“Mobilisation has turned into a real nightmare for Ukrainians” – former PM Mykola Azarov

By Ahmed Adel | April 16, 2024
Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov (2010-2014) has described the Kiev regime’s forcible conscription of civilians into the military as “a real nightmare for Ukrainians.” His comments come as the New York Times said that Ukrainian soldiers are being battered and exhausted by Russian forces.
“Territorial recruitment centres in Ukraine (…) began to use weapons against those who try to resist the anarchy and permissiveness they are perpetrating,” Azarov wrote on his Telegram channel.
As Azarov revealed, Anton Kudrich, an ordinary Ukrainian citizen, was driving to his village in the Transcarpathian region when recruitment officers stopped his car at a checkpoint and tried to conscript him. Even though Kudrich stated that he had the right to be exempt from military service according to the law “since his brother died in the war,” the officers ignored this and attempted to put him in their vehicle forcibly.
“Kudrich managed to escape, ran into the forest, but they opened fire on him. He was wounded in the arm and leg,” said the former Prime Minister of Ukraine, adding that the young man’s father is sure that the case will be hushed up since the Ukrainian authorities are covering for each other.
On April 11, the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) of Ukraine adopted a law toughening the conditions for the mobilisation of military personnel. According to Ukrainian media, the clause stipulating the demobilisation of military personnel after 36 months of service was removed from the bill. The regulations give reservists a period of 60 days after mobilisation is decreed to appear before a military registration and enlistment office and update their personal data.
Likewise, the new law allows summons to be sent to electronic accounts and obliges male citizens aged 18 to 60 to carry military registration papers and present them at the request of military registration and enlistment officials, police officers, and border guards.
In another Telegram post, Azarov said that the Kiev regime is using former prisoners “to catch as much of the population as possible” since mobilisation has been “virtually exhausted,” in addition to civilians “fleeing the country in all possible ways.”
In Ukraine, the reserves are depleted, and at the front, the military is asking for rotation, which cannot be done due to a shortage in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Thus, “while the Ukrainian authorities use force against their own people, fewer and fewer supporters remain in the country, and fewer and fewer volunteers appear in the ranks of the Ukrainian forces. This means that with such sentiments in society, Ukraine has a catastrophically small chance of holding out,” the former prime minister stressed.
It is recalled that Azarov has previously accused the Kiev regime of embezzling billions of dollars from the state budget through the procurement of overpriced and subpar equipment, such as ammunition and air defence weapons. In September 2023, Azarov revealed how the Kiev regime signed a contract for four air defence missiles, but only three were procured. Deepening the embezzling in this particular case, Azarov said that all four missiles were written off following a Russian attack, benefiting someone who allegedly used the funds to purchase a new apartment in Paris.
Azarov has been a consistent critic of the Kiev regime and continues to highlight the deeply ingrained corruption and authoritarianism, such as the forced and illegal conscription of civilians. However, he is no longer a rare voice, with more criticism of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the conscription process emerging in the Verkhovna Rada.
“After voting in favour of the mobilisation bill, the Ukrainian people will become not an opponent, but a verdict for [Zelensky] and the Government’s deputies,” independent deputy Dmytro Razumkov wrote on his Telegram channel. “You cannot play with the life of Ukrainians.”
He asked deputies from the ruling Servant of the People party if they would be able to look into the eyes of the soldiers they visited at the front after they removed the clause on demobilisation and rotation of soldiers from the bill.
Alarmingly, much of the bill remains confidential, including the number of Ukrainians who will be mobilised. In recent months, Ukrainian generals and Zelensky have said that between 450,000 and 500,000 people are needed for conscription. This will be difficult to achieve, especially since an article published by The New York Times highlighted that Ukraine has faced a drastic reduction in its population. The military now has very few young men to conscript, while those fighting on the front lines are battered and exhausted.
According to the outlet, it is not clear how quickly Ukraine will recruit and train the additional troops it requires or whether they will be ready before the Russian offensive, which is expected between spring and summer. Despite this reality, the Kiev regime is still preparing for an offensive in 2025 instead of seeking to preserve the lives of thousands of Ukrainians by achieving a peace deal with Moscow.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
Iran’s strike on Israel was much more successful than it seems. Here’s why
By Abbas Juma | RT | April 16, 2024
On the night of April 14, Iran and its proxy forces launched a series of cruise missile and kamikaze drone strikes on Israeli territory. The attacks did not come as a surprise. Tehran had warned that it would respond to the Israeli airstrike on Iran’s consulate in Damascus, Syria, on April 1, which killed several high-ranking officers of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), including two generals. The retaliatory strike was called Operation True Promise.
There is still much debate on whether Iran’s retaliatory strike was successful. Most military experts agree that there was nothing unusual about Tehran’s actions, except that this was Iran’s first direct attack on Israel. From a technical point of view, the strategy was simple and correct: Iran first suppressed the enemy’s air defense systems with drones and then launched hypersonic missiles which the Israelis and Americans were not able to intercept. Incidentally, in light of this, Ukraine’s statements about shooting down Russian Kinzhal hypersonic missiles sound ridiculous.
Do not jump to conclusions
Many experts were skeptical about Iran’s strike and hastened to say that the retaliation did not live up to expectations. Given the clip thinking of most commentators, this reaction is hardly surprising. Their reasoning resembles a Hollywood blockbuster stuffed with special effects, where the end of the world and its miraculous salvation fit into 90-120 minutes, with a love scene in the middle. In real life, things are different. As Sun Tzu wrote in ancient times, to fight 100 battles and win 100 battles is not the height of skill. The best way to win is not to fight at all. This is Iran’s strategy. Its strike against Israel was not so much a military response as a grandmaster’s move in a big chess game. And the game is not over yet.
After the attack on the Iranian consulate in Syria’s capital, Tehran found itself in a tough situation. It had to respond in a way that would look convincing and would achieve specific military goals, but would not start World War III.
To achieve the first point, Iran had to carry out a direct strike without resorting exclusively to proxy forces – and that is indeed how it acted. Regarding the second point, even though most of the missiles and drones were indeed shot down, some managed to penetrate Israeli air space and hit military targets. The Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces, Mohammad Bagheri, said that the information center on the Israeli-Syrian border and Israel’s Nevatim air base were hit. And finally, as to the third point – war didn’t happen. This resembled the situation in 2020, when the Iranians hit US bases in Iraq in response to the assassination of General Soleimani.
However, it is still too early to speculate as to whether Iran’s attack was a success or not. The big question now is how Israel will respond.
What Iran has accomplished
It’s important to emphasize that Iran’s operation carried more political than military weight. In this sense, it was carried out subtly and was a success. Obviously, the Iranians did not want to start a war which would involve the US, even though that is what Netanyahu wanted. In other words, Israel didn’t manage to provoke Iran.
It is also obvious that the Islamic Republic possesses more powerful drones and missiles than those used in the attack on April 14. However, even the less advanced drones and missiles were able to penetrate Israeli air space and inflict economic damage, since Israel spent much more money on shooting down the missiles and drones than Iran spent on launching them.
Tehran has once again demonstrated that Israel is not invulnerable, and it is possible to attack it. As for the degree of inflicted damage, which some commentators were unsatisfied with, it largely depends on the type of missiles and drones used in the attack – and Iran has a lot of military equipment.
Finally, Iran’s main achievement is that it has managed to confuse Israel in the same way that it was confused after the October 7 Hamas attack. The country has to respond. But how? Should Israel strike Iranian proxy forces? This is possible, but Israel does it all the time without much result. Should it hit Iran directly? But that would start a war which no one is prepared for, including the US.
Conclusion
The ball is now in Israel’s court, and the country faces the same challenges that the Islamic Republic did after April 1. But will Israel be able to solve these challenges as efficiently?
It is noteworthy that IRGC Commander-in-Chief, Hossein Salami, said that from now on, if Israel attacks the interests of Iran and Iranian citizens, Tehran will strike it again.
This is an important statement. Essentially, the attack carried out by Iran on April 14 was not just a retaliatory strike, but established a new order. Iran demonstrated that it is ready to resort to new means of influence in a situation where words are not sufficient. It attacked Israel directly not in order to start a war, but to demonstrate what could happen if all other methods of pressure on Israel fail.
A new option has been put forward. Israel may be deprived of its most important advantage – absolute impunity, which until recently had been guaranteed by the US.
‘Nothing You Can Do to Stop Us’: Iran’s Strikes on Israeli Bases Establish Deterrence
By John Miles – Sputnik – 15.04.2024
Former US Marine Corps intelligence officer Scott Ritter urged observers to look beyond Israel and the United States’ framing of Iran’s retaliatory strike, noting Tehran was able to successfully deal damage to Israeli military assets.
Former United Nations weapons inspector Scott Ritter stressed that Iran is playing the long game in its dealings with Israel, carefully calibrating its actions to restore deterrence against the country rather than concerning itself with world opinion.
The former US Marine Corps intelligence officer offered the analysis on Sputnik’s Fault Lines program Monday, challenging the perception that Israel is in a stronger position after intercepting most of Iran’s retaliatory strikes over the weekend.
“The point is prior to this Israel had established a dominance – I’ll call it deterrence dominance,” claimed Ritter. “Meaning that, from an Israeli perspective, nobody should ever dare attack Israel, that Israel has let it be known that if you attack Israel, there will be a ten-fold response, that your life would end, it would be horrible, you can’t do it. And, for the most part, people didn’t attack Israel.”
“And so Israel had become very arrogant, had become sort of the neighborhood bully writ large,” he explained. “And this is why Israel was bombing Syria with impunity, striking targets in Lebanon with impunity, striking targets in Iraq with impunity.”
Israel frequently bombs Syrian airports and other infrastructure and has been illegally occupying the country’s Golan Heights territory since 1967. In 1982 the Israeli military bombed the Lebanese capital of Beirut so aggressively the US President Ronald Reagan referred to the event as a “holocaust,” hurting the feelings of Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin.
Observers also suggest Zionist opposition to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein played a role in the United States’ decision to invade the country and remove him from power in 2003. “It’s very clear: Israel had the most influence in this and more so since we know how the Israelis were running into the Pentagon consulting with Rumsfeld and all those guys without even having to show any badge or anything,” former CIA Analyst Ray McGovern claimed on Sputnik’s The Critical Hour program recently.
“And then they struck the wrong target,” said Ritter, referring to Israel’s recent strike on Iran’s diplomatic compound in Syria earlier this month. “You see, Iran said, ‘we have a great latitude for pain because we’ll absorb that pain, because we recognize that in a broader sense of the word Iran is prevailing strategically against Israel, especially when it comes to Gaza and the Israeli defeat that is ongoing in Gaza.’”
“And so Iran delivered a blow, but remember, the purpose of the blow was not to destroy Israel or even bring harm to Israel,” he clarified. “The purpose of the blow was to establish Iranian deterrence precedent so that in the future Israel would know what the consequences of its actions would be. And this Iran did with extreme alacrity and extreme effectiveness.”
“The job wasn’t to say, ‘we’re going to hurt you.’ The job was to say, ‘hey, Israel, look around you. Right now you have America’s most sophisticated X-band radar to give you intelligence when we launch our missiles… you have the whole world coming to your assistance to protect you and you can’t stop our missiles from hitting your most important bases. That’s the future, if you dare attack us again.’”
Israel has claimed in public statements that it was allegedly able to intercept most of Iran’s strikes and prevent major damage. But the country has conspicuously forbidden journalists from observing the aftermath of the attack on Israel’s bases, notes former CIA analyst Larry Johnson. Video posted to social media appeared to show several hypersonic missiles striking Israel’s Ramon military airbase in the Negev desert.
Host Jamarl Thomas pushed back on Ritter’s analysis, asking, “At the point where their generals keep getting murdered, are you really projecting that level of strength if ultimately you are just choreographing in this way?… Is it really a projection of strength if you’re choreographing what you’re doing?”
“You’re referring to the Iranian attack on al-Assad airbase after the [US] assassination of Qasem Soleimani and the fact Iran telegraphed that so that they struck empty buildings and they didn’t kill Americans,” Ritter responded. “Let’s look at it this way. When Iran shot down a Global Hawk [US drone] and Donald Trump wanted to bomb Iranian air defense sites, did he? The answer’s no. Why? Because the Pentagon said they’ll kill everybody. They just set their deterrence. They showed us what they got, and we got nothing to defend against it.”
“When Iran said we’re going to strike Israel, what did the United States do?” he asked. “Say bring it on? We stand side by side with the Israelis? We will attack you? We will bomb your territory? The United States went ‘wow, we’ll defend Israel, but we’re not attacking you.’ Yeah, that’s called deterrence.”
“Iran doesn’t want a shooting match with the United States,” Ritter argued. “They wanted to avoid it, and they have done so. The United States is scared to death of bombing Iran, of creating a conflict because they know what Iran will do. Iran will flatten every single American military base within the range of their missiles. And if the United States takes its next step, Iran will shut down international oil supplies and the economy will crash, and Joe Biden will never get reelected.”
Ritter insisted that Iran attacked Israel in such a way that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could save face and back down while also revealing Tehran’s capabilities if Israel strikes it again.
“All those things that were shot down – understand those were designed to be shot down,” he claimed. “Iran put a program together with the United States that said, ‘we’re going to let you shoot all this stuff down so you feel good. But in the end our good stuff hit the bases, just so you know that we can do that anytime we want, and there’s nothing you can do to stop us.’”
Ritter also claimed Iran is focused on economic development rather than seeking military conflict with Tel Aviv.
“They’ve been focused on the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, they’ve been focused on BRICS, they’ve been focused on their strategic pivot to the East,” he noted. “So for them to come in and do this feel good thing to make you, me and everybody else feel good – because apparently that’s what this is about, making the larger audience that has nothing to do with Iran feel good about the Iranian response – they don’t care.
“The Iranians are focused strategically on maintaining that pivot to the East, building strong economic relations, normalizing relations with Saudi Arabia, and, more importantly since October 7th, facilitating the victory of Hamas over Israel which by Israel’s own admission Hamas is winning,” he claimed.
“Haaretz – I think a day before the Iranian retaliation – came out with a headline story that said ‘Israel’s lost this thing, it’s over.’ I mean, there’s nothing Israel could do to turn this around in Gaza. They’ve lost the world. They can’t defeat Hamas. Hamas is emerging still intact militarily, they’re stronger politically. And Iran’s like, ‘we want to sustain that, too. We don’t want to distract the world with this larger Israeli-Iranian conflict, we want to keep the focus on Palestinian statehood.’”
US-NATO: The Cost of War in Occupied Europe

By Manlio Dinucci | Global Research | April 15, 2024
NATO’s war against Russia in Ukraine involves increasing military spending. According to official data, Italy’s military spending has increased from 21 billion euros in 2019 to more than 30 billion euros in 2023, equivalent to an annual daily average of more than 80 million euros, in public money diverted from social spending. According to the NATO commitment, Italy will have to increase this spending to about 100 million euros per day. Since 2014, NATO-member Europe’s military spending has soared, exceeding the level of the last phase of the Cold War.
NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg emphasizes,
“The Allies are providing Ukraine with unprecedented military and financial aid. France will soon send more Caesar howitzers, and several Allies have joined the Czech Republic’s initiative to procure 800,000 additional artillery shells.”
Italy, which has already also supplied Kiev with heavy artillery pieces, is participating in the purchase of these additional 800,000 shells, with an additional outlay of public money paid by us citizens.
A further aggravation comes from the fact that Italy shares in the expenses of U.S.-NATO bases that, from Italian territory, play primary roles in supporting war operations, from Ukraine to the Middle East. Of particular importance is the role of Camp Darby, the largest U.S. arsenal outside U.S. territory. These days, new and more powerful armored vehicles are arriving from the United States at this base, located between Pisa and Livorno, which will be sent from Camp Darby, via the port of Livorno, to Ukraine.
The U.S. bases at Camp Darby, Sigonella and others on Italian soil also support war operations in the Middle East, where the United States continues to arm Israel under an agreement, entered into by President Obama and his deputy Biden, to supply Israel with $38 billion worth of weapons, including the bombs with which Israel is exterminating Palestinians in Gaza.
Iran’s drone strike busts a number of myths and strains Israel-U.S. relations
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | April 14, 2024
It is ironic to western analysts how invariably it is the East which keeps a cool head and doesn’t rise to the bait of escalation while it is the West which is reckless, foolhardy and careless with its provocations. In Ukraine we have seen nothing but this accompanied by miscalculation and poor decisions on the part of NATO. And now we are seeing this in Israel as remarkably, Joe Biden, has managed to be ensnared now in a regional war between Israel and Iran – a dream for the latter for well over 30 years.
Iran’s reaction to the bombing of its consulate in Damascus was very measured, well thought-out and pulled off with a certain sobriety which will not be matched by Israel and the U.S. Tehran did not want to kill civilians but simply send a message that Israel crossed a line and if it does this again, then there will be more attacks from Iran, perhaps intercontinental missiles with deeper impact than cheap drones. That is not to say that the drones were not effective. They were at the specific task which the Iranians wanted of them, knowing full well that most of them would be intercepted.
But the move by Tehran was still a shock to many western experts and no doubt the Netanyahu cabal as well, as it busted a number of myths in one evening. Firstly, that Iran would have the courage to bomb directly Israel, as many pundits dismissed this without a thought. The fact that Iran is prepared to use its missiles to potentially kill civilians on Israeli soil changes the dynamic now as Israel can no longer double guess what the payback will be if it continues its feral bombing of Iranian soldiers, even on Syrian soil.
Secondly, it also busts the myth that Israel has the capability to tackle war on more than one front. All during the night while its military was busy, Gazans were enjoying a peaceful night of no shelling at all and took to social media to celebrate the detente. Israel’s military does not have the capacity or strength to fight a war in Gaza as well as one from a second front, such as a massive drone attack, let alone a third one from Hezbollah in Lebanon, if need be.
And thirdly, the role of partners. Israel couldn’t have got through the night and got what it claims to be a 99 percent hit rate without the help of partners like British RAF fighter jets who helped, not to mention King Abdullah of Jordan whose air force also shot down the drones. If these relations, along with the U.S., are tested and pushed beyond their limits, Israel’s vulnerability becomes contentious to say the least.
And so how Netanyahu plays his cards in the coming days is crucial for Israel to stay on good terms with its western allies but also to realistically stay in the game. Iran’s drone attack has opened up a can of worms now which Biden would have preferred wouldn’t have been opened. According to some reports, it is believed that Biden told Netanyahu now to back down and leave the Iranians, fearing the situation spiralling out of control. Could Biden seriously go to the polls in December of this year with a foreign policy cheat sheet which listed pulling out of Afghanistan, starting a war in the Ukraine which will humiliate him and NATO when Russia inevitably wins and now start a world war with Iran? Seasoned analysts have ventured that he will not be able to hold himself back from upping the stakes and going for a revenge attack on Iran or its proxies. This of course would test the relationship with the U.S. and push it to its very limit – a stunt which Biden is hoping very much will not be carried out by Netanyahu. Given that this will almost certainly bring the relationship between Biden and Netanyahu to breaking point and will give Iran the victory either way, it’s hard to see how most western pundits failed to see the drone strike as a great victory for Tehran. Netanyahu’s gambit will be that Biden is weak and now lost in the maze of Middle Eastern warmongering. He will also think that Biden will need to present himself to the hawks in Washington as a victor and so is now in deeper more than ever before, as options run out and the window for rational thinking seems to now no longer be. Biden’s nightmare with Netanyahu is just starting.
What you need to know about the Iranian attack on Israel but will not find in mainstream news
By Gilbert Doctorow | April 15, 2024
Iran’s weekend massive drone, cruise missile and ballistic missile attack on Israel has now been covered in the global media, with the headlines announcing that 99% of the barrage was shot down by Israeli, U.S. and other friendly air defense systems. The question these media pose is what will be the Israeli response, as if that were a matter strictly to be decided by Prime Minister Netanyahu’s cabinet.
In fairness, I note that The Financial Times has also published a front page article setting out what it considers to be the Iranian perspective on the attack, namely that it was successful insofar as it demonstrated their country is not shying away from direct military confrontation with Israel and is confidently prepared to prosecute a full scale war if it comes to that. See “We’re crazier than you realize”: Iran delivers its message with attack on Israel. Tehran believes calibrated missile and drone barrage is enough to restore deterrent and bolster image.”
However, the Iranian position is much more nuanced and contains far greater threat not only to Israel but also to the entire United States presence in the region than the FT suggests. I say this on the basis of an analysis provided on last night’s edition of the Vladimir Solovyov talk show on Russian state television by a regular panelist, Semyon Arkadievich Bagdasarov, who is a leading Russian specialist on the region.
For those who wish to see and hear Bagdasarov’s 14 minutes on air in the original Russian, the link is https://all-make.su/22174-vecher-s-solovyovym-14-04-2024/ minutes: 27 – 41.
In what follows I offer a brief biographical sketch of Bagdasarov so that the seriousness of his remarks can be better appreciated. Then I will summarize what he said on air.
Aged 69, Bagdasarov was born in Central Asia in the Ferghana Valley, which passes through Uzbekistan, Tadjikistan and Kyrgyzstan. Accordingly, he has the proper birthright to his position since 2014 as director of the think tank called the Center for the Study of the Countries of the Near East and Central Asia. However, Bagdasarov reached this academic plateau after passing through a succession of military and civilian government posts, including the 5 years starting in 2007 as a Duma member from the ‘For a Just Russia opposition party of Sergei Mironov, which might be described as slightly to the Left of the ruling United Russia party.
Bagdasarov’s professional education was in a military academy and he ultimately retired with the rank of colonel. He then moved into government service first at the regional level and then as an expert to the Duma, to which, as I said above, he was later elected.
In line with what the FT article has said, Bagdasarov calls the Iranian attack on Israel a limited strike intended as a warning, but also yielding both specific tactical and strategic results.
On the tactical side, the swarming of drones was intended to activate the Iron Dome and other levels of Israeli air defense and to reveal the location of their component parts as well as to deplete the Israeli stock of relevant missiles.
Per Bagdasarov, Israeli claims to have shot down 99% of the incoming barrage should be taken with a grain of salt. The Iranians’ key targets in the attack were the Israeli air force base in the south of the country from which the Israeli strike on Iran’s consulate in Damascus was launched two weeks ago and a military intelligence compound which had prepared that deadly strike. The actual extent of damage from Iranian missiles remains to be evaluated.
Bagdasarov explains that the Iranian attack was ‘limited’ because it consisted of rather slow moving drones and of missiles with small warheads. These were not Iran’s most advanced and lethal attack materiel, which has been held in reserve for any possible Round Two.
How many drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles does Iran have? Bagdasarov says no one knows exactly but it may well be 10,000 or more and includes several hundred highly advanced missiles which also have multiple warheads and so are very difficult to defend against. Over the past 20 years, Iran has bet its defense budget on missiles and drones, and it has a large-scale serial production of both. Meanwhile, Iran’s regional allies also have large stocks of these weapons, some of which are also fairly sophisticated. In particular, Hizbollah in Lebanon may have 1500 high quality missiles in its arsenal.
At the strategic level, Iran demonstrated its ability to coordinate a missile and drone attack on Israel with its regional proxies so as to maximize the threat coming from all directions.
Iran used the attack to achieve a political and military objective that has long eluded it. Teheran has now issued threats against Persian Gulf states to bomb any and all that allow the Americans to use their air space or otherwise facilitate Israel’s possible revenge attack on Iran from their territories. These states all fear a war and have now agreed to Iran’s demand. In effect, this negates decades of U.S. unchallenged domination in the Gulf.
Iran has specifically threatened the U.S. regional command in Qatar and the base of the 5th fleet in Bahrain.
The latter point is reflected in Biden’s latest urging restraint on Israel. Washington has understood that its forces in the region are now hostage to whatever Netanyahu may do against Iran as follow-up to this weekend’s barrage.
Furthermore, at the threat level, Iran has a still unused but clearly visible ace in the hole: its ability at will to blockade the Straits of Hormuz and thereby cut off nearly all export shipments of gas and oil from the region. The Straits are just 50 km wide and are easily controlled by Iran’s anti-ship missiles ashore. Such a closure would create havoc on global energy markets. We were reminded of Iran’s dominant position there several days ago when they captured a container ship owned by an Israeli millionaire which was traveling through and directed it to their own coast.
And what about Israel’s alleged plans to attack Iran’s nuclear installations? Bagdasarov insists that this is an impossible objective. Firstly, because the Iranian nuclear program is distributed among 200 centers spread across the vast country and many of these locations are in desert areas buried under 40 meters of sand. The Israelis might only destroy a couple of the best known nuclear centers. Secondly, because to reach their targets in Iran, the Israeli jets would require in-air refueling by American tankers, and it is scarcely credible that Biden will give his consent considering how the U.S. regional bases are under threat.
Iran fired this time only on military objects, but if they use not 300 but 10,000 missiles and drones then Israel will be obliterated. Hizbollah alone have 1,500 advanced missiles. Iran surely has real missiles and drones that are still more powerful. No one knows exactly how many. Over the past 20 years Iran placed its bets on drones and missiles. In the assortment, they have some very sophisticated multi warhead missiles that are unstoppable.
Later in the program (at 1 hour 36 minutes) a military commentator who is a frequent panelist on the Solovyov show, Lt General (retired), Yevgeny Buzhinsky, head of the Center of Applied Military Research of Moscow State University, seconded the estimation of Bagdasarov that this was just a warning, a PR exercise by Iran. As for the shoot-down, he noted that with its S400 and other systems Russia has probably the best air defense in the world, and yet they strain to reach the 99% interception that Israel has blithely claimed.
As host Vladimir Solovyov commented at the opening of the program, the principal fact is that the Iranians did it. They spat on the U.S. and its allies, and they just did what they believed was necessary. In consequence the world ‘built on rules’ counts for nothing.
©Gilbert Doctorow, 2024
Iranian Media Confirms Use of Unstoppable Hypersonic Missiles in Israel Counterstrike
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 15.04.2024
Tehran fired dozens of ballistic and cruise missiles and hundreds of drones at Israel Saturday night in response to the April 1 Israeli strike on the Iranian Embassy compound in Damascus, Syria. The IDF declared that “99 percent” of the projectiles were shot down and that the Iranian attack failed. Iran said it achieved its strategic objectives.
The Islamic Republic used hypersonic missiles during the Operation True Promise missile and drone barrage against Israel, with all of them hitting their targets after evading Israel’s air and missile defenses. That’s according to a Press TV report, citing informed sources.
The Iranian news agency and broadcaster did not elaborate on the details of the missiles which were used, how many were fired, or what their targets were. However, earlier, Iranian media reported that the Islamic Republic fired at least seven hypersonic missiles during the attack, with none of them intercepted. Separately on Sunday, Lebanese national security expert Ali Hamie told Sputnik that he had information that Iran had fired its new Fattah 2 hypersonic missiles in Saturday night’s strikes.
The Fattah 2 (literally “Conquerer 2” or “Victory Giver 2”) is a liquid-fueled hypersonic missile unveiled in November 2023, with a declared range of up to 1,500 km, a 450 kg warhead, and the ability to maneuver in flight. It is one of two hypersonic missiles in Iran’s arsenal, with the other being the Fattah 1 – a solid fuel, maneuverable hypersonic missile with a 1,400 km range, a 350-450 kg payload and the reported ability to accelerate to speeds of Mach 13-Mach 15 in the terminal stage.
These speeds, combined with Fattah missiles’ ability to maneuver, may have made it difficult for Israel’s sophisticated air and missile defenses to take them down. For decades, Israel’s air defense forces have had to concentrate on the threat posed by garage-built rockets fired by militias in Gaza, and by better-armed non-state actors in Lebanon and Yemen.
Iran, on the other hand, is one of the world’s top developers and manufacturers of advanced missiles, drones, and other weaponry, which has proven more than a match even for military systems possessed by the US, and produced at a lower cost (a former advisor to Israel’s chief of staff complained on Sunday that Israel spent $1.3 billion worth of air defense interceptor missiles to shoot down Iranian projectiles which had cost Iran nearly ten times less to build and fire).
New Info on Weapons Used
Iranian media has provided other details on the weapons used during Saturday night’s attack, with state TV confirming that Shahed-136 kamikaze drones were used in the assault. These UAVs have a 2,500 km range, a 185 km flight speed, and 50 kg of explosives on board.
The report further indicated that Emad missiles (which are liquid-fueled, have a 1,700 km range, a 750 kg payload, and a 10-50 meter circular error probable) were used.
30 cruise missiles, including the Paveh (a turbojet-engine powered smart missile with a 1,650 km range and the ability to change course mid-flight), and the Soumar (a little-known cruise missile with a range of at least 1,500 km and an unknown payload) are also said to have been deployed. The latter projectiles reportedly have the ability to fold and unfold their winglets midflight, with the projectiles able to communicate with one another to coordinate an attack.
Operational Failure or Operational Success?
Despite assurances by the Israel Defense Force that some “99 percent” of the drones and missiles used in Iran’s attack had been neutralized with help from the US, UK, France, and Jordan, further reports by US and Israeli media Sunday and Monday confirmed aspects of Iranian officials’ statements about the strikes’ objectives and effectiveness.
A senior US official told ABC News Sunday that “at least nine” Iranian missiles hit two Israeli airbases, with five missiles damaging infrastructure, including a C-130 military transport plane, runway, and storage facilities at the Nevatim Air Base, and four additional missiles touching down on a separate, undisclosed airbase in the Negev Desert, but not causing any significant damage (Iranian media said Sunday that “at least seven” missiles had struck the Ramon Air Base in the Negev, which hosts Israeli F-16I jets).
Iranian Armed Forces Chief of Staff Mohammad Bagheri said in a briefing early Sunday that Iran’s strikes had concentrated on the Nevatim Air Base, which he said hosted “the F-35 planes that were used for targeting our consulate in Damascus,” and an intelligence-gathering facility in Jabal al-Shaykh heights. “Both of these centers were destroyed to a considerable extent and became inactive,” Bagheri said, adding that Israel’s missile shield had proven incapable of blunting the attack.
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps chief Hossein Salami said that Iran’s “limited” strikes were “more successful than we expected,” and that Iran’s missiles had broken through sophisticated Israeli air and missile defenses.
Former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter told Sputnik on Sunday that Iran “deliberately chose not to inflict extremely lethal action against Israel,” and that Saturday night’s attack was a signal to Israel and the US “that it could do what it did in Nevatim, at Ramona, anywhere in Israel, anywhere in the Middle East, and there was nothing the United States or Israel could do in response.” Iran, Ritter said in a separate interview with George Galloway, had managed to inflict damage on the facilities it was targeting despite giving ample advance warning of its impending strikes, and forced Israel to concentrate resources and attention on its slow-moving drones and missiles, allowing its more sophisticated strike means to slip through and reach their targets.
General Bagheri said Sunday that Iran had deliberately avoided targeting population and economic centers, and warned that Iran could launch an attack “tens of times” more powerful than the demonstrative strikes carried out Saturday night if Israel retaliates.
Ottawa fails to condemn Israeli damage to Canadian embassy
By Yves Engler | The Canada Files | April 13, 2024
An apartheid state committing genocide damaged a Canadian embassy while conducting a flagrant war crime. But Ottawa has remained silent about an incident designed to ignite a regional war.
Two weeks ago, the Israeli Air Force murdered 16 people in strikes on Iran’s embassy compound in Damascus. They reportedly killed two top Iranian generals, two civilians and a dozen militants. The illegal strikes obviously impinged on Syrian sovereignty and contravene multiple conventions such as the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
Dozens of governments condemned Israel’s violation of international law. The European Union criticized the strikes and a senior United Nations official told an emergency meeting of the Security Council that the inviolability of diplomatic and consular premises and personnel must be respected. The Coordinating Bureau of the 120 nation Non-Aligned Movement released a statement that “strongly condemns the heinous attack conducted by Israel against Iranian diplomatic premises and representatives in Damascus.”
For its part, Ottawa failed to criticize Israel’s actions even as it has emerged that Israel’s strike destroyed a number of windows in the Canadian embassy, which is located next to Iran’s. While formally closed since 2012, the damaged embassy remains Canadian property.
Ottawa was also mum when Israel killed over 50 people in Syria, 72 hours earlier. To the best of this author’s knowledge, the Trudeau government hasn’t criticized any of Israel’s innumerable — 33 times since the start of this year — illegal strikes in that country. Nor has Ottawa criticized a series of (presumed) Israeli killings in Iran though they regularly criticize that country’s actions.
As Israel has bombed Lebanon, Syria and Palestine in recent years, Ottawa has sold it arms and maintained a multitude of bilateral and multilateral military ties. Additionally, the Trudeau government has turned a blind eye to the inducement of Canadians to join or assist the Israeli military in violation of the Foreign Enlistment Act and to registered charities fundraising for the Israeli military in contravention of Canada Revenue Agency rules.
Israel’s attack on Iran’s diplomatic outpost in Syria is a major escalation. The Iranians have said they will respond with a significant assault (reportedly Tehran told Washington that if they impose a ceasefire in Gaza, they will hold back). Israel has responded to Iranian threats by claiming it will further escalate the conflict. On Wednesday Israel’s foreign minister, Israel Katz, posted to X, “If Iran attacks from its territory, Israel will respond and attack in Iran.” President Joe Biden said the US will support Israel.
As has been speculated for some time, Benjamin Netanyahu wants to draw the US into a war with Iran. Netanyahu has long hyped the Iranian threat and wants to have the US weaken the only power in the region that hasn’t been cowed by Israel/US dictates.
Netanyahu has a personal interest to continue fighting. He’s likely going to be ousted as prime minister and may even end up in jail on corruption charges when the fighting stops. Additionally, Israel has failed in its bid to liquidate Hamas in Gaza, Palestine. After six months of Israeli-perpetrated horrors, most of Hamas’ top leaders are alive, uncaptured, and Israel hasn’t even recovered those kidnapped on October 7.
More generally, instigating wars is a national pastime for Israel. (“Israel is an army with a state” goes the saying). Israel has bombed Jordan, Egypt, Sudan, Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, Tunisia and Iraq. Fifteen years ago, Israeli military historian Zeev Maoz explained in Defending The Holy Land: A Critical Analysis of Israel’s Security & Foreign Policy:
“Between 1948 and 2004, Israel fought six interstate wars, fought two (some say three) civil wars, and engaged in over 144 dyadic militarized interstate disputes (MIDs) that involved the threat, the display, or the use of military force against another state. Israel is by far the most conflict prone state in modern history. It has averaged nearly four MIDS every year. It has fought an interstate war every nine years. Israel appears on top of the list of the most intense international rivalries in the last 200-year period.”
Later in the book, Moaz said:
“There was only one year out of 56 years of history in which Israel did not engage in acts involving the threat, display, or limited use of force with its neighbors. The only year in which Israel did not engage in a militarized conflict was 1988, when Israel was deeply immersed in fighting the Palestinian uprising, the intifada. So, it is fair to say that during each and every year of its history Israel was engaged in violent military actions of some magnitude.”
Maoz concludes (describing the Nakba as a “war of independence”):
“None of the wars — with a possible exception of the 1948 war of Independence — was what Israel refers to as Milhemet Ein Brerah (‘war of necessity’). They were all wars of choice or wars of folly.”
For its size, Israel may be the most violent state in the history of humanity. Canada has seldom criticized and in fact enabled this rogue state, as it unleashes ever more death and destruction.
Yves Engler is the author of 13 books. His latest book, available now, is “Canada’s Long Fight Against Democracy”.
Strike on Israel Shows US Bases Near Iran Are ‘Achilles Heel’ – Analyst
By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 14.04.2024
Fears of a greater Middle East escalation were triggered after Iran launched a massive drone and missile attack against Israel, aided by Hezbollah and the Yemeni Houthis. Iran said the attack was in response to Israel’s bombing of the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria, which killed seven members of the elite Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Iran’s massive retaliatory attack on Israel from its own territory is a sign that the conflict could “escalate out of control.”
Michael Maloof, a former senior security analyst in the office of the US secretary of defense, told Sputnik that the first ever direct Iranian attack on Israel set a dangerous precedent.
“My concern is that this could easily escalate into something not only between Iran and Israel, but beyond the Middle East region,” he said.
Iran’s assault, which it stated was an act of “self-defense” after the Israeli strike on its consulate in Damascus, was originally intended to be a “limited” one, said Maloof.
Iran first sent in “swarms of drones with lights on as a sign of psychological warfare,” but sending in cruise and ballistic missiles by Tehran was a “distinct escalation,” said Maloof.
The scale of Iran’s attack on Israel suggests that Tehran was sending a message, demonstrating that it possesses “extraordinary capabilities,” said Maloof.
“They have built up their missile capabilities extraordinarily, they have drones, cruise missiles, and some of the most accurate ballistic missiles in the region right now,” he added.
“I think that this clearly showed that Iran has a capability. I think it’s limited. They cannot do this on a sustained basis. And they did send their slower ordinance, such as drones, UAVs. But they also claim to have hypersonics,” Maloof noted.
“I think that if Israel were to retaliate, then I think they would engage the more sophisticated missiles and hypersonics, potentially, if they have them,” He added. “Then you’re talking some very serious escalation in the entire region. It’s already unprecedented, but this escalation could be even ratcheted up that could conceivably bring in other and extend beyond just this region.”
All signs point to the potential of a larger regional war erupting, Maloof warned, adding that everything now depends on Israel’s reaction. “Is this a tit-for-tat, a one-on-one, or a further escalation?” he asked.
“I think we are already getting that message from Netanyahu, his ministers, that they are going to respond… How they respond is going to determine the extent of that escalation through the [Middle East] region,” stressed Maloof. “I am quite concerned that neither side is going to stand down at this point.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is prepared to “continue an endless war in the region,” suggested Maloof, adding that he “knows he had the US backing,” and could opt to strike now, taking advantage of this “window of opportunity.”
“He may not get such an opportunity under a potential Trump administration coming in [after the US elections in November],” said the expert.
Looking at possible scenarios for Israel’s response, he noted that Tel Aviv had already stated publicly an intention to “go after the nuclear sites in Iran.”
“That is going to be exceedingly difficult, plus I don’t know that they have the power projection to do that on any consistent basis, and secondly, I don’t believe they have the so-called ‘bunker busters’ that would be needed to be able to drill down through the mountains to reach those facilities. The US has been reluctant to give Israel these bunker buster [munitions],” said Maloof.
As for the US, it has already “gotten sucked into this,” Maloof noted.
US President Joe Biden issued a statement on Iran’s attack against Israel after speaking with Netanyahu by phone. Biden condemned the attack “in the strongest possible terms”.
He reaffirmed Washington’s “ironclad commitment” to help support Israel’s security. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the US does “not seek escalation” but will “continue to support” Israel’s defense. “I will be consulting with allies and partners in the region and around the world in the hours and days ahead,” he added.
“There is already a call in Congress to put on fast-track the legislation to approve new ordinance, and the $14 billion for Israel,” said the pundit. He remarked that the Pentagon might “empty its stockpiles to provide support to Israel,” and recalled that besides giving Israel bombs and artillery, the US supports its Iron Dome air defense system, whose missiles will need to be replenished.
“If you have a swarm, wave after wave of swarms, Israel is going to be very hard pressed to be able to defend against that. And that’s why the US now is coming in, and that gets the US directly involved,” Maloof pointed out. “And that could then open up US assets in the region.” We have got some 35 bases that surround Iran, and they thereby become vulnerable. They were meant to be a deterrence. Clearly, deterrence is no longer on the table here. Now they become the American Achilles heel because of their vulnerabilities to attack. They’ve got air defense systems, but they’ve got to be replenished. And given that you got active war going on right now in the region, it’s going to be difficult to replenish those supplies.”
According to the ex-Pentagon analyst, much now also depends upon what stockpiles Iran has and “with what consistency they can keep sending these wave after wave of drones and ballistic missiles… Ultimately, if they have them, the hypersonics… and there’s no defense against hypersonics. Not even Israel’s ‘Arrow’ system, which is designed to deal with ballistic missiles… And apparently, that’s been engaged tonight, as well as the Iron Dome.”
The United Nations (UN) Security Council is to meet on Sunday in response to a request from Gilad Erdan, Israel’s permanent representative to the United Nations. The meeting is scheduled for 4 pm New York time (2000 GMT), as announced by the UN Department of Global Communications.
“I’m hoping that the UN Security Council can take this up and maybe some adult supervision could begin to intervene in this and maybe try to bring it to a halt for now,” Maloof said. “But right now, this minute, it doesn’t look like it. And again, it’s going to depend upon the response from the Israelis if they go directly into Iran in response.”
The current media frenzy surrounding the Iran strike is “disproportionately amplified compared to the actual events transpiring on the ground,” Dr Ahmed Al Ibrahim, a Riyadh-based political analyst, told Sputnik.
He added that any true aftermath of Iran’s strike will be discernible after a “thorough assessment.”
“Indeed, I dismiss the current situation as largely sensationalized, a “bubble” inflated by media coverage and public attention,” the political analyst said.
He expressed skepticism that any Middle Eastern countries would “willingly entangle themselves in the unfolding chaos.” Arguing that “Iran’s capacity to directly threaten Israel is limited by geographical constraints,” Ibrahim agreed that there is “potential for escalation.”
Iran describes response to Israeli attack as ‘legitimate defense’
Press TV – April 13, 2024
Iran’s permanent mission to the United Nations defends the country’s retaliation against the Israeli regime’s recent terrorist attack on the Islamic Republic’s diplomatic premises in the Syrian capital.
“Iran’s military action was based on Article 51 of the United Nations Charter concerning legitimate defense in response to the Zionist regime’s aggression against our diplomatic premises in Damascus,” the mission said in a statement on Saturday.
“The matter can be considered as concluded,” it added.
The mission, however, warned that if the Israeli regime perpetrated another mistake, Iran’s subsequent response could be “remarkably more intense.”
The statement concluded that the conflict was one between Iran and the rogue regime, “of which the United States should stay away.”
Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), on Saturday night, launched “extensive” retaliatory missile and drone strikes against the occupied territories, defining the mission as “Operation True Promise.”
The Israeli attack had resulted in the martyrdom of Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, a commander of the IRGC’s Quds Force, his deputy, General Mohammad Hadi Haji Rahimi, and five of their accompanying officers.
The terrorist attack drew sharp condemnation from senior Iranian political and military leaders, who vowed “definitive revenge.”
On Thursday, the Iranian mission to the United Nations said the UN Security Council’s condemnation of the Israeli atrocity could have prevented the need for retaliation.
“Had the UN Security Council condemned the Zionist regime’s reprehensible act of aggression on our diplomatic premises in Damascus and subsequently brought to justice its perpetrators, the imperative for Iran to punish this rogue regime might have been obviated,” it said on the social media platform X Thursday.
End of Escalatory Ladder in Ukraine & MidEast – John Mearsheimer, Alexander Mercouris & Glenn Diesen
The Duran | April 12, 2024
Game Over? Persian Gulf Powers Reportedly Refuse to Give US Access to Bases for Anti-Iran Strikes
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 13.04.2024
Going back to the Gulf War in 1991, the US has depended on regional allies for large-scale military operations across the Middle East. Now, as tensions between Israel and Iran rise and the US-led unipolar world order comes under strain, America’s traditional partners are apparently refusing to walk in lock step with Washington.
Persian Gulf countries have reportedly told the United States not to launch any attacks against Iran from their territory or airspace amid seething regional tensions.
Sources, including a senior US official told the Middle East Eye that Gulf monarchies have been “working overtime” on the diplomatic track “to shut down avenues that could link them to a US reprisal against Tehran or its proxies from bases inside their kingdoms.”
The countries include regional heavyweights Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Kuwait, with their leaderships reportedly “raising questions” on the details of US basing agreements, and taking steps to prevent the use of their Iran-adjacent bases against the Islamic Republic.
NATO member Turkiye has also reportedly barred the US from using its airspace for strikes against Iran, but Sputnik has not been able to independently verify this information.
“It’s a mess,” a senior US official said, referring to the headache the Biden administration faces as it prepares for a potential Iranian retaliatory strike against its top regional ally Israel following Tel Aviv’s April 1 attack on the Iranian Embassy compound in Damascus, Syria.
The Middle East Eye report follows a report by Axios on Friday citing US officials who said that Iran has privately warned the US that it will target American forces in the Middle East if Washington gets involved in a military confrontation between Iran and Israel.
The US has an estimated 40,000+ military personnel at bases dotting the Middle East, including the Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, which hosts at least 10,000 troops, and serves as the forward headquarters of United States Central Command – the combatant command responsible for military operations across the Middle East. Nearby Bahrain hosts up to 7,000 troops and the US Fifth Fleet – which operates in the Persian Gulf, the Red and Arabian Seas, and part of the Indian Ocean. The US also has a 15,000-troop garrison in Kuwait, at least 5,000 troops in the UAE, and about 2,700 troops and fighter jets at the Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia. Oman hosts a few hundred US troops, and allows the US Air Force to conduct overflights and landings, and warships to make 80 port calls annually.
The Gulf powers’ increasingly independent foreign policy is potentially a major setback for Washington, which for many decades after World War II (and especially after the Cold War) was able to rely on the Persian Gulf monarchies for its military operations in the oil-rich region.
Regional countries led by Saudi Arabia and the UAE have taken a series of steps recently to wean themselves off of dependence on the US economically, politically and militarily, with Riyadh moving to break the petrodollar monopoly in the oil trade with China, pausing its military campaign against Yemen’s Houthi militia, restoring diplomatic ties with Iran and, together with Abu Dhabi, joining the BRICS Plus bloc.
The Palestinian-Israeli crisis has driven Gulf state leaders and their populations further from the idea of the establishing relations with Israel, and chilled ties with the US thanks to the Biden administration’s full-fledged support for Tel Aviv in the course of the Gaza War.
