Israel expands occupation of Golan Heights as Assad’s government falls

The Cradle | December 8, 2024
Israel deployed tanks and troops to occupy the buffer zone in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights on 8 December following the fall of the Syrian government to foreign-backed extremist groups overnight.
The Israeli army announced its forces occupy “several points necessary for defense” in the buffer zone, citing the possibility of “armed men” entering the zone.
The buffer zone was established in 1974 as part of the ceasefire that ended the Yom Kippur War between Israel and Syria.
Foreign-backed extremist militants from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) entered Damascus overnight after a lightning advance on the capital that began less than two weeks ago from their strongholds in Idlib Governorate.
Militants from HTS, formerly known as the Al-Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front, quickly occupied the Aleppo countryside and city before moving south to capture Hama, Homs, and finally, Damascus.
The Syrian army withdrew from Homs and Damascus without putting up resistance.
The Israeli army claimed it “does not interfere in internal events” in Syria but will remain in the buffer zone “as long as necessary.”
Israeli troops entered the buffer zone under the pretext of an alleged threat from extremist militants.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar claimed “armed forces” entered the buffer zone and attacked UN peacekeeping forces stationed in the area.
“Israel is concerned about violations of the 1974 Disengagement Agreement between Israel and Syria, which also pose a threat to its security, the safety of its communities, and its citizens, particularly in the Golan Heights region,” he wrote on X.
Israel captured the Golan Heights from Syria during the 1967 war, illegally occupying the area and annexing it in 1981.
Israel has bombed Syria hundreds of times since the start of the US-led covert war on Syria began in 2011. The bombing continued after the war ended in 2019, in what Israeli media dubbed the “battle between the wars.”
Israeli attacks intensified further after the start of the war in Gaza over a year ago. Israel claimed it was targeting weapons facilities used to support Hezbollah and the Islamic resistance in Lebanon.
Growing distrust of the USA globally
By Vladimir Mashin – New Eastern Outlook – December 7, 2024
The special military operation in Ukraine essentially puts an end to the unipolar world in which the Americans considered themselves the supreme ruler, bossing around other countries.
The movement from a unipolar world to a multipolar reality takes several years and this process is not always linear. It is appropriate to recall the words of N. G. Chernyshevsky: history is not the sidewalk of Nevsky Prospekt; it goes in zigzags, with digressions, etc.
At the same time, Israel’s war in Gaza, which began in October, 2023, has noticeably accelerated this process. There are many signs that Israel’s horrible military behaviour in the Palestinian enclave under the guise of self-defence had significant geopolitical consequences, which first and foremost manifested themselves in undermining the US’ status as a global superpower. The world is deeply polarised again; the Global South no longer sees the West as a defender of values and the rule of law.
The United States has seriously weakened the UN Security Council, repeatedly using its veto power to thwart draft resolutions calling for an unconditional ceasefire in Gaza. The fact that many so-called Western liberal democracies defended Israel’s policy of genocide has undermined the functioning of the existing world order.
US ‘mediation’ in favour of Israel
Israel has put itself above the law and it did so with the unconditional support of the United States. For many years, the US, which designated itself the exclusive mediator in the political settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, accepted without any reservations the expansion of illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied territories, ignoring the demolition of Palestinian houses, murder and the imprisonment of thousands of people. In fact, they encouraged the apartheid regime and used their influence in the UN Security Council to curb any attempts to hold Israel accountable.
During the first Trump administration, Washington went even further, unilaterally recognising Israel’s illegal annexation of East Jerusalem and the Syrian Golan Heights. By doing so, the Arab News newspaper emphasised in an article on November 26, “the United States itself became a rogue state violating international law and becoming guilty of Israeli war crimes”.
Israeli extremists assume that the United States will give them the green light to annex the West Bank of the Jordan River and thereby destroy any prospect of creating a Palestinian state.
It is the United States that is guilty of destroying many opportunities to settle the Arab-Israeli conflict. The Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth noted at the end of November this year that President Bill Clinton, wishing to go down in history as a peacemaker, made a bold diplomatic gesture on December 13, 1998, by visiting Gaza and the site of the future international airport of Palestine. Clinton and his wife Hillary were then greeted by Yasser Arafat and his wife Suha. The US president, whose term in office was ending, privately assured several Arab officials of his intention to declare his support for Palestinian statehood before leaving office. However, as always, his promises only remained on paper.
At the end of November this year, some Americans spread rumours that the Biden administration hinted at the possibility of supporting the Security Council resolution calling for the creation of an independent Palestinian state in an attempt to somehow wash the blood off its hands.
The West is no longer at the helm
Following the sharp international reaction to the war in Gaza, the United States are among the only open supporters of Israel’s actions. This obvious disregard by Washington and its allies for Palestinians lives has seriously undermined their authority and influence in many parts of the globe – and above all in the Global South.
The US position in the world is weakening as a result of Russia’s firm and consistent vector, China’s rapid economic growth, the birth of new coalitions of the Global South (such as BRICS, SCO, ASEAN, etc.). Regional powers such as Türkiye, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa, Malaysia, etc. are gaining strength.
The growing global influence of non-Western cultural movements, especially the media, challenges the power of traditional Western media. The proliferation of diverse sources and social media platforms significantly limits the role of the once dominant Western newspapers and TV channels. Not only is America’s position weakening, but there is an unprecedented drop in confidence in government structures in Western Europe.
The transition to a multipolar world is a reality that coincides with the decline of US global hegemony and Trump’s ‘America First’ policy. As the United States retreats to its chambers, its global influence will decrease.
In the United States, there is a growing awareness of the decline of the US role in international affairs. The West is no longer at the helm, the Bloomberg agency wrote on November 20; more and more countries no longer want to play by the old rules. The domestic political situation is so tense that Bloomberg concludes that the US is in a revolutionary situation and that the decline of ordinary people’s well-being decreases trust in the ruling elites.
However, the West is not going to give up its positions without a fight, so we are yet to face new crises and cataclysms.
Syrian Army foils US-backed SDF offensive in Deir Ezzor: Sources
Al Mayadeen | December 3, 2024
The clashes initiated today by militants belonging to the Deir Ezzor Military Council, affiliated with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), toward the seven peaceful villages in Deir Ezzor, have ended, and the militants have withdrawn to the positions from which they launched their attack in northern Deir Ezzor, Al Mayadeen’s correspondent reported on Tuesday.
The Deir Ezzor Military Council stands for armed groups supported by US occupation forces, operating under the SDF and controlling areas north of the Euphrates River, where several US military bases are located.
Our correspondent further reported the complete withdrawal of the SDF militants after their failed attempt to advance toward the seven peaceful villages in northern Deir Ezzor, after American artillery at the Conoco field provided heavy fire cover for their assault.
Earlier, Al Mayadeen’s correspondent confirmed that US occupation forces had instructed Deir Ezzor Military Council militants to launch an attack on Syrian Army positions in the seven villages in the Deir Ezzor countryside, coinciding with an offensive by the terrorist Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) group and other opposition factions on Aleppo, Idlib, and Hama countrysides.
The seven villages are located on the eastern bank of the Euphrates River, in the northern Deir Ezzor countryside. They are: al-Hussainiya, al-Salihiya, Hatla, Marrat, Mazloum, Khasham, and al-Tabiya, all of which are under the control of the Syrian Army.
Our correspondent added that Deir Ezzor Military Council militants had brought in mine-clearance vehicles and began removing the earthen berm on the Khasham front, northern Deir Ezzor.
Intense clashes were reported between Deir Ezzor Military Council militants and the Syrian Army on the outskirts of the towns of al-Salihiya, Marrat, and al-Tabiya in northern Deir Ezzor, where the US-backed militants shelled Khasham village in Deir Ezzor countryside with 12 mortar rounds.
Violent clashes were also reported between the militants and the Syrian Army on the al-Salihiya front in northern Deir Ezzor.
The Syrian Army units also captured 14 members of the SDF-affiliated Deir Ezzor Military Council during the attack that targeted the northeastern countryside of Deir Ezzor, Sputnik reported.
Moreover, SANA reported that the Syrian army is engaged in violent clashes with armed groups north and west of the town of Khattab in the northwestern countryside of Hama, with dozens of terrorists killed and wounded in the vicinity of the towns of Deir Ezzor and the northern countryside of Hama.
SDF attack aims to stop Resistance attacks on US occupation base
Sources told Al Mayadeen that the Americans’ goal in supporting the SDF’s attack is to stop the Resistance attacks on the Conoco base due to its proximity to these villages.
The attack was carried out under American cover and was thwarted by the army, allied forces, and locals, the sources confirmed.
According to the sources, the SDF initiated the attack by firing rockets and shells, which inflicted damage on the residents’ property.
The sources mentioned that the Syrian Army and allied forces repelled an attack by the SDF on the seven villages, north of Deir Ezzor, and forced them to withdraw.
Syrian Army repelling attack on liberated villages
Meanwhile, Syrian state TV said earlier the army and its allied forces were repelling an attack by the Deir Ezzor Military Council on the liberated villages in the al-Jazira region.
The Syrian army, along with allied forces, is also repelling an attack launched by SDF forces in the Deir Ezzor countryside, the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) reported.
On its part, the Syrian Ministry of Defense confirmed that Syrian and Russian airstrikes and missile strikes have targeted militant positions in the southern Idlib countryside and northern Hama, pointing out that the strikes resulted in dozens of fatalities and injuries among the militants, as well as the destruction of their vehicles and weapons.
Al Mayadeen’s correspondent later reported that the Syrian-Russian air forces destroyed a command center belonging to armed groups in the Khan Sheikhoun area in the southern Idlib countryside.
HTS militants launched a wide-scale offensive last Wednesday on areas in the countryside of Aleppo, Idlib, and Hama, managing to enter the city of Aleppo.
The Syrian Army subsequently established a defensive line in the northern Hama countryside and launched a counteroffensive against the militants, regaining control of villages and towns in the northern part of the province.
Qatar seeking solution
Commenting on the events, Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesperson Majed al-Ansari confirmed that “Doha is working with its partners in the region to find solutions to end the fighting in Syria.”
Qatari media quoted Al-Ansari as saying, “We emphasize that there should be a comprehensive solution in Syria based on international resolutions.”
Ensuing disagreements
In a related context, the sources told Al Mayadeen that disagreements erupted after HTS demanded that the so-called “National Army” militants evacuate the sites they had taken control of north of Aleppo.
The sources said that disagreements emerged between the HTS operations room and the “National Army’s” operations room over control positions in Aleppo and its countryside.
Al-Tanf: The US stronghold in Syria and how it safeguards Israel
By Haidar Mustafa | The Cradle | December 2, 2024
On 10 September 2014, the US announced the formation of an international coalition with the participation of 86 countries to eradicate the terrorist group ISIS, which had declared the establishment of a “caliphate” in late June.
The coalition’s operations began in Syria and Iraq in early 2015. However, what unfolded was more than just a campaign against terrorism; it became a vehicle for advancing US strategic ambitions in West Asia – including the establishment of illegal military bases to secure influence and resources in eastern Syria, primarily to protect the interests of its key ally, Israel.
Exploiting the war for geostrategic gains
Washington leveraged the anti-ISIS campaign to pursue broader geostrategic goals, deploying roughly 2,000 troops into Syria – an occupation that violated international law and Syrian sovereignty. By 2016, US forces had established a presence at Al-Tanf, a strategically important base located at the tri-border area between Syria, Iraq, and Jordan. This position, south of the Euphrates River, overlooks a critical supply route from Tehran to Damascus and Beirut, which the US views as significant for regional control.
The Al-Tanf base was originally established in 1991 before the Second Gulf War, reactivated during the 2003 Iraq invasion, and then closed after US forces consolidated control in Iraq. It reopened in 2016 after ISIS was driven from the area.
Since then, Al-Tanf has served not only as a training ground for fighters of the CIA-backed Maghawir al-Thawra but also as a cornerstone of broader US interests, as Colonel Daniel Magruder Jr. noted in a 2020 Brookings Institution report entitled Al Tanf garrison: America’s strategic baggage in the Middle East.
According to Magruder, Al-Tanf was meant to facilitate the continued fight against ISIS, counter Iranian activities, and maintain leverage in negotiations over Syria’s future.
However, the base’s role went far beyond these stated goals. US occupation forces at Al-Tanf engaged in both offensive and defensive intelligence operations while also supporting armed groups against the Syrian government.
The base acted as a hub for the Military Operations Center (MOC), a joint effort with several states aimed at coordinating military activities in southern Syria, ultimately undermining Syrian sovereignty and its allies.
The real strategic goal: A buffer zone for Israel
Beyond its military role, Al-Tanf’s strategic location supports plans for a controlled buffer zone involving the nearby Rukban refugee camp. Military expert Major General Muhammad Abbas told The Cradle that this buffer would help US and Israeli objectives by creating a physical barrier between Syria and Iraq.
The base also facilitates Israeli operations in Syrian airspace, providing a logistical advantage for air force missions that circumvent Syrian air defenses. The collaboration between the US and the occupation state has been well documented, with Al-Tanf serving as a launching point for Israeli air strikes deep inside Syria – attacks that would be far riskier from other approaches due to Syrian anti-aircraft systems.
A 2021 report by the Washington Institute highlighted how the US occupying presence at Al-Tanf has directly benefited Israel, supporting its “battle between wars” – a strategic approach aimed at minimizing risk and exploiting weaknesses in Syrian defenses.
Speaking to The Cradle, political analyst Bassem al-Shehawi notes that the US presence in Syria has always aligned with safeguarding Israel, whether by severing geographical links between members of the Axis of Resistance or by deploying advanced radar and air defense systems to protect Tel Aviv’s interests.
Al-Tanf’s importance for the US and Israel
Crucially, it also facilitates Israeli air force attacks on targets deep inside Syria – attacks that could not have been carried out from above Lebanon or the occupied Golan Heights due to the distance involved. Since 2018, when Syrian air defenses shot down an Israeli F-16, Israeli forces have completely avoided entering Syrian airspace from the western side.
Shehawi adds that this base’s importance comes from its buffer zone and air umbrella, which have a radius of 55 kilometers. These were established due to the non-conflict understanding between Russia and the US regarding Syria. The base also played a role in confronting drone and missile attacks launched by Iran during Operations True Promise 1 and 2, whether by providing radar monitoring or attempting to shoot them down, similar to the role played by other US bases in Syria and the wider region.
A report published by Al-Monitor also confirms that Israeli fighter planes had previously used the corridor along the Jordanian–Syrian border and the airspace around Al-Tanf to penetrate Syrian airspace to launch strikes.
The significance of Al-Tanf was evident during the presidency of Donald Trump, who often spoke of pulling US troops out of Syria. However, the situation on the ground was more nuanced. Even as Trump made public declarations about withdrawing troops, officials within his administration, including former National Security Advisor John Bolton, ensured that key positions like Al-Tanf remained secure. Bolton stated that any withdrawal from Syria would be conditional on an agreement with Russia to replace US forces at Al-Tanf, thereby ensuring that Israeli security interests were safeguarded.
The future of the US occupation of Syria
With Trump poised to return to the White House next month, questions have resurfaced about the future of American military involvement in Syria. The expectation is that despite any renewed rhetoric about reducing military involvement, Al-Tanf will remain a key asset in maintaining US influence in Syria and the region.
In 2023, former Chief of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley visited Al-Tanf, emphasizing its importance for Israel’s security and confirming that there were no plans to withdraw. Al-Tanf will likely continue to play a key role in Washington’s West Asia strategy, even if it reduces its presence elsewhere in Syria.
The base serves as a strategic card – enabling continued influence, fostering instability, and complicating the region’s dynamics. Yet, a critical question remains: How sustainable is the US presence at Al-Tanf, given the growing resistance? With Iraqi and local Syrian factions increasingly targeting US positions, Washington’s ability to maintain control over Al-Tanf may weaken.
In time, Syria might leverage its own “Popular Resistance” to apply pressure, forcing US forces to eventually leave Syrian territory, as indicated earlier in the year with the tribal uprising in Deir Ezzor.
No more ‘deals’: what Palestinians want and will fight to achieve
By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | November 26, 2024
The Islamic world reorganizes the strategy in Riyadh
By Lorenzo Maria Pacini | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 15, 2024
On 11 November, an emergency Arab-Islamic summit on the question of Palestine was held in Riyadh. It was an extremely important event, from which the directives of the coming months for the Middle Eastern Islamic world and beyond will take their course. A shared international strategy emerged, even if contradictions and risks are not entirely absent.
A necessary window for dialogue
On Monday, 11 November, Riyadh invited the 22 countries of the Arab League and the 50 or so states that make up the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation to take part in a summit dedicated to the ongoing conflicts in the region. The meeting focused on ongoing conflicts in the region, with a particular focus on Donald Trump’s return to the Oval Office.
At the opening of the summit dedicated to Israel’s wars in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman used the term ‘genocide ’ to describe Israel’s military operations in the Gaza Strip: ‘We call on the international community to assume its responsibility […] by immediately ending Israeli attacks against our brothers in Palestine and Lebanon’.
The assembled Arab and Muslim leaders took the same stance towards Israel, condemning the horrific and shocking crimes committed by the Israeli army in Gaza, denouncing torture, executions, disappearances and outright ethnic cleansing, as stated in the final communiqué of the meeting.
Mohammed bin Salman also called on Israel to ‘respect the territorial sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran” and to ”refrain from attacking its territory’. Most members of the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation will support these very firm statements. Although there are big differences between the countries that have normalised relations with Israel and those that oppose it, starting with the Islamic Republic of Iran. MBS explicitly said that not only the very existence of Palestine is now in question, but also the fate of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the second holiest shrine in Islam after Mecca, a statement reminiscent of the name of the Hamas operation entitled ‘Storm Al-Aqsa’. Evidently, Hamas leaders expected that such an emergency Arab-Islamic summit would convene much earlier, for instance soon after the start of Israel’s ground operation in Gaza.
In this regard, the Crown Prince referred to Iran as a ‘sister republic’, which made the press throughout the Islamic world rejoice, signalling a detente in relations between the two countries. Diplomatic relations were officially reopened in March 2023, after a seven-year blockade, thanks to an agreement brokered by China, and after the infamous 7 October 2023, dialogue resumed and intensified. Iran supports the Palestinian Islamist movement, while Saudi Arabia tries to contain the spread of the conflict.
At the summit, Iran’s First Vice-President Mohammad Reza Aref called Israel’s assassination of the leaders of Palestinian Hamas and Lebanese Hezbollah ‘organised terrorism’, adding that ‘Operations misleadingly described as “targeted killings”, in which Palestinian elites and leaders of other countries in the region are killed one by one or en masse, are nothing but organised terrorism’. Similarly expressed by Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati, who called on the international community to continue sending aid to Lebanon. It should be noted that Mikati spoke a few days ago of ‘interference by Iran’ in Lebanon, an accusation rejected by Tehran.
It is worth noting the simultaneous involvement of Assad and Erdogan. Only recently, such crossovers were impossible. The government in Ankara has spoken increasingly strong and clear words against the extermination that Israel is perpetrating, certainly favouring a round table with the neighbouring Islamic countries, at least from the point of view of positive intentions.
Why only now?
There is almost nothing left of the leadership of Hamas and Hezbollah. This is a fact to be confronted with. Such a summit would have been very different if the leaders of the Resistance were still alive.
The reason for this delay is perhaps the American elections. While the BRICS+ summit in Kazan had paved the way and pointed in a direction of international cohesion in condemning Israel’s actions and the need to restore Palestinian autonomy, it is true that the final placet was missing to move from theory to action.
Donald Trump’s victory must be framed from an Arab-Islamic perspective. Trump is a supporter of right-wing Zionism, that of Netanyahu and certain radicals such as Smotrich, Ben Gvir and Rabbi Dov Lior, who have never shied away from proclamations of massacres, sacrifices and religious destruction. For Zionists, Jerusalem is as important as Al Quds for Islamists (Al Quds is the Arabic name for Jerusalem). In the election campaign, Trump never gave an inch about his pro-Zionist position and support for the government in Tel Aviv. It was he who proposed moving the capital of the Zionist entity to Jerusalem and it was he who ordered the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani. Trump’s election strengthened the prospects for US-Israeli collaboration, so much so that Smotrich immediately declared his intention to attack the Palestinians in the West Bank and blow up the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
Trump has accelerated these processes. The next goal, which he personally supported and financed, is the construction of the Third Temple, an eschatological keystone for the entire American neocon world. The physical destruction of all of Israel’s enemies is not a side effect or minor harm, but a duty inherent in Jewish messianism.
The emergence of the Islamic pole in the multipolar world is acquiring an increasingly recognisable and identifiable form. Of course, there are still many problems to be solved: Saudi Arabia and Turkey do business with the US and Israel, continue to play on opposing sides, and are historically unreliable. The countries of South East Asia still have to define their position with regard to international relations with the West, in order to definitively emancipate themselves and make themselves safe from blackmail and retaliation.
The questions many are asking themselves are various: will the next American president commit himself to ending the ongoing conflicts as he has promised? Or will he be an unconditional supporter of Israel, both in the war and in his plans to torpedo any prospect of establishing a Palestinian state? Saudi Arabia makes any normalization with Israel conditional on the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. The two-state solution is supported by much of the international community as a means to resolve the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Arab and Muslim leaders hold firm to the position, in accordance with UN resolutions and the 2002 Arab peace plan, that Israel must return all territories occupied since 1967.
The Abrahamic agreements are no longer enough. This time, however, the US can no longer decide the entire future of the Middle East on its own, because the chessboard has changed and the new positions taken by the Islamic countries will force Washington to weigh up more elements. Russia and China will not let the multipolar project be compromised. Not even the African countries, where the Palestinian cause is a deeply felt and shared issue of freedom, identity and anti-colonialism, are going to give way in the fight against this historic injustice.
The Muslim population of Islamic countries, seeing the passivity of the rulers, will not tolerate the ongoing extermination and attack on the holy places of their religion much longer.
Probably, only a common war against a common enemy can unite Muslims. And that could happen very soon.
Ukraine in league with Al-Qaeda – Syria
RT | November 12, 2024
Ukrainian agents have been working with Al-Qaeda in Syria, offering them drone warfare training and some of their US-supplied weapons in exchange for manpower, the government in Damascus has told RT.
The terrorist group Jabhat al-Nusra, since rebranded as Hayat Tahrir-al-Sham (HTS) has been reduced to parts of Idlib province in the northwest of the country, thanks in part to Russia helping the Syrian government defeat various rebel militants, including Islamic State (formerly ISIS).
RT’s Roman Kosarev has visited Syria and saw “undeniable evidence” that Kiev has made an alliance with HTS.
“We have real confirmation of the Ukrainian instructors’ presence in Syria,” a Russian soldier, identified only by the callsign ‘Gilza’, told RT. He said Kiev’s operatives have been teaching HTS militants how to fly suicide drones, as well as supplying them with such weapons.
Video footage filmed on a ship showed a US-made Switchblade 600 drone being delivered to the Syrian militants in crates labeled as humanitarian aid. Another video showed a man, wearing a black T-shirt with a Ukrainian trident symbol, chatting with a militant somewhere in Idlib.
Mohammed Hamra, a former government official who had to flee Idlib, has his own sources about what’s going on in the province. He told RT that around 250 Ukrainian instructors have been training HTS militants to kill Syrians and Russians.
Syrian intelligence has confirmed the presence of “several” Ukrainian operatives in Idlib. One of the Syrian officials, who sought anonymity, told Kosarev that Kiev’s instructors have been preparing HTS militants for attacks on government-controlled territory, in particular the Russian base at Khmeimim.
Kiev has delivered drones and even drugs – stimulants to keep militants alert – to HTS through Turkish territory, the Syrian said. In return for advice and technology, Kiev has asked HTS to release Chechen militants from their ranks so they could fight in Ukraine.
Moscow has “reliable information” that Islamic State militants and “similar groups” have been fighting in Ukraine under the guise of Chechen and Crimean Tatar units, according to Alexander Bortnikov, head of the Russian security service FSB.
Russia has accused Ukraine of “openly supporting terrorist groups in Africa,” pointing to an incident in Mali earlier this year involving Touareg militants. Ukraine’s HUR military intelligence agency has boasted about providing the Touaregs with information and drone warfare techniques to help them kill government soldiers and Russian security contractors.
Trump wants US troops out of northern Syria: RFK Jr
Press TV – November 7, 2024
President-elect Donald Trump wants to withdraw US troops from northern Syria rather than leave them as “cannon fodder” if fighting breaks out between Turkey and Kurdish militants, his ally Robert F Kennedy Jr has said.
Kennedy, who is expected to play a major role in the new US government, said during a live broadcast that Trump had expressed his intentions for northern Syria during a plane journey.
“We were talking about the Middle East, and he took a piece of paper and drew on it a map of the Middle East with all the nations on it, which most Americans couldn’t do.
“He was he was particularly looking at the border between Syria and Turkey, and he said, ‘We have 500 men on the border of Syria and Turkey and a little encampment that was bombed,’” Kennedy said.
Trump had told him there were 750,000 troops in Turkey and 250,000 militants in Syria. “If they go up against each other, we’re in the middle,” Trump told him, according to Kennedy.
Trump was told by the “generals” that the US troops would be “cannon fodder” if Turkey and the Kurdish forces came to blows. “And he said, ‘Get them out!'” Kennedy said.
Trump was re-elected president on Wednesday after easily beating his rival Kamala Harris.
The US military has for long stationed its forces and equipment in northeastern Syria, with the Pentagon claiming that the deployment is aimed at preventing the oilfields in the area from falling into the hands of Daesh terrorists.
Damascus maintains the deployment is meant to plunder the country’s natural resources. Trump admitted on several occasions that American forces were in the Arab country for its oil wealth.
Turkey has also deployed forces in Syria in violation of the Arab country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Ankara views US-backed YPG Kurdish militants as a terrorist organization tied to the homegrown Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which has been seeking an autonomous region in Turkey since 1984.
Germany is a ‘banana republic’ – Zakharova

RT | November 7, 2024
The collapse of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s government just hours after Donald Trump was elected US president is a sign that Germany has become a “banana republic,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Thursday.
The coalition collapsed on Wednesday, prompted by disagreements over the budget deficit and further aid to Ukraine.
“The … coalition breakdown has exposed the main problem of Germany’s political system: it is a classic ‘banana republic’,” the spokeswoman wrote in her Telegram channel. According to Zakharova, Berlin failed to maintain good economic relations with Russia, the supplier of cheap natural gas, which was “vitally important for its citizens and industry.”
Scholz’s government also could not keep the national economy afloat and allowed its industries to “emigrate” to the US, the spokeswoman stated, adding that it was all apparently done to “please Washington.”
Last month, the newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung reported that the German economy is expected to contract for a second year in a row as it struggles to keep up with soaring energy costs after cutting itself off from Russian gas. The nation’s industrial output dropped by 4.6% in September year-on-year as orders for domestic-made goods have also plummeted, according to official data released this week.
“Berlin stopped even pretending that the German government had any sovereignty and … was not just proxies for the American neoliberals in the EU,” Zakharova added.
Scholz fired Finance Minister Christian Lindner, the head of the business-friendly Free Democratic Party (FDP), late on Wednesday. The FDP was one of three parties comprising the German government coalition together with the chancellor’s Social Democrats and the Greens.
In response to the dismissal, the FDP announced its withdrawal from the government and formally ended the three-way coalition. The development left Scholz with a minority government consisting only of his own party and the Greens.
On Thursday, Scholz admitted that aid to Ukraine had become a major point of contention during talks the previous day during which the coalition members failed to find common ground.
According to the chancellor, he put forward a four-point plan that included “increasing our support for Ukraine” among other things. Lindner rejected the proposal and reportedly suggested calling for snap elections instead.
Earlier, Lindner had reportedly asked the Defense Ministry to limit military assistance to Kiev, citing budgetary difficulties. The government is still seeking a way to plug a multibillion-euro hole in next year’s budget and to revive the struggling economy.
Israel’s limited counter to Iran’s massive attack
By Fereshteh Sadeghi | The Cradle | October 27, 2024
After weeks of grandiose threats, Israel struck a number of military sites in Iran over the weekend. While many details of the attack remain unclear, Iran’s leadership suggests that a qualitative response is on the horizon.
Twenty-five days after Iran’s massive 1 October missile attacks on Israel, and following weeks of threats and bluster about its huge preparations, Tel Aviv unleashed its own offensive against military sites of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the early hours of Saturday, 26 October.
The Israeli attack started in the capital, Tehran, where at around 02:15 local time (22:45 GMT), very loud explosions were heard on the western side of the city. Reports which usually are published immediately on the social media platform X, suggested six explosions had been heard.
A multi-wave attack
Footage surfacing afterward — though scarce in number — showed Iranian anti-aircraft guns firing into the sky over Tehran, but no sign of missiles were recorded in those videos. The lack of visible missile evidence sparked debate among analysts, with some suggesting that the occupation state employed tactics designed to evade traditional detection methods, potentially by using low-altitude or stealth drones. But others have questioned whether Israeli jets even entered Iranian airspace.
The second and third waves of strikes came two to four hours later when aerial defense systems became active in Iran’s western province of Ilam and the southwestern province of Khuzestan. This multi-wave strategy indicated a calculated attempt to wear down Iran’s defenses, probing their response times and resilience in multiple regions simultaneously.
With news about the initial raids ebbing, western media began to frame the Israeli strikes as enormous as well as successful. These evidence-free portrayals were met with skepticism from Iranian officials, who emphasized the effectiveness of their air defenses in minimizing any damage from Israeli strikes.
The New York Times wrote, “Israeli jets first targeted air defense batteries and later struck Iran’s missile arrays and production sites.”
Axios quoted Israeli officials as claiming, “Israel had sent a message to Tehran, ahead of the airstrikes, warning the Iranians not to respond.”
In the morning, the Israeli military issued a statement saying “it had completed its strikes but that if Iran makes the mistake of carrying out another attack, Israel will have to fight back.”
The Khatam al-Anbiya Air Defense Base — the central command in charge of defending the skies of Iran — meanwhile announced that:
“Despite all previous warnings from the Iranian authorities to the criminal, illegal Zionist regime against engaging in any form of adventurism, that fake regime in an escalating move struck military locations in Tehran, Ilam, and Khuzestan. The joint aerial defense of the country successfully intercepted and thwarted the aggressor’s raids. Despite that, limited damage was done to some sites with the extent of the harm being investigated.”
The Iranian army later in the day announced the death of at least four officers, including a colonel, killed during Israeli air raids in Khuzestan. An informed source speaking to The Cradle on condition of anonymity reveals that the number of Iranian casualties is higher than what is officially being reported.
What were Tel Aviv’s tactics?
More than 24 hours on, details about the Israeli air raids or the extent of the harm to the Iranian military are unclear and patchy at best. Both sides have a vested interest in controlling the narrative: Tel Aviv to project power and deterrence, and Tehran to maintain an image of resilience and minimize perceived vulnerabilities.
Israel says it deployed over 100 F-35 fighter jets to conduct the offensive. However, an Iranian conservative lawmaker on Saturday morning claimed that the strikes in Tehran were actually carried out by small drones or quadcopters.
Hamid Rasaei wrote on his Telegram channel that “the Zionist regime’s agents in Tehran were involved in those attacks and Iranian anti-aircraft guns fired at those microdrones.”
The narrative in the west of the country was different. Images of an Israeli missile’s booster falling in Iraq’s Salahuddin province suggest Israel used the Golden Horizon Air launched Ballistic Missile to hit Iranian radars in the western belt of the country.
The use of Iraqi airspace by Israel was confirmed by the Khatam Al-Anbiya Air Defense Base. It has blamed the US military for allowing Israel to fire air-launched ballistic missiles into Iranian territory from 100 kilometers deep inside the Iraqi soil. No such permission had been granted from Iraqi authorities.
Baghdad was joined by other Arab capitals in strongly condemning the Israeli attack on Iranian soil without referring to the use of its airspace by Israel. The Cradle’s correspondent in Baghdad says, “Iraq did not approve of the use of its skies, but Prime Minister [Mohammed Shia] al-Sudani has no say in this matter because Washington controls the Iraqi airspace, while Iraqi radar systems are old.”
Khatam al-Anbiya has not mentioned Jordan, a country that denies involvement in the Israeli aerial attack despite its track record of defending the occupation state from previous Iranian retaliatory strikes.
Limited success or major damage?
Although the official Iranian media have downplayed the extent and strength of the Israeli strikes, University of Tehran academic and political analyst Mohammad Marandi tells The Cradle that “it was a big operation on the side of Israel and actually a considerable one, as Israelis did a harm to Iranian radar and defense systems.”
Iranian academic Foad Izadi believes “the Israeli attack was not something that many had expected, much less than what was thought it would do.” But, he emphasizes, “(In essence) Israel has no right to strike Iran, whether the strikes are small, medium or large. Iran is an independent country, and attacking another country is a violation of international law.”
Izadi dismisses western claims that Israel’s patently illegal strikes on Iran are justified as “self-defense,” pointing out that, in all cases, Tel Aviv launched the original aggressions while Tehran was legally retaliating.
“Iran fired a barrage of missiles on Israel for the first time in April in the wake of an Israeli attack on the Iranian embassy in Damascus, Syria, that had been conducted despite Tehran’s previous warnings. The second encounter happened following Israel’s assassination of Hamas’s leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran. Iran had the right to respond to the killing of its guest, as well as the events that unfolded in Lebanon including Nasrallah’s assassination.”
Izadi points to a stellar performance by Iran’s air defense systems, in which “Iran was basically able to minimize the effect of this aggression” by Israel.
Marandi, who served as a consultant for the Iranian negotiating team at the last round of Vienna nuclear talks, agrees with the assessment that Iran’s air defenses performed well:
“Iranians had conducted security and intelligence operations ahead of the strikes and succeeded in limiting the extent of damage by dummies and decoys as well as spreading misinformation about sensitive sites.”
As he tells The Cradle, the damage inflicted on Iranian military sites was not grave because “the possibility of a direct confrontation with the United States convinced Iranians many years ago to relocate almost all sensitive sites and strategic production facilities underground. Neither warplanes nor missiles are able to penetrate into those underground facilities.”
“What remains on the ground are small workshops producing missile spare parts and they are scattered across the country, but not near borders, that’s why the strike failed to leave a significant harm,” Marandi adds.
True Promise 3?
Saturday’s direct hits on the Iranian capital and Iran’s provincial military facilities were the first since 1987, when former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s military forces rained missiles on Tehran and other Iranian cities. The psychological impact of targeting Tehran itself cannot be overstated; it represents a symbolic blow that challenges Iranian security and sovereignty and will likely necessitate a meaningful and calibrated response.
That notion was reiterated by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who has the final word on all national security matters. During a meeting with“Martyrs of Security” family members earlier today, Khamenei pointed out that Israel has yet to learn its lesson:
“They (the Israelis) need to understand the power, determination, and innovation of the Iranian nation and its youth. How to convey this power and resolve of the Iranian nation to the Zionist regime is for our officials to determine, and what is in the best interest of the nation and the country should be done.”
Foad Izadi believes a third Iranian attack against the occupation state is likely because “Iran’s leaders are very much in line with the analysis that attacking the country should not become normalized. Mohammad Marandi says Tehran’s retaliation isn’t a matter of if, but when: “Even if Tehran had not been struck and only Ilam had been targeted by the Israelis, the Iranian leadership would have reacted,” he tells The Cradle.
“Iran’s retaliation to April’s Damascus strike took days. After Haniyeh’s assassination, it took months for Tehran to strike back,” Marandi elaborates. Following the Israeli strikes, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council met to get briefed on the targets that were hit and assess the extent of damage. While a possible Iranian military response was reportedly discussed, there is no information yet on whether that decision has been made.
