Debate Debacle: Our Bleak Foreign Policy Future
By Daniel Larison | The Libertarian Institute | September 12, 2024
The first presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump presented a bleak picture of the future of U.S. foreign policy no matter who wins in November. On the most urgent and important foreign policy issue of the year, the war and genocide in Gaza, Harris repeated empty platitudes about a “two-state solution” and Trump fell back on tired “pro-Israel” rhetoric. Neither candidate offered voters any hope that there would be a meaningful change from incumbent Joe Biden’s policy of unconditional support for the slaughter and starvation of Palestinians.
Trump absurdly said that Harris hates Israel, but aside from her perfunctory expression of support for Palestinian self-determination there was unfortunately very little to distinguish the two of them on this issue. Like Trump, Harris backs Israel to the hilt, and the main difference is that she pays lip service to Palestinian rights while doing nothing to protect them. She says some of the right things about the need for a ceasefire, but the Joe Biden administration isn’t willing to use its leverage to secure one and Harris refuses to call for the halt to U.S. arms transfers that U.S. law requires.
Harris has had many opportunities in the two months since Biden dropped out to separate herself from the president on this issue. She squandered them all by sticking to the official administration line. The vice president would rather tout her support from the likes of Dick Cheney than try and win the support of antiwar voters across the country. Harris has been catering mostly to hawks this summer, and she prefers attacking Trump for being “weak” instead of using his policy failures against him.
For his part, Trump returned to his old obsession with Iran and criticized the Biden administration because “they took off all the sanctions that I had.” Unfortunately for diplomacy with Iran, Biden never lifted any Iran sanctions, and the small amount of sanctions relief that he was prepared to grant was never delivered. Biden kept Trump’s dangerous Iran policy in place with similarly poor results, and there is no evidence so far that Harris is interested in pursuing a policy of diplomatic engagement.
The candidates had almost nothing to say about diplomacy during the debate. It was telling that the only time the word diplomacy was uttered during the debate was when Harris was criticizing the Trump administration’s negotiations with the Taliban that led to the withdrawal of U.S. troops. Trump mentioned negotiating an end to the war in Ukraine, but he offered no specifics on how he would bring the belligerents to the table or what he would do to secure an agreement.
Harris also repeated the president’s strange lie that the United States isn’t at war anywhere. She said, “There is not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone in any war zone around the world, the first time this century.” That would come as a surprise to the soldiers recently injured during a raid in Iraq and to the sailors waging Biden’s war in Yemen. It would also be news to the American forces fighting in Somalia and the troops illegally stationed in Syria. The U.S. Navy has said that its ships have been engaged in the most intense combat since World War II in the Red Sea, but as far as Biden and Harris are concerned it isn’t even happening.
Meanwhile, the U.S.-backed war in Gaza continues to claim innocent lives. Israeli forces bombed yet another tent encampment filled with displaced civilians on Tuesday, killing dozens of them. According to analysis of the damage, they used 2,000-pound U.S.-made bombs to do it. These bombs are so large and so powerful that using them in a densely populated area is obviously criminal. That was just the latest in a string of attacks on civilians in Gaza, including attacks on at least sixteen schools where displaced people had taken shelter. The official death toll is now over 40,000, but informed estimates from doctors that have worked in the territory suggest that the real number is more than double that.
During the debate there was no mention of that massacre in a so-called humanitarian zone, nor did anyone bring up the name of Aysenur Eygi, the American citizen murdered by an Israeli sniper in the West Bank just last week. People watching the debate would have had no idea that one of the worst man-made famines in modern times is currently raging in Gaza, and they wouldn’t know that the famine is the result of an Israeli campaign of deliberate starvation. The victims of the monstrous bipartisan foreign policy consensus in Washington are usually invisible in American debates, and this was no exception.
Israel tasks US Congress with pressuring South Africa to drop ICJ genocide case
The Cradle | September 10, 2024
Israel is lobbying members of Congress to pressure South Africa to drop its case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accusing Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, Axios reported on 9 September.
South Africa has until 28 October to submit its arguments for continuing its case, claiming Israel is in violation of the Genocide Convention due to its war in Gaza.
Israeli officials say they want members of Congress to threaten South Africa with consequences for continuing to pursue the case.
On Monday, the Israeli foreign ministry sent a classified cable to the Israeli embassy and consulates in the US with instructions for dealing with South Africa.
“We are asking you to immediately work with [US] lawmakers on the federal and state level, with governors and Jewish organizations to put pressure on South Africa to change its policy towards Israel and to make clear that continuing their current actions like supporting Hamas and pushing anti-Israeli moves in international courts will come with a heavy price,” the cable read.
In December, South Africa filed a case at the ICJ accusing Israel of violating its obligations under the 1948 Genocide Convention. The case alleged Israel’s actions “are genocidal in character because they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part” of the Palestinian population in Gaza.
After the start of the war on 7 October, Israeli political and military leaders issued statements suggesting they intended to pursue a genocidal military campaign against Palestinian civilians in Gaza.
Israeli forces have killed over 40,000 Palestinians since then, the majority women and children, in a vicious 11-month bombing campaign.
The ICJ issued an interim ruling in January demanding Israel to take all measures to prevent genocidal acts, prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to genocide, and take immediate and effective steps to ensure the provision of humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza.
However, Israel hopes the new coalition government in South Africa can be pressured to take a different approach to Israel and the war in Gaza, the officials speaking with Axios said.
In parliamentary elections in June, the African National Congress (ANC) party lost its majority for the first time since the end of the apartheid system of white minority rule 30 years ago.
The Israeli diplomats were instructed to ask members of Congress to issue public statements condemning South Africa and threatening to cut off trade relations with South Africa.
Axios adds that the Israeli diplomats were also instructed to ask members of Congress and Jewish organizations in the US to reach out directly to South African diplomats in the US and make clear South Africa would “pay a heavy price” if it doesn’t change its policy.
The Israeli foreign ministry asked Israeli diplomats to lobby for hearings about South Africa’s policy towards Israel in state legislatures.
According to the cable, Israeli diplomats were instructed to emphasize to the ANC and “pursue dialogue” with Israel “instead of boycotts and punishments.”
Washington, Baghdad clinch deal on US troop withdrawal from Iraq: Report
Press TV – September 6, 2024
The US and Iraq have reached an agreement for the withdrawal of US-led coalition forces from Iraq, which would see hundreds of troops leave by September 2025 and the remainder by the end of 2026, according to a Western media report.
The Reuters news agency, quoting multiple unnamed sources within the governments of the US, Iraq, and other countries, said the withdrawal plan “has been broadly agreed but requires a final go-ahead from both capitals and an announcement date.”
“We have an agreement, it’s now just a question of when to announce it,” Reuters quoted a senior US official.
An official announcement was initially scheduled for weeks ago but was postponed due to regional escalation related to Israel’s genocidal onslaught on Gaza and to iron out some remaining details, the report quoted the sources as saying.
Farhad Alaaldin, foreign affairs adviser to the Iraqi prime minister, told the news agency that technical talks with Washington on the coalition drawdown had concluded.
“We are now on the brink of transitioning the relationship between Iraq and members of the international coalition to a new level, focusing on bilateral relations in military, security, economic, and cultural areas,” he said.
According to the agency, the US and Iraq are also seeking to establish a new advisory relationship that could see some US troops remain in Iraq after the drawdown.
The agreement comes six months after Baghdad initiated talks with Washington on the withdrawal of US forces stationed at Iraqi bases.
Those talks began after a wave of rocket and drone attacks on American forces in Iraq and Syria in retaliation for Washington’s support for the Israeli genocide in Gaza and its atrocities against the Iraqi people.
The Iraqi resistance groups have been pressing for an end to the presence of foreign forces in Iraq for more than a decade after a US-led coalition invaded the country in violation of international law based on false claims of it owning weapons of mass destruction.
There are nearly 2,500 American troops in Iraq and some 900 in Syria as part of what Washington claims to be a fighting force against Daesh.
The US has maintained its presence even after the Arab country and its allies, including Iran, vanquished the Takfiri terrorist group in late 2017.
In 2020, the Iraqi parliament voted for the expulsion of US forces. The vote came after Iran’s top anti-terror commander, martyr General Qassem Soleimani, and deputy PMU commander Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis were assassinated in a cowardly drone strike ordered by then-US president Donald Trump outside of the Baghdad airport.
On January 8, 2020, Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) targeted the US-run Ain al-Asad air base in Iraq after launching a wave of attacks to retaliate for the assassination of the two top anti-terror commanders.
Turkish protestors demand expulsion of US warship docking in Izmir Port
Press TV – September 3, 2024
Turkish citizens have taken to the streets in Izmir to demonstrate against the docking of an American warship, expressing solidarity with Palestinians and their opposition to US all-out military support for Israel amid the Gaza genocide.
Turkish parties on Monday night gathered at the Izmir port entrance to voice their opposition to the USS Wasp anchoring, one of the ships sent to the region by the US to support the Israeli regime.
Waving the Palestinian flag, protesters held banners reading “Our country’s ports cannot be supply and logistics points for murderers” and “We do not want the US ship that brings war and death to Palestine in Izmir.”
They chanted slogans such as “Down with Israel,” “Down with NATO” and “Down with USA,” demanding the immediate departure of the American ship from the Port of Izmir, as they honored the memory of Palestinians killed in Israel’s US-backed war in Gaza.
The USS Wasp, carrying nearly 1,500 US soldiers, anchored at the port of Izmir on Sunday after participating in bilateral at-sea training with Turkish Navy ships in August. The vessel, along with its accompanying ships, the USS Oak Hill and the USS New York, has been positioned in the region since June as part of deterrence efforts against possible threats to Israel amid high tensions in the region.
Protesters issued a stern warning to the Izmir Governorship, declaring they will not leave the port until the ship departs.
The protesters condemned the United States for its role in causing suffering and violence in Iraq, Syria, the West Asia region, and globally.
“It has been almost a year. Israel is carrying out a brutal massacre in Gaza. By killing tens of thousands of people, Israel is not only committing a great crime against humanity. It is also persistently continuing an unlawful and unscrupulous incitement to drag our region into a bloody war,” the protesters said in their statement.
The statement emphasized that the United States openly backs Israel and its military actions, and questioned its occasional ceasefire calls.
They also called on the Turkish government to remove the American soldiers from the streets of Izmir, after two US Marines from the USS Wasp were assaulted during a port visit in Izmir on Monday, as part of a protest against Israeli actions in Gaza and decades-long “US imperialism.”
“US soldiers who have the blood of our soldiers and thousands of Palestinians on their hands cannot tarnish our country. Every step you take on these lands will be met with the response you deserve,” the Turkey Youth Union (TGB), which carried out the attack said in its statement on Monday.
Fifteen individuals involved in the incident were detained by Turkey’s police.
The US has ramped up its military presence in the region as the Israel war on Gaza rages on.
Washington has sent 50,000 tons of arms and ammunition to Israel since October 7 when the regime launched its genocidal war on Gaza.
Late last month, the US completed the air delivery of its 500th consignment of weapons and munitions to Israel since it launched its genocidal war in October.
“We told Israel, ‘Look, if you guys have to go, we’re behind you all the way’”
By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | August 30, 2024
“The successful thwarting of Hizbullah’s attack on Sunday, symbolized Israel’s intelligence and operational edge”: According to the IDF spokesman, the Hezbollah attack was thwarted for the most part – thanks to 100 Israel aircraft carrying out around the clock – pre-emptive strikes that destroyed “thousands of missile launchers”.
“The group [Hizbullah], did manage to fire hundreds of rockets at northern Israel, but the damage they caused was quite limited”, the Israeli spokespersons disdainfully suggested (amidst a complete blackout on publication, under full censorship, in Israel of any reporting on damage caused to strategic Israeli infrastructure or to military sites).
In effect, it was ‘theatre’ mounted by both sides: By limiting their 20 minute strike to within 5 kms of the border – and by Hizbullah staying within the ‘equations’ of war – both sides signalled plainly to each other they were not looking for all-out war.
The ‘winner narrative’ from Israel was to be expected in today’s psy-war atmosphere. Yet it comes at a cost: Amos Harel in Haaretz suggests that “there’s a tendency in Israel [as a result] to view the success in foiling Sunday’s attack as renewed evidence of the consolidation of regional deterrence and [of western] strategic supremacy. But such an assessment” he concedes, “appears to be far from accurate”.
Indeed it is (far from accurate). The Sunday theatre concluded with no change to the strategic situation in the north of Israel: Daily attrition continues from across the frontier of Lebanon, down to the new 40 km border defining the extent of Israel’s loss of territory to the Hizbullah no-go zone.
The strategic point is not that this narrative of a successful thwarting of Hizbullah’s capabilities is highly misleading. Rather, it sets up expectations of available military success from which wrong conclusions will be drawn. We have been here before. It didn’t go well …
Seymour Hersh, doyen of U.S. investigative journalism, this week re-posted a piece that he wrote in August 2006 about U.S. thinking in the context of an Israeli war on Hizbullah – and on its intended role as a pathfinder-project for a subsequent U.S. strike on Iran.
What Hersh wrote then represents a striking déjà vu of today’s situation. It remains to the point because U.S. neocon thinking rarely evolves, but remains constant.
“The big question for our [U.S.] Air Force”, Hersh noted in 2006, “was how to hit a series of hard targets in Iran successfully”, the former senior intelligence official said. “Who is the closest ally of the U.S. Air Force in its planning? It’s not Congo—it’s Israel”. The official continued:
“Everybody knows that Iranian engineers have been advising Hezbollah on tunnels and underground missile emplacements. And so the USAF went to the Israelis with some new tactics and said to them: ‘Let’s concentrate on the bombing and share what we have on Iran – and what you have on Lebanon.’”.
“The Israelis told us [that Hesballah] would be a cheap war with many benefits,” a U.S. government consultant with close ties to Israel said: “Why oppose it? We’ll be able to hunt down and bomb missiles, tunnels, and bunkers from the air. It would be a demo for Iran”.
“I was told by the consultant that the Israelis repeatedly pointed to the war in Kosovo as an example of what Israel would try to achieve. “The NATO forces … methodically bombed and strafed not only military targets but tunnels, bridges, and roads, in Kosovo and elsewhere in Serbia, for seventy-eight days …“Israel studied the Kosovo war as its role model … The Israelis told Condi Rice: You did it in about seventy days, but we need half of that—thirty-five days’ [to finish off Hizbullah]””.
“The Bush White House”, a Pentagon consultant said, “has been agitating for some time to find a reason for a preëmptive blow against Hizbullah”; adding, “It was our intent to have Hezbollah diminished, and now we have someone else doing it … According to a Middle East expert, with knowledge of the current thinking of both the Israeli and the U.S. governments: Israel had devised a plan for attacking Hezbollah—and shared it with Bush Administration officials—well before the July 12th [2006] kidnappings: “It’s not that the Israelis had a trap that Hezbollah walked into,” he said, “but there was a strong feeling in the White House that sooner or later the Israelis were going to do it”, Hersh wrote.
“The White House was more focussed on stripping Hezbollah of its missiles, because – if there were to be a military option against Iran’s nuclear facilities – it had to get rid of the weapons that Hezbollah could use in a potential retaliation at Israel. Bush wanted both”, Hersh was told”.
“The Bush Administration was closely involved in the planning of Israel’s retaliatory attacks. President Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney were convinced … that a successful Israeli Air Force bombing campaign against Hezbollah’s heavily fortified underground-missile and command-and-control complexes in Lebanon could ease Israel’s security concerns and also serve as a prelude to a potential American preëmptive attack to destroy Iran’s nuclear installations – some of which are also buried deep underground”. (Emphasis added.)
A former intelligence officer said, “We told Israel, ‘Look, if you guys have to go, we’re behind you all the way”.
“Nonetheless, some officers serving with the Joint Chiefs of Staff were deeply concerned that the Administration will have a far more positive assessment of the air campaign than they should – the former senior intelligence official said. “There is no way that Rumsfeld and Cheney will draw the right conclusion about this,” he said. “When the smoke clears, they’ll say it was a success, and they’ll draw reinforcement for their plan to attack Iran”.
(This is where we are today: When the smoke clears from Sunday’s ‘exemplary pre-emptive attack in Lebanon’, Netanyahu will be using it with Washington to draw reinforcement for his aspiration to engage the U.S. for a strike on Iran.)
“Strategic bombing has been a failed military concept for ninety years, and yet air forces all over the world keep on doing it,” John Arquilla, a defense analyst at the Naval Postgraduate School, told [Hersh] … Rumsfeld [too, shared this expert’s jaded view]: “Air power and the use of a few Special Forces had worked in Afghanistan, and he [Rumsfeld] had tried to do it again in Iraq. It was the same idea, but it didn’t work. He thought that Hezbollah was too dug in – and the Israeli attack plan would not work, and the last thing he wanted was another war on his shift that would put the American forces in Iraq in greater jeopardy”.
“The 2006 Israeli plan, according to the former senior intelligence official, was “the mirror image of what the United States had been planning for Iran””. (The initial U.S. Air Force proposals for an air attack to destroy Iran’s nuclear capacity, which included the option of intense bombing of civilian infrastructure targets inside Iran) were being resisted by the top leadership of the Army, the Navy, and the Marine Corps – according to current and former officials. They argued that the Air Force plan will not work and will inevitably lead, as in the Israeli war with Hezbollah, to the insertion of troops on the ground.
David Siegel, the then Israeli spokesman, said that his country’s leadership believed, as of early August 2006, that the air war had been successful, and had destroyed more than seventy per cent of Hizbullah’s medium-and long-range-missile launching capacity.
Israel however had not destroyed 70% of Hizbullah’s missile inventory in 2006. It was deceived by Hizbullah’s intelligence decoy operation. The Israelis bombed empty sites.
Today, we hear the same exultatory narrative coming from IDF Spokesman Rear Admiral Hagari – parading how successful Israel’s strikes on Sunday had been.
Likely some in Israel and U.S. again will be deeply concerned that the Biden team may fall for a far more positive assessment of the Israeli air campaign than they should.
Many commentators across the West are making the same mistake. As Haaretz’ military correspondent noted in respect to this Sunday’s air strikes: “there’s a tendency in Israel to view the success in foiling Sunday’s attack as renewed evidence for the consolidation of regional deterrence – and strategic supremacy”.
Or, in other words, Iran has been deterred from carrying out its ‘commitment’ to retaliate for Ismail Haniyah’s assassination in Tehran by the amassing of fire-power by the U.S. in the waters of the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf and the fear of overwhelming U.S. firepower.
Anyone seeing the video glimpses of Iran’s automated and deep ‘missile cities’ deployed throughout the depth of Iran (and which it has allowed to be exposed to momentary view), should understand that carpet bombing Iranian civilian structure will not prevent the Iranian ability to respond lethally. Iran could unleash Regional Armageddon, nothing less.
So, for clarity’s sake: Who exactly is it that is deterred and backing down? Is it Iran or Washington?
Yet, “If it’s true that the Israeli campaign is based on the American approach in Kosovo, then it missed the point”, General Wesley Clark, the U.S. commander told Hersh. Killing civilians was not the objective: “In my experience, air campaigns have to be backed, ultimately, by the will and capability to finish the job on the ground”.
And that – simply – for the U.S. to contemplate for Iran is impossible.
“We face a dilemma”, an Israeli official told Hersh in 2006. Effectively, to decide whether to go for a local response (which is ineffective), or go for a comprehensive response—to really take on Hezbollah [and Iran] once and for all”.
Plus ça change: The dilemma may not have changed, but Israel has altered radically. A majority in Israel today is messianic in its support for Jabotinsky’s followers to do what they had always wanted and promised to do: To expel the Palestinians from the Land of Israel.
It is understood by many in Washington that the Revisionist Zionists (who represent maybe about 2 million Israelis) intend cynically to impose their will on the ‘Anglo-Saxons’, by plunging the U.S. into a wide regional war, should the White House try to undercut their neo-Nakba project of Palestinian forcible expulsion.
Benjamin Netanyahu has provoked Iran once (with the assassination in the Damascus Consulate of a top IRGC general); twice with killing of Haniyeh in Tehran; and a possible third would be were Israel to launch a so-called ‘pre-emptive’ strike against Iran, believing that the U.S. would be trapped and politically unable to stand aloof as Iran retaliated against Israel.
However, should the U.S. veto a strike on Iran before the U.S. elections (and Iran not retaliate for the death of Haniyeh before then), the Naqba ‘project’ can be moved forward via extending the existing Gaza military offensive to the West Bank, or through a grave provocation on the Haram al-Sharif (such as a fire at the al-Aqsa Mosque).
The Revisionist Zionists have been clear over recent years that some crisis or the confusion of war would be required to implement their neo-Naqba project fully.
America particularly is trapped by its ‘ironclad’, unqualified military support for Israel – which offers Netanyahu ample room for manoeuvre.
Manoeuvre, that is, towards the conflict that is Netanyahu’s only escape hatch ‘upwards’ as the ‘walls of attrition’ close-in on Israel. Iran and Hizbullah seem to have chosen too, for now, to preserve their escalatory dominance through a return to imposed calibrated attrition on Israel.
The U.S. will not be able to keep such a huge deployment of naval vessels in the region for long; but equally, Netanyahu will not be able to politically prevaricate at home for long, either.
Why the US is failing in the Red Sea: Responsible Statecraft
Al Mayadeen | August 30, 2024
When Yemen’s Ansar Allah declared the Red Sea as part of the support fronts backing the Palestinian people and their Resistance, the United States announced that it would try to subvert its operations to protect Israeli ships and shipments, trapping itself in an indefinite and congressionally uncertified military conflict in the region.
Coined “the most intense running sea battle” the US has seen since World War II, Washington’s decision to enter the Red Sea rapidly transpired into “the epitome of strategic malpractice“, an op-ed published by Responsible Statecraft said.
According to authors Jonathan Hoffman and Benjamin Giltner, the US military conquest in the Red Sea is not only failing but also exposing US military personnel in the region to extreme danger to protect foreign vessels, as well as risking escalation and the destabilization of not only Yemen but the entire region.
Hoffman and Giltner expand on the reasons for the US failure in the Red Sea and explain that they stem primarily from Washington’s willful ignorance and refusal to acknowledge the main motive behind Ansar Allah’s operations [that being the Israeli genocide in Gaza], clearing all hopes it has for triumphing in the region.
A vain costly conquest
The United States deployed its forces in the Red Sea, firstly to counter the Yemeni ban on Israeli-affiliated or Israeli ships under Operation Prosperity Guardian, and secondly to launch its joint aggression with the United Kingdom against Yemen under Operation Poseidon Archer. The goal, allegedly, is to restore its deterrence in the region.
However, the US has now spent millions in American taxpayer funds and over a billion dollars to shoot down homegrown Yemeni drones, only to fail in deterring the Yemenis. In detail, the US has claimed that its forces shot down 150 Yemeni drones, each costing $2,000 at most, using missiles and weapon systems that cost more than one billion dollars.
The authors also note that Yemen escalated its operations only after the US and its partners launched their aggression to “restore deterrence”, further proving that their mission in the Red Sea failed.
This is due to the Yemeni military niche as a result of a decade-long conflict with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which enabled the country to develop its “shoot and scoot” guerrilla tactic. The Yemenis have proven to be skilled in producing highly versatile drones that carry out their attacks and retreat rapidly, at relatively extremely low costs.
Ironically, the US acknowledges the detachment between the US military campaign and its goals in the Red Sea, as well as its ineffectiveness in either deterring Yemen or restoring the maritime supply chain, but still expresses its determination to maintain its presence in the region and prolong the conflict further.
On the contrary, the US, according to the authors, has worsened the situation in the Red Sea.
US presence could destabilize Yemen
The second reason why the American strategy continues failing is because it risks destabilizing a war-torn Yemen following a decade of war against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
The Saudi war against Yemen has not only left almost 400,000 casualties, but also created one of the worst modern-day humanitarian crises the world has seen. Despite the disastrous consequences of the war, Yemen’s Ansar Allah still emerged victorious.
The UN was able to mediate and establish a two-month ceasefire back in April 2022, which has extended to the current day. Saudi Arabia has been trying to pull out from the war it lost, while Ansar Allah maintained and fortified their positions in Yemen.
In the aftermath of October 7, Yemen emerged as a support front to back the Palestinian Resistance and the people of Gaza, further synthesizing Ansar Allah’s resistive front with the Yemeni government, in the face of any aggression that targets the country or its affiliations.
However, the escalating US-led aggression risks fracturing the UN-established ceasefire, further risking the destabilization of Yemen.
Risk of regional war
Lastly, the ongoing conflict between the United States and Ansar Allah risks escalating already mounting regional tensions, potentially pushing the Middle East closer to an all-out war. In the nearly 11 months since “Israel’s” war in Gaza began, military escalations have increased throughout the region, with the current clashes between Ansar Allah and the US military emerging as a result.
In a sequence of successes for the Axis of Resistance, the “deterrence” the US sought to impose against Yemen was further asserted as a failure when Ansar Allah successfully struck a site located near the US embassy in Tel Aviv.
“Israel”, backed by the United States, then bombed Hodeidah, killing six civilians and injuring dozens more.
With no resolution in sight for the war in Gaza and increasing concerns of a regional conflict, Yemen could become a key flashpoint, the authors wrote. If the US aims to prevent further Yemeni attacks and avoid being drawn into a larger regional war, military force is unlikely to accomplish these goals.
There are no critical US national interests in Yemen that warrant the current level of American military involvement or the waste of billions in taxpayer dollars. Rather than continuing its tit-for-tat conflict with Ansar Allah, Washington should acknowledge that its unwavering support for “Israel’s” war in Gaza is destabilizing the region and harming US interests.
The authors called for a ceasefire in Gaza, which would offer the most promising opportunity to halt, or at least significantly reduce Yemeni attacks, and ease growing tensions across the Middle East.
NATO invades Russia?
Colonel Douglas Macgregor & Prof Glenn Diesen | August 22, 2024
Has the thin line between proxy war and direct war now been eliminated? I spoke with Colonel Douglas Macgregor as NATO’s direct involvement in the war is evident with its involvement in the invasion of Russia.
Russia has restrained itself to a large extent as retaliating against NATO could trigger another world war and possible nuclear exchange, although the failure to retaliate emboldens NATO and results in subsequent escalations. Even Zelensky referred to the failure of Russia to respond to the invasion of Kursk as a reason for why NATO should not fear stepping over more Russian red lines. Colonel Macgregor suggests that the assumption of the US and NATO being all-powerful will continue to contribute to reckless escalations in the war against Russia – but also in the Middle East, and against China.
Most Ukrainian, Western and Russian observers seemed to recognise during the first days of the invasion of Kursk that it was a mistake. Ukrainian troops emerged out of well-defended frontlines and could be easily targeted in the open and with poor supply lines. As this is a war of attrition, it is likely a huge mistake to throw away Ukraine’s best soldiers and NATO’s military equipment on territory that is not strategic and cannot be held. However, the propaganda machine has since been turned on and the war is now sold to the Western public as a great opportunity to improve negotiation power, to develop a buffer zone, and to humiliate Putin – although none of these arguments can stand up to scrutiny.
The Ukrainian and NATO invasion of Kursk has changed the war completely as the Ukrainian causalities have increased dramatically, the Ukrainian defensive lines in Donbas are now collapsing even faster, and NATO’s role in the war is no longer ambiguous. This is all happening as internal divisions in NATO are surfacing, and the US/Israel will likely trigger a regional war in the Middle East.
Iran will hit Israel, ball is in US-Israeli court
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | August 22, 2024
There is a Zen proverb — ‘If you want to climb a mountain, begin at the top.’ All the show of contrived enthusiasm by US President Joe Biden and CIA Director William Burns over an Israel-Hamas deal on the Gaza war cannot obfuscate the grim reality that unless and until Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu greenlights it, this is a road to nowhere.
But what did Netanyahu do? On the eve of the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s arrival in Tel Aviv on Sunday to press the flesh and cajole Netanyahu to cooperate, the latter disdainfully ordered yet another air strike in the central town of Deir Al-Balah in Gaza, killing “at least” 21 people, including six children. Biden had emphasised only the previous day that all parties involved in the Gaza ceasefire negotiations should desist from jeopardising the US-led diplomatic efforts to halt the war and secure a deal to return hostages and achieve a ceasefire to end the bloodshed.
And this was even after a ‘senior administration official’ who has been actively involved as negotiator — presumably, Burns himself — laboured to convey in a special briefing from Doha that the negotiations had reached an inflection point. The crux of the matter is that the western leaders have a maximum pressure strategy toward Iran to exercise restraint while they don’t have the moral or political courage to tackle Netanyahu, who is invidiously undermining the Doha process because he is simply not interested in a ceasefire deal that may lead to his removal from power, investigation to pin responsibility for October 7 attacks, revival of court cases against him and possible jail sentence if convicted.
Indeed, Tehran is sceptical that peace cannot come to Gaza under American mediation but taking care not to create any new facts on the ground while the Doha negotiations are under way. Tehran has adopted a mature, responsible attitude not to derail the Doha process. The point is, Iran is keen that the horrific war that the Israeli state unleashed in Gaza must be somehow brought to an end. Over 40,000 people have died so far.
That said, Hamas’ response to the US’ “bridging proposal” at Doha meeting will be a major determinant for Tehran. From available indications, there are serious disagreements over Israel’s continued military presence inside Gaza, particularly along the border with Egypt, over the free movement of Palestinians inside the territory, and over the identity and number of prisoners to be released in a swap. Both Israel and Hamas have signalled that a deal will be difficult.
On the other hand, the new Iranian government under Masoud Pezeshkian has highlighted his desire for a constructive engagement with the West and prioritises the removal of western sanctions. Pezeshkian’s nominee for the foreign ministry Abbass Araghchi reiterated these policy parameters in his testimony at the Majlis on Sunday while seeking parliament’s approval for his appointment.
Dispelling speculations that Araghchi, a career diplomat who is reputed to be a moderate, may face difficulty to garner support in the conservative-majority parliament, the Majlis recognised his high professionalism by unanimously approving his name as Iran’s next foreign minister in a vote instantaneously.
There is much food for thought here for the strategists in the White House. Suffice to say that what Pezeshkian’s predecessor late Ebrahim Raisi left behind as his foreign policy legacy will continue to guide the new government. That signals a high level of national consensus. Succinctly put, in all these years since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, there has not been a more conducive setting in the power calculus in Tehran for a pragmatic engagement with the West. It will be extremely unwise for Washington to overlook the window of opportunity to engage with Iran.
On the other hand, Tehran’s grit to push back western bullying is also at an all-time high level. The bottom line is that Iran will not submit to western diktat. In today’s circumstances, therefore, it is unrealistic to expect Tehran not to react to the Israeli aggression of July 31. Iran’s sovereignty was violated and its response will be strong and decisive, — and as a deterrent for the future as well.
No amount of muscle-flexing by Washington will frighten Tehran. The national unity, unlike in the US, is a crucial factor. The stunning endorsement by the Majlis of the entire list of cabinet ministers proposed by President Masoud Pezeshkian shows that there is no daylight between the different branches of state power. All indications are that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei and Pezeshkian are on the same page — and this message has gone down the echelons of policymaking and state power in Tehran.
The contrast with the disarray in Israel’s confrontational domestic politics couldn’t be sharper.
Therefore, Iran will do what it considers necessary and an obligation — and a matter of national honour. The Deputy Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, General Ali Fadavi said on Monday, “We will determine the time and manner of punishment (of Israel). The usurping Zionist regime committed a great crime by assassinating Martyr Haniyeh, and this time it will be punished more severely than before.”
In a statement to The Wall Street Journal, Iran’s UN mission said any response must both punish the Israeli regime and deter future strikes in the country, but also “must be carefully calibrated to avoid any possible adverse impact that could potentially influence a prospective ceasefire.
“The timing, conditions, and manner of Iran’s response will be meticulously orchestrated to ensure that it occurs at a moment of maximum surprise; perhaps when their eyes are fixed on the skies and their radar screens, they will be taken by surprise from the ground — or, perhaps, even by a combination of both.”
The Iranian statement from the UN podium in New York is a message addressed to the White House that the ball is in the US-Israeli court. Interestingly, it coincided with the toned down White House readout on Biden’s call with Netanyahu on Wednesday, where Biden flagged the “defensive U.S. military deployments” and stressed the urgency of bringing the ceasefire and hostage release deal to closure and discussed upcoming talks in Cairo to remove any remaining obstacles.” It stands to reason that Tehran and Washington are communicating with each other.
Clearly, against such a heavily nuanced backdrop, the paranoia about a regional war is unwarranted, since neither Iran nor the US wants war. As for Israel, a small country, it simply lacks the capability to go to war with Iran armed with three submarines stacked with nuclear missiles as its strategic assets.
The stunning disclosure of Hezbollah’s vast network of underground missile network in southern and central Lebanon is a reality check for the Israeli political elite and settler communities on what they are up against.
As the former Israeli war minister Avigdor Lieberman puts it, Israel is engaged in a war of attrition, exactly as the Iranians wanted, having succeeded in uniting the resistance fronts. Lieberman pointed out that the agony of the indeterminate waiting for Tehran’s retaliatory operation is in itself an achievement for Tehran and the Axis of Resistance.
READ MORE: Iran finesses its deterrence strategy, Indian Punchline, August 12, 2024
Iran Hawks’ Hacking Claims Designed to Distract Americans, Set Stage for New Regional War
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 20.08.2024
After nearly a year of efforts to taunt, provoke and intimidate Iran into a full-on regional war in the Middle East amid the Gaza crisis, Iran hawks in Washington have turned to a new strategy, accusing Tehran of interfering in the upcoming US presidential election. A respected Middle Eastern affairs scholar explains what’s behind the new approach.
The FBI, the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence formally accused Iran of attempting to hack the Trump and Biden-Harris presidential campaigns on Monday.
The new allegations, which came weeks after a series of reports in US media citing “anonymous intelligence sources” claiming that Iran was plotting to assassinate Donald Trump, or to hack his presidential campaign, were not accompanied with any evidence.
“As the lead for threat response, the FBI has been tracking this activity, has been in contact with the victims, and will continue to investigate and gather information in order to pursue and disrupt the threat actors responsible. We will not tolerate foreign efforts to influence or interfere with our elections, including the targeting of American political campaigns,” the US intel agencies said in a joint statement.
Iran calmly rejected the US’s “unsubstantiated” and evidence-free claims.
“Such allegations are unsubstantiated and devoid of any standing. As we have previously announced, the Islamic Republic of Iran harbors neither the intention nor the motive to interference with the US presidential election,” the country’s permanent mission to the United Nations said in a statement.
“Should the US government genuinely believe in the validity of its claims, it should furnish us with the pertinent evidence – if any, to which we will respond accordingly,” the mission added.
Dangerous Distraction Action
“There is little doubt that the rhetoric itself has more impact than the substantiation of these accusations,” Dr. Mehmet Rakipoglu, a political scientist and international affairs observer and assistant professor at Turkiye’s Mardin Artuklu University, told Sputnik.
“Creating artificial agendas such as [the Iran hacking claims] intensifies hostilities between the parties involved. This accusation seems to be aimed at diverting attention from Israel’s actions in Gaza and refocusing it on the US election process,” Rakipoglu added, pointing out that Tel Aviv has been bogged down by accusations of engaging in genocide against Gaza’s civilian population, while proving unable to defeat Hamas militarily.
“It is already clear that the American public is deeply divided, regardless of whether there is an alleged Iranian attack. It is not Iran or any other external actor that is responsible for these divisions, but rather the US administrations themselves,” the academic said.
Rakipoglu stressed that, conveniently for the accusers, there’s virtually no way to verify the US intelligence agencies’ allegations, or conversely, prove that or Iran, or any other country, has interfered in the US election.
In some sense, the claims against Iran this election cycle are reminiscent of similar allegations made against Russia ahead of, during and following the 2016 vote, Rakipoglu said.
“While the US propagated a narrative of Russian interference during the 2016 elections, it continued to lose influence over time. It seems that the current accusation against Iran serves the same purpose as the allegations against Russian interference in 2016,” the observer said.
If that’s the case, it could signal a dangerous turn for Iran, and the Middle East in general. The 2016 Russian meddling allegations sparked a deep downturn in Russia-US relations, with the Russiagate conspiracy hounding Donald Trump throughout his term in office, blocking his ability to restore any semblance of normal ties with Moscow, and ultimately manufacturing consent among a substantial portion of the US electorate for the NATO-Russia proxy conflict in Ukraine which began in 2022.
Israel expects US and other allies to help bomb Iran
RT | August 17, 2024
Israel’s Foreign Minister, Israel Katz, has stated that his country expects not only the United States but also its allies, including Britain and France, to assist in offensive operations against Tehran in the event of direct conflict.
Katz made these comments during a meeting with British Foreign Secretary David Lammy and French Foreign Minister Stéphane Séjourne in Jerusalem on Friday, according to a Hebrew-language statement from his office.
”Israel expects France and Britain to publicly clarify to Iran that it is unacceptable for it to attack Israel, and that if Iran attacks, the US-led coalition will join Israel not only in defense but also in an attack against significant targets in Iran,” the statement said, as cited by the Times of Israel.
Katz reiterated in a post on X that he made it “clear” to his colleagues that they should publicly announce their countries “will stand with Israel not only in defense but also in striking targets in Iran.”
The French and British diplomats downplayed these assertions, with Sejourne telling reporters that it would be “inappropriate” to discuss any “retaliation or preparation for an Israeli retaliation” amid diplomatic efforts to negotiate a deal to end the Gaza war. A joint French-British statement following the meeting also made no mention of any anti-Iran coalitions.
“We have urged Iran and its proxies to stand down the ongoing threats of military attack against Israel. We have also stressed to all parties that the spiral of escalating reprisals must end,” they said in their only reference to Tehran.
The meeting in Jerusalem occurred shortly before the latest round of indirect ceasefire talks ended without breakthroughs, though there were promises to return to the negotiating table next week. The war between Israel and Hamas has dragged on for 10 months since the militant group staged a deadly incursion, resulting in approximately 1,100 deaths and around 200 hostages. The massive Israeli response has claimed over 40,000 Palestinian lives, according to Gaza health officials.
The risk of wider conflict in the Middle East was drastically exacerbated by the assassination of Hamas Political Bureau Chief Ismail Haniyeh, who served as the Palestinian armed group’s lead negotiator in indirect talks with Israel. He was killed in Tehran on June 31, hours after attending the inauguration of Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. Iran promised to inflict a “harsh punishment” on Israel, which has neither acknowledged nor denied any involvement in the killing.
The US has deployed additional warships and a submarine to the Middle East to protect the Jewish state from potential attacks, but it remains unclear whether Washington has agreed to any plans to bomb Iran.
In April, when Iran fired hundreds of missiles and drones at Israel in retaliation for the bombing of its embassy in Damascus, US fighter jets and warships helped intercept many of the incoming projectiles. However, this was a purely defensive operation, with no direct counterstrike on targets inside Iran.
CIA awards Qatari intel chief top medal for cooperation with US
The Cradle | August 16, 2024
In a ceremony earlier this week, CIA Director William Burns awarded the head of the Qatari State Security Agency the George Tenet medal for his work on strengthening intelligence cooperation between the US and Qatar, Axios reported on 16 August.
Both Burns and Al-Khulaifi have played important roles in the negotiations between Israel and Hamas for a potential ceasefire in Gaza and prisoner exchange.
One reason for the award is Qatari efforts to release the remaining 111 Israeli captives held by Hamas in Gaza, one source with knowledge of the issue told Axios.
Israel is holding thousands of Palestinians in its prisons and detention camps, where torture and rape is common.
Another source said Burns gave the award to his Qatari counterpart in “appreciation of his role in maintaining national and regional security, and the exceptional support he provided to the CIA in preserving the interests and security of the US and Qatar.”
Another important reason for the award was the cooperation between the CIA and Qatari intelligence in counterterrorism and the ability of the Qatari State Security Agency to prevent and foil threats and attacks in West Asia, the source told Axios.
Both the US and Qatar have long been known for their support of terrorist groups in the region.
Starting in 2011, the US and Qatar worked closely with other regional states to support Al-Qaeda in Syria.
The Syrian branch of the terror group, the Nusra Front, led a jihadist insurgency against the Syrian government led by Bashar al-Assad under the cover of US-sponsored anti-government protests.
Featured Video
Iran Walks Out On Peace Deal Due To Trump’s Threats
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
As Hillary Clinton kisses up to Henry Kissinger, RT looks at 4 of his most heinous acts
RT | September 3, 2016
… While Clinton retains the ultimate warmongering seal, RT examines some of Kissinger’s most memorable acts… Read full article
Blog Roll
Aletho News- IRAN WALKS OUT ON PEACE DEAL DUE TO TRUMP’S THREATS – w/ Prof. Seyed Mohammad Marandi
- Moderna’s mRNA Flu Vaccine Gets Unanimous Thumbs-Up Despite Risks, Low Efficacy
- UK Speech Regulator’s Telegram Questions Point Toward Private Chats
- Cuban FM blasts Rubio for ‘chronically lying’ about US fuel blockade
- Al-Jazeera demands punishment for Israeli officials following latest assassination of cameraman
- Iran opens hundreds of legal cases over US, Israeli aggression: Prosecutor general
- Iran delegation protests Trump’s threat at Switzerland talks, weighs ‘proper’ response: Source
- Terms of US capitulation to Iran presage new era for the region
- Strategic Oil Reserve Nears Collapse… US Must Choose: Guns or Butter
- The Story the Media — and the Government — Don’t Want You to Hear
- If Americans Knew
- JNS Policy Summit to kick off in Israel
- Fatalities From Israel’s Vast Gaza Genocide Deliberately Undercounted
- ‘Reproductive genocide’ in Gaza; death toll in Lebanon tops 4,000 (during a ceasefire) – Daily Update
- Israelis Invaded Lebanon And Then Cried Victim When Their Soldiers Got Killed
- FARA Docs: Israel is Spying On Millions Of Christian Americans In Their Churches
- Why US presidents from both parties end up cursing Benjamin Netanyahu
- Israel Asked Facebook to Censor Iran War Content, Internal Documents Show
- Deaths in Gaza undercounted, possibly by 100s of thousands; “Psychopath” Ben-Gvir talks trash – Daily Update
- UNICEF: “Trauma is woven into the very fabric of childhood in Gaza”
- 15 articles a day: The extent of the Israeli army’s media interference
- No Tricks Zone
- THE TRANSCEIVER PARADOX: Why Organoid Intelligence (OI) Could Become Our Ultimate Alien Predator
- German Wind Turbines Face Regulatory Shutdown Due To Excessive Noise
- New Study: Chile’s Relative Sea Level Was 3.2 Meters Higher Than Today During The Mid-Holocene
- Beyond The Pitch: Why FIFA’s World Cup Is One Of Humanity’s Best Investments
- Climate Alarmists Now Using Natural Phenomena To Support Their Claims
- New Study: Significant CO2 Fluxes From Non-Volcanic Sources Are Largely Neglected In Carbon Budgets
- Women Climate Scientists Being Harassed, Insulted By Skeptics, Claims Berkeley Earth Researcher
- Germany’s Longterm Spring Climate Data Show “No Climate Trend”
- New Study: Solar Photovoltaic, Wind Power Fail To Meet Annual Energy Demands 62% Of The Time
- Germany’s Die Welt: “Too Much Is Too Much” … Green Energies Are Cannabalizing Each Other!
Aletho News 