson-Zaporozhya-Donbass direction. 

Indeed, it is no secret that the Americans are literally scratching the bottom of the barrel to deliver weapons to Ukraine as their inventory is drying up and several months or a few years are needed to replenish depleted stocks. (here, here  ,here and here) 

Suffice to say, from the geopolitical angle, Patrushev’s talks in Tehran — and Putin’s call soon after with Raisi — have messaged in no unmistaken terms that Russia is strategising for the long haul in Ukraine. 

November 13, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Britain’s Liberal Technocratic Recession

BY NOAH CARL | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | NOVEMBER 13, 2022

On November 3rd, the Bank of England announced that Britain is facing its “longest recession since records began”, with unemployment forecast to nearly double by 2025.

How did we get here?

In most developed economies, recessions happen once or twice a decade (although Australia went without one for 30 years). So in some sense, they’re unavoidable. Yet the scale of the one we’re facing – the longest since records began – suggests some fundamental errors have been made.

The first was lockdown. For more than a year, we spent untold sums of money on daft furlough schemes and boondoggles like ‘Test and Trace’. Meanwhile, we allowed supply chains to break down through trade restrictions and lack of maintenance. We were spending more while producing less – which set us on course for inflation.

The second was letting dozens of oil refineries shut down without building any new ones. Such refineries became unprofitable during the pandemic, and firms didn’t bother to upgrade or replace them due to costly environmental regulations and the uncertainty surrounding ‘Net Zero’.

The third were the reckless sanctions against Russia. Rather than using the threat of sanctions as a bargaining chip, we immediately went pedal to the metal and tried to crush Russia’s economy. This backfired: while we have inflicted some long-term damage, we hamstrung our own economies in the process.

All three of these blunders stem from hubris on the part of liberal technocratic policymakers, who believe there are straightforward ‘solutions’ to problems like pandemics, climate change and interstate conflict. In reality, we’re always faced with trade-offs and unintended consequences.

The British economy is now grappling with general inflation (caused by lockdowns) and rising energy costs (caused by lack of refining capacity and sanctions against Russia).

The severity of these problems is laid bare in the ONS’s Business Insights and Conditions Survey – a fortnightly survey of around 10,000 businesses. Respondents were asked, “Which of the following, if any, will be the main concern for your business in November 2022?” Results are shown below.

Results from the ONS’s Business Insights and Conditions Survey

As you can see, by far the most frequently mentioned concerns were “inflation” and “energy prices”. Only around 7% of businesses mentioned “taxation” as their main concern, demonstrating how ill-conceived was Liz Truss’s economic program. (She thought we could tax-cut our way out of an energy crisis).

Policymakers need to get grips with the fact that not every problem has a liberal technocratic ‘solution’. Paying people not to work, shutting down refineries, and sanctioning other countries may feel good. But that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do.

November 13, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

New Delhi may sue Berlin over undelivered LNG – Bloomberg

RT | November 12, 2022

A diplomatic dispute is brewing between India and Germany after Berlin took over a former Gazprom subsidiary and halted LNG shipments to New Delhi.

The Russian gas giant’s former local subsidiary Gazprom Germania, renamed SEFE (Securing Energy for Europe), cut LNG supplies to India’s Gail back in May, citing sanctions Moscow imposed after the company was taken over by the German state. Under the sanctions, Gazprom stopped supplying SEFE with gas.

Gail had a 20-year contract with Gazprom Germania’s Singaporean unit, GM&T Singapore, for the supply of 2.5 million tons of LNG per year. According to Bloomberg, citing the association of LNG importers GIIGNL, the contract remained valid after Berlin took over Gazprom Germania, meaning SEFE was still required to meet its obligations to Gail.

In September, SEFE’s Singaporean unit said it could no longer fulfill its long-term contract with Gail and offered to pay compensation of 20% of the contract price for the failed LNG deliveries. Gail CFO Rakesh Kumar Jain last week said that SEFE had canceled a total of 17 LNG shipments since May.

According to Bloomberg’s sources, India is now demanding that SEFE find alternative gas suppliers in order to meet its obligations to Gail, as the Indian company has been forced to spend much larger sums to buy gas on the spot market. It also had to cut supplies to customers and lower production at its petrochemicals plant due to the LNG deficit. The company has also turned down the compensation offer for undelivered LNG as it prefers to retain the right to the cancelled cargoes, Reuters reported on Friday.

Bloomberg’s sources said that both Indian and German diplomats have been engaged to solve the dispute. A diplomatic solution is preferable for the parties, according to the sources, although they noted that Gail was also consulting lawyers about arbitration over the contract with SEFE, which means the dispute could turn into a lawsuit. Gail is also reportedly negotiating with Gazprom to buy LNG directly from the Russian company.

November 12, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Up to 280,000 Tonnes of Russian Fertilizers Arrested in Europe, Deputy Foreign Minister Says

Samizdat – 12.11.2022

As many as 280,000 tonnes of Russian mineral fertilizers remain arrested in European ports, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Vershinin said on Saturday.

“Up to 280,000 tonnes of Russian mineral fertilizers have been under arrest in a number of European countries over recent months,” Vershinin said adding that Russia supported gratuitous exports of these arrested fertilizers to countries in need, especially in Africa.

The deputy minister added that Moscow was not satisfied with the implementation of the Black Sea grain deal, as Russian food products and fertilizers should have a “real access” to international markets.

Russia, Ukraine and Turkey signed on July 22 the United Nations-brokered agreement to secure a humanitarian corridor via the Black Sea for grain and fertilizer exports. The parties agreed for the agreement to last 120 days and expire on November 19.

On October 29, Russia suspended its participation in the agreement after its military and civilian ships were attacked by Ukraine in the bay of Sevastopol. On November 2, the Russian Defense Ministry said that Moscow was returning to the agreement after receiving written guarantees from Ukraine that Kiev will refrain from using the humanitarian corridor for military purposes. Kiev has denied providing any additional guarantees.

November 12, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Enough: Why Western Leaders, Populations Call for Halting Money Flow to Ukraine

By Ekaterina Blinova – Samizdat – 11.11.2022

On November 10, Hungary blocked €18 billion in EU financial aid to Ukraine, triggering a wave of criticism from the bloc’s leadership. Budapest said that it has had enough of joint EU borrowing initiatives. Meanwhile, protesters in Italy and other EU nations have called for arms to stop being sent to Ukraine and for lifting anti-Russia sanctions.

“I’m not surprised the Hungarians and the Italians and others will go their own way. They have every right to do that,” Joe Siracusa, US politics expert and professor of history and diplomacy at Curtin University, Australia, told Sputnik. “There’s going to be more of it. And I think every nation in Europe is going to do what they think they have to do to survive the winter and to get on with life. I mean, they’re not committed to a life and death blueprint. Europe’s not going down the rabbit hole because somebody wants to support [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelensky. And I think Zelensky really expects this to happen.”

The European Commission (EC) proposed an $18 billion aid package for Ukraine on November 9 that was expected to come into effect in 2023 to help cover Ukraine’s budget needs. That assistance was meant to come in the form of highly concessional loans, disbursed in regular installments.

Ukraine is running a budget deficit of up to $5 billion per month, as per the nation’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, with the country’s defense spending jumping five-fold to $17 billion for the first seven months of 2022.

Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Ministry of Economy admitted last month that the country’s real GDP fell by as much as 40% in the second quarter of 2022. The full year contraction of Ukraine’s economic output is expected to reach 35%, according to the World Bank. To cap it off, Ukraine’s financial officials forecast that inflation could hit 40% at the beginning of 2023, morphing into nothing short of hyperinflation. Kiev does not have money to cope with the financial crunch, but instead of joining Russia at the negotiating table, it urges its Western backers to give it more.

The EC’s latest generous offer came as US officials continued chastising their European allies last month for not delivering enough to Kiev. According to the US press, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on multiple occasions called upon her international peers to ramp up both the speed and amount of money going to Ukraine. In addition to that, Yellen reportedly raised the issue at a private meeting with European Commission Executive Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis and European Economy Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni at the International Monetary Fund.

Eventually, Brussels agreed to fork out, but Hungary upset the EC’s bid on Wednesday: the money cannot go to Kiev without the full backing of all 27 EU countries because of the bloc’s budget rules. “We will certainly not support any kind of joint EU borrowing in this field,” Hungary’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Péter Szijjártó told a Hungarian newspaper. Budapest justifies its decision by the fact that it has already spent hundreds of millions of euros to support health, education, and cultural institutions in Ukraine. In addition to that, Hungary earlier supported the EU’s joint borrowing during the COVID pandemic, “and that was more than enough,” Szijjártó underscored.

Brussels, Berlin, and other European capitals subjected Budapest to criticism, while some mainstream media outlets pinned the blame on Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who, according to them, has repeatedly neglected EU norms and wooed Russian President Vladimir Putin in the past.

Protest Movement Growing in EU, Sentiment Changing in US

Still, the problem is that it’s not just Hungarian politicians who are opposing the bloc’s continuous financial and military aid to Ukraine and sweeping sanctions on Russia at a time when inflation and recession are engulfing the Old Continent.

During the past weekend in Rome, an estimated 100,000 Italians took to the streets, calling on the government to stop sending weapons to Ukraine. The rally was reportedly organized by trade unions, numerous Catholic associations, and peace groups.

On November 9, Greek workers in Athens conducted a day-long strike backed by unions, such as the General Confederation of Greek Workers and ADEDY, protesting against soaring inflation and skyrocketing energy prices, which rose dramatically after the EU joined Washington’s energy embargo against Russia.

Earlier, in September, around 70,000 people protested in Prague, Czech Republic, urging their government to maintain direct gas contracts with Russia in order to overcome the unfolding energy crisis.

The European Parliament acknowledged in October that almost 50% of Greeks and 43% of Italians said they want anti-Russia sanctions to be lifted. At the same time, a survey by Eupinions, an independent platform for European public opinion, indicated that less than 40% of Italians approve of Rome supplying weapons to Kiev.

The backlash is not limited to Europe, as US Republican lawmakers who are projected to take control of the House in January 2023 have clearly signaled their dissatisfaction with the growing burden of spending on Ukraine. On October 18, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy made it clear that the House GOP won’t give a “blank check” to Kiev if Republicans win the lower chamber in November.

“Republicans will win the House of Representatives,” said Siracusa. “They’re in control of the purse. If you don’t control the House, and all you need is 218 votes, you don’t need a red wave, you don’t need a 30, 40 seat majority. All you need is one vote. And they got 218. And they can make sure that the House of Representatives, where all money bills originate, will not give Ukraine another penny. Winning the House is more important than winning the Senate. It’s in the House of Representatives that the Constitution guarantees that money will originate – money bills. So the House is very, very important. And Congressman Kevin McCarthy is going to be very, very important after this. But I think the mood in America has changed. There is no doubt in my mind, there is going to be a Republican victory in the House.”

According to the US mainstream press, this stance is shared by many Republicans from the Make America Great Again (MAGA) camp. For their part, American Democratic progressives, who are also expected to maintain and, probably, expand their presence in the US Congress, recently voiced their opposition to Washington’s military involvement in Ukraine and called on US President Joe Biden to broker peace between Kiev and Moscow. Despite their flip-flopping with a letter addressing the president on the matter, the US press admitted that anti-war sentiments persist among the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC).

“I think the Republicans were hesitating before the election,” Siracusa said. “There’s only so much you can give to another nation before you empty out your own arsenal. And it was quite clear if there had been a big Republican victory, Marjorie Greene’s comment about there would be no more money for Ukraine, in fact she had a wonderful comment, she said that as far as she is concerned and a number of Republicans are concerned, Ukraine is not an ally and Russia is not an enemy. And that’s kind of where it’s headed.”

Moreover, a September survey by Data for Progress on behalf of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft indicated that roughly 60% of Americans would support the US engaging in diplomatic efforts “as soon as possible” to end the Ukraine standoff, even if that means Kiev having to make concessions to Russia.

West Cannot Fund Ukraine Indefinitely

One should admit that the US, UK, EU, and their close allies have committed a lot in terms of military, financial, and humanitarian aid for the Kiev regime, which says that all the money received so far has been burned through.

According to the Germany-based Kiel Institute for the World Economy, the US, EU, and several other countries committed a total of €93.73 billion ($93.62 billion) to Ukraine between January and October 2022, with the US being the most generous giver.

In addition to sending weapons and money to Kiev, the EU is also carrying the burden of accommodating Ukrainian refugees. The number of Ukrainian refugees taken in by the US is miniscule, amounting to only around 0.02% of the US population. Washington has taken fewer Ukrainian refugees (100,000) than Poland (1,365,810), Germany (1,003,029), the Czech Republic (427,696), Italy (159,968), Turkey (145,000), Spain (140,391), and the UK (122,900), according to the UN data.

The cost of housing Ukrainians in Europe is considerable, especially amid swirling inflation and the accompanying economic slowdown. According to the Kiel Institute, for some nations the cost of housing Ukrainian refugees has exceeded their overall aid to Ukraine. For instance, Estonia is spending more than 1.2% of its GDP on aid to Kiev and housing Ukrainian refugees. Latvia and Poland’s cumulative aid also exceeds 1% of their GDP.

Meanwhile, Eurozone inflation hit a new historic high of 10.7% in October, according to preliminary data, with Brussels already admitting that the bloc is heading to a recession at the end of this year.

It raises the question whether European governments will halt their help to Ukraine, as Biden’s State Department is continuing to pressure them into exhaustive spending regardless of the bloc’s economic difficulties. Speaking to a US broadcaster in the aftermath of Election Day, Zelensky warned against reducing Washington’s aid to Kiev, insisting that it’s the only way to keep Europeans sending money to Ukraine. Still, it’s unclear where exactly the money goes, with millions of dollars and euros vanishing in the fog of the conflict.

Siracusa does not rule out that the US will be the first to suspend the money flow to Kiev, which even the Biden administration does not consider grateful enough.

“I think at the end of the day, Americans will call a halt to it,” said Siracusa. “And I think a number of Ukrainians will exhibit some resentment to the aid given to them, because they’ll say it wasn’t enough. I think Zelensky wanted the Americans to pick up their monthly public service and army salaries. He wanted $5 billion from the American people, heard him say it, to keep Ukraine going. What country is going to pay for soldiers and public servants endlessly? The idea of the United States Treasury printing money, $5 billion a month, to pay for Ukrainian civil service or public service, that’s nuts, that’s unrealistic thinking.”

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

US Siege Persists: Lebanon Prevented from Importing Iran’s Fuel Donation

Al-Manar | November 9, 2022

After several months of vagueness, the US administration announced clearly that sanctions will be imposed on Lebanon if it approves the Iranian fuel donation, according to a report posted by Al-Akhbar daily.

The Lebanese newspaper mentioned that the remarks made by the Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Barbara Leaf, indicated that the US siege on Lebanon persists.

Al-Akhbar added that the US vague stances pertaining the Iranian fuel donation during the past months aimed only at sustaining the positive atmosphere of the maritime border demarcation.

It is worth noting that Hezbollah secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah mentioned during his latest speech that the Americans will not allow Lebanon to import the Egyptian gas, Jordanian electric power, and Iranian fuel.

According to Al-Akhbar, the Lebanese caretaker prime minister, Najib Mikati, followed the US vagueness with time consuming steps, including sending a technical team to Tehran to study the fuel specifications.

The newspaper added that, after the energy minister Walid Fayyad sent a report about the Iranian fuel specifications to Mikati, the latter contacted the US administrations whose various offices told him that Washington rejects granting Beirut any waiver in this regard.

November 9, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Subjugation - Torture | , , , | Leave a comment

Hungarian objections to EU aid for Kiev regime in line with what most Europeans think

By Drago Bosnic | November 9, 2022

The bureaucratic empire in Brussels seems to be pushing all the wrong buttons in regards to Budapest. The European Union’s failed attempts to force it into submission are effectively being laughed off in Hungary. The bloc’s suicidal anti-Russian sanctions and policies are creating numerous points of contention between Brussels and Budapest. Viktor Orban’s Hungary has run out of patience for this, especially as the EU is also threatening the Central European country with internal sanctions and other restrictions under various pretexts. There are very few things Brussels and Budapest agree on and the differences aren’t only limited to domestic EU policies, but foreign relations as well.

While Hungary prefers a realpolitik approach in regards to other countries and global powers, particularly Russia (and to a certain extent China), the EU’s foreign policy framework is ideological. This often results in accusations that Budapest is a “Russian puppet/asset” and that it’s “trying to ease” the bloc’s economic pressure on Moscow. However, the reality is much simpler – Hungary is trying to ease the pressure on its citizens, as the economic fallout of the failed siege of Russia is deeply affecting the regular people. In the meantime, the detached bureaucrats in Brussels are left unscathed and thus unmoved by the struggles of tens of millions of EU countries’ citizens.

Being fully aware of this for years and determined to prevent economic consequences of such policies, Budapest stated that it won’t support the bloc’s latest “aid” package for the Kiev regime. Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto openly stated that the country will not change its stance as long as it’s forced to fight for access to EU funds blocked by the “rule-of-law” dispute. Namely, Brussels is still holding up at least €7.5 billion in funds for Hungary under the pretext of “persisting corruption and fraud” in the country. In reality, the reason is Budapest’s refusal to follow anti-Russian sanctions and policies which would effectively destroy its economy.

The Western mainstream propaganda machine often portrays Hungary as a “rogue state” and the main obstacle to the futile attempts of isolating Russia, while its leader Viktor Orban is usually presented as a “dictator”, although his popularity in the country suggests otherwise. Hungary’s persistence in its demands for exemptions from anti-Russian energy sanctions is usually used to accuse it of being pro-Russian. However, the country accomplished retaining lower energy prices in comparison to the rest of the EU, which is going through economic and financial unraveling thanks to Brussels’ suicidal subservience to Washington DC.

As there is growing conviction among many EU member states that anti-Russian policies have not only failed to produce desired results, but have even backfired and are ravaging their economies, Hungary is hardly alone in this regard. In addition, the claim that Budapest is pro-Russian is genuinely laughable, as it has provided ample support for the Kiev regime and will continue to do so, as stated by the country’s foreign minister Szijjarto, who said so on November 7 during a conference in Sofia. However, “Budapest still opposes any arrangement that would see funding [for Kiev] jointly with other EU member states,” he added.

Today, November 9, the EU is set to propose a new €18 billion “aid” package for the Kiev regime, which would provide constant cash flow to the Neo-Nazi junta in 2023. The plan is to use the bloc’s joint budget as a guarantee to secure funding for the Kiev regime. The move also involves changes to the EU’s rules that require a unanimous vote to pass proposals. Hungary objects to this, as it would be a dangerous precedent which would force members who voted against certain policies to still follow them, regardless of the negative consequences for those who objected. What’s more, even if a member state voted for a certain decision, it could still be denied funds if it was under sanctions of the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.

This paradox is precisely what’s happening to Hungary. Namely, the country already supported the EU’s decision to jointly raise debt to finance the bloc’s recovery from the economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic, but the funds Budapest is set to receive are being blocked until it “ensures the rule of law.” Brussels is planning to discuss the status of those funds on November 22, which is the deadline given to Hungary to meet the bloc’s “rule of law” requirements. EU bureaucrats are currently working on an assessment of Hungary’s compliance regarding 17 pieces of legislation the bloc insists on. Still, Budapest is not hiding its frustration with the way it’s being treated.

“They’re punishing us and openly blackmailing us with EU money,” Viktor Orban said in a statement for the Budapester Zeitung news outlet last month. “But there’s no legal basis for this — it’s blackmail, pure and simple,” he concluded.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

November 9, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »