Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Why India must decouple from I2U2

Foreign Ministers of India, Israel, UAE, US (clockwise) held a videoconference in October 2021 to launch a ‘Quad’ for West Asia
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | JUNE 17, 2022 

Indian diplomacy is descending from the sublime to the absurd. Such wild swings signal rank opportunism. These are extraordinary times when to be smart is equated as being opportunistic.

Hardly a week passed since PM Modi received the Iranian Foreign Minister Amir-Abdollahian in Delhi and expressed high hopes for India-Iran relationship. Now it transpires that India also forms part of the Gang of Four led by US President Joe Biden to “contain” Iran, from a new platform called I2U2 — the ‘I’ being India and Israel, and ‘U’ being US and UAE.   

The I2U2 summit in mid-July between Biden, Israeli Prime Minister Bennett, Modi, and Emirati President Mohammed bin Zayed is destined to be a signpost in the geopolitics of West Asia. This new Quad first appeared on 18th October 2021 as an offspring of External Affairs Minister Jaishankar’s 5-day trip to Israel when from Tel Aviv he pulled a rabbit out of the hat, leaving the Indian public wonder what new grandstanding their impulsive minister was indulging in. 

Between October and July this year, the I2U2 is getting an upgrade from foreign minister to prime minister/president level. On Tuesday, while announcing Biden’s first West Asian tour as president in mid-July, Washington has made some effort to rationalise Biden’s intentions in undertaking the planned visits to Israel and Saudi Arabia. A senior White House official said Biden intends: 

  • To demonstrate “the return of American leadership to bring countries together”; 
  • To create “new frameworks that aim to harness unique American capabilities to enable partners to work more closely together, which is essential to a more secure, prosperous, and stable Middle East region over the long term”; 
  • To build on the “resounding vote isolating Iran last week at the IAEA Board of Governors in Vienna where 30 countries condemned Iran’s lack of compliance with safeguard obligations” (where India, by the way, had abstained from supporting the US move); 
  • “To make sure we’re doing all we can to strengthen Israel’s security, prosperity, and integration into the larger region, both now and over the longer term”; 
  • To “focus on Israel’s increasing integration into the region” through new formats other than Abraham Accords, such as the “entirely new grouping of partners… what we call I2U2”! 

So, that’s it. India will lend a hand to assist the US to refill the fizz that has gone out of the Abraham Accords. The hope that more countries would join Abraham Accords is withering away. Israel needs to be shown around to prospective suitors in its neighbourhood. I2U2 is, in essence, a dating agency. When it concerns Israel, the role of pandar comes naturally to the US presidents. But why should India squander away its soft power? 

The US prestige and influence in West Asia has suffered a severe jolt during the Biden presidency. Not too long ago, Biden had called Saudi Arabia a “pariah” and pledged to make a horrible example of it on account of its human rights record. But now the shoe is on the other foot. Biden is craving for attention from Saudi Arabia. He had taken a second vow not to have any dealings with the powerful Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. But he is now beseeching the proud Prince for an audience. His recent phone calls weren’t answered. 

The White House official explained Biden’s U-turn this way: “we have important interests interwoven with Saudi Arabia, and engagement is essential to protecting and advancing those interests on behalf of the American people.” In reality, Biden is swallowing pride and reviving the old matrix of US-Saudi relationship riveted on the petrodollar. 

With poll rating falling abysmally low, Biden is desperate to tackle the rising inflation in the US economy, and the soaring price of oil is fuelling public disaffection. Saudi Arabia can help Biden salvage his standing. 

However, it is the turn of the Saudis now to tell Americans there’s no free lunch. They want a written treaty to the effect that the US won’t ditch them when the crunch time comes or if the Kingdom or the ruling family feels insecure. Put differently, they want the Americans to act as their Praetorian guards as before.  

In return, of course, Saudis will generate massive business for the US military-industrial complex, recycle their petrodollar to strengthen the Western banking system and create lucrative business for American companies — in short, help the beleaguered Western economies to pursue their post-pandemic recovery that is getting derailed by the war in Ukraine. 

Indeed, the Saudis also have a rich history of lavishly greasing the palm of the American elite in the administration, the Pentagon and the Congress. In a nutshell, Biden as a seasoned operator in the Beltway knows which side of the bread is buttered. 

But to rationalise his U-turn, an alibi is needed. So, Biden has decided to hoist “Iranian threat” as the leitmotif of the revamped US-Saudi security alliance. All signs are that Biden has acceded to the Saudi demand to scuttle the JCPOA and pile new sanctions against Iran, although the negotiations in Vienna are in home stretch and an agreement is within sight. 

Biden’s West Asian agenda is completely US-centric, aimed at securing US business interests and shoring up its regional influence. Israel, of course, is a “holy cow”. Very soon Biden will begin fund-raising for his re-election bid in 2024, and Jewish donors are a generous lot. 

However, the million dollar question remains: What has India got to do with Biden’s agenda? There are real risks, for the subplot here is that Biden hopes to nix India’s plans to revive its atrophied relationship with Iran. The recent visit of the Iranian foreign minister to India would have set alarm bells ringing in Washington and Tel Aviv. 

Biden has a game plan for leaders like Modi who have a tendency to disregard the US diktat occasionally. Biden’s national security advisor Jake Sullivan spoke candidly just the other day: 

“We’re playing the long game here. We are investing in a relationship (with India) that we are not going to judge by one issue even if that issue is quite consequential, but rather that we are going to judge over the fullness of time, as we try to work to convergence on the major strategic questions facing our two countries. 

“On one of those questions — how to deal with the challenge posed by China — there’s much more convergence today, and that is important to US foreign policy. On the question of Russia, obviously, we have different historical perspectives, different muscle memories, but we feel confident that the dialogue we have going with India right now will bear fruit over time.”

Sullivan was discussing India’s time-tested relationship with Russia — how Washington hopes to erode and dissolve it all in good time. 

Plainly put, Americans estimate that Indians have no “staying power,” or “big picture.” They probably estimate that the Indian government would grab the I2U2 platform to burnish its  international image. But if there is any sanity left in the Indian foreign policy establishment, a subaltern role to serve US and Israeli interests cannot enhance India’s prestige in West Asia where, as it is, Modi government is perceived as an Islamophobic regime backed by religious fanatics. 

In the life of individuals and nations alike, there are moments when one has to learn to say “no.” This self-serving, cynical overture from 78-year old Biden is one such moment. That’s why, despite zero chance of India turning down Biden’s invite, not to urge Modi to say “Nyet” to I2U2 will be a serious lapse. 

South Block is underestimating the gravity of its folly. India never ever got entangled in the intra-regional issues in West Asia. It never acted as the surrogate of extra-regional powers, either. Most important, it never sought the “containment” of any regional state. That’s how it held its head high in the choppy waters of the Persian Gulf.  

June 17, 2022 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Road to Nuclear Armageddon

By Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. | June 16, 2022

Ladies and gentlemen, we face a grave danger. The leader of a major European power wants to make territorial revisions. He is surrounded by hostile powers who threaten him. He does not seek war with other countries but if the hostile powers continue to encircle him, he will fight. A European war looms.

You probably think I’m talking about the current crisis between Russia and the Ukraine, but I’m not. I’m talking about Europe just before World War II began in September 1939. At that time, Hitler wanted small territorial revisions with its Polish neighbor. East Prussia was cut off from the rest of Germany by a band of territory called the Polish Corridor.

As the great British historian A.J. P. Taylor explains,

“The losses of territory to Poland were, for most Germans, the indelible grievance against Versailles. Hitler undertook a daring operation over this grievance when he planned co-operation with Poland. But there was a way out. The actual Germans under Polish rule might be forgotten—or withdrawn; what could not be forgiven was the ‘Polish corridor’ which divided East Prussia from the Reich. Here, too, there was a possible compromise. Germany might be satisfied with a corridor across the corridor—a complicated idea for which there were however many precedents in German history. German feeling could be appeased by the recovery of Danzig. This seemed easy. Danzig was not part of Poland. It was a Free City, with its own autonomous administration under a High Commissioner, appointed by the League of Nations. The Poles themselves, in their false pride as a Great Power, had taken the lead in challenging the League’s authority. Surely, therefore, they would not object if Germany took the League’s place. Moreover, the problem had changed since 1919. Then the port of Danzig had been essential to Poland. Now, with the creation of Gdynia by the Poles, Danzig needed Poland more than the Poles needed Danzig. It should then be easy to arrange for the safeguarding of Poland’s economic interests, and yet to recover Danzig for the Reich.”

The British responded by guaranteeing Poland’s western boundary against Germany. They also issued a guarantee to Romania, even though there had been no threat to that country. As a result of the guarantee, Poland refused to negotiate with Germany. War broke out, and Poland was destroyed. The great Murray Rothbard tells us what happened:

“And as a direct result, Poland was destroyed. Hitler’s ‘demands’ on the Poles were almost non-existent; as Taylor points out, the Weimar Republic would have scorned the terms as a sell-out of vital German interests. Hitler at most wanted a ‘corridor through the Corridor’ and the return of heavily-German (and pro-German) Danzig; in return for which he would guarantee the rest. Poland resolutely refused to yield’ one inch of Polish soil,’ and refused even to negotiate with the Germans, and this down to the last minute.”

Murray draws an important lesson from what happened then. This lesson provides the key to keeping us out of a nuclear war today. And of course a nuclear war would destroy the world. Here is what Murray says:

“[Polish Foreign Minister Józef] Beck clearly knew that Britain and France could not actually save Poland from attack. He relied to the end on those great shibboleths of all ‘hard-liners’ and other ‘crackpot realists’ everywhere: X is ‘bluffing’; X will back down if met by toughness, resolution, and the resolve not to give an inch. (Just as in the case of Finland, when the ‘X is bluffing’ line of the hard-liners is shown to be sheer absurdity, and X has already attacked, the ‘hard-liner’ turns, self-contradictorily, to the dictum that not ‘one inch of sacred soil’ will be given up, no peace while the enemy is on our soil, etc., which completes the ruin of the country by its ‘hard-line’ rulers. This is what Beck did to Poland.) As Taylor shows, Hitler had originally not the slightest intention to invade or conquer Poland; instead, Danzig and other minor rectifications would be gotten out of the way, and then Poland would be a comfortable ally, perhaps for an eventual invasion of Soviet Russia. But Beck’s irrational toughness blocked the path.”

Now we have the background we need to understand what’s going on today. Russia is surrounded by a hostile NATO alliance. The propagandists for brain-dead Biden like to say that Putin had Ukraine surrounded. But in fact, the US and its NATO satellites had Russia surrounded. In the years before the current crisis, we had ample opportunity to reach a compromise settlement. Instead, we kept the option of membership in NATO open to Ukraine and overthrew a Ukrainian President who was pro-Russian. At the Kremlin. . . in a speech in November 2021] Putin drew his red line:

‘The threat on our western borders is … rising, as we have said multiple times. … In our dialogue with the United States and its allies, we will insist on developing concrete agreements prohibiting any further eastward expansion of NATO and the placement there of weapons systems in the immediate vicinity of Russian territory.’

A story in The New York Times exposes what brain-dead Biden and the gang of neo-cons that controls him have in store for us. According to an item that was published April 26,

“When Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III declared Monday at the end of a stealth visit to Ukraine that America’s goal is to see Russia so ‘weakened’ that it would no longer have the power to invade a neighboring state, he was acknowledging a transformation of the conflict, from a battle over control of Ukraine to one that pits Washington more directly against Moscow. . . in word and deed, the United States has been gradually pushing in the direction of undercutting the Russian military.

It has imposed sanctions that were explicitly designed to stop Russia’s military from developing and manufacturing new weapons. It has worked — with mixed success — to cut off the oil and gas revenues that drive its war machine. . . over the longer term, Mr. Austin’s description of America’s strategic goal is bound to reinforce President Vladimir V. Putin’s oft-stated belief that the war is really about the West’s desire to choke off Russian power and destabilize his government. And by casting the American goal as a weakened Russian military, Mr. Austin and others in the Biden administration are becoming more explicit about the future they see: years of continuous contest for power and influence with Moscow that in some ways resembles what President John F. Kennedy termed the ‘long twilight struggle’ of the Cold War.

Mr. Austin’s comments, bolstered by statements by Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken about the various ways in which Mr. Putin has ‘already lost’ in the struggle over Ukraine, reflect a decision made by the Biden administration and its closest allies, several officials said on Monday, to talk more openly and optimistically about the possibility of Ukrainian victory in the next few months as the battle moves to the Russian-speaking south and east, where Mr. Putin’s military should, in theory, have an advantage.

At a moment when American intelligence officials are reporting that Mr. Putin thinks he is winning the war, the strategy is to drive home the narrative that Russia’s military adventure will be ruinous, and that it is a conflict Mr. Putin cannot afford to sustain.”

Let’s make sure we understand this. Critics of US policy have pointed out for a long time that America has surrounded Russia with nuclear bases. It helped overthrow a pro-Russian government in the Ukraine. Naturally, this made Putin nervous. He does not want an invasion of Russia through the Ukraine, as happened in World War II, when Russia lost millions of lives. Now, the brain dead Biden gang of neocons is saying to Putin, “You are exactly right! We do want to degrade Russia to a minor power and use the Ukraine as a base for attack!”

Nothing could be more certain to lead to nuclear disaster. The Russians warn us about this  A story in The Guardian says:

“Russia’s foreign minister has accused Nato of fighting a proxy war by supplying military aid to Ukraine, as defence ministers gathered in Germany for US-hosted talks on supporting Ukraine through what one US general called a ‘very critical’ few weeks.

Sergei Lavrov told Russian state media: ‘Nato, in essence, is engaged in a war with Russia through a proxy and is arming that proxy. War means war.’

He also warned that the risks of nuclear conflict were now ‘considerable’. . . When asked about the importance of avoiding a third world war, Lavrov said: ‘I would not want to elevate those risks artificially. Many would like that. The danger is serious, real. And we must not underestimate it.’”

If it weren’t for the US arms shipments to the Ukraine, Russia and the Ukraine would quickly arrange a settlement that would protect Russia’s security interests. Those in control know this, but they don’t want a peaceful settlement along these lines. They want to rule the world. They don’t want countries that reject US supremacy to have a role in the world.

“Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley told CNN’s Jim Sciutto on Tuesday that the entire ‘global international security order’ put in place after World War II is at stake if Russia gets away ‘cost-free’ following its invasion of Ukraine. . . ‘What’s at stake is the global international security order that was put in place in 1945. That international order has lasted 78 years. . . Milley’s warning about the potential global implications of Russia’s actions in Ukraine also underscores the current sense of urgency felt by the US and its allies as the war enters what they say is a critical juncture… Shortly after Milley’s interview, [Defense Secretary] Austin also stressed the importance of moving quickly to provide Ukraine with the military aid it needs, saying during a news conference that the US and other allies and partners ‘don’t have any time to waste’ when it comes to providing crucial assistance to counter Russia as their invasion continues.

‘We don’t have any time to waste. The briefings today laid out clearly why the coming weeks will be so crucial for Ukraine, so we’ve got to move at the speed of war. . . Austin also said that he thought Ukraine ‘will seek to once again apply to become a member of NATO in the future.’”

Is there anything we can do to de-escalate the situation? The greatest Congressman in American history, Dr. Ron Paul, whom we are here today to honor, has the answer. America should end its encirclement of Russia and disband NATO. Let’s look at his vital message to us:

“When the Bush Administration announced in 2008 that Ukraine and Georgia would be eligible for NATO membership, I knew it was a terrible idea. Nearly two decades after the end of both the Warsaw Pact and the Cold War, expanding NATO made no sense. NATO itself made no sense.

Explaining my ‘no’ vote on a bill to endorse the expansion, I said at the time:

NATO is an organization whose purpose ended with the end of its Warsaw Pact adversary… This current round of NATO expansion is a political reward to governments in Georgia and Ukraine that came to power as a result of US-supported revolutions, the so-called Orange Revolution and Rose Revolution.

Providing US military guarantees to Ukraine and Georgia can only further strain our military. This NATO expansion may well involve the US military in conflicts unrelated to our national interest…

Unfortunately,. . . , my fears have come true. One does not need to approve of Russia’s military actions to analyze its stated motivation: NATO membership for Ukraine was a red line it was not willing to see crossed. As we find ourselves at risk of a terrible escalation, we should remind ourselves that it didn’t have to happen this way. There was no advantage to the United States to expand and threaten to expand NATO to Russia’s doorstep. There is no way to argue that we are any safer for it.

NATO itself was a huge mistake. . . I believe as strongly today as I did back in my 2008 House Floor speech that, ‘NATO should be disbanded, not expanded.’ In the meantime, expansion should be off the table. The risks do not outweigh the benefits!”

The saddest part of this whole manufactured crisis is that it should make absolutely no difference to us whether Russia controls Ukraine. How is that a threat to the United States? Whatever Biden and his neocon advisers say, America should stay out of conflicts that are none of our business. As usual, Murray Rothbard put it best. “In the context of the 1980 Afghan war, he quoted Canon Sydney Smith – a great classical liberal in early 19th century England who wrote to his warmongering Prime Minister, thus:

“For God’s sake, do not drag me into another war!

I am worn down, and worn out, with crusading and defending Europe, and protecting mankind; I must think a little of myself.

I am sorry for the Spaniards – I am sorry for the Greeks – I deplore the fate of the Jews; the people of the Sandwich Islands are groaning under the most detestable tyranny; Baghdad is oppressed, I do not like the present state of the Delta; Tibet is not comfortable. Am I to fight for all these people?

The world is bursting with sin and sorrow. Am I to be champion of the Decalogue, and to be eternally raising fleets and armies to make all men good and happy?

We have just done saving Europe, and I am afraid the consequence will be, that we shall cut each other’s throats. No war, dear Lady Grey! – No eloquence; but apathy,  selfishness, common sense, arithmetic!”

The same people who imposed Covid-tyranny on us now want us to risk war with Russia. Let’s stop them before it’s too late.

June 16, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

All of Greece turned into ‘huge US base,’ Greek lawmaker warns

Press TV – June 15, 2022

The Greek government has turned the whole country into a “huge US base,” a local lawmaker warned on Tuesday, amid attempts by Washington to expand its access to military zones across the European country.

Kleon Grigoriadis, in a speech in the Greek parliament on Tuesday, lambasted the government of Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis over its foreign policy for allowing the United States to turn the whole of Greece into a massive American base.

“At the moment, American soldiers, not Turkish soldiers, are wandering in Crete, Alexandroupoli, Larisa, and other areas left by (the left-wing party) Syriza’s old comrades to the United States. Let’s be clear: Greece has now turned into a huge US base,” said the lawmaker, who is a deputy of the left-wing MeRA25 party,” he remarked.

Grigoriadis warned that an atmosphere of war with Turkey has been created in the press. He said Greek citizens have been intimidated by such a perception in an attempt to make acceptable the conversion of Greece into an American military base.

The lawmaker said the Greek people should learn from history lest their country turns into a tool for big powers.

“History shows that big powers use small powers as tools and use them for their own interests regardless of the pain they may cause, as in 1922,” Grigoriadis said.

Grigoriadis’s comments almost echoed last week’s remarks by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who objected to the presence of US bases in Greece.

“Currently, nine US military bases have been established in Greece. Whom have they been deployed against? They say that against Russia. But we won’t buy that,” Erdogan said at the time.

Turkey and Greece have been at loggerheads for years over hydrocarbon resources and naval influence in the eastern Mediterranean.

In May, Erdogan said there were nearly ten American bases in Greece, asking: “Who is being threatened with these bases? Why are these bases being established in Greece?”

Back in November 2021, he warned that Greece itself had become a US military base. “At the moment, I can’t count all the American bases in Greece, there are so many. … It almost looks like Greece itself is a US base.”

The Greek authorities recently seized a tanker carrying Iranian oil in its territorial waters, under US pressure. The oil cargo was later transferred to the US, a move denounced by Iran as an “act of piracy”.

On Tuesday, Iran’s Ports and Maritime Organization (PMO) said in a statement that an Iranian-flagged tanker seized in April was released by Greek authorities.

“The Greek government finally issued an order and we are now witnessing the lifting of the ship’s seizure and the return of its cargo to its owner,” it said.

Iran’s foreign ministry had condemned the unacceptable surrender of Greece to Washington’s illegal pressure and reiterated that the seizure was an example of international piracy.

The seizure of the Iranian oil tanker took place at a time when the US administration claims it seeks the revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran deal. So far, talks for the revival of the 2015 deal have come to a standstill.

Days after the seizure, Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) seized two Greek oil tankers in the Persian Gulf over violations.

June 15, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Iran vs. UAE – ‘Russia and Ukraine Gulf edition’ coming soon?

By Gavin O’Reilly | OffGuardian | June 15, 2022

Although receiving miniscule media coverage, Thursday’s announcement that Israel had deployed military infrastructure to the UAE and Bahrain in the shape of radar systems, ostensibly to counter an alleged missile threat from nearby Iran, should be a cause for concern amongst onlookers.

Coming in the same 24 hour period in which Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett paid a surprise visit to the Emirates, and in which Israeli Forces bombed Damascus International Airport, the announcement that both Abu Dhabi and Manama had agreed to host Israeli military infrastructure should be seen as the first step towards current tensions between Tel Aviv and Tehran being placed on a possibly irreversible path towards conflict in the region.

Indeed, Israeli encirclement of Iran via Tel Aviv-allied Arab states possibly triggering a war between Tehran and both the UAE and Bahrain bears a stark similarity to the nine-year long build-up of provocations which would ultimately led Russia to launch a military intervention into neighbouring Ukraine in February of this year.

In November 2013, following the decision by then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych to suspend a trade deal with the EU in order to pursue closer ties with Russia, a CIA-orchestrated regime change operation, known as ‘Euromaidan’, would be launched in order to depose Yanukovych’s leadership and replace him with the pro-Western Petro Poroshenko – whose coalition government would contain rabid far-right sympathisers hostile to Moscow.

Indeed, such was the anti-Russian sentiment amongst the new US-backed Kiev government that the predominantly ethnic-Russian Donbass region in the east of the country would breakaway to form the independent republics of Donetsk and Luhansk in April 2014, following the previous month’s successful reunification of the Crimean Peninsula with the rest of Russia.

The establishment of these two pro-Russian Republics however, would spark a near eight-year long conflict in the eastern European country, in which Kiev would use neo-Nazi paramilitaries such as Azov Battalion and Right Sector to wage an ethnic cleansing campaign against the inhabitants of the Donbass.

In spite of Western media descriptions of ‘Russian aggression’ however, Moscow had sought to resolve the conflict in Donbass through peaceful mean via the Minsk Agreements – which would see both Republics granted a degree of autonomy whilst still remaining under the rule of Kiev.

With 14,000 dead in the Donbass conflict, NATO failing to honour a post-Cold War agreement not to expand eastwards, and the subsequent confirmation that US-funded labs were developing bioweapons in Ukraine however, Moscow’s hand was ultimately forced in February of this year when a Russian military intervention was launched into Ukraine in order to remove neo-Nazi elements from power and to destroy any military infrastructure that would ultimately have been used by NATO had Kiev gone on to become a member.

This is where the similarities with Iran and the neighbouring Gulf states of the UAE and Bahrain come into play, with both countries having formalised diplomatic links with Tel Aviv via the September 2020 US-brokered Abraham Accords.

Lauded as a ‘peace deal’ by the then-administration of Donald Trump, despite Israel, the UAE and Bahrain never actually being at war, the ‘normalisation’ agreements, coming eight months after the US had nearly triggered a new Gulf war with the assassination of Iranian Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani in a drone strike, were seen by many geopolitical observers as a means to contain Iran within the region, a long-time foreign policy aim shared by both Washington and Tel Aviv.

Indeed, despite the relationship between Israel and both states initially starting off on a purely diplomatic basis, the announcement that Israeli radar systems are to be moved into both the UAE and Bahrain marks a dangerous step towards a scenario were Israeli military infrastructure is placed within striking distance of Iran – a situation that would likely lead to a major regional conflict, one that could reach far beyond the Persian Gulf.

Gavin O’Reilly is an Irish Republican activist from Dublin, Ireland, with a strong interest in the effects of British and US Imperialism; he was a writer for the American Herald Tribune from January 2018 up until their seizure by the FBI in 2021, with his work also appearing on The Duran, Al-Masdar, MintPress News, Global Research and SouthFront. He can be reached through Twitter and Facebook and supported on Patreon.

June 15, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Nuclear-armed states spent $82.4bn on nukes in 2021, US topped list: Report

Press TV – June 15, 2022

The world’s nine nuclear-armed countries – led by the US – spent $82.4 billion upgrading their atomic arsenal in 2021, eight percent more than the previous year, an anti-nuke campaign group has unveiled.

The largest spender by far was the United States, which accounted for more than half the total expenditures on nuclear weapons – followed respectively by China, Russia, Britain, France, India, the Israeli regime, Pakistan and North Korea – the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) stated in its annual report, titled “Squandered: 2021 Global Nuclear Weapons Spending.”

“Nuclear-armed states spent an obscene amount of money on illegal weapons of mass destruction in 2021, while the majority of the world’s countries support a global nuclear weapons ban,” the group said in the report, noting that the massive spending nevertheless failed to prevent a war in Europe.

“This spending failed to deter a war in Europe and squandered valuable resources that could be better used to address current security challenges, or cope with the outcome of a still raging global pandemic,” ICAN said. “This corrupt cycle of wasteful spending must be put to an end.”

The group said atomic arms producers had further spent millions of dollars on political lobbying efforts, saying that every $1 spent on lobbying had led to an average of $256 in new contracts involving nuclear weaponry.

“The exchange of money and influence, from countries to companies to lobbyists and think tanks, sustains and maintains a global arsenal of catastrophically destructive weapons,” it said.

The US spent $44.2 billion on atomic weaponry in 2021, followed by China’s $11.7 billion, Russia’s $8.6 billion, the UK’s $6.8 billion, and France’s $5.9 billion, according to the report. India led the more recent nuclear arms developers in expenditures on the mass-destructive weaponry, spending $2.3 billion, followed by the Israeli regime’s $1.2 billion, Pakistan’s $1.1 billion and North Korea’s $642 million.

The report came a week after US-led NATO alliance declared that it did not offer a guarantee to Russia that it would not deploy nuclear weapons on the territories of its two prospective new members, Finland and Sweden.

ICAN’s report further confirmed a statement released by the prominent Stockholm International Peace Research (SIPRI) a day earlier in which it had warned that all the nine nuclear-armed states were increasing or upgrading their arsenals, and that the risk of deployment of such weapons appeared higher now than at any time since the height of the Cold War.

While there is no official confirmation on the amount North Korea spends on nuclear weapons or its arsenal, SIPRI estimates that it possesses as many as 20 warheads.

The Israeli regime, along with India, Pakistan, and South Sudan have never joined the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), an international treaty purportedly established to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.

As of August 2016, 191 states have become parties to the NPT, though North Korea, which acceded in 1985, announced its withdrawal from the treaty in 2003, following detonation of nuclear devices in violation of core obligations.

Critics of the treaty insist, however, that the NPT cannot stop the proliferation of nuclear arms or the motivation to acquire them, arguing that the biggest possessors and developers of atomic weapons are leading members of the global accord. Officials of the treaty have been selective in enforcing nuclear disarmament, imposing sanctions on observant member nations, such as Iran, while ignoring certain atomic arms possessor and developers such as India, Pakistan, and the Israeli regime, which is widely believe to possess at least 300 nuclear warheads.

June 15, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

HOLD THE LINE

Computing Forever | June 11, 2022

Visit: https://sovereignpeople.ie/index.html
Music: Peaceful Mind by Astron

Support my work on Subscribe Star: https://www.subscribestar.com/dave-cullen
Support my work via crypto: https://computingforever.com/donate/
Follow me on Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/hybM74uIHJKg/

http://www.computingforever.com

KEEP UP ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Gab: https://gab.ai/DaveCullen
Subscribe on Gab TV: https://tv.gab.com/channel/DaveCullen
Minds.com: https://www.minds.com/davecullen
Subscribe on Odysee: https://odysee.com/@TheDaveCullenShow:7
Telegram: https://t.me/ComputingForeverOfficial

June 15, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Militarism, Solidarity and Activism, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Mexico President Slams “Immoral” NATO Proxy War in Ukraine

By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | June 13, 2022

The president of Mexico has condemned NATO’s approach to the war in Ukraine – labelling it “immoral.”

“How easy it is to say, ‘Here, I’ll send you this much money for weapons.’ Couldn’t the war in Ukraine have been avoided? Of course it could,” said President Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

López Obrador didn’t elaborate on how, but fair to say a peaceful resolution would have centered on the negotiation of:

  • Some form of independence for the eastern Ukraine provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk
  • A Ukraine government pledge that it will not join NATO
  • Ukraine’s recognition that Crimea is now part of Russia

The increasingly dismal prospects for Ukraine’s military now seem to point to a negotiated end to the war that embraces those same three elements, but perhaps with Donetsk and Luhansk—which together comprise the Donbas region—joining Russia outright.

Though we’re likely to end at the same position—or worse, from a Western view—the Biden White House and NATO member countries were content to first wage a weapon-industry-enriching proxy war that took a terrible human toll on Ukraine, paired with economic warfare that’s causing despair and hunger for people in the United States, Europe and around the world.

U.S.-NATO policy is tantamount to saying, “I’ll supply the weapons, and you supply the dead,” said López Obrador. “It is immoral.”

His comments come as Russian forces continue to strengthen their position in the Donbas, while having already secured a “land bridge” of territory connecting Russia to Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014.

The remarks were López Obrador’s second display of independence from Washington in recent days. Last week, he refused to attend the U.S.-hosted Summit of the Americas, in protest of Biden’s exclusion of Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela.

Explaining his refusal, López Obrador said, “I believe in the need to change the policy that has been imposed or centuries, the exclusion, the desire to dominate… the lack of respect for the sovereignty of the countries, the independence of every country.”

Mexico voted for a U.N. resolution condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but López Obrador has otherwise proclaimed, “Our posture is neutrality.”

López Obrador is a member of the Morena party. A month after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, six Morena members were among a group of Mexican legislators who launched a “Mexico-Russia Friendship Committee,” which applauded Russian Ambassador Viktor Koronelli when he addressed the group in March.

“For us this is a sign of support, of friendship, of solidarity in these complicated times in which my country is not just facing a special military operation in Ukraine, but a tremendous media war,” Koronelli said. “Russia didn’t start this war, it is finishing it.”

June 14, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Pentagon-NATO Blowback in Nicaragua?

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | June 13, 2022

In what is obviously a tit-for-tat response to the Pentagon’s role in ginning up the Russia-Ukraine war, Nicaraguan officials have announced that they have invited Russian troops to visit the country for “humanitarian”and “training” purposes. They are saying that the visit will be “routine,” but there is actually nothing routine about it. 

It will be fascinating to see how the Pentagon and its loyal supporters within the mainstream press respond to the announcement. So far, there have been no Pentagon reaction and no mainstream press editorials or op-eds coming to the defense of Nicaragua’s “right” to enter into a military alliance with Russia.

Don’t forget, after all, that that is the root cause of the crisis in Ukraine — the “right” of Ukraine to join NATO, the old Cold War dinosaur. If NATO ends up absorbing Ukraine, the Pentagon will be able to fulfill its longtime aim of installing nuclear missiles pointed at Russia’s cities along Russia’s border with Ukraine. 

For its part, Russia has long made it clear that this was a “red line” that it would not permit to be crossed, just as U.S. officials refused to permit Soviet nuclear missiles to be installed in Cuba in 1962. That’s what precipitated Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — the attempt to establish Russia’s control over the Ukrainian regime in order to prevent the Pentagon from fulfilling its longtime aim through NATO to install nuclear missiles along Russia’s border.

The U.S. mainstream press, which oftentimes acts like an American Pravda, has been vociferous in its defense of Ukraine’s “right” to join NATO. It’s an independent country, they have repeatedly pointed out, and, therefore, it has the “right” to join any military alliance it wants.

Okay, fair enough. But then what about Nicaragua? Isn’t it just as independent as Ukraine? Given such, why doesn’t it have the same “right” to enter into a military alliance with Russia or, for that matter, China, North Korea, Cuba, Iran, or Vietnam? 

Why are the Pentagon and its mainstream press acolytes remaining quiet about those questions?

Wouldn’t it be darkly ironic if the Pentagon’s NATO machinations with Ukraine ended up producing blowback in the form of a permanent Russian military base in Nicaragua? Wouldn’t it be darkly ironic if Russia accepted an invitation from Nicaragua to establish nuclear missiles in Nicaragua? 

What then would be the response of the Pentagon and its mainstream-press acolytes? Would they opine that while Ukraine has the “right” to join NATO, which would enable the Pentagon to install its nuclear missiles on Russia’s border, Nicaragua has no “right” to enter into a similar military alliance with Russia (or China, North Korea, Cuba, Iran, or Vietnam)? If they were to take that position, would not their evil NATO machinations and hypocritical two-faced policies be on open display for all the world to witness?

Of course, none of this had to be. If the old, rotten Cold War dinosaur NATO had been dismantled at the end of the Cold War, which it should have been, the Pentagon could not have used it to engage in its Cold War machinations that ultimately have led to the deadly and destructive Russia-Ukraine war. 

And now we are witnessing blowback from the Pentagon’s NATO machinations in the form of a possible Russia military base in Nicaragua or, even worse, another Cold War crisis similar to the Cuban Missile Crisis, which brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. 

As I point out in my new book An Encounter with Evil: The Abraham Zapruder Story, President Kennedy was able to circumvent and nullify the Pentagon’s Cold War machinations during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and everyone in both Russia and the United States was better off for it. Unfortunately, however, as everyone knows, President Biden is no John Kennedy, and therefore, it is impossible to predict how this latest crisis will be resolved.

Purchase  An Encounter with Evil: The Abraham Zapruder Story at Amazon: $9.95 Kindle version; $14.95 print version.

June 13, 2022 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | Leave a comment

After Touting Military Resolution of Ukrainian Crisis, EU’s Borrell Now Wants Dialogue With Moscow

Samizdat – 13.06.2022

“This war will be won on the battlefield”, European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs Josep Borrell said in April while announcing an additional 500 million euros in EU military assistance to Kiev. In May, the diplomat complained that the bloc had run out of hardware to provide Ukraine and urged the EU to boost its defence capabilities.

Russia and the EU are bound by the confines of geography and must coexist and talk to one another, the EU’s foreign affairs chief has indicated.

“Russia will continue to exist after peace negotiations, and it is necessary to define clearly how we intend to coexist with the country. It will be very difficult after what Russia has done in Ukraine… but we still have to try to coexist with the Russians on this continent”, Borrell said in an interview with Le Journal du Dimanche.

The diplomat assured that the channels of communication with Russia “were never closed”, pointing to Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer’s recent visit to Moscow, African Union Chairman Macky Sall’s trip to Sochi, and visits of United Nations envoys to Russia to discuss Ukraine’s grains exports. “We must continue to talk with Russia”, Borrell emphasised.

Asked about the fate of EU weapons aid to Ukraine, and whether they were achieving the results on the ground that Brussels was hoping for, Borrell characterised the arms deliveries as “war, not a picnic on the grass”, and that Russia was bombing the convoys. He admitted that over the past 100 days, the EU “used a lot of our capabilities in service of Ukraine and it is imperative that our stocks be renewed”.

Asked whether Brussels should help Ukraine directly militarily, Borrell stressed that he doesn’t “engage in theology”, and reiterated the need for EU aid to reach Ukrainian forces as quickly as possible, “because they are not waging a conflict with banknotes but with guns”.

“Having said that, all conflicts end with a ceasefire and negotiations, and it is necessary for Ukraine to be able to approach this phase from a position of strength”, the diplomat said.

The EU high representative for foreign affairs’ comments mark a stark contrast with sentiments he expressed in April about to need to “win” the conflict in Ukraine “on the battlefield”, and to tailor weapons deliveries to Kiev’s needs. “We need to continue to increase our pressure on Russia. We have imposed massive sanctions already but more needs to be done on the energy sector, including oil… Ukraine will prevail and rise back even stronger. And the EU will continue to stand by you, ever step of the way”, he promised at the time.

A month later, Borrell complained that the EU had run out of weapons to send, blaming “past budget cuts and underinvestment”.

The EU has committed to send over two billion euros in aid for the Ukrainian military, on top of roughly 4.1 billion euros to support Kiev’s economy. Last month, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed providing Ukraine with an additional nine billion euros in fiscal support, to be paid back at the end of the year.

Since the onset of the Ukraine crisis in 2014, Washington and Brussels have provided Ukraine with tens of billions of euros’ worth of military assistance and economic loans. But assistance has come with conditions, including requirements that the country open its markets, and carry out painful reforms aimed at liberalising its economy. Aid has also occasionally been tied to political preconditions, with then-former Vice President Joe Biden boasting in a 2018 panel meeting of the Council on Foreign Relations on how he had threatened to withhold a $1 billion loan to Kiev unless Ukraine’s president fired a prosecutor investigating the activities of a gas company working with his son Hunter.

June 13, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

France entered ‘war economy’ – Macron

Samizdat | June 13, 2022

France will adjust its six-year military spending plan in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, President Emmanuel Macron announced on Monday.

Macron said he instructed the government to “carry out a reassessment of the military spending program in the coming weeks, in the light of the geopolitical context.”

France “has entered into a war economy in which I believe we will find ourselves for a long time,” he said during the opening of the Eurosatory arms expo in Paris. The French president said that Russia’s military campaign in Ukraine created “an additional need to move faster and become stronger at a lower cost.”

“As for anyone doubting the urgency of these efforts, we only need take another look at Ukraine, whose soldiers are in demand of quality weapons and are entitled to a response from us,” Macron noted.

France and other NATO members are supplying Kiev with weapons, including armored vehicles, missiles, and drones.

Macron said Europe needs “a much larger defense industry” and should not rely on procuring weapons from elsewhere. The current program entails spending €295 billion ($308 billion) between 2019 and 2025 on modernizing the French military. The annual military budget is set to reach €41 billion ($43 billion) this year and €50 billion ($52 billion) in 2025.

Last month, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that Europe would boost its defense in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. She said EU countries had announced increases of their defense budgets to an additional €200 billion ($209 billion) in the coming years.

Russia attacked Ukraine in late February, following Kiev’s failure to implement the terms of the Minsk agreements, first signed in 2014, and Moscow’s eventual recognition of the Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk. The German- and French-brokered protocols were designed to give the breakaway regions special status within the Ukrainian state.

The Kremlin has since demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join the US-led NATO military bloc. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked and has denied claims it was planning to retake the two republics by force.

June 13, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | | Leave a comment

The US is trying to use Ukraine as a test lab for its drones, a move Russia is unlikely to forget

By Scott Ritter | Samizdat | June 12, 2022

According to Reuters, the US government is considering selling to Ukraine four MQ-1C Grey Eagle drones capable of firing Hellfire missiles for use against Russian forces participating in the special military operation in the Donbass region.

If true, the sale would require special permission from both the State Department and US Congress, since US law restricts the sale of armed drones to all but the closest US allies. If approval is granted, then Ukrainian operators would be provided with a crash course, anticipated to last a few weeks (the normal training time for an MQ-1C operator is several months), meaning that the earliest the MQ-1C Grey Eagle could be expected to see action over Ukraine would be sometime in July of this year.

The MQ-1C Grey Eagle is the descendant of the RQ/MQ-5 Hunter tactical unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) jointly developed by the US Army and Marine Corps. While the development program began in 1989, it reached maturity in the years following the 9/11 attacks, which meant that the Hunter UAV was a weapons system not designed to survive in a high-threat conflict against the Soviet Union, for example, but rather operate in the softer environment of the Global War on Terror (GWOT).

The operational history of the Hunter UAV reflects this. During testing in 2002, the Hunter was used to deliver BAT (brilliant anti-tank) submunitions capable of destroying Russian armored vehicles. By the time it was fielded in 2005, however, the Hunter had been modified to deliver a laser-guided bomb against insurgents in Iraq. The nature of the threat had evolved, from striking a moving target in a non-permissive environment to being able to loiter over the battlefield, unbothered by any threat, and deliver precision-guided strikes against a static enemy.

The demands of the GWOT quickly outpaced the performance characteristics of the Hunter UAV, and as early as 2002 the US Army began looking for a replacement capable of carrying multiple payloads, which would enable it to perform reconnaissance, surveillance, target acquisition, command and control, communications relay, signals intelligence (SIGINT), electronic warfare (EW), as well as attack, detect improvised explosive devices (IEDs), and carry out battle damage assessment missions – in short, a jack of all trades.

The main factor driving the design of the Hunter follow-on was a threat-free environment, which made accomplishing the multitude of assigned mission profiles possible. The MQ-1C was chosen from a competition, and by 2009 the US Army had begun taking deliveries of it. By 2010, the MQ-1C had seen combat in both Iraq and Afghanistan, with its preferred weapons system being the laser-guided Hellfire missile (although the Grey Eagle can also carry Stinger missiles configured for air-to-air use, and the GBU-44/Viper laser-guided bomb.)

As effective as the Grey Eagle was against Iraqi insurgents, the Afghan Taliban, and ISIS terrorists, there was a recognition within the US Army that it was not up to the demands of what the US military was calling “joint all-domain operations,”– the so-called “future fight” against peer-level opponents like Russia. The line-of-sight sensors that had proven so lethal in the counter-insurgency mission of the GWOT no longer applied – if you could see the enemy, then the enemy could see you, and kill you.

If the Grey Eagle were to be viable and survive on the modern battlefield, it would require new sensors that provided standoff target identification, which could be used to support the Army’s anticipated long-range precision fires (LRPF) capabilities. The new Grey Eagles must be able to survive against an “Integrated Air Defense System (IADS)-rich environment,” according to a solicitation put out by the US Army, flying “racetrack patterns tangential to the IADS threat at 80 km distance” and deploying so-called air-launched effects (ALE) systems – sensor-equipped mini-drones – into enemy territory to detect, identify and locate targets for subsequent destruction.

This capability does not currently exist in the US military, which means that the Grey Eagles the US is planning on providing to Ukraine are not configured to fight and survive on the modern battlefield that is the Russian-Ukraine fight. The MQ-1C is twice the size of Ukraine’s most ubiquitous drone, the Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2. While the TB2 had some success in Libya, Syria, and Nagorno-Karabakh, and performed well against Russia in the early phases of the special military operation, Russia was able to shore up its air defenses and eventually shot down 35 of the 36 TB2s provided to Ukraine prior to the conflict, and most of the 12 TB2s delivered to Ukraine since the fighting began. It is highly likely that the MQ-1C will suffer a similar fate.

This, of course, may be the intent of the US. The number of Grey Eagles scheduled to be delivered to Ukraine – four – is small, and even if they were able to survive on the battlefield, they would not have a discernible impact on the course of the conflict. But if the operations of the Grey Eagle against Russian forces in Ukraine were looked at as a real-world laboratory for the development of tactics capable of defeating Russian IADS, then for the price of four MQ-1Cs, the US would be able to save hundreds of millions more in research and development expenditures.

Ukraine is losing the conflict against Russia, and no amount of military equipment supplied to the Ukrainian military by the US and other Western nations will be able to change this outcome. The US knows this, and thus one must question the utility of providing such a high-tech system as the MQ-1C in such limited numbers and at this stage of the conflict. The only rational answer is that the US is seeking to use the Russian operation as a real-world laboratory, where the “rats” are Russian and Ukrainian soldiers. The cynicism of such an exercise is astounding, something Ukrainians should remember when the final cost of this NATO-driven conflict is calculated, and Russia should never forget (or forgive) when dealing with the US going forward.

June 12, 2022 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

Damascus Airport Runways Out of Service After Israeli Strikes: Syrian Transport Ministry

Samizdat – 10.06.2022

The runways at Damascus airport are out of service as a result of airstrikes conducted by the Israeli air force, the Syrian Ministry of Transport said.

On Thursday, the Syrian Defense Ministry said that Israel had fired missiles at a number of targets south of Damascus. Syria said that Israeli warplanes aimed to hit the airport.

“As a result of the Israeli aggression, which hit the infrastructure of the international airport of Damascus, the runways are significantly damaged in several places along with the navigation lighting,” the ministry said, as quoted by the Shams FM broadcaster.

The attack also damaged the second terminal of the airport.

“At the moment, our specialists are working to eliminate the consequences of the airstrikes and repair what was damaged as a result of the attack. The airport’s operations will be resumed immediately after repair and safety checks,” the ministry added.

Syria’s Cham Wings Airlines said earlier that all of its flights were diverted from Damascus airport to Aleppo in the north of the country.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry Strongly Condemns Israeli Airstrike at Damascus Airport

Also on Friday, Maria Zakharova, the Russian Foreign Ministry’s spokeswoman, said that Moscow strongly condemns the Israeli airstrikes at the airport and calls on the Israeli side to halt such activities.

“In this regard, we are forced to emphasize again that the ongoing Israeli shelling of Syria territory … is absolutely unacceptable. We strongly condemn Israel’s provocative attack on critical Syrian civilian infrastructure,” the spokeswoman said in a statement published by the ministry.

Zakharova also said that such strikes create risks “for international air traffic.”

“We demand from the Israeli side to halt such activities,” Zakharova added.

June 11, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »