Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Blinken’s window dressing tour of Arab capitals

BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE  | JANUARY 9, 2024 

The expectation raised by the United States in allowing a UN Security Council resolution on Gaza pass through on December 22, 2023 without having to exercise its veto — albeit a watered-down one that stopped short of calling for ceasefire — was that the manifest international isolation facing Washington and Tel Aviv would inevitably impact Israel’s options going forward. 

However, there are contrarian trends. Israel started the new year by ordering the withdrawal of part of its military forces from Gaza, but the spokesman of the IDF Daniel Hagari emphasised that the war will continue in 2024 and called this withdrawal in line with the renewal of forces and new organisation of Israeli army. Speaking on New Year’s Eve, Hagari said, “Tonight, 2024 begins and our goals require a long war, and we are preparing ourselves accordingly. We have a smart plan to manage our deployments, taking into account reserves, the economy, families, and resupply, as well as the continuation of combat and training.”

Hagari’s ambivalent hint that the military has wrapped up major combat in northern Gaza was buttressed with the claim that the forces would “continue to deepen the achievement” in northern Gaza, strengthen defences along the Israel-Gaza border fence and focus on the central and southern parts of the territory.          

On Thursday, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant also presented a plan of a shift toward less intense military operations. The minister’s office said in a statement, “In the northern region of the Gaza strip, we will transition to a new combat approach in accordance with military achievements on the ground.” But Gallant added, “It will continue for as long as is deemed necessary.” Under Gallant’s plan, the war in Gaza will continue until all of the hostages are released and remaining military threats are neutralised.

Basically, Hagari’s remarks and Gallant’s plan can be seen as a nod to the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken who is expected in Israel later this week after visiting Turkey, Jordan, Qatar, UAE and Saudi Arabia. At the same time, Israel has, typically, also ratcheted up tensions by a series of belligerent acts in the recent days. 

There has been a new escalation of cross-border fighting between Israel and Hezbollah. Besides, the targeted killing of a top Hamas political leader Saleh al-Arouri in a Hezbollah stronghold of Beirut last week; the killing of a senior IRGC commander and four others in the suburbs of Damascus; terrorist attacks in Kerman (Iran); killing of the commander of the elite Radwan forces of Hezbollah;  — all these within the space of the past week are attributable to Israeli intelligence one way or another. 

These events in turn have added to the resurgent fears lately that an Israel-Hamas war could erupt into a broader conflict. Earlier today, Hezbollah deputy leader Naim Qassem, said in a televised speech his group did not want to expand the war from Lebanon, “but if Israel expands, the response is inevitable to the maximum extent required to deter Israel.” 

The pattern of Israeli behaviour needs to be understood from different angles. This is an incredibly complicated matrix. First and foremost, the Israeli operation in Gaza so far has been a failure. It turned the world opinion, especially in the Global South, heavily against Israel — South Africa’s petition to the International Criminal Court over war crimes in Gaza being the most telling evidence of it —  while the Israeli military came a cropper in terms of its agenda to decimate Hamas. 

Tel Aviv has reached none of its stated goals in the Gaza war, which are annihilation of Hamas or disarming of Hamas and release of captives held by Palestinians in Gaza. That brings the security and military establishment in Tel Aviv, whose reputation has been seriously dented following the October 7 attack, under immense pressure. On the other hand, there has been a cover-up of the heavy casualties suffered by Israeli troops in the Gaza operation. The Kerman terrorist attack and the killing of Saleh al-Arouri actually betray a high level of frustration. 

In political terms, there is a convergence between the security and military establishment and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (whose political future hangs by a thread) and the ultra-rightist fascist forces aligned with him, whose interests lie in an extended war. 

The only external force capable of pressuring Israel is of course the US administration. But it is too much to expect President Biden to draw the ‘red line’ to Israel — that is, even assuming that he has the political will to do so — given the Israel Lobby’s control of the Congress and its seamless capacity for making or destroying the careers of US politicians. 

Washington has not changed the intensity of Israeli  military operations. On the other hand, the US has shipped to Israel 10,000 tons of arms to Israel in the recent period alone. In fact, it cannot be a coincidence that every single Blinken visit to the region since October 7 has witnessed a particularly brutal Israeli attack to up the ante. In effect, the US is broadly in support of the Israeli policy and a commitment to the destruction of Hamas, in particular. 

Therefore, Biden’s interest narrows down to prevent the war from spreading in the region lest direct American military intervention becomes necessary. The US rhetoric and diplomatic posturing largely aims at damage control in Washington’s relations with its erstwhile allies in the region. Quintessentially, Blinken’s mission comes down to cheap window dressing — viz., to bringing the regional states to the same page that Israel is facing an existential crisis. But it does not take into account that the region has changed radically. 

What truly distinguishes the present crisis is that the Arab world is profoundly concerned and feels outraged by the barbaric Israeli behaviour toward hapless Palestinians — ‘animals,’ as Israeli politicians have described them. The Arab psyche is convinced that an enduring final settlement of the Palestine problem cannot be postponed indefinitely. Something has fundamentally changed even for Saudi Arabia which had clandestine dealings with Israel for decades and was inching toward establishing formal relations with it.

A Saudi statement said that while receiving Blinken in Al ‘Ula on Monday, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman “stressed the importance of stopping military operations, intensifying humanitarian action, and working to create conditions for restoring stability and for a peace process that ensures that the Palestinian people gain their legitimate rights and achieve a just and lasting peace.” The Saudi statement is at sharp variance with the readout by the US state department. 

Interestingly, an article in the Saudi daily Asharq Al-Awsat focused on Blinken’s forthcoming visit highlighted fundamental differences between Riyadh and Washington on a range of issues — ceasefire in Gaza (“not just a humanitarian truce or exchange of prisoners, but rather a comprehensive halt”); security of the Red Sea (“the responsibility for security in the Red Sea lies with the riparian countries first, and with a UN-international responsibility in the second place”); Israel’s culpability for “expanding the scope of the war”; futility of “talk about post-war phase” at this point. 

The article ended on a sombre note: “If the American administration wants Blinken’s visit to Saudi Arabia and the region to succeed, and if it wants to maintain its partnerships in the region, and preserve its role as a sponsor of peace in the Middle East at a time when international forces hostile to Washington are searching for a foothold in the region, it must adhere to neutrality, and not use the region’s interests and future as a card in the upcoming American elections. It must deal with the disease and not with the symptom as it is doing now.”  

January 9, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Israel about to engage in two-front war

By Lucas Leiroz | January 9, 2024

In recent days there has been a major escalation in the Middle Eastern conflict. Israel has launched a series of attacks against targets outside Palestine, including Lebanon, resulting in the deaths of key members of anti-Zionist organizations. Israel’s targeted assassinations have been seen as an affront to Lebanese national sovereignty, increasing the risks of an open war between the Zionist state and Hezbollah.

Israel has been bombing its neighboring countries since the war began in October. However, the frequency and brutality of these raids has grown significantly in recent weeks. Lebanon has become one of the main targets of Israeli attacks, especially in strikes targeting strategic public figures. In one of these operations, Wissam al-Tawil, deputy head of the Radwan group, a special unit of the Shiite militia, was murdered. Al-Tawil was a high-ranking member of Hezbollah, which means there will certainly be a retaliation.

A few days earlier, a brutal Israeli attack in Beirut had left six high-ranking Hamas members dead, including the Palestinian organization’s deputy head, Saleh al-Arouri. At the time members of Hezbollah were not targeted, and the strike was aimed at killing Hamas militants gathered in Beirut. However, the fact that the attack was carried out on Lebanese soil obviously generated outrage among members of the Shiite militia, who promised retaliation for the violation of Lebanese sovereignty.

Hassan Nasrallah, general secretary of Hezbollah, made two statements about these events. According to him, Hezbollah is already fighting Israel, but is using only a small percentage of its combat potential. The militia’s involvement is “limited”, being focused on neutralizing Israeli intelligence targets on the border. For now, the objectives of these operations are, according to Nasrallah, to generate military pressure against Israel and help the Palestinians by eliminating IDF’s resources. However, Nasrallah made it clear that if Israel continues to violate Lebanese sovereignty, the group will launch a “war without restrictions”, using full power against Zionist troops.

Apparently, Israel is not interested in de-escalation. The attacks on Lebanon have continued even after Nasrallah’s warnings – and more targeted killings of Hezbollah members could happen at any time. In fact, Tel Aviv is currently in a complicated military situation. The war in Gaza has become “unwinnable”, as the debris from the bombings have severely damaged the IDF itself, preventing the flow of armored vehicles and creating a network of hiding places and barricades that favor Hamas.

There is currently a guerrilla war in Gaza, with members of the Palestinian Resistance having the advantage, as they know the terrain better and are skilled at carrying out surprise attacks and hiding among the debris of buildings and tunnel networks. Although Israel has managed to destroy the physical structure of Gaza, the consequences of its attacks have mainly affected civilian people and have not been extremely effective in neutralizing Hamas and other Palestinian militias. The result is an uncomfortable situation, with Israel involved in a permanent war of attrition.

Given this, Israel is betting on the internationalization of the conflict as a way of “winning” the war. Since it is not being successful in Gaza, the Israeli government hopes to generate new outbreaks of hostilities by launching attacks against Lebanon and Syria. The aim is to bring new actors into the war, creating a situation of total regional conflict that makes intervention by Israel’s Western partners “inevitable”.

The main problem with this Israeli “strategy” is that the consequences could be devastating. It will not be easy to garner Western support and justify an intervention in the conflict, as global public opinion is outraged by Israeli genocidal actions in Gaza. Furthermore, Hezbollah is showing patience and strategic mentality by avoiding symmetrical responses to Israeli attacks. The group is trying not to engage in an all-out war, as the IDF is already in a delicate situation and there is no need to open a new front. Hezbollah’s focus appears to be to launch surgical strikes across the border, delaying more involvement as long as possible.

To get a strong reaction from Hezbollah, Israel will have to further increase the brutality of its raids against Lebanon. And this will be a serious problem in the Zionist strategy, since by doing this Tel Aviv will be justifying Hezbollah’s reactions, and there will therefore be no legal arguments for the West to mobilize collectively to support Israel. In fact, without full Western support, Israel will not be able to fight a two-front war, being a real catastrophe for the IDF itself.

This is further evidence of how Israel took wrong actions at the beginning of the conflict. Instead of only responding to Hamas’ “Operation Al Aqsa Flood”, Tel Aviv chose to launch a campaign of genocide and territorial expansion, sinking into a prolonged war that will not be won so easily.

Lucas Leiroz is a journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

You can follow Lucas on X (former Twitter) and Telegram.

January 9, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Two More U.S. Murders

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | January 9, 2024

The last thing the Founding Fathers wanted for our country was omnipotent government — that is, a government that wields totalitarian-like powers. Thus, when the U.S. Constitution called the federal government into existence, it expressly restricted its powers to those enumerated in the Constitution. If a power wasn’t enumerated, it could not be legally exercised.

The powers enumerated in the Constitution were few and limited. The Constitution’s enumerated powers did not include the power to murder people. That’s because our American ancestors did not want to live under a government that had the power to murder people.

Americans were leery about the enumerated-powers concept. They were concerned that federal officials would ignore the concept and exercise totalitarian-like powers anyway, including the power to murder people.

That’s why the Bill of Rights was enacted. It expressly prohibited the federal government from exercising totalitarian-like powers that would destroy the fundamental, God-given rights of people. The Bill of Rights made it clear that our American ancestors were concerned about the power to murder people. Thus, the language of the Fifth Amendment is clear and unequivocal: “No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.”

Notice that the term “person” is used. Not “American” but rather “person.” Our ancestors did not want the federal government to wield the power to murder anyone.

What is “due process of law.” It is a term stretching all the way back to Magna Carta. It requires a formal criminal charge and a trial before the federal government can kill someone. In other words, the Fifth Amendment prohibits federal officials from murdering people.

Why do I bring all this up? Because a few days ago the Associated Press reported that the Pentagon conducted an airstrike in central Baghdad, Iraq, that intentionally murdered two Iraqi citizens and injured five more.

No formal criminal charges. No trial. Just outright murder. Permit me to repeat the express restriction of the Fifth Amendment: “No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.”

Notice that it doesn’t say: “except when it’s the Pentagon or the CIA that is doing the killing.” It also doesn’t say “except when the person is a citizen of Iraq.” It says “No person.”

But wait a minute! Did that Associated Press article actually say that these killings took place in Iraq? Isn’t that the nation that the Pentagon and the CIA invaded after the 9/11 attacks, where they killed, injured, tortured, and abused countless Iraqi people in the process of installing a pro-U.S. regime? Given such, what in the world is the Pentagon doing murdering Iraqi citizens in the middle of Baghdad?

The Pentagon says that it is retaliating against militias in Iraq who are attacking U.S. military bases in Iraq. At the risk of belaboring the obvious, if the Pentagon didn’t have U.S. soldiers based in Iraq, there would be no attacks in U.S. military personnel in Iraq and, therefore, no need to murder people in Baghdad.

An obvious question arises: Why do people in Iraq want to kill U.S. soldiers in Iraq? I thought that their “Operation Iraqi Freedom” invasion was supposed to cause the Iraqi people to love the U.S. government. The reason for the widespread anger is because people in Iraq and other parts of the Middle East are extremely angry over the U.S. government’s unconditional military and financial support for the Israeli government and its brutal and deadly military campaign in Gaza. Question: Where in the Constitution is the U.S. government authorized to deliver taxpayer-funded military and financial aid to any foreign regime, including the government of Israel?

In any event, here you have a classic example of how one U.S. intervention — i.e, the unconditional U.S. support of the Israeli government — ultimately leads to another intervention — i.e., the cold-blooded murder of people who are suspected of targeting U.S. soldiers stationed in Iraq. Of course, the operative word is “suspected” given that there was never a formal criminal charge or trial accorded to the murder victims, as the Fifth Amendment expressly requires.

The recent U.S. murders in Baghdad reveal how the conversion of the U.S. government to a national-security state has resulted in the type of government our American ancestors feared and opposed: one that exercises omnipotent powers with impunity, including the power to murder people.

January 9, 2024 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Haifa missile strike by Iraqi resistance shows how fragile Israeli regime is

By Wesam Bahrani | Press TV | January 8, 2024

In yet another significant act of solidarity with the people of Gaza, the Islamic Resistance in Iraq on Sunday struck “a vital target in occupied Haifa” with an advanced long-range cruise missile, grabbing headlines and taking the embattled regime in Tel Aviv by another surprise.

In a statement, the Iraqi resistance emphasized that the operation was carried out because of “our ongoing support for people in Gaza,” who have been reeling under the Israeli aggression since Oct. 7.

The statement added that the operation was “in response to the massacres committed by the usurping entity against Palestinian civilians, including children, women, and the elderly.”

The Iraqi resistance, which has in recent months launched a string of attacks on US military bases in Iraq and Syria, said it will continue to hit enemy strongholds, warning that “more is yet to come”.

The concluding part of the statement was the most attention-grabbing.

Such is the stringent Israeli media censorship of the occupying regime’s war on the besieged Gaza Strip; it is difficult to speculate what vital infrastructure has been hit.

The Iraqi resistance struck Haifa with a long-range cruise missile, named al-Arqab, from Iraqi territory. The distance from Baghdad to Haifa is almost 1,000 kilometers.

According to sources, the launch of the missile took place closer to the Western Iraqi deserts. That is still roughly 600 kilometers away, or perhaps more, depending on the launch site.

It essentially means that Haifa, which is located in the northern part of the occupied territories, can expect attacks again from the Iraqi soil, the timing of which will be decided by the resistance.

More importantly, the long-range cruise missile traveled the same distance‌ that can put Tel Aviv and all other Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories within the range of Iraqi fire.

On Monday, Iraq’s Harakat al-Nujaba resistance movement claimed responsibility for the strike, warning that Israel should await more crippling attacks in retaliation for its bloody war on Gaza.

“The Axis of Resistance is determined to disrupt US scenarios in the region and thwart the occupying Israeli regime’s schemes in Gaza,” Hussein al-Moussawi, spokesman for the group, said.

Should we be surprised that the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU)‌, under which the Islamic Resistance in Iraq operates, possesses such world-class military technology?

The short answer is no.

The Iraqi government itself armed the PMU with the most capable military equipment from Baghdad’s weapons depots because it plays the most fundamental role of all the Iraqi armed forces.

The attack on Haifa points to the start of a new chapter by the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, in what is expected to be an even stronger show of support for the Palestinian resistance in Gaza and its people.

In this latest phase, we must expect an escalation in attacks on crucial Israeli infrastructure inside the occupied Palestinian territories, facilitated by the utilization of sophisticated long-range cruise missiles.

The Islamic Resistance in Iraq has made no secret of its iron-clad support and solidarity with the oppressed people of Gaza amid the Israeli regime’s indiscriminate bombings and inhumane siege.

It had also made no secret of its military operations against the Zionist regime and its Western backers, which has been completely evident in the past few weeks.

Shortly after the Israeli regime launched its war on Gaza on October 7, the Islamic Resistance in Iraq carried out a number of operations against Israeli interests and its main backer, the United States.

In late December, the Iraqi Resistance struck a vital target in the Eli-ad settlement, in the southern Israeli-occupied Syrian Golan Heights with drones.

Before targeting Eli-ad, the resistance also pounded the regime’s main offshore (occupied) Karish gas field in the eastern Mediterranean Sea with a direct hit, inflicting heavy damage.

That came after the Iraqi resistance struck a target in occupied Umm al-Rashrash (Eilat) with appropriate weapons and released images of the operation for the public.

The regime evacuated the settlers of Eilat, transforming the area into a military garrison. It made the site an ideal target for Iraq as well as Yemen, another Arab country that has upped the ante recently.

Yemen, Iraq and Lebanon’s Hezbollah resistance movement have carried out a series of operations against Israeli interests with a barrage of long-range drones and missiles.

At times, the goal has simply been to fire a barrage of missiles and drones to preoccupy the Israeli Iron Dome and Patriot Missiles. These calculated efforts have proven successful.

They effectively ease the pressure on the Palestinian resistance while at the same time drain out Israeli military resources, which have in recent months become extremely depleted.

The regime has killed more than 22,000 Palestinians since Oct. 7, the majority of whom have been women and children. Thousands more are missing, presumably dead under the rubble.

Among the countries and movements taking the lead in militarily pressuring the U.S. and its apartheid regime to end its inhumane attacks on Gaza, Iraqis have played a courageous role.

In Iraq, the resistance has targeted illegal American military bases on its territory as well as in Syria more than 110 times since the Israeli war against Gaza began three months ago‌.

Rockets, mortar shells, drones, and short and long-range ballistic missiles have all been used in these operations, leading to scores of casualties among US troops and collateral damage.

Now, the question that everyone is asking is: Why has the Iraqi resistance opened a new chapter?

Lately, the illegal US military occupation on Iraqi soil made a costly mistake by attacking sites belonging to the PMU, which means Washington and Tel Aviv have to pay the price.

Recent US attacks against affiliates of the PMU, including Kataib Hezbollah, and the recent deadly strike on the headquarters of Harakat al-Nujaba, which led to the assassination of one of its leaders in Baghdad, Haj Mishtaq, means the time is ripe for the resistance to expand its operations.

For context: In the eyes of the Iraqi resistance, there is no difference between the US military occupation of Iraqi soil and the Israeli occupation of Palestine. The liberation of the Palestinian territories begins with the expulsion of American troops from Iraq and the rest of the region.

While the Israeli regime commits horrendous crimes against humanity in Gaza, America is shielding, arming‌, funding and facilitating this madness of death and destruction campaign in the coastal strip.

Taking a closer look at the events unfolding in Gaza, it is‌, in essence, an American war on Gaza.

This direct complicity means that Washington has to pay the same price as the Israeli regime is paying for its massacres of civilians in Gaza. They are two sides of the same coin.

Whilst illegal US bases in Iraq and Syria are closer to the line of fire for the resistance, the indiscriminate Israeli attacks against women and children in Gaza have seen the PMU increasingly target the Israeli regime, the latest being Haifa.

What the Al-Aqsa Storm (or Al-Aqsa Flood) operation provided was an opportunity for the Iraqi resistance to strike at Israeli interests for the first time in history.

As pressure grows on the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Mohammad Shia’ al-Sudani to expel the illegal US forces, it has also opened a new window for the PMU to end the American occupation and avenge Washington’s assassination of its deputy leader Abu Mehdi al-Muhandis.

For the moment, the main goal of the resistance is to expand its scope of attacks against the Israeli regime in order to mount pressure on the apartheid occupation as well as the US.

And, as the Iraqi resistance warned after the Haifa attack, “more is yet to come”.

Wesam Bahrani is an Iraqi journalist and commentator.

January 8, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Amal Clooney Accuses a French Company, but Ignores the Crimes of the US and UK

By Steven Sahiounie | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 5, 2024

Amal Clooney, the international human rights lawyer, is representing victims of mass atrocities, including genocide and sexual violence, from the Iraqi Yazidi community who are seeking accountability for crimes perpetrated by ISIS.

The case alleges French conglomerate Lafarge SA conspired to provide material and funds to support ISIS terrorist campaigns against the Yazidis.

“Lafarge has admitted to a conspiracy that aided ISIS by providing millions of dollars in cash to ISIS, and is alleged to have provided ISIS with cement to construct underground tunnels and bunkers used to shelter ISIS members and hold hostages, including captured Yazidis,” a news release stated.

Clooney has focused on the French cement company which supported ISIS in Syria in order to remain in business during the war.

The crime committed by Lafarge is serious, but it is just one small incidence of western entities supporting terrorists in Syria following Radical Islam. Clooney is singling out a French company, and France is allied with both the U.S. and UK. While the crime affected hundreds of Yazidis, the same crime carried out by the U.S., UK and EU has affected millions of Syrian citizens.

The Free Syrian Army (FSA) forces were caught selling arms to the ISIS.

Weapons sent to terrorists in Syria from the U.S. directly allowed ISIS to obtain substantial amounts of sophisticated supplies which they used against civilians.

A study by Conflict Armament Research found that anti-tank weapons given to the ‘rebels’ in Syria by the U.S. ended up in the possession of the ISIS within two months of leaving the factory.

The U.S. provided extensive lethal and non-lethal aid to many terrorist groups fighting against the Syrian government. The CIA ran a covert program Timber Sycamore to arm, fund and train terrorists in Syria. U.S. President Trump shut the program down in 2017.

ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, Jabhat al-Nusra and the FSA fighting in Syria all shared the same political platform: to remove the Syrian government in Damascus, and replace it with a Islamic governing system. In March 2011, the U.S. and NATO began a war in Syria for the purpose of regime change. It was not successful, and the same government in Damascus has remained. However, the U.S.-NATO war was very successful in destroying the country, ruining the economy, killing thousands and sending the largest Syrian migrant wave to Europe in history.

U.S. President Barak Obama praised the FSA as ‘moderate’ rebels fighting for freedom and democracy. But, early on the FSA demonstrated that they were fighting to kill Christians and non-Sunni Muslim minorities, and had no interest in lofty ideals of freedom and democracy. They wanted to over throw the Damascus government with the support of the Obama administration, and realize the dream of a Sunni Muslim governing system which was based on Islamic Law, not civil codes.

In April 2014, investigative journalist Seymour M. Hersh exposed the Obama-Clinton “Rat Line”, which was a CIA weapons highway into Syria, serving the terrorists fighting for Obama’s regime change goal. Weapons and ammunition was sent from Libya to Syria via southern Turkey, and the terrorists on the receiving end were affiliated with Al Qaeda, and later aligned with ISIS.

Hersh revealed a 2012 agreement by Obama, and supported by the UK spy agency, MI6, which was responsible for getting weapons from Libya into Syria.

In 2013, Clooney was appointed to a number of United Nations commissions, including as adviser to Special Envoy Kofi Annan on Syria. The U.S. and UK involvement in supporting the terrorists who would later fight alongside ISIS was not any secret.

In 2016, Obama signed into law a defense policy bill which led to U.S. weapons provided to ‘rebels’ ending up in the hands of terrorists following Radical Islam, who became brothers in arms on the Syrian battlefields.

The Yazidis have suffered greatly and should receive justice. Clooney has focused on this one small incidence of ISIS benefiting from a French business. Clooney has ignored that the U.S., UK and their western democratic allies supported, funded, trained and weaponized terrorists in Syria which directly benefitted ISIS.

Where is the international court case to serve justice for the hundreds of thousands of Syrians dead, maimed, raped, kidnapped and made homeless by the FSA and their allies Al Qaeda and ISIS?

Clooney chose an easy win with the case against Lafarge. Clooney said she hopes to get a financial award for the Yazidis from her case so they can rebuild their lives.

The U.S. has prevented the Syrian people from rebuilding any hospital, school or home because of the U.S. imposed sanctions which prevent importing any products for reconstruction. The U.S. sanctions against Syria prevent any wealthy Arab country, or investor, from developing any reconstruction project to benefit the Syrian civilians, such as the repair of the water infrastructure in Aleppo. Last summer, Aleppo suffered cholera because the water plant is in need of repair.

The Syrians have no court case pending, and have no hope of any recovery from their suffering caused by the U.S.-NATO attack on the Syrian people for regime change.

January 6, 2024 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Iraqi PM says plans underway for withdrawal of US-led coalition

The Cradle | January 5, 2024

Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani announced on 5 January that the Iraq-US bilateral committee, established late last year, has started the process of scheduling the withdrawal of the US-led “international coalition” from the country.

“We are in the process of setting a date for the start of the dialogue through the bilateral committee that was formed to determine the arrangements for the [withdrawal of foreign troops,” Sudani said during a ceremony commemorating the fourth anniversary of the US assassination of the Deputy Chairman of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis, and Iranian Quds Force Commander General Qassem Soleimani.

“We affirm our firm and principled commitment to ending the presence of the international coalition as the justifications for its existence have ended,” the Iraqi head of state stressed, referring to Washington’s allegations of keeping troops and heavy weapons in Iraq to help the country “fight ISIS.”

“[This] is a commitment that the government will not back down from, and we will not neglect anything that would complete national sovereignty over Iraq’s land, sky, and waters,” Sudani added.

The premier also lambasted the US for launching a drone strike on the Baghdad headquarters of the PMU, located meters away from the Interior Ministry complex, killing a top leader of the Nujaba Movement.

“Iraq has a strategic partnership agreement and diplomatic relations with the US, and in this way, the main principles of international relations and what was stipulated in the UN Charter regarding equality of sovereignty between countries and the prohibition of the use of force in international relations were violated,” Sudani said.

He then highlighted that the PMU – also known as the Hashd al-Shaabi – represents “an official presence affiliated with the state, subject to it, and an integral part of our armed forces.”

“We have repeatedly emphasized that in the event of a violation or transgression by any Iraqi party, or if Iraqi law is violated, the Iraqi government is the only party with the right to follow up on the merits of these violations … The government is the body authorized to impose the law, and everyone must work through it, and no one has the right to infringe on Iraq’s sovereignty,” the prime minister stressed.

The PMU was formed in 2014 in response to the ISIS invasion of northwest Iraq, including Mosul. Ali Sistani, the top Shia cleric in Iraq, called for the establishment of the PMU to protect Baghdad and defeat the US-proxy terror group in Mosul.

The PMU was established with support from Iran, most notably General Soleimani, and was later incorporated into the Iraqi government as part of its armed forces.

Following the 2020 assassination of Soleimani and Muhandis, the Iraqi parliament voted on a law to withdraw permission for the US to operate on Iraqi soil.

US troops first entered Iraq in 2003 to topple the government of Saddam Hussein under false pretenses. Washington initially withdrew its forces in 2011 when the White House failed to secure a new Status of Forces (SOFA) agreement with former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

However, US troops returned to the Ain al-Asad base under the pretext of training Iraqis to fight ISIS six months after the extremist group invaded and occupied Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, in June 2014.

On 18 December 2021, the Iraqi government announced that “no combat forces of the international coalition or NATO” remained inside the Ain al-Assad base. However, at least 2,500 US troops remain in the country – many at the Ain al-Asad base – in a “training and advisory role.”

Their continued presence is part of an agreement reached between Washington and Baghdad in July 2021 that was meant to see the complete withdrawal of US troops – similar to their exit from Afghanistan.

January 5, 2024 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

US military buildup in Red Sea ‘serious’ threat to intl. shipping: Yemen

Press TV – January 5, 2024

Yemen’s Ansarullah resistance movement has cautioned that the US militarization of the Red Sea in an attempt to serve the Israeli regime will pose a serious threat to international shipping in the strategic waterway.

Ansarullah made the statement on Friday after the United States, which has over the past weeks been spearheading a maritime coalition in the Red Sea under the pretext of safeguarding the transit of vessels in the area, claimed that the Yemeni forces and the popular resistance movement were targeting international ships and jeopardizing the security of the Red Sea.

The United States and the coalition members warned Yemen’s Armed Forces of “consequences” if they continued their missile and drone attacks against ships en route to Israeli ports in support of Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip.

Ansarullah said the Yemeni armed forces never attacked international ships and that the security and safety of international maritime transport in the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait was guaranteed by them.

“The US claim and the statement of 12 countries regarding the [Yemeni] threat to international shipping is not true. This threat stems from the militarization of the Red Sea by the United States to serve the Israeli regime and encourage the regime to continue its crimes against Gaza,” the resistance movement said in a statement.

“The Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip and its genocidal crimes against Palestinians, which has entered the fourth consecutive month, should have forced the so-called international community or the UN Security Council to stop such massacres by the Israeli regime,” it added.

Ansarullah categorically censured the Israeli aggression against the besieged territory and said it has so far killed more than 22,000 Palestinians, injured tens of thousands of others, and “destroyed everything in Gaza.”

“The bloody events that have been taking place in Gaza for the past three consecutive months would not have been possible without the support of the United States and the complicity of Western countries with the criminal Zionist regime and encouraging it to continue its crimes against civilians in the Gaza Strip,” Ansarullah said.

Underlining that the regional countries cannot remain idle in the face of Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza and its suffocating siege on the Palestinian territory, the resistance movement said, “The Yemeni armed forces have carried out their missile, drone and naval operations to target the ships of the Israeli regime or the ships that move towards the ports of occupied Palestine.”

The statement said the US and its allies should know that their “evil alliance” will not prevent Yemen from continuing to support the oppressed people of Gaza by carrying out military operations against the ships of the Israeli regime or the ships that move towards the occupied Palestinian ports.

“Any attack on Yemen calls for a large-scale response, and Yemen does not accept any threat to its security and stability, and rejects the claim of the United States and its allies that Yemen is a threat to international shipping in the Red Sea,” Ansarullah said.

“The alliance of the United States and its allies was formed to support the Israeli regime and protect the ships of this regime, which is a real threat to the security and safety of international shipping and the security of the entire region,” the movement added, stressing that the coalition should bear the consequences of its escalation in the strategic waterway.

Yemenis have declared their open support for Palestine’s struggle against the Israeli occupation since the regime launched a devastating war on Gaza on October 7 after the territory’s Palestinian resistance movements carried out a surprise retaliatory attack, dubbed Operation Al-Aqsa Storm, against the occupying entity.

The relentless Israeli military campaign against Gaza has killed at least 22,438 people, most of them women and children. More than 57,614 individuals have been wounded.

Reports revealed that Israeli shipping companies have already decided to reroute their vessels in fear of attacks by Yemeni forces.

Yemeni forces have also launched missile and drone attacks on targets in the Israeli-occupied territories after the regime’s aggression on Gaza.

January 5, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Houthi group says 10 fighters killed by US in spillover of Gaza crisis; ‘major escalation so far unlikely’

By Deng Xiaoci | Global Times | January 1, 2024

The Red Sea – one of the world’s most important shipping lanes that links markets in Europe with Asia – saw another bloody incident on Sunday with Yemen’s Houthi group stating that 10 of its fighters were killed by US naval forces while they were preventing Israel-related ships from passing through the Red Sea, in solidarity and support for the Palestinian people.

Analysts said the new clash in the waters of the Red Sea is a spillover of the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and although it is unlikely to lead to a major escalation of tensions or the outbreak of a new war in the region, the US should understand that the key to fundamentally addressing the Red Sea issue lies in easing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.

According to the Xinhua News Agency on Sunday, Houthi military spokesman Yahya Sarea said that US forces attacked three boats belonging to the Houthi group. The spokesman said the US “bears the consequences of this crime,” and that the “military movements in the Red Sea to protect Israeli ships will not prevent Yemen (Houthi militia) from performing its humanitarian duty in support of Palestine and Gaza.”

According to Al Jazeera on Sunday, helicopters from two US warships – the USS Eisenhower and USS Gravely – shot at the “Iranian-backed Houthi small boats” in self-defense on Sunday morning while responding to an SOS call from the Singapore-flagged vessel Maersk Hangzhou, the US Central Command (CENTCOM) said.

The US helicopters sank three of the boats, killing several of their crew, it said.

Zhu Yongbiao, director of the Center for Afghanistan Studies in Lanzhou University, told the Global Times on Monday that after the Sunday turmoil, Houthi forces may continue to carry out small-scale actions, but it is unlikely that they will directly retaliate against or launch aggressive counterattacks on US forces.

The use of small boats for harassment may decrease, and more drones and missiles will be used for this purpose, while direct confrontations are very unlikely, the analyst said. “Such an event will not directly lead to an escalation, as the US military is still in a defensive mode and has not actively struck the Houthi forces. The Sunday event is a major one but not severe enough to become a turning point.”

The US on December 19 announced a global naval task force to safeguard shipping in the contentious waters, through which some 12 percent of global trade passes, according to reports from Al Jazeera.

Chinese observers pointed out that the clash in the Red Sea is actually a spillover of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. “To fundamentally solve it, it is necessary for the Israeli-Palestinian issue to be significantly eased, including the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip. Even if aggressive military strategies are adopted, the US may achieve good results in the short term, but they are not a permanent solution, as the root cause lies in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” they said.

The Sunday incident came shortly after UN Secretary-General António Guterres said in a statement via his spokesperson that he was gravely concerned about the further spillover of the conflict, which could have devastating consequences for the entire region, citing continuing attacks by armed groups in Iraq and Syria, as well as the Houthi attacks against vessels in the Red Sea, which have escalated in recent days, according to a transcript of the statement.

The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics said Sunday that more Palestinians were killed in conflicts in 2023 than in any other year since 1948.　According to the bureau, 22,404 Palestinians died in 2023, and 22,141 of them were killed since the outbreak of the conflict between Israel and the Hamas on October 7, 2023.

January 1, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

More discomfort awaits the West in 2024 if it doesn’t adapt to new reality

Illustration: Liu Rui/GT
Global Times | January 1, 2024

What kind of experience did 2023 bring to Western countries? According to mainstream Western media, the most apt term to encapsulate the Western sentiment is “uncomfortable.”

An article from the BBC suggests that the past 12 months have seen a number of setbacks for the US, Europe and other major democracies on the international politics stage. Although none has been disastrous for now, they point to a shifting balance of power away from the US-dominated, Western values that have held sway for years, the article claimed. The mentioned setbacks include regional conflicts such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Palestine conflict. Challenges posed by countries perceived as adversarial by the US and the West, such as China, Iran, and North Korea, were also highlighted.

The Ukraine crisis has continued on, and the Israel-Palestine conflict has reignited, while the responses from the international community don’t align with the preferences of the US and its Western allies. All of this has made them feel “uncomfortable.”

When it comes to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, despite receiving support from the West, Ukraine has faced difficulties and failed to progress as expected in its conflict with Russia. This has led to Western fatigue and frustration. Due to partisan divisions in the US, providing aid to Ukraine has become problematic. In contrast, Russia has managed to stabilize its frontlines and handle the prolonged war effectively, Lü Xiang, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times. He noted that sanctions against Russia, with only around 30 countries participating in condemning Russia’s actions, have failed to significantly impact the Russian economy, instead, Russia has demonstrated remarkable resilience, contrary to Western expectations.

In the case of the Israel-Palestine conflict, most developing countries held positions inconsistent with those of the US. Many countries expressed disappointment and regret over the US veto of the Gaza-related drafts demanding an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza, distancing themselves from the US pro-Israel stance.

The BBC states that Arab ministers believe there are double standards in Western approaches to the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the Israel-Palestine conflict, accusing the Western governments of hypocrisy. This reflects a growing opposition from Global South and developing countries against the values advocated by the US and the West in various events, and the Western influence is diminishing, said Yang Xiyu, a senior research fellow at the China Institute of International Studies.

Issues such as the Ukraine crisis and the Israel-Palestine conflict increasingly demonstrate that the West, particularly Europe and the US, can no longer bring positive values to the world. More and more countries and their people in the Global South have become aware of this and refuse to accept Western double standards.

Today, an increasing number of developing countries are expressing clear opposition to irresponsible actions by the US and Europe. The major demand of these countries is to have a peaceful and stable international environment for national development. However, Western countries, the US in particular, are acting as the world’s largest disruptor of peace and creator of conflicts. In the cases of the Ukraine crisis and the Israel-Palestine conflict, the US not only fuels the flames but also opposes proposals for peace talks raised by other countries. In pursuit of its selfish interests, the US has caused suffering to the people of Ukraine and the Gaza Strip, hindering the resolution of other urgent global issues. In such circumstances, more and more developing countries are becoming courageous enough to say no to the US and the West.

In 2024, the influence and dominance of the West, whether in the Russia-Ukraine conflict or the Israel-Palestine conflict, will continue to decline. If 2023 did not unfold according to their expectations, 2024 is likely to deviate even further. This will bring more discomfort for them. Washington now has to adapt to a new reality: Global South countries are becoming more mature and gaining more decision-making autonomy. US politicians, who are used to dictating terms to countries worldwide and expecting developments to revolve around US interests, must reflect on and adapt to this new change. Otherwise, when the media summarizes 2024, it may not be as simple as just feeling uncomfortable; the experience might be more agonizing.

January 1, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Europe under the unbearable yoke and heavy burden of the United States

By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – 01.01.2024

The latest round of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the current carnage inflicted by Israel on all Palestinians in Gaza, will continue for some time and end in another tragedy for the Palestinians. But in the long run, all these events will lead to huge negative consequences that all peoples of the Middle East, including the Israelis, will be experiencing for a long time. But while none of the parties in the world will benefit from the disaster, “European countries will particularly pay a higher price for the ongoing conflict,” notes the Iranian publication Tehran Times. Although the leaders of the European states are well aware of the erroneous nature of current US policy, they, like true American puppets, are forced to blindly and unconditionally follow Washington’s course.

History shows that there have been many cases where European countries have paid the price for US policy mistakes over the past two decades. One such striking example may be Europe’s erroneous policy towards the peaceful nuclear development issue of Iran. Until 2012, European countries were among Iran’s most important economic partners, if not the largest, and Iran was a very important market for European products. Iranians preferred German electronics and cars to similar products from elsewhere. But because of the illegal US sanctions against Iran, European companies withdrew from the Iranian market and eventually paid a heavy price for the loss of a very profitable and promising Iranian market. Today, the economic presence of European countries and their companies in Iran are almost non-existent.

The second such example could be the heavy-handed and brazen interference of the United States in the internal affairs of the Middle East over the past two decades. The Middle East, although not really peaceful, remained generally stable in the 1990s and early 2000s. Therefore, European countries were very ambitious in promoting economic integration with their Middle Eastern neighbors, since the security situation was acceptable. The Barcelona process of the 1990s was such a program for the integration of Europe and its neighbors on the other side of the Mediterranean Sea. But the first two decades of the 21st century witnessed the United States often intervening militarily in the internal affairs of a number of countries in the Middle East, including Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria. As a result of constant military actions, the states and peoples of the Middle East have been experiencing enormous regional upheavals for more than two decades, and, by all accounts, this region is the most turbulent in the world.

Several regional and non-regional players have, quite naturally, various disagreements with the United States in the field of strategy, ideology, politics and economy. However, it is the European countries that have been most seriously affected by the instability, since they are the immediate neighbors of the Middle East. The stream of refugees has increased the economic and social burden and caused divisions both at domestic and EU interstate levels. And in the distant future, they will face even more negative consequences, as European politicians will have to solve even more difficult tasks just to survive.

The third example could be the latest conflict between Israel and Palestine. The war, the carnage unleashed by Israel in the Gaza Strip, has already led to a very serious humanitarian catastrophe, since about 20,000 Palestinians have died so far, about two thirds of whom are women and children, and more than two million have been displaced and become homeless. If the war continues, there will be a more serious humanitarian catastrophe for both the Palestinians and other peoples of the region. More refugees are likely to arrive in European countries, which will add new difficulties to their economies. As some European politicians travel to Israel to demonstrate their support for Tel Aviv’s hardline policies, Muslims in these countries will become increasingly dissatisfied with the course of politicians. There will be new divisions within the EU, as some countries do not share the views of those who support Israel’s unwise policy of destroying the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip.

In general, if one knows his history, the United States has been making mistakes in the region, while the European countries have kept paying a high price for them. Then there is the question of whether the elites in Europe understand the scenario and the rationale behind it. The answer is a resounding yes. In fact, the various political concepts initiated by Europe have sufficiently indicated that Europeans are well aware of their aforementioned problem. But at the same time, they continue to make the same mistakes over and over again, or, as a Russian saying goes, they keep stepping on the same rake. Indeed, if God wants to punish someone, he takes away his mind.

In the early 2000s, European leaders proposed the concept of “negotiation diplomacy,” which, in their opinion, could allow them to shape the Middle East through an approach different from the United States’ policy of force. Thus, in 2003, French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder fiercely and decisively opposed the attempts of the United States to brazenly invade Iraq by falsifying documents and deceiving the world community. Over time, they were proved to be right, although they failed to stop the war, or rather the massacre of the civilian population of Iraq.

In the same year, three foreign ministers — of France, Germany and the United Kingdom — made a joint visit to Iran to find a solution to the Iranian peaceful nuclear development issue through their diplomacy, as opposed to the US approaches to economic sanctions and military pressure. The efforts of the European trio also proved to be correct, although they failed to change the US sanctions approach to solving the Iranian problem.

In 2010, the EU proposed a different concept of strategic autonomy, and the term itself indicated its intention to distance itself from the United States and reduce its dependence on the Americans in security matters. But, unfortunately, during this period, Europe did not make sufficient efforts to demonstrate the autonomous aspect of its policy. Instead, some European countries even sided with the United States in a policy that ultimately led to the infringement of their economic and security interests, as mentioned above.

It is true that Atlantic relations with Europe were based on cultural and historical ties, and they have not changed for a long time. But, on the other hand, European countries have really different interests. The Middle East is an immediate neighbor of Europe, yet is far removed from the United States, and anything bad that happens in the Middle East can negatively affect Europe. Logically speaking, it is unreasonable that the EU will always support the United States in all its risky plans.

Moreover, the current US policy towards the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, with millions of Palestinians already forced to leave their homes, obviously undermines justice, which should be one of the fundamental principles of the international order. The continuation of such a crisis will undermine the image not only of the United States, but also to an even greater extent of Europe, which neighbors the Middle East. In any case, it is high time for European leaders to develop a reasonable approach, balancing justice and its Atlantic obligations. Otherwise, if history is anything to go by, mistakes made under pressure from the United States can force Europe to pay an even higher and unaffordable price.

January 1, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Western War Machine is in Panic Mode

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – 01.01.2024 

The sheer inability of the collective West to force Russia into submission in Ukraine plus the fast-changing global opinion about the West in the context of the latter’s support for Israel’s brutal war on the Gazans has put the so-called ‘liberal-democratic’ world into a panic mode. The White House has already said that it will run out of money to fund Ukraine into 2024 unless the US Congress gives approval for more funding. This has led the Western war machine – primarily led by the US – to anticipate a possible defeat. “There is no guarantee of success with us, but they are certain to fail without us”, a senior US military official told CNN recently. Without the military support, US officials now estimate, Ukraine would fall by the summer of 2024. But, in Western calculations, Ukraine’s fall does not just mean Russia’s victory; it also implies a possible collapse of NATO and the eventual downfall of the Western-dominated global political, economic, and security order.

A recent piece in the Wall Street Journal said,

“Even more important, Russia’s success in Ukraine would increase a threat to NATO’s Eastern flank—in particular the Baltic states and Poland. Outside of Europe it would embolden Moscow’s allies Iran and North Korea and provide a template for China for the military solution of the Taiwan dispute. In all those cases, the U.S. and NATO troops could find themselves in the midst of a military conflict of the sort that Ukraine fights today without direct involvement of NATO”.

Such prospects are causing severe problems. Germany, for instance, is considering shelving voluntary force and making a return to conscription. “I believe that a nation that needs to become more resilient in times like these will have a higher level of awareness if it is mixed through with soldiers,” said Jan Christian Kaack, the chief of the German Navy. This is in addition to the fact that the German army is too small to defend itself against any threat; hence, the renewed emphasis on conscription.

But Germany is not an exceptional case. In fact, it mirrors developments in the rest of Europe. The UK, otherwise known to possess one of the best fighting forces in the world, is running into some problems of a fundamental nature. The Sky News reported earlier in the year that, a senior US general “privately told Defence Secretary Ben Wallace the British Army is no longer regarded as a top-level fighting force”. It was further reported that the “The armed forces would run out of ammunition in a few days if called upon to fight” and that “The UK lacks the ability to defend its skies against the level of missile and drone strikes that Ukraine is enduring”.

On top of it is the fact that the Russian military position in Ukraine remains strong, making it a lot harder for the West to provide enough funding. The Biden administration is facing its own challenges vis-à-vis more funding for Ukraine. As far as Europe is concerned, a recent report showed that pledges for funding made in August 2023 fell by almost 90 percent compared to the same period last year.

This is war fatigue that is being compounded by a well-sustained Russian resolve to achieve its objectives. For the West, Vladimir Putin remains “stubborn”. As Putin recently reiterated, “There will be peace when we achieve our goals… Now let’s return to these goals – they have not changed. I would like to remind you how we formulated them: denazification, demilitarisation, and a neutral status for Ukraine.”

Speaking from a position of strength – and keeping in mind the war fatigue in the West – Putin further said that Russian forces are “improving their position almost along the entire line of contact. Almost all of them are engaged in active combat. And the position of our troops is improving along [the entire line of contact.]”. This being the case, Putin conveyed no ideas of making a compromise with the West over Ukraine. Speaking from the Russian perspective, it would make no sense to offer negotiations and, thus, turn Russian tactical victories into unsustainable settlements.

Clearly, Russia has no intention of withdrawing from its victories, which is why there is a panic, especially in Europe. If Russia continues to win and the US funding stalls, Europe will be left to fend for itself. Germany’s defence minister minced no words to express this fear last Saturday when he said that the US “was losing interest in European affairs and that security tensions in the Pacific would likely leave the European Union having to fend for itself”, adding that “One can assume that the USA will be more involved in the Pacific region in the next decade than it is today – regardless of who becomes the next president,” he said. His conclusion is: “This means that we Europeans must increase our commitment to ensure security on our continent.”

In a nutshell, for the US, if the war in Ukraine was to unify the West, it is beginning to have an exactly opposite effect. There lies a very strong reason for the US to reconsider its strategy. This reconsideration can go in two directions. First, the US can withdraw from its obsession with expanding NATO to include Ukraine. Second, the US can make one last push and make Ukraine fight for as long as it can, hoping that this might break Russia. The Biden administration favours the second option, which is why it is pushing for the US$61 billion aid package. But will a Republican victory allow this to happen? A Republican victory could not only end support for Ukraine but also leave Europe in a total lurch. Tough times ahead.

Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

January 1, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Iran Deploys Cruise Missile-Armed Warship in Red Sea Amid US-Houthi Standoff

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 01.01.2024

The Alborz, an Iranian Navy Alvand-class frigate armed with long-range anti-ship missiles and anti-submarine warfare equipment, entered the Red Sea after passing through the Bab al-Mandab Strait, Iranian media reported on Monday.

Pointing to the nation’s record of operations in regional waters since the late 2000s fighting piracy and securing international shipping lanes, Iranian media indicated that the warship’s deployment to Red Sea now comes amid an “increase of tensions” in the wake of the Gaza crisis, Houthi operations against Israeli-owned and -bound commercial cargoes, and US attacks against the Yemeni militia.

Commissioned in 1971 and named after the Alborz mountain range, the Alborz is classified as a destroyer by Iran, but classed a frigate by many foreign military observers. The 1,100 ton, 94.5 meter long vessel has a 9,000 km range, a complement of over 125 officers and crew, and is fitted with Noor anti-ship sea-skimming turbojet-powered cruise missiles, which have a range of up to 220 km and can accelerate to up to Mach 1.4 in their terminal stage.

The warship underwent major capital repairs and the installation of new equipment in 2018, and was equipped with indigenously-developed combat systems in 2020, including new close-in air defense weapons, as well as electronic warfare and target detection and tracking systems.

The Alborz took part in the Iran-Iraq War of 1980-1988. In 2021, the ship successfully fought off a pirate attack against an Iranian oil tanker in the Indian Ocean. The warship has also taken part in joint exercises with Russian and Chinese warships in recent years.

The vessel’s deployment in the Red Sea comes amid the continued deterioration of the security situation in the region, with the US military drawing first blood in its campaign against Yemen’s Houthi militants (who are attempting to close the body of water to Israeli-owned or affiliated commercial shipping) on Sunday, destroying three Houthi boats and killing ten fighters. The Houthis warned of “repercussions,” signaling the possibility of direct attacks against the warships of the US and its allies.

Earlier, UK media reported that British and US naval forces were planning “direct action” against the Houthis after issuing the militia with a “verbal final warning” about its Red Sea anti-shipping campaign.

Washington and its allies have repeatedly accused Iran of supporting the Houthis militarily. Tehran and Sanaa have each separately dismissed these claims, with Iranian officials insisting that their assistance for the Yemeni militia have been limited to moral support as part of the loose regional ‘Axis of Resistance’ anti-US, anti-Israeli coalition, and the Houthis saying their decision to launch operations against Israel in solidarity with the Palestinians were taken independently.

January 1, 2024 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »