Can Europe be saved?
Professor Glenn Diesen interviewed by Dimitri Lascaris
Glenn Diesen | December 11, 2024
I was interviewed by Dimitri Lascaris about the future of Europe. I argue that Europe’s decline derives from its inability to adjust to a multipolar international system. Europe can become one of several centres of power by pursuing collective bargaining power based on common interests, diversifying economic partnerships to avoid excessive dependence on the US, and overcoming the Cold War legacy of zero-sum bloc politics.
The Europeans have done the exact opposite. The European security architecture has been built on the premise that expanding a military alliance ever closer to Russian borders would create peace and stability. Relations with Russia have subsequently collapsed and Europe is losing a costly proxy war against the world’s largest nuclear power. Countries in the shared neighbourhood (Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova) are destabilised and their democracy undermined to ensure pro-West/anti-Russia governments take power. These deeply divided societies have become the battleground for drawing new dividing lines in the new Cold War.
European economies are deindustrialising as they cut themselves off from the Russian market, and are also pressured by the US to decouple from the Chinese market. The US Inflation Reduction Act offers subsidies to what remains of struggling European industries if they relocate to the US. Excessive reliance on the US means that Europe cannot even criticise the US for destroying its energy infrastructure after the attack on Nord Stream. After centuries of a Europe-centric international system, the Europeans have not realised that they have been demoted from a subject to an object of security.
Governments that do not represent national interests will eventually be swept away, yet the political elites become increasingly authoritarian to keep their power. In France and Germany, their political opposition is pushed aside with undemocratic means. Hungary and Slovakia are punished by the EU for failing to fall in line. The election results in Romania were overturned after the electorate did not vote for the right candidate.
The continent desperately needs course correction, yet power structure and ideology prevent necessary changes from being implemented. More aggressive means to control the narrative also result in declining freedom of speech.
Strikes deep into Russia ‘big mistake’ – Trump
RT | December 12, 2024
US President-elect Donald Trump has criticized Ukraine’s strikes deep into Russia using Western-supplied weapons, saying that they only escalate the conflict between Kiev and Moscow.
Trump made the statement on Thursday in an interview with Time magazine, which named him the 2024 Person of the Year.
“I disagree very vehemently with sending missiles hundreds of miles into Russia. Why are we doing that?” he asked rhetorically.
According to the president-elect, such attacks are “just escalating this war and making it worse.”
“That should not have been allowed to be done… And I think that is a very big mistake, very big mistake,” he said of strikes deep into Russia’s internationally recognized territory.
Trump returned to the issue later in the interview, saying that “the most dangerous thing right now” is the fact that “[Ukrainian leader Vladimir] Zelensky has decided, with the approval of, I assume, the President [Joe Biden], to start shooting missiles into Russia.”
“I think that is a major escalation. I think it is a foolish decision,” he stressed.
The US president-elect’s comments came a day after the Russian Defense Ministry reported that Ukrainian forces had fired six US-supplied ATACMS missiles at a military airfield near the southern city of Taganrog.
Two of them were shot down and the rest were diverted using electronic warfare during the attack, the ministry said. The fallen debris resulted in some injuries and minor damage to two buildings and several vehicles, it added.
On Thursday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Russia’s response to the strike on Taganrog “will follow at the time and in the way that will be deemed appropriate. But it will definitely follow.”
In late November, Russia used its new Oreshnik hypersonic ballistic missile system for the first time, striking the Yuzhmash military plant in the Ukrainian city of Dnepr.
According to Moscow, the deployment of the state-of-the-art weapon was a response to Washington and its allies allowing Ukraine to target internationally recognized Russian territory with the long-range weapons they supply to Kiev.
Russian President Vladimir Putin warned at the time that if Ukraine’s attacks deep inside Russia continue, Moscow reserves the right “to use our weapons against the military facilities of those countries that allow the use of their weapons against our facilities.”
Orban reveals Trump’s stance on Ukraine negotiations
RT | December 11, 2024
US President-elect Donald Trump is not yet able to conduct official negotiations to seek a resolution to the Ukraine conflict but will start doing so after assuming office on January 20, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said.
Orban made the remarks in a Facebook post on Wednesday in which he recounted his meeting with Trump and members of his inner circle earlier this week. The Hungarian prime minister expressed confidence that a “positive effect” on the conflict will be seen immediately after Trump’s inauguration.
“If two people, whether in Europe or in America, sit down to talk to each other today, they will hardly be able to avoid talking about peace and war,” Orban wrote, noting that US law strictly bars Trump from negotiating in any official capacity before he assumes office.
Orban, one of a handful of dissenters to the Western approach to the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, has reportedly been actively seeking a mediatory role in settling the hostilities.
Early on Wednesday, Orban held an hour-long phone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin that revolved around the Ukraine conflict, the situation in Syria, and bilateral ties between Moscow and Budapest.
“These are the most dangerous weeks” in the entire conflict, and Hungary is “taking every possible diplomatic step to argue in favor of a ceasefire and peace talks,” Orban said in a post on X after the talks.
Putin explained Moscow’s position to Orban, detailing “his principled assessment of the current development of the situation regarding Ukraine and the destructive line of the Kiev regime, which continues to exclude any opportunity for peaceful resolution,” according to the Kremlin press service.
The talks between Orban and Putin evoked an angry reaction from Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, who mockingly expressed hopes that the Hungarian leader “at least won’t call [former Syrian President Bashar] Assad in Moscow to listen to his hour-long lectures as well.”
“No one should boost personal image at the expense of unity; everyone should focus on shared success. Unity in Europe has always been key to achieving it. There can be no discussions about the war that Russia wages against Ukraine without Ukraine,” Zelensky stated.
Orban promptly reacted to Zelensky’s rebuke, stating that the Ukrainian leader had rejected his peace efforts, namely “a Christmas ceasefire and a large-scale prisoner exchange” he had proposed.
“It’s sad that [Zelensky] clearly rejected and ruled this out today. We did what we could!” Orban said on X.
Peace Plans, Schmese Plans: Key Path to Ukraine Peace Long Ignored by All
By William Dunkerley | Ron Paul Institute | December 10, 2024
Politico ran the headline, “Ukraine Peace Plans Galore.”
Ukraine, Russia, and China each have a peace plan. Trump is developing one. The Alliance of Democracies has one. It looks a lot like Ukraine’s plan at first glance.
There’s talk of a Demilitarized Zone between Ukraine and Russia. There’s also the suggestion of imposing a frozen conflict. They seem like an open invitation for continued stress between the countries, not real peace.
So, what’s the ignored key path to peace I’m talking about?
The first step along that path involves adopting a strategy of honesty. That requires sharp awareness of a troubling situation. It is that the mainstream Ukraine narrative expressed by most of our politicians is fabricated. Likewise are the stories reported by our media.
Instead of debunking all the falsehoods one by one I’ll describe the truths that the false narratives ignore. They became apparent to me by closely following what actually happened during and after the revolution. Here’s what I saw:
When in 2014 the Maidan revolutionaries took over by force, they cancelled Ukraine’s democracy.
–They illegally chased the democratically elected president out of the country, falsely claiming he was impeached. But on close examination he wasn’t. The United States has admitted that. A Ukrainian official also confirmed it to me personally. No impeachment. No resignation, either.
–The revolutionaries threw out the democratically promulgated constitution and replaced it with an old one that the legitimate Supreme Court had previously declared unconstitutional.
–They began to rule as militant, self-appointed, unelected leaders of a new, non-democratic state.
–They showed early intentions of drastically altering what had been successfully a Ukrainian-Russian multilingual state. That actually played out in later overt initiatives to linguistically and culturally cleanse things Russian from the new Ukrainian state. That brought about the oppression of Ukraine’s significant Russian minority population.
Most areas of Ukraine accepted all that as a fait accompli. Two did not: Crimea and Donbas. (Donbas consists of the areas known as Donetsk and Luhansk.)
Both Crimea and Donbas rejected the loss of democracy and also the unelected revolutionary leaders that caused it. Crimea and Donbas each declared their respective independence.
In response, the revolutionaries launched a hostile attack. They waged war on what was by then the independent area of Donbas. The intent was apparently to capture it by force.
They didn’t attack Crimea, however.
You see, a treaty that Russia had with Ukraine gave Russia control over its historical naval base at Sevastopol, Crimea. It also allowed for up to 25,000 Russian troops to be stationed there. According to the March 18, 2014 Washington Post, Russia was believed to have had about 15,000 on-base at the time of the revolution. That may have deterred an attack by the revolutionaries.
The net effect of the revolution was to create in a very real sense a different country, a different Ukraine.
Look at the chain of events I described above. Pre revolution — democracy. Post revolution — unelected rule by force. There was a complete break from the earlier government. There was no continuity. Pre revolution — control over Donbas and Crimea. Post revolution — no such control. They both had achieved independence.
In a de facto sense, pre-revolution Ukraine and post-revolution Ukraine aren’t the same country when it comes to statehood.
The post-revolution Ukrainian state was given some semblance of democracy in June 2014. That’s when it installed its first democratically elected president, Petro Poroshenko. This was about two months after the revolutionaries had already attacked Donbas. Upon taking office Poroshenko continued to attack Donbas as did Volodymyr Zelensky who followed as president.
To appreciate the concept of post-revolution Ukraine as a “different country” think of China in the 1900s. It had a revolution, too. Pre revolution it was the Republic of China. Post revolution it was the communist People’s Republic of China. Again, a complete break. Who would argue that they were the same country?
This perspective is consistent with a multinational treaty. It is the Montevideo Convention of 1933. It was signed on behalf of the United States by Cordell Hull, President Franklin Roosevelt’s secretary of state.
In international law this treaty is widely regarded as definitional regarding statehood and country status. Two essential qualifications are government and territory. Pre- and post-revolution Ukraine were discontinuous on both qualifications.
Why have the politicians and media gone for the false narrative? The full answer is beyond the scope of this article. But suffice to say, the extended war has been very lucrative and beneficial for many investors/financiers, defense industry companies, and politicians.
The impact of this on a potentially successful peace plan is a misalignment of interests. The interests of the war beneficiaries are served by prolonged war and tensions, not by sustainable peace.
That’s exactly why a sustainable peace agreement must be based on an honest perspective. The so-called peace plans that I’ve seen in the news all are accommodations of the false narrative. An honest accounting of the etiology of war in Ukraine will serve as a sounder basis.
I’m not suggesting that this be used to place blame. That would not be a wise approach. Rick Staggenborg, MD has followed this situation and explains: “To move toward peace in Ukraine we don’t have to agree on who is at fault. Unfortunately too many make that a big issue — but that’s gotten us nowhere. As a psychotherapist with training in family therapy, I know from experience that focusing on who is responsible for a problem almost never leads to a satisfactory solution; indeed it can be counterproductive.”
The key principals in negotiating a genuine peace plan must be the presidents of Ukraine, Russia, and the United States. I fail to see how they can bring about sustainable peace if the pretense of the false narrative is not broken, regardless of how entrenched it has become.
An approach based on honesty will have a better chance.
Here’s an example of an honest approach on a related matter: In mapping Ukraine, the National Geographic Society in 2014 chose not to include Crimea as part of it.
U.S. News quoted the Society’s geographer and director of editorial and research, “We map de facto, in other words we map the world as it is, not as people would like it to be.” That’s honesty on display.
In contrast, a spokesperson for Rand McNally said, “We take our direction from the State Department.” At that time the State Department was headed by politician John Kerry.
But fighting the false mainstream narrative will be difficult. There is a lot of dishonest narrative to discard.
Many countries have recognized the bogus territorial claims of the revolutionaries as factual. They’ve accepted the false narrative as being true. They side with the war beneficiaries. Those countries do so in disregard of the actual facts that are at hand.
However, in traditional diplomacy the concept of “recognition” is very powerful. Many judgments are based on that concept. Negotiators will need strength to oppose that.
“Recognition” is a political contrivance, though. It does not necessarily comport with the honest truth. Frankly, recognition sounds to me like a genteel euphemism for mob rule.
The negotiators will have a lot of controversial issues to deal with: Russia’s sudden 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the disposition of post-Ukraine territories now claimed by Russia, the main water supply for Crimea that the revolutionaries cut off, just to start with.
Then there are Russia’s security concerns over Nato advancement. History tells that President John F. Kennedy brought the world to the brink of nuclear war in 1962 over a Soviet missile threat far smaller than the Nato threat now perceived by Russia. In due fairness, Russia deserves having Nato threats considered with a comparable level of seriousness.
The peace negotiators will need the courage and integrity to resist pressure from the war beneficiaries and their allies, and reject the entrenched false narrative about Ukraine.
I hope that an honest view of the real circumstances will prevail if and when the three presidents meet to negotiate peace. That in effect is the “key path to Ukraine peace that has been long ignored by all.”
Ukraine strikes Russia with US-made ATACMS missiles
RT | December 11, 2024
Ukrainian forces fired a barrage of six US-made ATACMS missiles at a military airfield near the southern Russian city of Taganrog, the Defense Ministry in Moscow has said, vowing retaliation for the attack.
Two of the missiles were shot down, while the other four were affected by electronic warfare measures and veered off course, the ministry said in a statement. The attack inflicted minor damage on the airfield, with two administrative buildings and a number of cars hit with shrapnel.
An unspecified number of Russian servicemen were injured in the attack by “falling fragments of the missiles,” the ministry added, vowing to retaliate for the strike.
“This attack by Western long-range weapons will not go unanswered, and appropriate measures will be taken,” it said without providing further details.
Earlier in the day, acting Rostov Region Governor Yury Slyusar said an unspecified “industrial site” was targeted by the barrage, with around 15 cars being burned out in a parking lot.
Eyewitness Syria, the Last 12 Days
By Rick Sterling | Global Research | December 11, 2024
My friend lives in Damascus. I will call him Qusay to protect his identity. Qusay was born and grew up in Aleppo and still has family there. He is a high-level translator and university professor. From his family he learned what unfolded in Aleppo following the invasion beginning November 27. He personally witnessed events in Damascus where he still is. The following is what Qusay told me about events in Syria over the past 12 days.
Overthrow of Aleppo
The march and overthrow of Aleppo was done by Syrian and many foreign fighters supplied and backed by Turkish intelligence and military. Syrian military communications were jammed using electronic warfare. The invaders used drones for surveilling and attacking Syria forces. The jihadists were trained in the use of drones by NATO-funded Ukrainians. Turkey and other NATO forces supplied the drones and all sorts of other advanced weaponry. They had tanks in addition to machine gun mounted trucks and other vehicles.
The jihadists were carefully prepared by Turkish / US forces. They sent individuals to talk with influential people in the Aleppo community, promising payments of hundreds of dollars and other rewards in exchange for complicity or no opposition. Doctors, engineers and public officials were contacted personally. It is highly likely that military officials were also contacted. When the invasion supported by the Turkish military happened starting November 27, the Syrian defense of Aleppo collapsed.
Qusay thinks the Syrian army was exhausted from 13 years of war plus constant attacks from Israeli jets they have been helpless to stop. They, like all Syrian society, have been impoverished by intense sanctions from the West coupled with the theft of essential national resources. The primary wheat growing and oil and gas producing regions have been occupied by US forces and their Kurdish proxies since 2016. As a result, most Syrians only have electricity a few hours per day and have trouble putting food on the table. Before the “dirty war” began in 2011, Syria was self sufficient in food and energy. Syria had no national debt and Syrians enjoyed free health care and education.
The invaders in Aleppo tried to assuage the public that they are not like the “rebels” of old who persecuted and killed Christians and Alawi and enforced sharia law. In Aleppo, they provided free bread for families and quickly set up electronic communications hubs so that everyone might have internet and also so they could broadcast their messages.
Collapse in Damascus
While the northern invading army went on to central Syria, a different attacking group worked from the south. First they attacked and took over Deraa on the Jordan border, then Suweida. Then they advanced to Damascus. It seems there were agreements in advance because there was little military defense of the capital of Syria. President Assad relinquished power and departed for Moscow.
On Day One (Sunday) after the collapse of Bashar’s government, looting and chaos erupted immediately. People were terrified and afraid to go out of their homes. Government and other buildings were looted and ransacked. Universities were broken into and computers and lab equipment stolen. The Central Bank of Syria and other institutions were vandalized.
Many people have replaced the flag of Syria with the “revolution” flag out of fear.
Now, on Day Two, the situation is better. There is more security. Many stores are still closed but they are opening one by one. The former PM and cabinet have urged people to go back to work.
The titular head of the new government is Abu Mohammed al Jolani. He has publicly stated women are free to wear what they want and there will be no retaliation or revenge attacks. The Syrian Prime Minister has been replaced with Mohamad al Bashir. The Jolani government seems to be in control throughout most of the country, including Latakia.
A huge concern now is the ongoing Israeli attacks and bombings. Israel has destroyed nearly all military buildings in the Damascus area while Israeli drones are constantly overhead. Queneitra in the far south has been occupied by the Zionist army. Netanyahu and Biden have both taken “credit” for the long dirty war in Syria.
Qusay says,
“Suddenly everything is lost… Syrians are used to relying on the army to defend our country. But there is no more defense. Israel is taking overy Syrian land. Turkey is taking over another part of Syria. … We don’t know where Syria is going.”
Some Syrians think they will have a better life. Others believe this is an illusion and there are dark days ahead. Last weekend Qusay’s family had their bags packed and were ready to leave. But there is no place to go. Both Jordan and Lebanon have closed their borders.
Rick Sterling is an independent journalist based in norther California. He can be reached at rsterling1@gmail.com
Syria, a pawn on the grand chessboard of global geopolitics
By Eduardo Vasco | Strategic Culture Foundation | December 10, 2024
Very few people really know what happened – and is still happening – in Syria. We may never know what really happened. All most of us can do is speculate and analyze based on public information and logic. Sometimes logic is more accurate than information.
What we need to keep in mind is that Donald Trump’s election has changed everything. The American Deep State does not accept that he can put into practice what he has been talking about for a long time: withdrawing (or at least reducing the participation of) the United States from the great global geopolitical game. This would be a near-fatal blow not only to the imperialist domination of the United States, which has lasted almost 80 years, but to the entire international imperialist system that has been in force since the beginning of the last century.
That is why the Deep State made a very dangerous move – although it could turn out to be a masterstroke: it launched a series of offensives to leave the United States in a situation that Trump will not be able to reverse. This could even lead to a new world war, including a nuclear one.
Interconnected episodes of great magnitude then occurred at critical points in the Cold War (which is becoming less and less cold) with the Russians and the Chinese:
- The authorization for Ukraine to use ATACMS against Russian territory;
- The first use of ATACMS by Ukrainians inside Russia;
- The attempted military coup in South Korea;
- The devastating offensive by the “rebels” in Syria.
The advance on the Donbass front and the revelation of the Oreshnik are certainly important cards for the Russians to deter [US offensives]. However, there is a feeling in the government that the war needs to end as soon as possible and the risk of two new all-out wars in the vicinity of its territory (Syria and Korea) have raised the alarm in the Kremlin. At the same time, the frantic announcements of $725 million and $988 million, respectively, in military aid to Ukraine in the coming weeks, as well as $841 billion in defense spending for 2025, have shown the Russians that the Deep State is indeed capable of taking action and starting World War III.
Knowing that Vladimir Putin has already demonstrated that he is willing to fight for Ukraine, whatever the cost, and realizing the advantage the Russians have on the ground, the escalation at the end of Joe Biden’s administration would have served as a strong bargaining chip for imperialism to secure dominance on other fronts. For the first time, Vladimir Zelensky spoke of accepting dialogue with Russia and even seeking an agreed peace. In Paris, Trump met with the Ukrainian leader and reaffirmed Kiev’s surprising willingness to seek a possible peaceful solution in the short term.
It is possible that the Deep State exerted all this pressure to force Putin to give up Syria if it wants peace in Ukraine. The imperialists showed Moscow that they were willing to set the world on fire to protect their interests, and the Russians had to give up positions in the Middle East in exchange for guarantees in Eastern Europe.
After all, it would be extremely costly to maintain Bashar al-Assad’s regime. After 13 years of resisting imperialist aggression, Syria was already tired. Assad was not very popular among the population or among the state bureaucracy and the national bourgeoisie. The economic crisis was distressing and the armed forces were devastated. The Russians would only have to lose by intervening if the Americans really wanted to overthrow Assad once and for all. Russia would not be able to fight two wars at the same time.
Everything indicates that the Assad regime was indeed crumbling. All it took was a blow. And it came in an overwhelming way, with an alliance between the US, Turkey, Israel and Qatar. The Russians and Iranians had to accept it. But at least the Russians were able to take part in the agreement. They repelled the “rebel” forces near Latakia and Tartus, to protect their naval and air bases, but intelligence certainly knew that Assad would fall without Russian intervention and helped him escape. While the Iranian embassy was stormed and destroyed by the terrorists, the Russian embassy was unharmed.
The new regime has already announced that it will treat Russia as a partner like any other. Reports indicate that the military bases will be maintained. The Russian media no longer calls the terrorists terrorists, as it had done until the end of the week. It now calls them the “armed opposition”. The flag of the new regime has already been raised over the Syrian embassy in Moscow, without any inconvenience. Contrary to the trend in several countries whose regimes imperialism wants to overthrow, the Syrian opposition has not shown itself to be anti-Russian at any time during this fatal offensive. Compare what we see in Georgia, where a government much less influenced by Moscow is labeled a puppet of the Kremlin and protesters try to beat up anyone who speaks Russian.
Most of the state bureaucracy of the old regime (including diplomats in Russia) will be preserved. Prime Minister Mohammed Ghazi al-Jalali will remain in office. He was appointed by Assad on September 24, and I do not rule out the possibility that there was already a move to change the regime “peacefully.” His continued presence in office may have been a condition for the Russians to allow Assad to leave.
The situation for the Russians is not the same as it was in 2015. The necessary intervention in Ukraine took a lot of its military and economy. It was not possible to save Assad once again. Between Syria and Ukraine, the Russians would obviously choose Ukraine. The Russians have always had dialogue with many parties wherever they are, and in Syria it is no different. Assad was the first option, but not the only one. Now they will try to preserve their interests to a minimum, especially on the Mediterranean coast, and neutralize the United States as much as possible. We will see what happens in Georgia, which is nearby.
The Soviet legacy, since Stalin, is also highly valued by the current Russian bureaucracy. When it was necessary to sell off an allied country in order to preserve a more important one, Moscow never hesitated. The most famous example was the handover of Italy, mainly, and some other Western European countries, to the United States and the European imperialist bourgeoisie, saving them from the proletarian revolution, in order to obtain from them the guarantee that they would not interfere in Eastern Europe. In fact, the division of the world after the Second World War into zones of influence was a hallmark of Soviet diplomacy to preserve the interests of Moscow’s bureaucratic caste.
That was a betrayal by Stalin of the peoples of the world. But it would guarantee the survival of the Soviet bureaucracy for another 45 years. Putin’s current government is not founded on the foundations of a proletarian state, the fruit of a socialist revolution. Therefore, it has no obligation to save anyone. It fights for the interests of the new Russian state, which is weaker than Stalin’s Soviet one. It is understandable – even if one does not agree – that he gave up Syria to defend his positions in Ukraine against NATO aggression.
This does not mean that it was not a mistake. Much less that it was not a very important defeat. Nor does it mean that it contained the warlike and chaotic impulses of American imperialism.
Israeli forces reach Damascus outskirts as chaos grips Syria
The Cradle | December 10, 2024
Israeli forces have continued to expand their occupation in Syria and are now around 20 kilometers from the capital, Damascus – coming as Tel Aviv is simultaneously waging a massive bombing campaign across the country.
The Israeli army reached the city of Qatana in the southern Damascus countryside on 10 December, according to Al Mayadeen and Reuters.
Tel Aviv has denied moving past the now expanded UN-monitored buffer zone near Quneitra, which Israeli forces invaded on 8 December after the collapse of the deposed Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s government and the storming of Damascus by extremists.
Israeli jets continued destructive airstrikes early on Tuesday, hitting Syrian army facilities in Aleppo, Damascus, and the western port city of Latakia.
“The Israeli Navy carried out a large-scale operation last night to destroy the Syrian army fleet, where several ships belonging to the Syrian naval fleet were destroyed, which were carrying dozens of naval missiles, in the area of the Bayda port and the Latakia port,” Israeli Army Radio reported on 10 December.
Over 250 Israeli airstrikes have targeted Syria since the fall of Damascus. Meanwhile, violence and instability have prevailed across post-Assad Syria.
According to reports on 10 December, Syrian chemist Dr Hamdi Ismail has been found killed inside his home.
Several executions of Syrian army soldiers have been reported since Damascus fell.
The new leadership in Damascus, led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) commander Abu Mohammed al-Julani, has kept quiet about the Israeli occupation of southern Syria and the relentless attacks across the country.
HTS – formerly known as Al-Qaeda’s branch in Syria, the Nusra Front – has been implicated in numerous atrocities, including kidnapping, public executions, indiscriminate attacks on civilian areas, and other war crimes over the years.
The extremist organization appointed Mohammad Bashir as the new Syrian prime minister on 9 December.
Bashir was the prime minister of the HTS-led Salvation Government, which was formed in 2017 and ruled Syria’s northern province of Idlib – where HTS was based before the massive Turkish-backed assault against Syria that began late last month.
US backs Israeli invasion of Syria
RT | December 10, 2024
Washington has defended Israel’s military incursion into Syria, with State Department spokesman Matthew Miller stressing that the operation is in self-defense. At a press briefing on Monday, Miller claimed that the Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) advance to the Syrian side of the Golan Heights was done to prevent Syrian-based militants from taking over the border areas and launching an offensive into Israel in the future.
Israeli troops moved into the demilitarized buffer zone in the occupied Golan Heights on Sunday, after Syrian opposition forces seized Damascus and forced former President Bashar Assad to flee the country. On Monday, Israeli forces moved beyond the buffer zone and into Syria proper, with Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz saying they intend to create a new “security area” there that would be clear of “heavy strategic weapons and terrorist infrastructure.”
According to Miller, by abandoning its positions in the area around the buffer zone, the Syrian Army “potentially created a vacuum” that could be filled by terrorist organizations.
“That would threaten the state of Israel and would threaten civilians inside Israel. Every country has the right to take action against terrorist organizations,” Miller stated, adding that “ultimately, it’s important that there is security along that border,” which, according to him, the Israeli military can now ensure.
Miller noted, however, that Washington expects the Israeli occupation to be temporary.
“This is a temporary action that they have taken in response to actions by the Syrian military to withdraw from that area… We want to see the 1974 disengagement agreement upheld, and that includes the terms of the buffer zones, which includes Israel withdrawing to its previous positions,” he stated, referring to Israel’s 1974 agreement with Syria to establish a demilitarized strip in the Golan Heights.
Miller’s words run counter to remarks made earlier by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. While West Jerusalem told the UN Security Council that its incursion into Syria is a “limited and temporary measure” at a press conference on Monday night, Netanyahu declared that “the Golan Heights will forever be an inseparable part of the state of Israel.” He previously argued that Israel’s disengagement agreement with Syria effectively “collapsed” once Syrian troops “abandoned their positions” in the buffer zone.
The UN has criticized Israel for the incursion, saying it violates the disengagement agreement and stressing that “there should be no military forces or activities in the area of separation.” A number of Middle Eastern countries have also condemned Israel’s advance past the Golan Heights, accusing West Jerusalem of orchestrating an illegal land grab. In a statement on Monday, Qatar’s Foreign Ministry slammed the move as “a blatant attack on Syria’s sovereignty and unity” and “a flagrant violation of international law.” Similar remarks were made by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan.
Russia’s Demands in Peace Negotiations
Dmitri Polyanskiy, Alexander Mercouris & Glenn Diesen on the Duran
Glenn Diesen | December 7, 2024
We had a conversation with Dmitri Polyanskiy, the First Deputy Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations. Polyanskiy shared the Russian perspective on recent escalations with NATO and the requirements for a peaceful settlement.
As Ukrainian frontlines are collapsing, the US can either escalate or start negotiations. The decision by the Biden administration to attack Russia with long-range ATACMS crossed Russia’s red lines, and the response was the Oreshnik missile. The Oreshnik missile was intended as a warning shot by not attaching a warhead. Russia demands an end to NATO expansion, territorial concessions, and restoring minority rights in Ukraine.
View video at Odysee
US Bill Would Reverse ATACMS Order
By Joe Lauria | Consortium News | December 7, 2024
Capitol Hill, Washington – A bill introduced into the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) would prohibit the U.S. from sending long-range ATACMS missiles to Ukraine to be fired into Russia.
As U.S. personnel and satellites are required to fire the missiles from Ukrainian territory, Moscow considers it a direct U.S. attack on Russia putting it in a state of war with the U.S. which could lead to nuclear conflict.
To remove the potential of nuclear war, the proposed legislation seeks to end ATACMS launches into Russia. The bill reads:
(a) Prohibition. —For the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending at the close of January 20, 2025, notwithstanding any other provision of law, during any period for which a state of conflict exists between Ukraine and the Russian Federation—
1) no Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) may be transferred to Ukraine; and
(2) U.S. Military Services or intelligence agencies may not provide support to Ukrainian units operating High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HMARS) platforms utilizing ATACMS munitions to strike outside of internationally recognized Ukrainian territorial borders—
(A) targeting intelligence support;
(B) mission planning support; and
(C) any other type of support.
Several members of Congress and their staff said they were taken off guard by President Joe Biden’s reversal of his previous decision not to allow the use of ATACMS to be fired into Russia from Ukraine.
The members and their staff made these remarks during meetings on Thursday on Capitol Hill with former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter and activists of Code Pink, led by Medea Benjamin.
Biden Breaks With Realists
Biden had twice before sided with the Pentagon to avoid direct war with Russia. In March 2022 he overruled his Secretary of State Antony Blinken to scotch plans for a NATO no-fly zone over Ukraine, which could have lead to direct conflict with Russia.
Biden opposed the no-fly zone, he said at the time, because “that’s called World War III, okay? Let’s get it straight here, guys. We will not fight the third world war in Ukraine.”
Then in September Biden deferred to the realists in the Pentagon to oppose long-range British Storm Shadow missiles from being fired by Ukraine deep into Russia out of fear it would also lead to a direct NATO-Russia military confrontation with all that that entails.
Putin warned at the time that because British soldiers on the ground in Ukraine would actually launch the British missiles into Russia with U.S. geostrategic support, it “will mean that NATO countries — the United States and European countries — are at war with Russia. And if this is the case, then, bearing in mind the change in the essence of the conflict, we will make appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us.”
That was a clear warning that British and U.S. targets could be hit. Biden thus wisely backed off.
But after he was driven from the race and his party lost the White House last month, Biden suddenly switched gears allowing not only British, but also U.S. long-range ATACMS missiles to be fired into Russia. It’s not clear that the White House ever informed the Pentagon in advance.
Higgin’s bill was introduced as H.R. 10218 on Nov. 21, but none of the other House members that Ritter and Benjamin met with on Capitol Hill had heard of it. Nor was it reported in the mainstream media.
“We found that commonsense is actually alive and living here in the halls of Congress,” Ritter told Consortium News. “Members of Congress and their staffs understand the danger of nuclear war. We found that there was a bill already written … that sought to achieve what we were trying to get them to do.”
Benjamin said: “We are excited to push this bill, which we just found out about. … It will not pass, but the idea is to get momentum for it so that message is coming out there that there are members of Congress who want to see this reversed and that in the next Congress, they will introduce it again with a lot more momentum.”
“To stop a nuclear war comes down to one issue,” Ritter said:
“The United States has to stop attacking Russian soil with American-made ATACMS missiles. Even though we use a Ukrainian cutout, it’s American provided, American targets and American intelligence. It’s the Americans attacking Russia. From the Russian perspective, the United States is at war with Russia … which has triggered their nuclear doctrine.”
Israeli forces seize towns in Syria’s Quneitra, moving towards Dara’a
Press TV – December 9, 2024
Israeli forces have captured two towns in the southwestern Syrian province of Quneitra near the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights and are moving towards the neighboring Dara’a province, after militant groups took control of the Arab country.
Israeli troops seized the towns of Madinat al-Baath and Hader after they pushed into the buffer zone in the Quneitra area and launched artillery shelling in the strategic region.
According to Israeli media outlets, the incursion was launched following heavy shelling of surrounding areas.
Israeli army soldiers are now heading towards areas in Dara’a, located about 90 kilometers (56 miles) south of the capital Damascus.
Earlier, Israeli soldiers had taken over a Syrian army outpost at the summit of Mount Hermon in the Golan Heights.
Soldiers from Shaldag, the Israeli Air Force’s commando unit, captured the outpost “without encountering resistance,” according to Kan TV News.
The commander of the Israeli military’s Northern Command, Ori Gordin, and the commander of the Training Command, David Zini, also visited the summit, the broadcaster said.
The Syrian army reportedly left the post amid the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government.
Israeli media also reported the entry of the regime’s tanks into Khan Arnabeh, which is to the northeast of Quneitra and five kilometers from the border of the occupied Golan.
The regime’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that the decades-old agreement with Syria had collapsed, and he ordered Israeli forces to grab a buffer zone in the Golan Heights after Syrian soldiers had abandoned their positions.
The Israeli military also issued a warning, calling on residents of five towns in southern Syria to stay in their homes until further notice as it carried out dozens of air strikes against Syrian military bases, facilities and weapon depots.
These towns are Ofania, Quneitra, al-Hamidiyah, western al-Samadaniyah, and al-Qahtaniyah.
Armed groups, led by Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) militants, announced on Sunday that they had fully captured the Syrian capital and confirmed reports of the fall of the Assad government.
Syrian Prime Minister Mohammed Ghazi Jalali said the government was ready to “extend its hand” to the opposition and hand over its functions to a transitional government.
Featured Video
Iran Blockade Complications
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Review
Alarmist climate science as a textbook example of groupthink
By Paul MacRae | May 1, 2012
… Groupthink was extensively studied by Yale psychologist Irving L. Janis and described in his 1982 book Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes.
Janis was curious about how teams of highly intelligent and motivated people—the “best and the brightest” as David Halberstam called them in his 1972 book of the same name—could have come up with political policy disasters like the Vietnam War, Watergate, Pearl Harbor and the Bay of Pigs. Similarly, in 2008 and 2009, we saw the best and brightest in the world’s financial sphere crash thanks to some incredibly stupid decisions, such as allowing sub-prime mortgages to people on the verge of bankruptcy.
In other words, Janis studied why and how groups of highly intelligent professional bureaucrats and, yes, even scientists, screw up, sometimes disastrously and almost always unnecessarily. The reason, Janis believed, was “groupthink.” He quotes Nietzsche’s observation that “madness is the exception in individuals but the rule in groups,” and notes that groupthink occurs when “subtle constraints … prevent a [group] member from fully exercising his critical powers and from openly expressing doubts when most others in the group appear to have reached a consensus.”[2]
Janis found that even if the group leader expresses an openness to new ideas, group members value consensus more than critical thinking; groups are thus led astray by excessive “concurrence-seeking behavior.”[3] Therefore, Janis wrote, groupthink is “a model of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.”[4]
The groupthink syndrome
The result is what Janis calls “the groupthink syndrome.” This consists of three main categories of symptoms:
1. Overestimate of the group’s power and morality, including “an unquestioned belief in the group’s inherent morality, inclining the members to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their actions.” [emphasis added]
2. Closed-mindedness, including a refusal to consider alternative explanations and stereotyped negative views of those who aren’t part of the group’s consensus. The group takes on a “win-lose fighting stance” toward alternative views.[5]
3. Pressure toward uniformity, including “a shared illusion of unanimity concerning judgments conforming to the majority view”; “direct pressure on any member who expresses strong arguments against any of the group’s stereotypes”; and “the emergence of self-appointed mind-guards … who protect the group from adverse information that might shatter their shared complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decisions.”[6]
It’s obvious that alarmist climate science—as explicitly and extensively revealed in the Climatic Research Unit’s “Climategate” emails—shares all of these defects of groupthink, including a huge emphasis on maintaining consensus, a sense that because they are saving the world, alarmist climate scientists are beyond the normal moral constraints of scientific honesty (“overestimation of the group’s power and morality”), and vilification of those (“deniers”) who don’t share the consensus. … Read full article
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Left in Disbelief: Israel in Panic over Hezbollah FPV Drone Nightmare
- Trump Taps Israel Lobbyist From Mossad Cutout FDD To Join Iran Negotiations
- Trump’s Blockade Snatches Defeat from the Jaws of Victory
- Geopolitics and Geoeconomics of the Strait of Hormuz
- Mali: a new front in the Western war on multipolarism
- CHD Scientist: CDC, FDA COVID Vaccine Safety Monitoring ‘Insulting, and Many People Are Injured’
- COVID Conniving Receives First Federal Indictment
- Iran Blockade Complications /Lt Col Daniel Davis & Nima Alkhorshid
- Pirates of Mediterranean: Israel does as it pleases in the Sea of Three Continents
- Minab children massacre not ‘unfortunate situation’ but ‘heinous war crime’: Tehran
- If Americans Knew
- Israel’s New Ambassador to the ‘Christian World’ Served as Envoy to Azerbaijan During the Ethnic Cleansing of Christians from Nagorno-Karabakh
- US set to sell $1B “Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System” to Israel – Daily Update
- Israeli Strikes Kill at Least 32 Across S Lebanon, Including Children – Amid “Ceasefire”
- Israel to pour $730m into propaganda arm amid reputational crisis
- Real Cost of Iran War Likely Double the $25 Billion Figure the Pentagon Gave to Congress
- Israel conducts farthest-ever strike in long history of attacks on Gaza humanitarian aid flotillas
- In Gaza, Israel commits 10+ ceasefire violations a day – Daily Update
- US ships 6,500 tons of munitions, equipment to Israel in 24 hours
- A New Library in Gaza Rises From the Ashes of Destruction
- Israel’s top Jewish religious body ‘refuses to condemn’ smashing of Jesus statue
- No Tricks Zone
- Oversupply Of Volatile Solar Energy Leads To Record NEGATIVE Prices!
- New Study: Extreme Heat Records, Heatwaves, Extreme Cold Records Declining Across US Since 1899
- It’s The Cold, Stupid! Cold 20 Times More Lethal Than Heat, Multiple Studies Show
- European Institute For Climate And Energy: “Climate Debate is Seldom About Science”
- New Study: The Climate May Be 5 Times More Sensitive To Solar Forcing Than Commonly Assumed
- EV Industry Reached $70 Billion In Losses In 2024 Due To Delusional Green Ideologies
- Reality Check: Maldives Have Actually Grown In Size Or Remained Stable Over Recent Decades
- Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
- German Expert: Heat Dome Led To Record Temps In Western USA…Warmer In 1934, 1936
Aletho News 