Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

To secure peace in Ukraine, Trump must review misguided western sanctions

By Ian Proud | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 17, 2024

Following Trump’s election, there has been much speculation about how the war in Ukraine might end. But to understand how it might end, it’s vital to understand how it started.

The origins of the war in Ukraine can be traced back to the ouster of Ukrainian President Yanukovych in February 2014. Russia labelled it a coup, realists would say it was unconstitutional change in power, and U.S. & British officials would shrug their shoulders.

After Russia occupied Crimea and as insurgency broke out in the Donbas, the French and Germans launched a peace process involving the Presidents of Russia and Ukraine. From this so-called ‘Normandy format’ emerged two peace deals named the Minsk agreements. But the UK was sidelined from the peace process and the Americans suspicious of it.

Left out, Britian, supported by the U.S., pushed sanctions as the primary vehicle to contain Russia, running counter to what the French and Germans were trying to achieve. By the summer of 2015, the Minsk agreements had become sidelined, and sanctions were set in stone.

Since that time, Russia has become the most sanctioned country on the planet. Thirty-three western countries, led by the USA, imposed more than twenty thousand sanctions against Russian people and companies. That’s fifteen times more sanctions than Iran in a distant second place.

If we could completely cut Russia’s economic ties with the west, so the theory went, then that would be so damaging that Russia would have to withdraw from Ukraine. Western powers therefore sanctioned everything that they could, from money, ships, oil, gold, diamonds, weapons and all manner of hi-tech components. But from a very early stage, it was clear that sanctions weren’t altering Russian policy to Ukraine, quite the opposite.

When I left the Foreign Office in 2023, the UK government with its western partners, had gone through all the sanctions that they thought might weaken Russia. The west could probably find more people or entities to sanction. But policy makers never really gripped Russian gas, as some European countries still rely on it. And anyway, the destruction of the Nordstream pipeline solved that conundrum. Russian oligarchs that had political connections in the west were spared as were Russian companies that owned factories in the USA, to prevent American job losses. But we hit most things and neared the bottom of the barrel.

Yet, Russia’s economy always seemed to bounce back. That’s partly because, sanctions were never as big a deal as other events that moved the global economy, such as the oil price collapses in 2014 and 2016 and Covid. But it was also because Russia continually adapted its macroeconomic policy to absorb and, in the end, profit from sanctions. Following an immediate post-sanctions contraction of economic growth in 2022, Russia has grown more strongly than the western countries that imposed sanctions.

Western powers therefore needed something stronger, so sanctions evolved into a political tool to isolate Russia on the world stage. The USA, European Union and other countries including Japan and Australia sanctioned every possible type of economic, social and cultural activity involving Russia. Western academics no longer collaborate with Russian academics. Russian airliners can’t pass over western airspace and vice versa. Border posts have been closed or minimised. Russia can’t compete in international sporting events or even the Eurovision song contest.

Russian Ministers are subjected to indignant walkouts by western diplomats and ministers at international gatherings. Ordinary Russian people were denied a weekend ParkRun. Ukraine did its part, cancelling the Russian Orthodox church and going on a propaganda offensive with any western company that sold goods with the word ‘Russia’ in their branding.

And yet, outside of the west, Russia’s standing on the global stage doesn’t seem to be in decline. In a process accelerated by the Ukraine war, Russia, with China, has spearheaded a rapid shift by the developing world to create their own formats for dialogue and cooperation. There are over 200 countries on this planet, so the wealthy ‘west’ is in a minority. The BRICS group has grown rapidly, with a long queue of countries waiting to join, including NATO member Turkey. Vladimir Putin has an International Criminal Court arrest warrant out on him, yet he still travels freely to ‘friendly’ countries, where he receives the red-carpet treatment. He recently hosted a successful BRICS summit in Kazan while war continued to rage in Ukraine.

War started in February 2022 a few days after the Ukrainian government finally signalled the death knell of the Minsk peace agreements. But the point is that the Minsk agreement was [not] necessarily bad; it’s simply that the U.S. and UK invested significant efforts in ensuring its failure.

Sanctions never looked likely to prevent war, nor force its end, despite the death or injury to over one million people and a vast exodus of Ukraine’s population. War in Ukraine became reduced to the brutal, bloody town by town fighting in Europe after D-Day, while life in the west, and in Russia, carried on almost as normal. Fighting alone, Ukraine has never had sufficient resources to survive and never will.

There is a strong case that sanctions created the conditions for war to erupt, by undermining the very peace process – the Normandy Format – that was established to prevent it. And that the west’s continued blind faith in sanctions took us to the brink of a doomsday scenario, more horrific than the use of nuclear weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Western leaders, not wanting war themselves, focussed blindly on supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes. But the notion of ‘as long as it takes’ became tarnished with increasing numbers of western politicians started complaining that it is taking too long. Not least as the economics and demographics of war still show that Russia can continue fighting for as long as it takes, and that Vladimir Putin has the domestic political support to do that.

So, beyond the hype, if Trump is serious about ending the war in Ukraine, he must look at its origins. A ceasefire alone won’t cut it with Putin. There needs finally to be a peace proposal that includes targeted sanctions reduction. That, and a final reckoning with the NATO membership issue, the brightest red line of all.

November 18, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

Can China Rise Peacefully?

By Professor Glenn Diesen | November 15, 2024

The spectacular rise of China will inevitably spark security competition with the US and create tensions between the two leading economies in the world. The peaceful rise of China is, however, not solely the responsibility of Beijing as the US must also manage the security competition by accommodating shifts in the international distribution of power. The US constructed an international system based on unipolarity / global dominance after the Cold War, and attempting to preserve this system when it no longer reflects realities on the ground will make it near impossible to manage the security competition.

A temporary strategy

China’s peaceful rise in its previous format was to a large extent a temporary strategy. China’s peaceful rise involved rapid industrialisation and building its strength without engaging much in international affairs to avoid attracting unwanted concerns from other great powers. In Deng Xiaoping’s own words, a peaceful rise meant that China’s objective was to “bide our time and hide our capabilities”. China pursued an export-driven development model to rapidly industrialise, build up vast amounts of foreign reserves, and gradually climb up global value chains. What would happen when China could no longer hide its capabilities?

This “mutually beneficial” partnership with the US was not sustainable as China would incrementally increase its industrial competitiveness vis-à-vis the US and the US would continue to send more money to China to buy Chinese goods. At some point, the US would want to exit the relationship as debt levels become untenable and the loss of production power prevents recovery. The Chinese side would similarly seek to restructure the partnership as the growing US debt becomes a vulnerability as the US would not be able to pay its debts. As John Maynard Keynes succinctly put it: “If you owe your bank a hundred pounds, you have a problem. But if you owe your bank a million pounds, it has…”.

The breaking point for the relationship became the Global Financial Crisis in 2008-09 when the US discovered that borrowing and spending was not a sustainable economic model, while the Chinese took note that the US would not restore its fiscal discipline. Washington’s policy to “borrow and consume” its way back to prosperity implied that China could either invest more in an increasingly insolvent US, or alternatively accept the devaluation of its existing investments since the US Federal Reserve would print the money. The US effectively blackmailed China by demanding that China either lend them more money or the US would print the money. Washington also began to recognise that interdependence should not be measured by absolute gain, but by relative gain.

China was destined to outgrow the US-led international economic system and thus challenge the dominant position of the US. China would need to diversify away from the excessive reliance on the US by connecting with the other Eurasian giants, making inroads into Africa and even entering Latin America as the US “backyard”. The US would naturally view this challenge to its dominant position as a threat, at which point it would be very dangerous to be too reliant on the US. Chinese excessive dependence on US technologies meant that Washington could disrupt Chinese supply chains, excessive dependence on transportation corridors and choke points under the control of the US Navy meant China could be severed from the arteries of international trade, and excessive reliance on US banks, payment systems and the dollar meant that the US could shut down China’s finance. Furthermore, the US would begin to challenge China’s sovereignty over Taiwan, destabilise Hong Kong and Xinjiang with “human rights NGOs”, and pull China’s neighbours into a confrontational US alliance system. A confident US hegemon seeks to build trust in reliance on its international economic architecture and the possibility for peaceful coexistence, but a declining US hegemon is predictably extremely vicious and uses its administrative control over the international economic system to weaken or destroy rivals.

What would be good advice to China after the Global Financial Crisis? China should diversify its economic partners to reduce dependence on the US and prepare for increasingly aggressive US policies aimed at cutting China down in size. China subsequently began to launch ambitious industrial policies to take leadership in the most advanced technologies associated with the Fourth Industrial Revolution, it developed the Belt & Road Initiative to connect with the wider world, and new financial instruments such as alternative development banks, payment systems and trade in national currencies. Furthermore, China began building a powerful military deterrent and prepared to push through the containment of the US island chains.

America Shared Responsibility

A “peaceful rise” can be considered a dual process, as China must be willing to integrate itself into the rules and structures of the international order, while concurrently the power dominating the existing system must be prepared to reform and adjust to accommodate China. Preserving a hegemonic strategy in a multipolar world entails abandoning any efforts to mitigate the security competition, as unipolarity requires the containment, weakening or destruction of rising rivals.

Washington has not accommodated China sufficiently in the existing structures, which compelled China to develop alternative economic structures. The US has for example been reluctant to accommodate China by relinquishing the mechanisms of US primacy within institutions such as the IMF, World Bank and Asian Development Bank. China’s technological development is sabotaged with economic coercion that clearly violates the rules of the WTO. The US no longer abides by the rules of the US-led international economic system.

The US is developing new rules that the other side cannot agree to and thus disrupts stability. The intention of marginalising China was made explicit in an op-ed by Obama in 2016, where he posited that “the world has changed. The rules are changing with it. The United States, not countries like China, should write them”. The economic warfare that further intensified under the Trump presidency and then Biden presidency was rooted in the failure to manage shifts in the international distribution of power. The efforts to build a Europe without Russia as the largest European state predictably led to conflict, and the effort to construct an Asia where China is a spectator will have the same consequences.

A New Format for a Peaceful Rise?

For decades, China has been open about its critical view of a system based on US hegemony, as it is inflexible in accommodating the rise of other powers and shifts in the international distribution of power. The mere rise of other powers threatens to disrupt a system of hegemony. China’s desire to develop alternatives is also not new. In 1990, Deng Xiaoping told members of the Central Committee that the world was moving towards multipolarity:

“The situation in which the United States and the Soviet Union dominated all international affairs is changing. Nevertheless, in the future when the world becomes three-polar, four-polar or five-polar, the Soviet Union, no matter how weakened it may be and even if some of its republics withdraw from it, will still be one pole. In the so-called multi-polar world, China too will be a pole. We should not belittle our own importance: one way or another, China will be counted as a pole. Our foreign policies remain the same: first, opposing hegemonism and power politics and safeguarding world peace; and second, working to establish a new international political order and a new international economic order”.

China has not necessarily abandoned its “peaceful rise”, but merely reformulated it. Peaceful rise no longer entails building and hiding its strength within the US hegemonic system to avoid unwanted attention. Rather, peaceful rise entails developing a multipolar economic system that is more capable of managing changes in the international distribution of power and thus harmonising its interest with other great powers.

November 16, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

This time Trump really means business

By Fyodor Lukyanov | Rossiyskaya Gazeta | November 13, 2024

US President-elect Donald Trump has moved quickly to form his proposed new administration. His team is better prepared to take power than it was in 2016 – when neither the candidate himself nor the vast majority of his supporters believed he could win.

It’s too early to draw far-reaching conclusions, but in general, the composition of the preferred government reflects the ideological and political coalition that has gathered around the president-elect. From the outside, it may look motley, but so far it is all in line with Trump’s views.

Contrary to the perception actively propagated by Trump’s opponents, he is not an unpredictable and inconsistent eccentric. More precisely, we should separate his character and mannerisms, which are flighty, from his overall worldview. The latter has not changed, not only in the years since Trump entered big politics, but more generally in his public life since the 1980s. It suffices to look through the old interviews of the famed tycoon to see this: ‘Communism (in the broadest sense) is evil’, ‘the allies must pay up’, ‘the American leadership does not know how to make favorable deals but I do’, and so on.

Trump’s personal qualities are important. But more importantly, in a somewhat cartoonish way, he embodies a set of classic Republican notions. America is at the center of the universe. However, not as a hegemon that rules everything, but simply as the best and most powerful country. It must be the strongest, including (or especially) militarily, in order to advance its interests wherever and whenever it needs to. Essentially, there is no need for Washington to get directly involved in world affairs at all.

Profit is an absolute imperative for the future president (he is a businessman), and this does not contradict conservative ideals. America is a country built on the spirit of enterprise. Hence his rejection of over-regulation and his general suspicion of the extensive powers of the bureaucracy. In this, Trump joins forces with the equally flamboyant libertarian Elon Musk, who promises to rid the state of a hodgepodge of bureaucrats.

Musk himself is unlikely to be hanging around the president’s office for long, but politicians who think along these lines are likely to be there.

An important difference between the new Trump cohort and traditional Republicans is a significantly lower degree of ideologization of politics in general and international politics in particular. Domestically, the rejection of an aggressive agenda in the spirit of the Woke movement and the imposition of the cult of minorities (which the Republicans call ‘Marxism’ and ‘communism’) plays an important role. It’s about imposition, because the human right to any lifestyle is not in itself questioned by conservatives. For example, key figures around Trump – ardent supporter and former ambassador to Germany Ric Grenell and billionaire Peter Thiel – are married to men.

In foreign policy, the conceptual difference is that Trump and his entourage do not believe, as the Biden White House does, that at the core of international relations is the struggle of democracies against autocracies. This does not mean ideological neutrality. The idea of the ‘free world’ and criticism of ‘communism’ (in which they include China, Cuba, Venezuela, and by inertia, Russia) plays an important role in the thinking of many Republicans. But the defining factor is something else – intolerance of those who for various reasons do not accept American supremacy.

Trump’s choice for national security adviser, Michael Waltz, for example, speaks negatively and disparagingly of Russia, but not in terms of a need to be ‘re-educated’, but because it interferes with America. Marco Rubio, who is being considered for secretary of state, does not oppose regime change in his ancestral homeland of Cuba, but is otherwise not a militant supporter of American intervention anywhere.

The undoubted priority of the Trumpists and those who have joined them is to support Israel and confront its opponents, first and foremost Iran. Last year, Elise Stefanik, the likely US ambassador to the UN, publicly shamed the presidents of leading American universities in Congress for alleged anti-Semitism. It is worth remembering that the only really effective use of force in Trump’s first term was the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, the head of the special forces of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Trump is not a warrior. Threats, pressure, violent demonstrations – yes. A large-scale armed campaign and mass bloodshed – why? Perhaps because of the peculiarities of relations with China, which is clearly seen as the number one rival. Not in a military sense, but rather in the political and economic sphere, so any ‘war’ with it (forcing it to accept terms favorable to America) should be cold and ruthless. This also applies in part to Russia, though the situation is very different. All of this is neither good nor bad for Moscow. Or to put it another way, it’s both good and bad. But the main thing is that it is not the way it has been up to now.

Fyodor Lukyanov is the editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, and research director of the Valdai International Discussion Club.

This article was first published by the newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta and was translated and edited by the RT team

November 15, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

EU must reconsider ‘hare-brained’ Russia sanctions – Orban

RT | November 15, 2024

The EU must reconsider the sanctions it has placed on Russia in connection with the Ukraine conflict, and work to end hostilities as soon as possible, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said.

Speaking on Kossuth Radio on Friday, Orban explained that the current economic problems within the bloc stem from Brussels’ “hare-brained” decision to respond to the Ukraine conflict by placing restrictions on Moscow, which have driven up energy prices and overall inflation, hindering the EU’s competitiveness.

The EU declared the elimination of its reliance on Russian energy as a key priority after the Ukraine conflict escalated in February 2022. Sanctions and the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines later that year led to a dramatic drop in Russia’s gas supplies to the bloc, resulting in a spike in energy prices and soaring inflation.

“Sanctions were a wrong, hare-brained answer to the [Ukraine conflict], the EU made a mistake… Energy prices must definitely be brought down. This means that the sanctions must be reconsidered, because the policy of sanctions… it will destroy the European economy,” Orban stated. He called for an “anti-bureaucratic rebellion” within the bloc so that decisions on EU policies will be made with the people’s welfare in mind, both in regard to sanctions and to peace.

Orban also said that European businesses and industries cannot focus on development goals and growth opportunities when there is a war going on, so everything needs to be done to end the Ukraine conflict.

“If we look at this conflict from the point of view of our pockets, our economy, our income, it is a scourge of God on us all… In order to be successful again, we have to end it, end it as soon as possible,” he stressed.

Orban said Hungary would continue its diplomatic efforts toward peace in Ukraine, but said that it needs “a protagonist” who will be “strong enough to not only want peace but also to be able to create it.” He reiterated his hope that the power shift in the US with Donald Trump’s election would help achieve that goal. The Republican has previously claimed that he could end the Ukraine conflict in 24 hours. Until Trump takes office in January, Budapest will work on “achieving change in Brussels” to make sure “EU bureaucrats” do not decide to “continue the war without the Americans,” Orban pledged.

Orban has long been at odds with Brussels over the approach to Ukraine, opposing both aid to Kiev and sanctions on Moscow. Tensions grew further after he met with Russian President Vladimir Putin as part of his Ukraine ‘peace mission’ earlier this year.

Some EU leaders accused Orban of siding with Russia and abusing Hungary’s rotating presidency of the bloc. The premier clarified that he was representing only his own nation, but pledged to continue to work on changing the EU’s overall stance on the conflict.

November 15, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

India-Russia ties ‘helpful’ for the world – foreign minister

RT | November 14, 2024

Friendly relations between Moscow and New Delhi are an important element of international stability, Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar told Sky News Australia in an interview published this week. According to the diplomat, the West should be less concerned about countries enjoying good relationships with Russia and more about diplomacy and ending the Ukraine conflict.

The minister defended New Delhi’s decision to increase oil purchases from Russia after the US and its allies slapped Moscow with unprecedented sanctions over the Ukraine conflict, which targeted Russia’s financial sector and international trade.

“If we had not made the moves we had, let me tell you the energy markets would have taken a completely different turn and actually would have precipitated a global energy crisis. It would have caused inflation across the world as a consequence,” Jaishankar said.

Imports of crude oil from Russia currently constitute nearly 40% of India’s total oil purchases, up from less than 1% before the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Earlier this week, the foreign minister said that he expected bilateral trade between the two nations to reach a target volume of $100 billion before 2030.

The minister was responding to Sky News host Sharri Markson, who said that New Delhi’s close ties to Moscow were causing “angst” in Australia. Jaishankar hit back by saying that “countries don’t have exclusive relationships” nowadays. Using the same logic, India should be worried about any country who has a relationship with its regional rival, Pakistan.

“What India has done and is doing with Russia is actually… helpful to the international community as a whole,” the minister said. He said that not only had India’s actions helped to avert a potential global energy crisis, but may also contribute to ending the fighting between Moscow and Kiev.

New Delhi can talk to both parties and “try to find some intersection in those conversations” to eventually find a way to get them both to the negotiating table, according to the top diplomat.

“I think the world, including Australia, needs such a country that will help bring this conflict back to the conference table,” he stated, adding that “conflicts rarely ends on the battlefield, mostly they end [through] negotiations.”

When further pressed by Markson on whether India is concerned about growing cooperation between Russia, China, North Korea and Iran, Jaishankar replied that such developments, which were further encouraged by the Ukraine conflict, show that the West should also be primarily interested in ending the hostilities.

”It’s in everybody’s interest that the sooner the conflict ends the better,” the minister said. “The longer the conflict drags out… all sorts of things are going to happen. Not all those things could necessarily be to Australia’s advantage or… that of Western countries.”

November 14, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

BRICS stockpiling gold as the G7 weaponised finance

The predictable consequences of stealing Russia’s sovereign funds

By Glenn Diesen | November 13, 2024

The West’s decision to freeze and legalise the theft of Russian sovereign funds predictably diminished trust in the Western financial system, resulting in a huge demand for gold and other precious metals as a safe haven. Gold is not a yield-bearing asset, yet it preserves its value during turbulent times. There are some more twists to the story: There is a rise in demand for physical gold and a push to store it in their home countries due to the lack of trust it can be stored safely in the West.

What was done to Russia could happen to anyone. An adversary like China is obviously next in line as the economic coercion to prevent its continued development intensifies. The EU demands China must pay a “higher cost” for supporting Russia, linking Russia and China seemingly for the purpose of convincing Trump to continue the war in Ukraine. Even friendly countries such as India could be targeted anytime with secondary sanctions for failing to bow to the demands of Washington.

From the US seizure of Afghanistan’s sovereign funds to Britain confiscating Venezuela’s gold, there is evidently reason for distrust. The main shock to the system was nonetheless the legalisation of the theft of Russia’s sovereign funds, which was justified by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The moral premise is dubious at best as it would obviously not be considered acceptable if countries around the world seized the funds of the US and its NATO allies to pay reparations to the countries they have invaded.

Even within Western countries, predictability diminishes as the rules of law weaken. A British journalist reporting from Donbas had his bank account frozen without a day in court.[1] In Canda, hundreds of people had their bank accounts frozen for organising or attending the trucker protest.[2] Even the British opposition politician, Nigel Farage (“Mr. Brexit”), had his account suspended for political reasons.[3] Metro Bank used access to its financial services to punish opposition to its gender ideology as it denied banking services to an organisation opposed to the medical transitioning of children.[4] With many similar cases emerging, the term “de-banking” has entered the vocabulary.

Inflation and weaponisation of the dollar, coupled with growing political instability, are compelling large powers to take their money out of the Western financial system. China is still making dollars with its great trade surplus, but there is a growing reluctance to buy Western bonds or even leave the money in the Western financial system. China lends these dollars to other countries around the world rather than reinvesting it into the US market.

BRICS countries also prefer buying physical gold and they are also moving it to their own countries. Central banks and investors are not interested in exchange-traded funds (ETFs) as a cheap and easy way to own gold. Paper gold is not trusted, and investors demand physical gold. The gold is not even trusted to be stored in Western vaults anymore. China is having hundreds of tonnes of gold shipped from the West to China. Switzerland alone sent 524 tonnes of gold to China in 2022.[5] India brought home 100 tonnes of gold from the UK in 2024, the first large shipment since 1991. The transfer and storage of these metals are neither convenient nor cheap, yet the collapse in trust demands drastic actions. Bloomberg reports on Singapore constructing a six-story warehouse “designed to hold 10,000 tons of silver, more than a third of global annual supply, and 500 tons of gold”.[6]

There are many reasons not to store assets in rogue states: Risk of seizure or confiscation, lack of transparency, economic volatility, political instability etc. Unfortunately, all of these symptoms are becoming associated with the G7 countries as the financial system was weaponised. A key lesson of sanctions is that severe and prolonged sanctions result in the rest of the world adapting by learning to live without the belligerent actors.

Large gold reserves safely protected within national borders can also become important as new trade and reserve currencies are promoted. Fiat currencies will lose much trust in the financial turmoil that awaits, and future alternatives may need to yet again be backed by gold. Gold will certainly play a greater role as BRICS prepares a post-American financial system.


[1] PETER HITCHENS: Freedom for all means freedom for nasty people – Mail Online – Peter Hitchens blog

[2] Canada Ends Its Freeze on Hundreds of Accounts Tied to Protests – The New York Times

[3] Debanking: How Nigel Farage’s Banking Woes Have Raised Serious Concerns Over Account Closures

[4] The terrifying rise of ‘debanking’ – spiked

[5] Switzerland sent 524 tonnes of gold to China last year, the most since 2018 | Euronews

[6] As the Rich Snap Up Gold Bars, Storage Vaults Brace for Business – Bloomberg

November 13, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , , , | Leave a comment

Israel’s Economic Implosion: “Genocide Blowback” Threatens the Zionist Entity…

… And the US empire

By Kevin Barrett | November 10, 2024

When a nation becomes known as a genocide perpetrator it suffers reputational damage. And reputational damage has economic consequences. A whole branch of the public relations industry specializes in such matters: Well-paid damage-control hacks are hired by wealthy individuals, corporations, and governments when reputations propping up fortunes are threatened.

By murdering tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza in a transparent effort to steal more and more Palestinian land, the illegitimate state of “Israel” has labeled itself genocidal in the eyes of the world. And a nation that is genocidal, like an individual who is a serial killer, cannot expect to be treated as a respectable member of the community. Just ask the Germans, who were labeled “genocidal” after World War II and have been suffering economic consequences ever since.[i]

Partisans of Israel have used ethnic nepotism to gain control over western media. Due to its disproportionate media influence, the zionist entity has thus far managed to evade critical scrutiny of its long list of outrageous crimes. But as social media and international media erode the power of the zionist monopoly on western mainstream media, Israel’s hasbara flacks have entered ever-more-desperate damage-control mode.

Their uphill battle is not winnable in the long term. Today, well-informed people in all of the world’s nearly 200 countries know that “Israel” is committing genocide in Gaza. That knowledge is now a permanent part of humanity’s collective consciousness, and will remain so for generations.

“Israel” has become an international pariah due to the Gaza genocide. And even if it stopped committing genocide and other crimes tomorrow, the damage has already been done. The zionist entity is tainted and unsustainable. The only question is the timing of its forthcoming collapse. And economic data reveal that the collapse could happen sooner rather than later.

Since Hamas’s “most successful military raid of this century” on October 7, 2023, the Israeli economy has lost roughly 50,000 businesses to bankruptcy. According to some estimates as many as 500,000 zionist squatters (aka settlers) have fled the country, leaving shuttered businesses and unfilled positions in their wake. What’s worse, from the zionist perspective, is that the people fleeing “Israel” are, by and large, its most productive citizens. Or make that “former citizens.” These disgruntled expatriates are the well-educated engineers, doctors, entrepreneurs, technicians, and above all, the computer professionals who run Israel’s high-tech sector, the most productive element of its economy. Shir Hever writes:

Prof. Dan Ben David, a famous economist argued that the Israeli economy is held together by 300,000 people (the senior staff in universities, tech companies, and hospitals). Once a significant portion of these people leave he says “We won’t become a third world country, we just won’t be anymore.”

So who will remain in “Israel” after its most highly-educated and productive citizens leave? Increasingly, the zionist entity is becoming dominated by millenarian-messianic religious fanatics. These are the people who vote for ultra-genocidal lunatics like Ben Gvir and Smotrich, and who make up the bulk of the illegal squatters on stolen West Bank land.

This ultra-zionist segment of the population is characterized by extremely high birthrates, with families routinely reaching double figures. They get little or no education in history, math, science, and other non-religious subjects. The ultra-zionists are exempt from military duty and often evince no interest in work, preferring to live on public subsidies.

Handouts to messianic settlers are “widely unpopular among secular Israelis but ultra-Orthodox parties are a key pillar of Netanyahu’s ruling coalition” according to the Washington Post. The messianic maniacs long for the day their Messiah will return, conquer the world for the Jews, and give every Jew 2800 non-Jewish slaves. The demographic explosion of these unproductive, parasitical lunatics spells doom for the zionist settler colony.

Though western economic institutions are disproportionately run by Jews sympathetic to “Israel,” that systemic bias can’t hide harsh reality. Foreign investments were down 60% by the first quarter of 2024 and have gone even lower since then. The zionist entity’s credit rating has sunk to almost junk-bond levels. Multinational corporations like Intel, which recently canceled its plan for a $25 billion dollar factory, are increasingly aware that the genocidal zionist entity has no future.

Desperate for funds, the zionists have begun swindling local governments in the United States by having their mobbed-up agents purchase worthless “Israel bonds” that will ultimately be paid for by US taxpayers. The worst offender, Florida’s Palm Beach County, is now facing a lawsuit of epic proportions.

Proverbial wisdom has it that if you find yourself deep in a hole, you should stop digging. But the deeper the hole gets, the faster the zionists dig. When I wrote the original version of this article on October 21, 2024, “Israel” had all but announced plans to launch a huge and devastating attack on Iran. Israeli leaders vaunted their plans to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, while others hinted they might “only” destroy oil refineries and other energy infrastructure. But when the attack finally came on October 26, it was anticlimactic. Israeli planes were forced to turn back before entering Iranian airspace, reportedly after being locked onto by a new Iranian air defense system, and their standoff missiles killed four soldiers and damaged radar systems. Iran says it will retaliate with a “crushing response… involving more weapons and more powerful warheads than the 1 October attack… the new barrage would come between Tuesday’s US elections and the inauguration of the next US president in January.”

In the wake of the upcoming (November or December) Iranian retaliation against Israel, which will be larger and more destructive than the two previous Iranian rocket barrages, the Zionists will once again threaten to target Iranian leadership, nuclear, or energy facilities. But if Tel Aviv conducts a major attack by targeting Iranian leadership, nuclear facilities, or energy infrastructure, the Iranian response—even a limited one—could push the zionist settler colony off the cliff.[ii]

If the zionists attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, Iran will almost certainly retaliate in kind. The sight of Iranian rockets pulverizing Israeli nuclear sites, with ensuing concerns about radiation, would accelerate the flight of the zionist entity’s most productive citizens and intensify the financial world’s disinclination to invest in an obviously doomed settler colony. And since Iran would likely react to an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities by changing its principled anti-WMD stance and quickly developing and deploying nuclear weapons, thereby destroying the zionists’ regional monopoly, such an attack would amount to raising a self-inflicted radioactive mushroom cloud of doom over the zionist entity. (Indeed, it is not unlikely that Iran has already secretly changed its doctrine and now has a covert nuclear weapons capability waiting to be announced in the wake of regional escalation.)

The Biden regime, knowing this, has succeeded in convincing “Israel” to refrain from attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities. But even if the zionists “only” attack Iran’s leadership or energy infrastructure, the response could be just as devastating. Iran has demonstrated its ability to defeat the so-called Iron Dome and land its missiles, beginning with hypersonic ones, anywhere it likes inside “Israel.” And if the zionists attack Iran’s leadership or infrastructure, Iran will likely target the Achilles heels of the zionist energy grid. In a worst case (for the zionists) scenario, “Israel” could lose most of its transformers and find itself without reliable electricity for up to two years.

Any Axis of Resistance attack on Israel’s energy infrastructure would intensify already-existing vulnerabilities. Shir Hever writes:

The biggest supplier of coal to Israel is Colombia which announced that it would suspend coal shipments to Israel as long as the genocide was ongoing. After Colombia the next two biggest suppliers are South Africa and Russia. Without reliable and continuous electricity Israel will no longer be able to pretend to be a developed economy. Server farms do not work without 24-hour power and no one knows how many blackouts the Israeli high-tech sector could potentially survive.

If South Africa and Russia follow Columbia and cut off Israel’s coal supply, pressure on Turkey will mount to do the same to the zionists’ oil supplies. “Israel” is running its genocide on oil from the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, which Erdogan is under pressure to turn off. One way or another, the lights in “Israel” will soon be going out.

The election of the uber-genocidal Donald “finish the job” Trump may hasten the process of Israel’s destruction. Trump, true to his promises to Miriam Adelson and other poorly-informed and emotionally-overwrought ultra-zionists, will likely give Netanyahu enough rope to hang himself and his genocidal settler colony. By wading ever-deeper into a conflict he can’t possibly win, Netanyahu, obeying orders from messiah-awaiters Smotrich and Ben Gvir, is courting national suicide. And even rabid-zionist-owned Trump won’t be able to save Israel from its own hubris. If the US doesn’t sever its bonds with the zionists and cut its losses, it too will go down.

The zionists think they can terrorize the world into submission in perpetuity. But reputational damage will gradually erode their impunity and impose accountability. Israelis, due to their own actions, have become global pariahs. Genocidal war criminals, they are despised wherever they go. No-one wants to deal with them, and no-one thinks they have a future. The economic blowback from their crimes will doom the blood-soaked settler colony and finally end its abominations in the Holy Land of Palestine.


[i] Germany was a genocide victim as well as perpetrator. Millions of Germans were murdered by the partially-implemented Morgenthau plan and by ethnic cleansings orchestrated by the Jewish-dominated US and Soviet occupiers in the wake of World War II. Today’s emasculated Holocaust-reparations-paying Lesser Germany, whose economy was devasted by its American masters’ destruction of the Nordstream pipeline, is a pale shadow, both economically and culturally, of what a sovereign Germany would have become. For more information on the anti-German holocaust see Thomas Goodrich’s Hellstorm and James Bacque’s Other Losses.

[ii] Most Zionist settlers, especially those who are educated and economically productive, are (1) rootless cosmopolitans who could live reasonably well in any large Western city, and (2) relatively intolerant of pain and insecurity. By initiating a long-term genocidal war that will inevitably make “Israel” the target of billions of people’s wrath for generations, the Zionist entity’s leaders are rendering the colonists’ lives insecure, and inadvertently “cleansing” Occupied Palestine of the very people who make the settler colony economically sustainable.

November 10, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Why Trump’s return is of little consequence to Iran

Press TV – November 10, 2024

Rolling sanctions imposed on Iran for years have generated a degree of endurance and resourcefulness which enables the country to deal with any possible fallout of Donald Trump’s return to the White House.

The mainstream Western media is already conjuring the things that will come out, citing what they call people briefed on his early plans saying he will drastically increase sanctions on Iran and throttle its oil sales as part of an aggressive strategy to undercut Tehran’s abilities.

Trump took a dim view of Iran during his first term, aborting a six-nation agreement with Tehran—known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. He also imposed what was described as a “maximum pressure” strategy in hopes Iran would abandon its anti-US and anti-Israeli policies.

However, he sounded contrite at an event for the New York Economic Club in September, where he fielded questions about his future plans, saying he would use sanctions as little as possible and singling out Russia and Iran.

“The problem with what we have with sanctions, and I was using the sanctions, but I put them on and take them off as quickly as possible, because ultimately it kills your dollar and it kills everything the dollar represents. And we have to continue to have that be the world currency. I think it’s important. I think we’d be losing a war.

“If we lost and we lost the dollar as much as the world currency, I think that would be the equivalent of losing a war. That would make us a third-world country. We can’t let it happen.

“So I use sanctions very powerfully against countries that deserve it. And then I take them off because, look, you’re losing Iran. You’re losing Russia. China is out there trying to get their currency to be the dominant currency, as you know better than anybody.

“All of these things are happening. You’re losing so many countries because there’s so much conflict with all of these countries that you’re going to lose that, and we can’t lose that.

“So I want to use sanctions as little as possible,” Trump said.

Analysts say a Trump administration return to a maximum-pressure campaign on Iran would mean tougher enforcement of US oil sanctions, but it could struggle to get China as Iran’s top crude customer to cooperate.

China, they say, could retaliate by strengthening work in the BRICS club of emerging economies, consisting of Iran, Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa and others, including by reducing reliance on the dollar in deals in oil and other goods.

Iranian officials have played down the significance of the US election result, with the government saying it will not affect the livelihoods of the Iranians.

“The US elections are not really our business. Our policies are steady and don’t change based on individuals. We made the necessary predictions before and there will not be change in people’s livelihoods,” Government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani said Wednesday after Trump claimed victory.

Iranian economists think Trump’s return to power is unlikely to lead to any turbulence in the country’s economy.

Nevertheless, much depends on measures taken by state planners to deal with the situation. The history of sanctions has shown every threat entails an opportunity that can be used to stabilize the situation and improve.

Trump’s sanctions in 2018 initially led to a steep drop in Iran’s oil exports, but they forced the country to find alternative export channels and return the Iranian oil to the market.

Iran has also been able to tamp down the effect of American sanctions by expanding its trade with third countries through a proactive economic policy.

One should not forget the wise leadership of the country’s top authority to the accompaniment and support of the people which have greatly reduced and sometimes neutralized the effects of the sanctions.

Moreover, the hegemonic power of the United States is waning, and its last tactic of using economic sanctions as a weapon against countries is losing effectiveness in the face of rising multilateralism.

As reflected in Trump’s remarks, further resort of such coercive measures has grave consequences for the country.

China, Russia and Iran have built a trading system that uses mostly national currencies in trade, avoiding the dollar and exposure to US regulators, making sanctions enforcement tough.

When Trump imposed sanctions during his first term, Iran was an observer member of BRICS. Now, it is a full member of the expanding strategic and economic coalition, which has given it diverse means of trade and ways to effectively fend off any hostile measure.

November 10, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia, India are early birds as Pax Americana is ending

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR – Indian Punchline – November 10, 2024 

The working visit of Russia’s First Deputy Prime Minister Denis Manturov to Mumbai and Delhi on November 11-12 has been in the cards for sometime. It assumes added interest today as, in a delightful coincidence, it overlaps with the beginning of the end of Pax Americana in international politics. 

Manturov, 55, is one of the brightest stars of the new generation of leaders in the Russian political firmament with a brilliant record as an economist and technocrat in the energy and military-industrial complex, two key sectors of the economy. 

President Vladimir Putin has entrusted him with responsibilities that go far beyond the portfolio of Minister of Trade and Industry, a position he held for 12 years until May 2024 when he was elevated as First Deputy Prime Minister. Manturov is now a familiar face at the high table when Putin takes meetings on Ukraine war, which shows he wears many hats. 

Manturov is the co-chairman of Russian-Indian joint commission, alongside External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar. To be sure, Jaishankar will have wide-ranging discussions with Manturov. Who else Manturov is meeting in Delhi will be an indication of the stirrings in the air in the Russian-Indian cooperation. 

The timing of the visit is notable since the neoconservatives who dominated the Biden administration — Secretary of State Antony Blinken, CIA director William Burns, et al — are on their way out and a brave new world is taking shape in Washington, DC. 

The influential CEO of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Ivo Daalder, who was the US ambassador to Nato, succinctly captured the imminent power shift in DC when he wrote in Politico in the weekend,  “Trump won in a landslide. He helped Republicans take control of the Senate and may well help them keep the House (by the way, Republicans have flipped the House as well) — ensuring single-party control across all three branches of government. He can rightly claim a mandate to implement all the policies he touted… All the while, he’ll be shielded by a Supreme Court.” 

Of course, Ambassador Daalder is an acolyte of the “rules-based order” and a firm believer in America’s manifest destiny to lead the world. He wrote in his column titled The end of Pax Americana: “I also worry about what this means for the rest of the world. In his first term, Trump made clear he doesn’t buy into Washington’s global leadership role as his predecessors have done. He doesn’t believe in leading — he believes in winning… 

“Moscow and Beijing have long chafed at Washington’s leadership, and for the past decade, they’ve sought to counter and undermine it. They may now get their wish. Trump isn’t interested in sustaining the Pax Americana in the ways his 14 predecessors were… The end of the Pax Americana will have profound consequences…The Pax America will officially end on Jan. 20, 2025, when the US inaugurates Donald J. Trump as its 47th president. The country and world will be very different because of it.” 

Suffice to say, we are getting a preview of this historic juncture. Although, taking place in the conditions under sanctions, Manturov’s agenda of discussions in Delhi will have a futuristic dimension. The point is, while the sanctions against Russia may take some time to be scrapped, their cutting edge — the fanaticism and the sound and fury with which Blinken and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen applied that intrusive diplomatic tool to dictate other countries’ economic and military relations with Russia — may now become blunt, what with all signs already pointing toward a Russian-American engagement. 

The Indian side should be mindful of this transition to accelerate the economic and military-technical cooperation with Russia with a medium and long-term term perspective. This is one thing. 

Second, we are edging toward a conversation between Trump and Putin. Do not be surprised if they decide to meet at an early date. Historically speaking, there is nothing like summitry to energise political systems with top-down culture as the US and Russia have.

Suffice to say, we are nearing a point when the International Criminal Court which has an arrest warrant against Putin won’t know where to hide itself. From our perspective, that opens the door leading to the rose garden for a state visit by Putin to India — perhaps,  as the chief guest at the celebrations marking the 75th anniversary of the Indian Republic on January 26, 2025. 

Putin is a great friend of India’s. Only two days ago, he described India as unparalleled in the global arena and went on to say Russia is strengthening its relationship with India on multiple fronts, with a high level of trust underpinning their bilateral ties. Putin paid fulsome praise to India’s rise saying, “India should undoubtedly be added to the list of superpowers, with its billion-and-a-half population, the fastest growth among all economies in the world, ancient culture, and very good prospects for further growth.” 

To be sure, India finds itself in a truly privileged position in the international political arena with the consolidation of the Indian-Russian partnership, prospects opening for a spurt to take the US-Indian ties to new heights taking advantage of Trump’s goodwill, and, indeed, the nascent signs of a thaw in the troubled Sino-Indian relationship — and as the fastest growing major economy in the world. 

India’s optimal aim should be to create synergy out of all three relationships running on parallel tracks — with Russia, US and China respectively. No matter the complexities of their mutual relationships, India should aspire for a confluence of the three streams for advancing its development. 

There is a whiff of hope in the air for a warming of bilateral relations between Moscow and Washington under Trump, which have been in a free fall. But Russophobia is deeply entrenched in the American elites and Russia will remain a toxic issue. Yet, Trump has repeatedly stressed good relations with Putin, as well as mutual respect. And Putin is a very talented politician who understands Trump. 

As for Russia-China relationship, Moscow and Beijing are at a high noon of partnership unparalleled in their history. That relationship is  anchored in the great camaraderie between Putin and Chinese president Xi Jinping, is rock solid and will remain so despite the fluidity in the international environment.

Of course, there are misgivings about the trajectory of the US-China relationship going forward. But, here again, the crux of the matter is the US’ economic rivalry with China in the American mindset. Per se, China does not hold any threat to the US. And China, unlike Russia, does not challenge American power, influence and interests directly or by design. 

A military confrontation between the US and China will not happen under Trump’s watch. Besides, the Indo-Pacific strategy is floundering, the latest sign being Indonesia, the largest country in southeast Asia, turning its back on US-led alliance systems. and seeking BRICS membership.

The presence of Tesla CEO Elon Musk as an influencer in Trump’s inner circle can be seen as a stabilising factor for US-China relations. Above all, only China can be a meaningful interlocutor to help Trump realise the ambitious MAGA project.

November 10, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Indo-Pacific braces for Trump 2.0

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – November 10 2024

The victory of Donald Trump in the US presidential election is far from unexpected. Yet, the fact that he has won means that many countries across the world will brace for the impact this win will have on them.

This is especially true for countries in Asia – in particular, in the Asia Pacific region – where the Biden administration, despite its flawed plans, appeared willing to invest US resources, both economic and military, to offset China. Although Donald Trump is, in many ways, more anti-China than Joe Biden is, his anti-China geopolitics is confined primarily to one arena: the US-China trade (im)balance.

It means that the Trump administration will be far less interested in extending military and economic assistance to the regional countries than the Biden administration has been in the past four years. On the contrary, his administration is likely to slap heavy tariffs, which will negatively affect Washington’s bilateral trade with regional countries. In such a scenario, regional countries will have one key policy option: turn more towards China to resolve bilateral ties via diplomatic means and reduce their dependence on Washington.

The Aftermath of the Victory

If Trump’s previous four years in office are any guides to the future, Washington’s Indo-Pacific allies, such as Japan and South Korea, are deeply worried. As former officials of the Trump administration, such as the former National Security Adviser John Bolton, revealed later in their memoirs, Trump had plans to withdraw US military forces from South Korea, keep up with his planned rapprochement with North Korea, and demand massive payments from Japan to pay for the American defence role. During his campaign, Trump defended his foreign policy and repeatedly vowed to continue after assuming the presidency.

For Japan, defence payments are, however, only one of the major areas of concern. Trump will hit trade as well. A key Trump campaign pledge is slapping 10- to 20-percent tariffs on all imports to the United States. Trump has also vowed to “absolutely” block Nippon Steel Corp.’s proposed 2-trillion-yen ($13 million) acquisition of US Steel Corp. More importantly, the US-Japan trade gap has widened to the disadvantage of the US – a situation that Trump would like to reset.  According to US official data,

“In 2022, both U.S. exports to Japan and imports from Japan continued to grow for a third year in a row. U.S. exports totaled $80.3 billion, an increase of 7.7% ($5.8 billion), and U.S. imports totaled $148.3 billion, an increase of 10.0% ($13.5 billion). The trade deficit was $68.0 billion, increasing 12.8% ($7.7 billion) from 2021”.

“Our allies have taken advantage of us more than our enemies,” Trump said in a media interview on October 15, referring to the US trade deficit and other issues. With Trump having repeatedly referred to cutting off US support for NATO, Japan’s idea of an ‘Asian NATO’, too, seems in deep trouble. The military pacts Joe Biden made with Japan, South Korea, and Australia are likely to face the same fate. According to Trump, one of the key reasons why the Biden administration entered into these pacts was the pressure the Ukraine conflict generated on these states.

Therefore, he believes, that if he can end the Ukraine conflict – which he promised to end quickly by cutting off US aid to Ukraine – this will allow for the US to divest its sources away from these countries. On the other hand, Trump would not only want South Korea and Japan to spend more on defence but also push them to join him in slapping tariffs on China, thus pushing them into a ‘trade war’ with Beijing. Given South Korea’s and Japan’s trade (im)balance with China, they are bound to suffer from such a policy step because China has the leverage to retaliate. Therefore, they are unlikely to initiate their ‘trade war’. Alternative routes, however, exist.

The Alternative Option

Official Think Tanks in India are already proposing that India should join the China-led Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Agreement. This policy shift probably speaks volumes about the direction that most regional countries might be willing to take. India is also one country that recently signed an agreement to jointly manage the disputed border. Now, this pact is crucial – not only because it signifies peaceful management of tensions, but also because the India-China border dispute is probably one major issue where China actually fought. This is unlike the South and East China Seas. Therefore, if China is able to diplomatically resolve its tense issues with India, there is little denying that other countries can do the same. There is, thus, a silver lining for countries like Japan, the Philippines, etc. to resolve their issues without relying on the US (or any other external power, such as the EU or NATO).

In some ways, an inward-looking approach, i.e., an approach that does not seek external mediation, would help push external powers permanently out of the region. Knowing that the Trump administration will itself be looking for disengagement, regional countries wouldn’t have to worry about annoying the US too.

For China, it presents an excellent opportunity to capitalise on US disengagement and deepen its ties with countries in the Indo-Pacific. Although China will probably be fighting a ‘trade war’ in the Atlantic, it can still find a major leeway in the Indo-Pacific. Its willingness and openness will only find regional countries ready to jump on the regional bandwagon of free trade for growth and diplomacy for dispute resolution.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

November 10, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Venezuela, Russia sign new energy, defense agreements

Press TV – November 8, 2024

Venezuela and Russia have signed 17 new agreements, in what was described as further consolidation of the “pressure-free” bilateral relationship between them.

During a visit by a senior Kremlin official to Caracas on Thursday, the two sides signed the new agreements in energy cooperation and petroleum exploration as well as in the security area on “intelligence, counterintelligence and counterespionage issues.”

Visiting Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Chernyshenko, who heads the Russian part of the Intergovernmental Russian-Venezuelan High-Level Commission (CIAN), told his Venezuelan counterpart Delcy Rodriguez that his country stood ready to support Venezuela’s armed forces with “the most sophisticated weapons and military equipment.”

The Russian delegation also met with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, before inking several documents, including the outline of key cooperation areas until 2030.

During the ceremony at the Miraflores Palace, Maduro expressed his satisfaction with the work carried out by both the Venezuelan and Russian teams at CIAN. He said the new agreements would “seal and strengthen the path of union and cooperation” between Venezuela and Russia, “from now until 2030 and beyond.”

“This meeting, 20 years after the High Level Commission between both nations was founded, is one of satisfaction for the work, the spirit of friendship and brotherhood that increasingly unites Russia and Venezuela,” he said.

The Latin American leader added that Caracas and Moscow are building an “impregnable” “win-win” relationship that is “free of pressure, blackmail and sanctions”.

The 17 new agreements are added to the more than 300 bilateral cooperation instruments which were signed before in the fields of finance, energy, industry, commerce, customs, transportation and tourism, agriculture, fishing and food, science and technology, education, health, culture, sports and youth, among others areas of bilateral cooperation.

Venezuela has one of the world’s largest natural gas reserves and the world’s largest proven reserves of oil. Russia is a Eurasia energy giant. However, both countries’ energy sectors face sanctions by the United States.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has repeatedly censured American leaders over Washington’s foreign policy which aims “to preserve their domination, hegemony and diktat” by targeting other countries with “blackmail, ultimatums, threats.”

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

Algeria halts trade with France over Western Sahara stance

MEMO | November 8, 2024

Algeria has instructed its banks to suspend financial transactions related to imports and exports with France, while also lifting the longstanding ban on imports from Spain, imposed more than two and a half years ago.

The move marks Algeria’s first tangible response to France’s position on the Western Sahara dispute.

In July, Algeria withdrew its ambassador from France after Paris endorsed Morocco’s autonomy plan as the sole basis for resolving the Western Sahara conflict.

France’s former Ambassador to Algeria, Xavier Driencourt, said the Algerian decision was a “major blow to economic relations between the two countries” and warned that it could lead to serious consequences for both parties.

Algeria had previously suspended its 20-year Treaty of Friendship, Good Neighbourliness, and Cooperation with Spain due to Madrid’s stance on the Western Sahara issue. However, it reversed the decision in September. The Algerian Banking Association informed bank directors in a document that the previous suspension of financial transactions with Spain was no longer in effect.

Relations between Algeria and Spain have since improved, with Algeria recently appointing a new ambassador to Madrid after recalling the previous envoy.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Illegal Occupation | , , , , , | Leave a comment