Hamas: Israel made decision to resume its criminal aggression
Palestine Information Center – December 1, 2023
GAZA – The Hamas Movement said in a statement issued Friday that the Israeli occupation bore responsibility for the end of the truce for rejecting terms to free more hostages and extend it.
The Movement pointed out that Israel refused an offer to release more captives and the dead bodies of an Israeli family killed in Israeli air strikes.
“We offered to hand over the bodies of the Bibas family, release their father so that he can participate in their burial, and hand over two Israeli captives,” the group said in a statement.
Israel refused “all these offers because it had made a prior decision to resume its criminal aggression against the Gaza Strip,” it added.
Hamas held the US administration and its president, Biden, fully responsible for the continuation of Israeli war crimes in the Gaza Strip after its absolute support and the green light it gave it following its Secretary of State Anthony Blinken’s visit to Israel.
The group also stressed that the Palestinian people and resistance led by Al-Qassam Brigades are steadfast.
UK escalating tensions across Middle East
By Lucas Leiroz | December 1, 2023
The collective West seems increasingly interested in worsening the crisis in the Middle East. Now, the United Kingdom is sending a new combat ship to the Persian Gulf region with the aim of deterring Iranian and pro-Palestinian forces. Amid growing tensions in the maritime zone of the Middle East, the British measure tends to escalate the crisis significantly.
According to Defense Secretary Grant Shapps, the destroyer HMS Diamond is heading to the Persian Gulf to “strengthen the United Kingdom’s presence” in the Middle East. The ship will join the frigate HMS Lancaster, which has been stationed in the region since last year. For Shapps, improving the UK’s defense capacity in that area is essential to guarantee British interests amid the current conflict situation.
“HMS Diamond is en route to join Operation Kipion, the UK’s maritime presence in the Gulf and the Indian Ocean (…) Recent events have proven how critical the Middle East remains to global security and stability,” he added in a statement (…) From joint efforts to deter escalation, following the onset of the renewed conflict in Israel and Gaza, to now the unlawful and brazen seizure of MV Galaxy Leader by the Houthis in the Red Sea – it is critical that the UK bolsters our presence in the region, to keep Britain and our interests safe from a more volatile and contested world,” he said.
More than that, Shapps also added that the destroyer will help deter regional actors, mainly “Iran and its proxies.” With these words, Shapps clearly refers to Hezbollah and mainly to the Yemeni Houthis, who recently launched a series of naval assaults, making the Israeli maritime presence in the Red Sea unworkable. Furthermore, it has also been stated that sending the ship will contribute to ensuring “freedom of navigation”, which is a common rhetoric of British and American strategists.
“Freedom of navigation” operations are naval military mobilizations carried out in disputed or conflict regions with the excuse of guaranteeing freedom of passage for civilian and merchant ships. Among Western navies, these operations have become commonplace to provoke enemy countries in a “disguised” way. The US constantly promotes such incursions into maritime zones claimed by China in Asia, for example. Now, the UK wants to do something similar in the Middle Eastern region, where military tensions are growing rapidly.
Around fifty large merchant ships pass through the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait daily, while one hundred pass through the Strait of Hormuz. These are extremely busy maritime areas that facilitate the commercial flows of local countries. The problem is that the sea is one of the first areas affected in a war scenario. Pro-Palestinian forces are intercepting Israeli ships reaching the Red Sea through the straits. Soon, it is possible that ships from Western countries will also begin to be attacked, as these states are giving full and unrestricted support to Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.
The UK uses this scenario as a justification for sending warships to the region, but this does not seem to be the correct way to deal with the situation. Instead of “deterring” the Palestinian and Iranian allies, the UK will be provoking them further and contributing to the deterioration of the crisis. The more Western interventionism is being conducted in the Middle Eastern situation, the more tensions will escalate, which is why London is making a serious mistake.
However, it is noteworthy that the British maneuver is inserted in a context of increased naval interventionism by London in several “tense” regions.
For example, in addition to the ship heading to the Gulf, the deployment of an international task force led by the British was also announced. The aim is allegedly to launch patrols from the English Channel to the Baltic Sea. In addition to the UK, countries such as Denmark, Finland, Iceland, the Baltic states, Norway and Sweden are participating in the project. The group is being called the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) and, according to Shapps, will “defend our shared critical infrastructure against potential threats”.
As we can see, once again the irresponsible maneuvers of Western countries can lead to serious consequences. In order to supposedly “protect their interests”, these countries implement dangerous escalatory measures that tend to create real problems. Maritime tensions in the Middle East will grow as there is more Western participation in favor of Israel – in the same sense that maritime tensions in Europe will begin to emerge from the moment that the maneuvers of Western countries began to generate security problems for Russia.
Instead of creating false enemies and launching bellicose measures, the best thing for the West to do is to calm tensions and reestablish dialogue for a peaceful solution. But unfortunately this strategic sense no longer seems to exist among Western decision makers.
Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.
You can follow Lucas on X (former Twitter) and Telegram.
NATO Chief Puts Hypocrisy on Full Display
By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | November 29, 2023
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg put NATO’s hypocrisy on display while talking to reporters ahead of the meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Brussels on November 28.
Asked by a reporter about American and European struggles to continue providing Ukraine with weapons and ammunition, Stoltenberg replied, “It’s our obligation to ensure that we provide Ukraine with the weapons they need. Because it will be a tragedy for Ukrainians if President Putin wins.”
The tragedy for Ukrainians has already happened. Their infrastructure and economy are destroyed, their population is dispersed, their relatives are dead or injured and their land is lost. The greater tragedy to come is not the war ending, but the war continuing. In the first weeks of the war, Ukrainians could have kept almost all of their land and lost almost none of their lives for a promise not to join NATO. The political West ordered them to walk away from the negotiating table and onto the battlefield. They promised them—directly or indirectly—as much military and financial support as it takes for as long as it takes. Nearly two years later, Ukraine will likely have to make the same promise, but they have lost that land and they have lost those lives.
Russia brought tragedy to Ukraine; the United States, United Kingdom, and their NATO allies bloated and magnified that tragedy. The tragedy now would not be ending the war even if it means “Putin wins.” The tragedy now is that NATO is willing to continue feeding a war that they know Ukraine can’t win. “When Ukraine launched its big counteroffensive this spring,” The Wall Street Journal reported, “Western military officials knew Kyiv didn’t have all the training or weapons—from shells to warplanes—that it needed to dislodge Russian forces.” Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Valery Zaluzhny has said that the war has reached a “stalemate” that over time can only favor Russia.
The tragedy for Ukrainians would not be negotiating an end to the war, it would be NATO exercising the “obligation” to continue the war.
Stoltenberg gave a second reason for continuing to provide Ukraine with the weapons they need; so that Ukrainians can go on dying for NATO goals and NATO security. If the war ends now, “it will be dangerous for us,” Stoltenberg said. The United States “will continue to provide support” to Ukraine “because it is in the security interest of the United States to do so.” NATO must “stay the course” because “[t]his is about also about our security interests.”
Stoltenberg knows this war is not being fought because Russia wanted to conquer other territory; Stoltenberg knows this war is being fought because Russia wanted to defend its territory. This war did not happen because Russia was a threat to NATO territory, it happened because NATO was a threat to Russian territory. How do we know that Stoltenberg knows this? Because he said so.
Putin “sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement,” Stoltenberg said on September 7, 2023. “That… was a pre-condition for not invade Ukraine.” He then said that when “we didn’t sign that… he went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders.”
“President Putin,” Stoltenberg concluded, “invaded a European country to prevent more NATO.”
Stoltenberg has publicly stated his awareness that this war was fought, not over American or NATO security concerns, but over Russian security concerns.
U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin also recently said that the United States must go on supporting Ukraine or Russia would win and steamroll on over the Baltic countries, Poland, and beyond. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov mocked Austin, saying, “This comes from a man who holds a high-ranking position and cannot but receive expert views… and who cannot but understand what is going on in Ukraine and that Russia has never had and can never have any aggressive or expansionist plans.”
Ukraine’s chief negotiator in the Belarus and Istanbul talks with Russia has also recently said that stopping NATO from expanding to Ukraine and Russia’s borders was the “key point” for Russia and that “[e]verything else was simply rhetoric and political ‘seasoning.’”
Stoltenberg says that if Russia is allowed to win “the message to all authoritarian leaders—not only in Moscow, but also in Beijing—is that when they violate international law, when they invade another country when they use force, they get what they want. So this is about the whole idea of a rules-based international order, where territorial borders are respected.”
Stoltenberg transitions from “international law” to “rules-based order” because his case cannot be made without hypocrisy on the former. International law applies equally to everybody. But the United States or NATO have frequently invaded other countries by force and disrespected their territorial borders: Panama, Grenada, Libya, Kosovo, Iraq and Syria. Before Ukraine, modern Russia had not. But the rules-based order, unlike international law, allows Stoltenberg to make the case that Russia has violated the rules but the U.S. and NATO have not because the rules are made up as you go along so that the United States is always within them and Russia is always without. Under the unwritten rules-based order, rules are applied when they benefit the U.S. while the U.S. is exempt when they don’t.
American and NATO support for Ukraine may be about U.S. insistence on enforcing the rules-based system, but the United States is not an enforcer of international law.
Stoltenberg’s third reason for continuing to press the war in Ukraine is read right off the U.S. script; “… we need to continue to support them also knowing that the stronger Ukraine is on the battlefield, the stronger the handle will be on the negotiating table.” That point has passed. Ukraine is in a weaker position on the battlefield than they were before the counteroffensive. Russia is winning the war of land, the war of attrition on weapons, the war of attrition on lives, and the technological war. Ukraine had a better seat at the negotiating table in the first weeks after the invasion when the political West ordered them to stop negotiating. They were in a better position a year ago when they recaptured areas of Kherson before the counteroffensive. Far from strengthening Ukraine’s position on the battlefield or at the negotiating table, supporting the continuation of the war seems to be putting Ukraine in a weaker and weaker position. The terms that will be offered Ukraine today are likely much worse than the terms they were offered at the start of the war. And they will likely be worse tomorrow.
Stoltenberg says that “if you want a negotiated, peaceful solution, which ensures that Ukraine prevails as a sovereign, independent nation, then the best way to get there is to continue to provide military support to Ukraine.” But it is not war that will guarantee Ukraine sovereignty. As Lavrov recently pointed out, Russia recognized the sovereignty of Ukraine based on a declaration of independence and a constitution that declared Ukraine’s neutrality and non-membership in NATO, and Russia will continue to when those conditions are reinstated. The best way to ensure Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty is not to help it fight for the right to be in NATO but to encourage it to promise not to join NATO.
Finally, Stoltenberg put NATO’s hypocrisy on display not only by what he said, but by what he did not say. If the words that Stoltenberg said were meant to rally Western ears, the words he did not say will be the loudest in Ukrainian ears. Though Ukraine is fighting, in part, for the right to be in NATO, that is the one thing that Stoltenberg, hypocritically, did not offer Ukraine. The “Allies have stated again and again the last time at the NATO Summit with all the leaders present in Vilnius” that they will “provide support to Ukraine,” that they “will step up” their support for Ukraine, that they will “help them… to modernize their army” and that they will “ensure full interoperability between the Ukrainian forces and the NATO forces.” The one thing Stoltenberg did not say that NATO has offered Ukraine is membership in NATO.
Ukraine should fight to defend NATO’s insistence on the right of a country to choose its own alliances and to join NATO without being offered membership in NATO. That is the final hypocrisy put on full display in Stoltenberg’s comments to reporters.
US military aid to Ukraine may be postponed until after 2024 elections
By Ahmed Adel | November 29, 2023
Members of the US Congress fear that if a military and financial aid package for Ukraine cannot be agreed before Christmas, it could be delayed until after the 2024 presidential elections, which take place in the distant November. The Economist notes that due to this funding uncertainty, “now America has become one of Ukraine’s greatest worries” since Washington has been “Ukraine’s greatest saviour as it marshalled arms, money and more to help” to fight Russian forces.
According to the London-based outlet, “the longer the delay, the more the Republican and Democratic parties will “become consumed by election fever.”
“If there is no deal before Christmas, some in Congress worry, a fresh allocation of aid may be delayed until after the elections in November 2024,” the Economist reported, citing a source in the US Senate, who added that if Donald Trump was to be elected president, funding could stop completely.
Ukrainian officials fear that without American support, Kiev’s allies in Europe could lose heart, with the magazine highlighting that Ukraine is trying to boost its defence industry, which was famous during the Soviet era but has been badly neglected since.
“No matter how much we grow local production, we would be hugely dependent on Western partnerships,” admitted a senior official in Kiev.
Another Ukrainian source cited by the Economist said, “In the spring the flow of military supplies was a broad river. In the summer it was a stream. Now it is a few drops of tears.”
Without US and Western funding, Ukraine’s collapse would be imminent since this was the decisive factor in why the eastern European country’s military has survived for as long as it has. The situation is so dire that the Ukrainian Ministry of Economy and the National Bank believe that Ukraine’s GDP is expected to reach pre-crisis 2021 levels only in 2030.
Ukraine’s GDP dropped 29.1% last year, falling from 5.5 trillion hryvnia to 3.8 trillion hryvnia at constant prices, considering 2021 as the base year. With an average annual growth rate of 4.8%, the Ukrainian economy will reach pre-crisis levels only in 2030, when GDP will reach 5.6 trillion hryvnia at 2021 prices.
In comparison, the International Monetary Fund expects an average growth of 4.3% per year for the Ukrainian economy from 2025 to 2028.
Meanwhile, the Russian economy, which contracted 2.1% last year to 132.5 trillion rubles in 2021 prices, is forecast to grow 2.45% this year, reaching a GDP of 135.7 trillion rubles. Despite the sanctions, this value represents approximately 445 billion rubles more than recorded before the crisis.
Evidently, the sanctions against Russia have failed whilst Ukraine continues to struggle. Yet, despite this reality, the Biden administration is adamant about maintaining sanctions and financing Ukraine and is only blocked from doing so because of the strong opposition in Congress.
Biden’s unrelenting yet failed Ukraine policy will likely be his undoing since his popularity continues to plummet in the polls.
The latest Morning Consult poll, updated on November 27, had Biden’s approval rating at 38% and his disapproval rating at 55%. According to FiveThirtyEight’s average of all polls, Biden’s approval rating sat at 39%, with 54.7% disapproving.
The New York Times/Siena College polls at the beginning of November showed Trump ahead of Biden in four of the six swing states. Still, more indicators of the president’s electoral peril soon followed. Biden’s popularity in head-to-head matchups with Trump is dwindling, as seen in the fact that among the latest surveys this month from 13 separate pollsters, Biden’s position is worse than their previous polls in all but two.
As Politico highlighted, “And while polls suggest most of the movement comes from voters abandoning Biden — who might become undecided but not swing to supporting Trump — the Republican has also started to gain steam. Trump’s vote share in the national polling average is higher now than at any point in the past year.”
A massive reason for the swing in popularity between Biden and Trump is their respective positions on the Ukraine war. Trump has claimed he can end the conflict in 24 hours, and even though this is doubtful, it points to the fact that he wants to wrap up this war quickly. Biden, on the other hand, not only instigated the start of the war but is attempting to continue it for as long as possible, even at the expense of the American taxpayers who are already struggling with the cost of living.
If funding of Ukraine is discontinued until at least November 2024, Moscow will likely have ended the war by then after achieving their goals and will be ready to start engaging in slow normalisation efforts with Washington – if Trump were to be elected. And even if Congress eventually approves a new aid package for Ukraine, it will only merely delay for a short duration Russia’s final victory.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
How to Lose A Carrier Strike Group in An Afternoon
By William Schryver – imetatronink – November 28, 2023
Imagine a scenario where China, for whatever reason, announces a “no warships allowed” closure of the Taiwan Strait. It’s not an implausible scenario at all. The Chinese have spoken openly of the possibility. They regard the entirety of the strait as their sovereign waters, and assert the right to exercise control over them.
Now imagine a US carrier strike group is commanded to challenge the blockade in order to assert what the empire regards as “freedom of navigation” through what the “rules-based international order” defines as international waters.
Then imagine the distinct possibility of a perceived provocation that escalates to a limited engagement that escalates into a launch of the carrier’s air wing and then escalates to the launch of a mixed-salvo of 500+ Chinese kamikaze drones and anti-ship missiles, plus a full complement of ECCM jammers and a couple hundred decoys.
Also bear in mind that very similar scenarios could just as easily play out in the Baltic Sea or the Persian Gulf.
And the day it finally happens — as I fear it surely will — the world will suddenly begin operating on radically altered terms.
Americans don’t want to keep funding Ukraine – congresswoman
RT | November 28, 2023
Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene has said that any spending bill pairing US border security with more military aid for Ukraine amid the conflict with Russia would be “a slap in the face” of the American people.
US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced on Sunday that he will hold a vote on President Joe Biden’s request for $106 billion in military assistance for Ukraine and Israel during the first week of December.
The Biden administration has so far failed to push through its supplementary ‘national security’ proposal, with Schumer saying that “the biggest holdup” is opposition from the Republicans, who insist that additional aid to Kiev should be combined with funding for security on the US-Mexico border.
“Our border is the worst national security crisis in US history,” Greene wrote on X on Tuesday. According to AP, illegal crossings on the US-Mexico border surpassed a daily average of more than 8,000 people in September. However, the flow has subsided by around 14% since then.
“Ukraine is not the 51st state,” she said. “US border security should not be paired with funding for the losing war in Ukraine.”
The congresswoman slammed the Democratic Party for resisting the Republican push for more spending and increased security on the border. “Democrats want the daily invasion into America, they don’t want to fix it,” she wrote.
“Americans do not support the war in Ukraine and don’t want to continue funding Ukraine,” Greene said. “So any bill pairing our own border security with more billions for Ukraine is a slap in the face to the American people.”
The Biden administration has provided Ukraine with more than $76 billion in military and other assistance since the start of the conflict between Moscow and Kiev in February 2022. However, it has recently said that the money is running out, as some Republicans refuse to back any new aid packages for Ukraine. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, who visited Kiev last week, announced a new tranche of arms and ammunition worth just $100 million.
READ MORE: Origin of US weaponry used by Hamas must be investigated – congresswoman
The US public also appears be souring on support for Ukraine, with a recent poll AP-NORC showing that around 45% of Americans believe that Washington is sending too much money to Kiev.
West ‘screwed over’ Ukraine – ex-Zelensky aide
RT | November 27, 2023
The West has essentially thrown Ukraine under the bus in its conflict with Russia by failing to provide Kiev with the necessary amount of military aid, Aleksey Arestovich, a former aide to President Vladimir Zelensky, has claimed.
Writing on Telegram on Sunday, Arestovich weighed in on the differing views of Ukrainian officials as to why Kiev’s conflict with Moscow is still in full swing despite several major attempts at peace.
According to the former presidential aide, the West bears most of the blame for the situation.
“The real responsibility lies with those who promised Ukraine real support for waging a real, big war and did not provide it. In other words, they screwed us over.”
Arestovich claimed that Ukraine “had won its war” by managing to survive in the first few months of the conflict. “This war of ours could have well ended with the Istanbul Agreements,” he suggested, referring to the talks in the Turkish city in the spring of 2022, which initially made some progress but stalled after then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s visit to Kiev. The negotiations collapsed but Russia maintains it is open to diplomatic engagement with Kiev.
After the Istanbul talks, the conflict entered another phase in which Ukraine had no chance of winning without securing massive Western arms supplies, including warplanes and long-range missiles, the former official continued. “But nothing came. We paid a huge price for that.”
Arestovich suggested that the West would now try to force Ukraine to accept the loss of several regions, which overwhelmingly voted to join Russia in a series of public referenda last autumn.
He also suggested that, while Kiev found itself in a tough spot mostly due to the West’s inaction, the Ukrainian leadership’s “stupidity and corruption has given them many formal and informal reasons to screw us over.”
Arestovich’s remarks came amid Ukraine’s faltering counteroffensive, which has been underway since early summer but has failed to gain any significant ground. Last month, Moscow said Kiev had lost more than 90,000 troops since the start of the push, with Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu claiming that Ukrainian casualties had reached more than 13,000 soldiers in November alone.
Earlier this month, Valery Zaluzhny, Ukraine’s top general, admitted that hostilities had reached a stalemate, an assessment rejected by Zelensky. Meanwhile, on Sunday, Mariana Bezuglaya, a senior Ukrainian MP, blasted Zaluzhny over the lack of a strategic plan for 2024 and called on the military leadership to step down.
Biden moves to lift all restrictions on Israel’s access to US weapons stockpile: US media
Press TV – November 26, 2023
US President Joe Biden has requested the removal of nearly every restriction on Israel’s use of the stockpiles of weapons and ammunition stored by the United States in Israel, according to an American report.
The Intercept said on Saturday that Biden is seeking to remove all restrictions on the usage of the little-known US weapons stockpiles in Israel that the Pentagon established for use in regional conflicts, to which the Israeli regime had been previously permitted to have access in limited circumstances.
The move was included in the White House’s supplemental budget request, sent to the Senate on October 20, according to the report.
“This request would allow for the transfer of all categories of defense articles,” the proposed budget says.
The War Reserve Stockpile Allies-Israel (WRSA-I) was created in the 1980s to supply the United States with equipment in the case of a regional war, which is the largest node in a network of de facto US foreign arms stockpiles. These warehouses are controlled by a set of strict requirements.
Under the conditions outlined in these requirements, the Israeli regime has been able to tap into these stockpiles and purchase weapons at low costs if effective subsidization of US military aid is used.
The report notes that with WRSA-I, Biden seeks to remove nearly all meaningful restrictions on the stockpile and arms transfer to Israel, with plans to lift restrictions on obsolete or surplus weapons, waive an annual spending cap on replenishing the stockpile, remove weapon-specific restrictions, and curtail congressional oversight.
All of the changes in the Biden budget plan would be permanent, except for lifting the spending cap, which is limited to the 2024 fiscal year. The changes would come in an arms-trade relationship that is already shrouded in secrecy.
The House has already passed legislation reflecting the White House’s request last month, and it now stands before the Senate.
“By dropping the requirement that such articles be declared excess, it would also increase the existing strain on US military readiness in order to provide more arms to Israel,” said Josh Paul, who was the director of congressional and public affairs for the State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, for over 11 years.
Paul, whose resignation last month due to US military aid to Israel caused a stir in Washington, admitted that “the President’s emergency supplemental funding request, would essentially create a free-flowing pipeline to provide any defense articles to Israel by the simple act of placing them in the WRSA-I stockpile, or other stockpiles intended for Israel.”
According to experts, the White House request would make it much harder for Congress or the public to monitor US arms transfers to Israel.
Under US law, there must be 30 days prior notice to Congress before arms transfer, but the Biden budget request would allow this to be shortened in “extraordinary” circumstances.
In a report last January, The New York Times, citing US and Israeli officials, revealed that the Pentagon sent hundreds of thousands of artillery shells to Ukraine from the so-called American emergency stockpile in Israel to help meet Ukraine’s need for artillery shells in the war with Russia.
The US has been a steadfast supporter of Israel for decades, both diplomatically and militarily. Each year, the US provides around $4bn of military support to the regime.
In early November, the American news outlet Bloomberg stated that the Pentagon has secretly increased its military aid to Israel, including more sophisticated missiles and equipment such as thousands of Hellfire missiles, which have been used extensively by Israel in Gaza war.
On Saturday in a phone call with Israeli minister of military affairs, Yoav Gallant, Pentagon chief Lloyd J. Austin underscored the US’s unwavering support for Israel and received updates as a temporary ceasefire continues across the besieged Gaza Strip following nearly seven weeks of Israeli genocidal war.
According to the Gaza-based health ministry, nearly 15,000 Palestinians have been killed in the Israeli strikes, most of them women and children, and injured around 36,000 others. 7,000 Palestinians are still missing.
Thousands-Strong Rally Takes Place in Berlin for Negotiations on Gaza, Ukraine
Sputnik – 25.11.2023
BERLIN – A rally organized by left-wing German politician Sahra Wagenknecht took place in Thousands-Strong Rally Takes Place in Berlin for Negotiations on Gaza, Ukraineon Saturday with thousands of participants rallying against the supply of weapons to Ukraine and for a diplomatic solution to the Ukrainian and Palestinian-Israeli conflicts, a Sputnik correspondent reported.
In an opening speech, Wagenknecht accused the German government of applying double standards in its assessment of the Ukrainian conflict and the “merciless bombing” in the Gaza Strip, the correspondent reported.
The politician criticized the government’s spending on the German military production at a time when the nation faces several internal problems, such as a shortage of teachers, hospital closures and aging infrastructure. She also criticized the government’s decision to stop holding down energy and electricity prices.
“And immediately it was about cutting spending on those least able to fend for themselves,” Wagenknecht said.
In leaflets distributed to demonstrators, protest organizers called for peace talks in all the world’s conflict zones, the report read. After the speech, rally participants marched past the Bundestag and back to the original meeting point, carrying placards calling for peace and an end to Russophobia, the Sputnik correspondent reported.
On October 23, Wagenknecht, who had criticized Germany’s military aid to Kiev and sanctions against Russia, said she had left the Left Party and intended to found a new political party with several close associates that would stand for “reason and justice.” About 14% of Germans were ready to support the new party, polls showed.
US-German ‘Peace Talks Plot’ Shows West on Brink of Losing Ukraine
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 25.11.2023
The two Western powers are reportedly trying to force Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into entering into talks with Russia, per German newspaper Bild. What’s behind the report and its timing?
Washington and Berlin have reportedly kicked off a plot to push Ukraine for negotiations with Russia by slashing military supplies to Kiev and leaving Volodymyr Zelensky with little if any options, according to the German publication.
According to Bild, there is also a plan B envisaging a frozen conflict that would solidify a new quasi-border between Ukraine and Russia along the contact line.
“First, [this report] should be seen in a specific temporal context,” Dmitry Evstafiev, a political scientist and High School of Economics (HSE) University professor, told Sputnik.
“This is not a statement, of course, this is a publicity stunt. It appeared in the media almost immediately after the end of the meeting of the notorious Ramstein group that has made an essential decision to create the [Ground Based] Air Defense coalition to strengthen air defense. Moreover, it is quite obvious that they will strengthen not so much the air defense of Ukraine, but the air defense of the countries bordering Ukraine. Therefore, this is a kind of first proposal that it is necessary to take certain political steps that would indicate that Ukraine is ready for negotiations.”
The second aspect is an interview given by the leader of the Servant of the People faction, Davyd Arakhamia, which is “clearly synchronized with the West.” According to Evstafiev, it is “even more indicative against the backdrop of problems at the front.”
Speaking to Western journalists, Arakhamia noted that Russia’s main condition during the March 2022 peace talks with Kiev was Ukraine’s neutrality and guarantees that the Eastern European country wouldn’t join NATO. (It was Arakhamia who headed the Ukrainian delegation during the negotiations with Russians in Belarus and Türkiye in 2022.) In addition, he debunked the Western media narrative that Russia does not want to negotiate peace with Ukraine by saying that Moscow is open to talks and it may start them when Kiev is ready.
“At the moment, [Western] support to Kiev is becoming more and more politically expensive/costly, or whatever you want to call it, for the key countries that provide assistance, these are, first of all: Germany and the United States,” said Evstafiev. “The United States has already almost halted aid [to Ukraine]. Of course, there will still be a revaluation through the Pentagon, but one can no longer expect large packages.”
“Assistance from the European Union will be largely aimed at maintaining the functionality of the public administration system and some kind of social support, but not so much for military support. Therefore, the first point is that support for Kiev has become toxic in terms of politics.
“The second point, which is absolutely clearly visible from the statements of Western sources, is that Kiev now faces the last moment when it can lay claim to more or less acceptable terms of a truce with Moscow. (…) The third point – which Westerners do not conceal – is that Russia will agree to any starting conditions for these negotiations. Arakhamia speaks about this directly, openly and without hesitation.”
West Gives Nothing Short of Ultimatum to Zelensky
Per the German newspaper, the US and Germany are going to supply Ukraine with limited amounts of weapons that would be enough to hold the line but not enough to launch a new offensive. This, the publication claims, would force Zelensky to consider a peace deal.
“This proposed manipulation appears to be quite effective,” said the academic. “Where else could Zelensky get weapons? [Weapons] that had remained on the territory of the former Ukrainian SSR, in the warehouses of the Soviet army, had already clearly been exhausted. The Ukrainian Armed Forces are increasingly fighting with Western weapons. That is, the number of Soviet and Ukrainian weapons is decreasing, and at a very rapid pace, especially in the last four to five months. The Armed Forces of Ukraine will be able to fight only with Western weapons, and (…) without logistical support from NATO, the armored forces of the Ukrainian Army would stop operations in about four to five weeks.”
Still, Evstafiev believes that the West wouldn’t waste time on convincing Zelensky to start talks. It’s more likely that they would give him an ultimatum: either he joins Russia at the negotiating table or his successor will. Zelensky is by no means indispensable in the eyes of the West, according to the professor.
The West “needs a person who is willing to buy time in exchange for territory,” said Evstafiev. Someone would stabilize the state system in Ukraine, carry out some reforms, ease the pressure on Ukrainians, “because the Zelensky regime has tightened the screws in terms of political and religious freedoms much deeper than is acceptable for the Americans and Germans,” per the expert.
When it comes to Zelensky, it would be very hard for him to reverse his months-long position on peace talks with Russia, according to Evstafiev. One should keep in mind that previously, the Ukrainian president issued a decree making bargaining with Moscow illegitimate. “This is absolutely unacceptable for Zelensky and his entourage,” the professor remarked.
The West is well aware of that and considering changing horses in midstream: “They have already indicated – it has already been openly written – that a new [Charles] de Gaulle is needed. Ukraine needs its own de Gaulle, who will abandon Ukrainian Algeria, which means the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics and Crimea.” (During a major armed conflict between France and the Algerian National Liberation Front (1954-1962) then-French President Charles de Gaulle came to the conclusion that continuing to hold on to Algeria, then a French colony, would exhaust France’s resources and weaken its position in Europe. On July 5, 1962, Algeria won independence.)
Why Has West Started Pushing Ukrainian Peace Talks Narrative?
While some Western policy-makers apparently view Commander-in-Chief Gen. Valery Zaluzhny as Ukraine’s de Gaulle, the problem is that he is unlikely to give up ambitions of taking back the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, according to Evstafiev. Both regions voted in local referendums to join Russia and officially became Russia’s new territories starting from September 2022.
Given that hardliners within the Ukrainian civil and military leadership are still strong, the West has a limited number of options. Hence plan B – a “frozen conflict” – cited by the German newspaper.
“All these negotiations are just an attempt to gain time to stabilize the internal situation in the territory now controlled by the Kiev regime. In my opinion, this needs to be paid attention to,” Evstafiev pointed out.
What’s behind the West’s attempts to stabilize the situation at all costs? The answer is clear, per the academic:
“What scares Westerners the most is not even the defeat at the front. Most of all Westerners – and I think they have an adequate idea of what is happening in [Ukraine’s] rear – are frightened by the possibility of a quick and catastrophic collapse of the public administration system [in Ukraine]. That’s why they are putting so much pressure, I might say, somewhat hysterically, to freeze the situation and try to somewhat restore the stability inside, in the rear,” Evstafiev concluded.
Featured Video
U.S. Defeated in Iran & Israel Will Not Survive
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Invisible harm from ionizing radiation
By Bjorn Hilt | International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War | December 8, 2015
Besides the terrible effects of the burst of light that causes eye damage, the heat that sets everything flammable on fire, the electromagnetic pulse that knocks out all electronic devices, and the blast that produces winds with ten times the force of a hurricane, demolishing everything, the detonation of nuclear weapons also leads to the emission of large amounts of ionizing radiation, which has serious deleterious effects on humans and many other species. Ionizing radiation is, in fact, a lurking danger as we cannot see it, we cannot smell it, we cannot hear it, and we cannot feel it immediately. But we certainly get harmed from it.
To reduce exposure to ionizing radiation and the risk of deleterious effects, we doctors usually warn our patients against having frequent examinations or procedures that involve x-rays. That is because x-rays are ionizing radiation that can harm your body in the same ways as radiation emitted by nuclear detonations. The main difference is that, for medical purposes, the radiation is applied in a controlled way.
The international standard unit for the dose of ionizing radiation is the Sievert. National guidelines in many countries warn against people having a cumulative dose of ionizing radiation exceeding 0.001 Sievert/year. The dose from a full body CT scan is 0.01 – 0.03 Sievert.
The ionizing radiation to which everybody in the vicinity of a nuclear detonation is exposed is so high and immediate that measuring in Sievert does not have much meaning. Such exposures are measured in Gray, where five Gray is reckoned to be lethal to 50% of those exposed (LD50). Even though these types of exposures are not directly comparable, for the common types of ionizing radiation, 1 Gray equals approximately 1.3 Sievert. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Douglas Macgregor: U.S. Defeated in Iran & Israel Will Not Survive
- 9/11 was an Inside/Outside Job
- Israeli military court sentences Palestinian journalist to 4 years for ‘incitement’
- Iran, Russia, China Demand Guarantees Against Further Attacks on Iranian Nuclear Sites
- How the Latest Iran Sanctions Could Impact Central Asia
- Pakistan threatens Yemeni strikes on KSA ‘could trigger’ Mecca defense pact
- Iran War Just Got Much Bigger / Matt Bracken & Lt Col Daniel Davis
- Qatar Warns of ‘Industrial Catastrophe’ If Strait of Hormuz Remains Closed
- Israeli Army Closes Tulkarem Zakat Committee Headquarters
- Blaming the Victim in the Gaza Genocide
- If Americans Knew
- ISRAELI MEDIA: Revealed: Netanyahu Received an Explicit Warning Days Before Oct. 7. He Didn’t Brief Israel’s Security Chiefs
- “Israel is a wonderful, safe place,” according to this totally objective expert
- The UK just announced it will comply with Int’l Court of Justice ruling from 2024. What does the ICJ ruling require states to do?
- Israel’s Quadcopter Drones Have Become a Weapon of Everyday Killing in Gaza
- Israel’s grip on American politics is finally being questioned
- Photos: Palestinians rebuild Gaza’s ruins with mud bricks, scrap
- Too many preemies in Gaza, no room in the NICU – Daily Update
- Front Row At the Revolution: Angry Americans are demanding liberation from the Israeli yoke
- Evangelical Zionist Huckabee attacks Jewish Ed Miliband, accuses UK government of ‘Jew hate’
- Macklemore Responds to Backlash Over “Free Palestine” Plea: “Wanting All Humans to Be Treated Equal Should Never Be Controversial”
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: The Antarctic Ice Sheet Gained Mass From 2020-2024 Due To Staggering Snow And Ice Accumulation
- Study: Ocean Heating Rates From Thousands Of Years Ago ‘Dwarf’ Modern Ocean Heating Rates
- Climate Extremists Target, Attack Large-Scale Power Grid Infrastructure In Germany!
- New Study: Antarctic Ice Melt Has Contributed Less Than 1 Centimeter To Sea Level Rise In The Last 30 Years
- Fear Of Debate: Alarmist German Climate Scientist Calls On Mainstream Media To Discredit Skeptic Voices
- End-Of-August Arctic Sea Ice Extent Hasn’t Fallen In 20 Years, Official Data Show!
- News-Making Nepal Region Has Had As-Warm Or Warmer Periods Than The 2000s In The 1600s, 1700s, 1800s
- 2025 Study: ‘There Exists No Unequivocal Experimental Evidence For The CO2 Greenhouse Effect’
- 2026 Atlantic Cyclone Energy Index Running At 85% Below Normal!
- New Research Shows Soil Respiration And Temperature Drive CO2 Change, Not Humans
Aletho News 