Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Insurance underwriters insert ‘no connection to Israel’ clause for shipping

MEMO | January 25, 2024

Insurance underwriters are requiring some clients to sign contracts guaranteeing that they have no connection to Israel or the US in order to obtain cover for cargo ships passing through the Suez Canal, the New York Times has reported. The demand comes as Houthi attacks in the Red Sea have pushed up insurance premiums for merchant vessels.

According to the NYT, the attacks at this critical choke point handling 12 per cent of global trade have more than doubled the average worldwide shipping costs. Some ships are opting to avoid the Suez Canal and instead take the longer route around the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa, adding weeks to delivery times.

Passing through the Red Sea still necessitates expensive speciality war risk insurance offered by London brokers to cover potential Houthi strikes. Rates have jumped as much as 50 times more than before the Yemen conflict, and now cost up to one per cent of a ship’s value despite relatively minimal damage to ships so far. For a ship carrying goods worth $100 million, that could mean an extra $1m to be insured.

Insurers blame the increased risk on Israel’s military offensive against the Palestinians in Gaza. By forcing clients to guarantee that they have no ties with Israel and its Western allies, underwriters aim to shield themselves from inadvertently covering any vessels associated with the current geopolitical tensions underlying the attacks.

Analysts say that the ripple effects on global trade and consumer prices are still unfolding. They warn that if Red Sea transit remains high-risk, inflation could return.

The demand by underwriters follows previous preventative measures taken by vessels to avoid Houthi attacks. Earlier this month, cargo ships passing into the Red Sea began to declare that they have no links to Israel, according to data from the navigation safety feature known as the Automatic Identification System (AIS), which transmits the identity, location and destination of larger vessels.

Israel’s Western allies appear to be running out of options in their attempt to contain the Houthis. Yesterday, the Financial Times revealed that the US has urged China to help curb Houthi attacks around the crucial Bab Al-Mandab Strait. Chinese ships are not being targeted by the Yemeni group and nor are vessels of countries that are not supporting Israel’s genocidal campaign in Gaza. Nevertheless, China is reported to have expressed “concern” about the attacks, and called for “restraint”.

January 25, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why Russia is Winning the Drone War in Ukraine

By Brian Berletic – New Eastern Outlook – 24.01.2024 

Ukraine is losing the drone war. This isn’t a claim made by the Russian Ministry of Defense or by Russian state media, but rather the headline of an article appearing in Foreign Affairs magazine, written by former Google CEO Eric Schmidt who now heads a think tank, the Special Competitive Studies Project (SCSP), advising the US government regarding artificial intelligence and other emerging technology.

The article titled, “Ukraine is Losing the Drone War – How Kyiv Can Close the Innovation Gap With Russia,” makes a wide range of claims, from repeating unlikely narratives regarding astronomically high Russian losses, to admissions regarding Russia’s many and multiplying advantages over both Ukraine and its Western supporters. Schmidt’s narrative is contradictory, and the article ultimately fails to deliver a coherent explanation as to how Ukraine can actually “close the innovation gap with Russia.”

It is a mystery as to why Schmidt is even writing this article in the first place, not being a journalist or a politician, but rather a leader of the US high-tech industry. But the article demonstrates how even at the highest levels of political and industrial leadership in the US, there lies a fundamental misunderstanding of not only the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, but of the fundamental premise upon which all American foreign policy is built.

Why Ukraine is Losing the Drone War, and will Continue Losing

Schmidt’s article lays out a distorted account of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, following familiar narratives found across the collective West’s media. This includes the notion that Ukraine initially “held the upper hand in drone warfare” and had managed to keep “Russian forces on the back foot.” Such conclusions are drawn by focusing solely on the trading of territory, and in particular, on Ukraine’s Kharkov and Kherson offensives in 2022.

However, because the Ukraine conflict is fundamentally a war of attrition, the true measure of Ukraine’s success or failure is measured in the loss of manpower and equipment versus its ability to regenerate forces, replace equipment, and replenish ammunition stockpiles. In all of these regards, Ukraine has been losing the war from the moment it began – some may even look back in hindsight and conclude the war was lost before it even began.

The collective West for decades developed a large, for-profit military industrial base. It focused on maximizing profits through the production of high-cost systems built in relatively small quantities, while eliminating extra manufacturing capacity for large-scale production that rarely if ever was necessary to sustain the West’s “small wars” following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Russia, on the other hand, inherited the Soviet Union’s massive military industrial base, maintained certain aspects of it, modernized and expanded others, preparing for large-scale, high-intensity, protracted warfare within or along its borders.

From 2008, when US-armed and trained Georgian forces attacked Russian troops in the South Caucasus region, Moscow began preparing for a conflict by proxy with NATO it considered inevitable. From 2014, following the US overthrow of the elected Ukrainian government, it was almost certain that conflict by proxy with NATO would be fought in Ukraine.

From that point onward, Russia began building up the military industrial base required to fight and win a large-scale proxy war against a NATO-armed and trained Ukraine. Because Russia’s military industrial base consists of a large network of state-owned enterprises, a preference for purpose over profits prevailed.

Today, this fundamental reality is reflected in virtually every aspect of the fighting in Ukraine, from Russia’s advantage in quantity regarding low-tech artillery shells, to more advanced systems like main battle tanks, cruise missiles, and warplanes that both outnumber and outperform their NATO counterparts, to – perhaps especially – drones of all kinds.

Schmidt’s article admits that Russia is not only outproducing Ukraine in terms of drones, placing the number of drones produced monthly to around 100,000, but also admits Russia possesses drones Ukraine has no equivalent of. Schmidt singled out the Orlan reconnaissance drone and the Lancet kamikaze drone in particular.

Ukraine, however, has been provided with a large variety of drones produced across the collective West. It began the conflict with a number of much more sophisticated Bayraktar TB-2 drones manufactured by Türkiye. While these drones are formidable weapons, they are inappropriate for the battlefield in Ukraine, where they face Russia’s extensive integrated air defense network and Russia’s extensive array of electronic warfare (EW) capabilities.

Should drones equivalent to the Orlan and Lancet exist in sufficient numbers to provide to Ukraine, the inability to overcome Russia’s advantages in both air defenses and EW would still impair their use.

Schmidt, in fact, notes Russia’s EW capabilities as “superior,” capable of jamming and spoofing signals between Ukrainian drones and their operators. While Ukraine has been provided with EW capabilities as well, the collective West is admittedly years behind Russia in this field of expertise.

At one point, the article admits:

Most Western-supplied weapons have fared poorly against Russia’s antiaircraft systems and electronic attacks. When missiles and attack drones are aimed at Russian sites, they are often spoofed or shot down. U.S. weapons in particular can often be thwarted via GPS jamming.

While Schmidt spends the rest of the article discussing “winning the drone war,” he never actually articulates a coherent strategy in doing so.

He claims, “Ukraine will need to secure additional Western ammunition supplies,” without acknowledging the fact that such supplies do not exist, and will not any time in the foreseeable future because the production capacity to manufacture them in sufficient quantities does not exist.

Schmidt continues, suggesting, “Ukraine also needs antiaircraft and attack missiles to strike fast-moving airborne targets.” Just as with artillery shells, antiaircraft missiles were in short supply even before the conflict began in Ukraine, and have only dwindled further. If producing low-tech artillery shells in greater quantities will take the West years to do, producing more complex missile interceptors will take even longer.

Schmidt claims that, “Ukrainian startups are working around the clock to develop advanced drones that can resist spoofing and jamming.” Yet, this ignores the fact that many more Russians with far greater resources are working around the clock to develop better means of spoofing and jamming.

Ultimately, Schmidt’s “solution” to Ukraine’s losing drone war (and losing the war in general) is for “Kyiv’s allies” to sustain “financial and technical support.” He never explains how this can be done in a way matching or exceeding Russia’s own efforts to constantly expand its military industrial output in both quantity and quality. Russia began with and continues to maintain a headstart over Ukraine and its Western backers. Simply suggesting Ukraine needs more of everything doesn’t address the shortcomings that created these disadvantages in the first place, nor suggest any way of solving them.

Schmidt’s stated objective in the article is “neutralizing the advantages that Russia has gained.” The only actual way to achieve this would be to build a military industrial base capable of matching or exceeding Russia’s ability to research and develop new technology, and then mass produce and place this technology on the battlefield.

It would require the creation of massive state-owned enterprises able to subordinate profit to purpose, the creation of an education system able to supply a steady stream of the necessary human resources this expanded industry would require, and the ability to source raw materials and components from adjacent, likewise state-owned enterprises.

It would take years for the United States to complete such a transformation – years Ukraine doesn’t have. It would also require the political will to do so in the first place, which simply does not and will never exist because of the systemic composition of American political and industrial power.

America’s Tenuous Grasp on Reality, its Worst Enemy  

Eric Schmidt has a close relationship with both the leading edge of high-tech American industry and the US government itself. His think tank, SCSP, says on its official website that its purpose is:

To make recommendations to strengthen America’s long-term competitiveness as artificial intelligence (AI) and other emerging technologies are reshaping our national security, economy, and society. We want to ensure that America is positioned and organized to win the techno-economic competition between now and 2030, the critical window for shaping the future.

SCSP sees 2025-2030 as a critical window in which the US must establish a clear lead over its “rivals” Russia and China. SCSP admits that the “margin for error is shrinking.”

Yet, Schmidt’s admission to Russia’s success in Ukraine and the advantages it holds over not only Ukraine but its Western supporters as well, seems to suggest that this critical window may have already closed.

The very premise that the United States can maintain techno-economic primacy over both Russia and China (and the rest of the world) is fundamentally flawed. All else built upon this flawed premise will find itself drifting further and further from the realm of practicality, and is reflected in a growing detachment from reality many Western leaders in politics and industry seem to exhibit, including Schmidt.

China alone has a larger population than the collective West. Its higher education system is larger than the United States’, graduating millions more each year in critical fields related to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. China’s industrial base dwarfs the collective West’s, and continues to expand, while the West continues to overextend itself and contract.

Given these fundamental realities, how exactly would the United States still somehow match or exceed China’s technological development unless one assumes “Americans” are simply “better” than the Chinese, and despite all of China’s fundamental and growing advantages over the United States, it will still somehow fall short?

These same assumptions have been prevalent throughout commentary and analysis focused on the conflict in Ukraine. These assumptions have consistently been proven wrong, with disastrous consequences. Russia’s many fundamental advantages on the battlefield ahead of the vaunted 2023 Ukrainian offensive unequivocally guaranteed the offensive would fail. Yet, “intangible” factors were added into an equation assuming Western supremacy and Russian inferiority, to skew projections of the offensive’s success in Ukraine’s favor.

A similar formula is being applied to US competition with Russia and China, ignoring fundamental realities and applying “intangible” assumptions of Western superiority to sidestep the reality that China will irreversibly surpass not just the US, but the collective West.

This reality demands the US reevaluate its position and role within international relations, and begin a transition from a hegemon, into a constructive, cooperative partner with Russia, China, and the emerging multipolar world. But just as battlefield fundamentals in Ukraine ahead of the 2023 offensive demanded Kiev negotiate an end to the war in Russia’s favor, only to be ignored at catastrophic costs, these increasingly clear geopolitical fundamentals will be ignored by the political and industrial leadership of the West, by those like Schmidt, at catastrophic costs to the collective West.

It will be the multipolar world and the restraint and patience it has exhibited as well as the political maturity it exercises in developing and implementing policies, that will attempt to temper and manage these costs, both for the sake of global peace and stability, but also and most ironically, for the sake of the collective West itself.

Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer.

January 25, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

China-led multipolarity has accelerated the decline of the American era, the war in Gaza may end it altogether.

By Mohamad Hasan Sweidan | The Cradle | January 24, 2024

What is unfolding today in West Asia — the Gaza war and its regional expansion — cannot be viewed separately from the international transformations that have grown in momentum over the past few years. Today, the transition to multipolarity is the underlying factor shaping the decisions and policies of most countries, particularly those of the great powers.

The timing of Israel’s devastating military assault on Gaza coincides with heightened US attention on its great power competition for Washington, this conflict has much wider geopolitical significance beyond West Asia. In this context, the US has assumed, and will continue to play, a pivotal role in Gaza and its environs, unlike its powerful peers in China and Russia.

According to statistics published by the China Society for Human Rights Studies, the US initiated 201 of the 248 armed conflicts that took place since the end of World War II, often engaging in these wars via US-led alliances and/or proxies.

For decades, Washington has led these conflicts by very ably forming, then leading, and directing broad alliances to achieve its political and military objectives. But that ability notably shifted in December 2023, signaling a sharp decline in this capability.

In response to Yemen’s Ansarallah-aligned armed forces’ Red Sea blockade of Israeli-linked vessels, the US Department of Defense announced the formation of “Operation Guardian of Prosperity … to uphold the foundational principle of freedom of navigation” in those waters, initially consisting of a coalition of ten countries, most of them insignificant partners.

Protecting Israel or maintaining maritime dominance?

The coalition proved shaky from the get-go, with only the US and Britain actively involved in military strikes on Yemen. The reluctance of key European countries France, Spain, and Italy to join the naval alliance indicated a growing skepticism among the US’s traditional partners — both western and West Asian — about Washington’s commitment and capability to defend its allies in any impactful way.

Interestingly, more than eight further countries reportedly joined the coalition, but demanded anonymity, given the potential political fallout from associating with Washington and Tel Aviv.

Crucially, the Pentagon’s stated purpose of securing navigation in the Red Sea does not align with the actual threat presented, revealing ulterior motives behind US actions. The Yemenis have repeatedly confirmed that they only intend to inhibit the passage of Israeli-owned or destined vessels — and that all other ships are free to pass.

In short, the US/UK-led coalition is acting as a naval arm for Israeli military forces, seeking specifically to ensure unimpeded access for ships heading to Israeli ports via the Bab al-Mandab Strait. That’s not a position many other states will get behind if they want to maintain freedom of transport for their own shipping vessels.

Ultimately, the American show of force in these waterways seeks to consolidate US naval dominance, which war-torn Yemen, West Asia’s poorest country, has contested.

As outlined in the National Security Strategy for 2022:

The US “will not allow foreign or regional powers to jeopardize freedom of navigation through the Middle East’s (West Asia) waterways, including the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab al Mandab, nor tolerate efforts by any country to dominate another — or the region — through military buildups, incursions, or threats.”

According to media reports following massive US airstrikes against Iraqi targets on 23 January, Iraqi resistance factions will now also follow Yemen’s suit by implementing a blockade of Israeli ports in the Mediterranean Sea.

Current events are spiraling out of Washington’s control as onlookers increasingly question the utility and competence of US naval leadership in the world’s important waterways. Equally, there is recognition that other formidable forces and states have emerged, challenging US control over key global straits. In the words of British politician and writer Walter Raleigh, “Who rules the seas rules the world.” Under Sanaa’s watch, the US no longer can claim rule over the Red Sea or even its adjacent waterways.

Great power competition amid the Gaza war 

The current scenario in West Asia, particularly post-Al-Aqsa Flood and the Gaza war that followed, coincides with a shift in Washington’s focus toward competition with China and its proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. As outlined in the US intelligence community’s annual threat assessment last year, this transition has already affected strategic goals, leading to a sharp decline in western support, especially from the US, for Ukraine. The Biden administration faced challenges in securing Congressional approval for a new aid package for Kiev, which directly competed for dollars against Tel Aviv’s military campaign in Gaza.

Despite assurances from western leaders during visits to Ukraine in October, their statements came without tangible material support, leaving President Volodymyr Zelensky in the proverbial dust. Quite unexpectedly, China has emerged as a potential peacemaker in this European conflict, with Kiev openly requesting Beijing’s involvement in mediation talks, and the US itself open to Chinese mediation to mitigate the escalation in West Asia.

The Chinese are well aware that there are no simple, face-saving exits for the US from the Gaza war it has championed and that the conflict’s metamorphosis into a regional one mires the US deeper into West Asia — and away from the Asia-Pacific.

Although China seeks to increase its presence in West Asia, it is very careful not to bog itself down in the region’s many issues. But Washington’s request that Beijing use its influence to sway Iran from conflict escalation makes clear that the US is no longer “the biggest power” in the region.

Why Israel opposes multipolarity

Following Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, US financial and military support for Israel has reached a critical stage, presenting two options for Washington. The first involves imposing some control on Israeli actions, given that the war’s timing has been unfavorable to US strategic interests, particularly in a critical election year. The second option, favored by the Washington elite, is to continue its unwavering support to Tel Aviv, even at the risk of damage to its global image.

Sustained global outrage over the Gaza war, coupled with the landmark genocide case filed against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), shows that Washington’s ability to cover for Israel is diminishing rapidly. Again, this reflects the global shift in the balance of power toward multipolarity, which is marked by the widespread decline of American influence.

But the US support for the Gaza genocide has had dramatic domestic repercussions, too. Polls show a major shift in the attitudes of young Americans, especially university youth, who will make up the ranks of America’s future leaders.

A Harvard-Harris poll published on 17 January reveals that 46 percent of respondents aged 18-24 believe that Hamas’ actions on 7 October can be justified because of the injustice to which the Palestinians are subjected.  The same poll shows that 43 percent of the same group support Hamas in this war, and that 57 percent believe that Israel is carrying out massacres in Gaza. The most staggering poll result of all, though, has to be the one in December (conducted by the same pollsters) in which 51 percent of young Americans believe a final solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is for Israel to end and be given to Hamas and the Palestinians.

While Israel remains a direct US interest in West Asia, Washington’s commitment to Tel Aviv’s security has already become a growing burden and increasingly difficult to justify. As the region’s Axis of Resistance expands its battle with Israel on new, multiple frontlines, the US will need to reallocate ever-expanding resources and focus on matching its international rivals in further-flung geographies.

Ukraine was a test run compared to this Gaza war and the immense, direct toll it is taking on US alliances, domestic politics, and the American image globally. For Israel, this presents an existential crisis beyond measure, as Washington is forced to compete with other great powers, none of whom are ideologically driven to support Zionism as part of their foreign policies.

January 24, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Understanding China’s Navigation of the Gaza War

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – 23.01.2024 

China has once again called for a comprehensive and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, including a globally agreed timeline for the creation of a separate state for the people of Palestine. China’s position, which many in the West see as singularly pro-Arab, has been consistent ever since the beginning of the present phase of Israel’s war on Gaza, which has already killed more than 23,000 civilians, including more than 10,000 Children. China has been trying to navigate the crisis in a way that guards its main interests, i.e., its multi-billion dollar investment across the region. A wider war in the region could hurt China’s interests more than it could hurt any other extra-regional power. China has a deep economic presence in most of the Arab world. Although it has sound economic ties with Israel too, those with the Muslim world in the Middle East, including Iran, clearly outweigh its ties with Israel. China’s collective investment in the Middle East and North Africa is above US$239 billion. This is on top of their bilateral trade, which crossed US$330 billion in 2021.

By contrast, the China-Israel bilateral trade is less than US$25 billion. Until 2018, China was a major investor in Israel, especially in the tech sector. However, due to the mounting US pressure over Chinese investments coming with potential “security risks”, China’s investments have cooled down. These investment and trade trends are shaping China’s options to navigate the present crisis. On the one hand, these trends explain a) why China has taken a pro-Arab position, and b) why China fears a wider war in the region. Not only, a wider war could impact billions of dollars but also put almost a million Chinese nationals based in the region working on numerous projects in serious jeopardy. Evacuating these many people will be a nightmare.

Beijing learnt a crucial lesson when NATO invaded Libya in 2011. When NATO invaded Libya in 2011, it cost China a lot. According to figures released by the Chinese government itself, 75 Chinese companies, including 13 state-owned companies, were involved in Libya in about 50 joint projects. More than 35,000 Chinese workers were there. The China State Construction Engineering Corporation said that its residential construction project worth US$2.68 billion was under threat. The China Railway Construction Corporation reported that it had to leave US$4.24 billion worth of unfinished projects in the country. The State-run Metallurgical Corporation of China said that it had suspended two projects in Libya that have a remaining value of 5.13 billion yuan.

China cannot afford a similar scenario, which will have a much bigger impact than Libya – not only because investments worth hundreds of billions of dollars will be adversely affected but also because this war will most certainly create a global energy crisis that would affect China’s economy that relies quite heavily on oil imports from this region. China, therefore, not only detests the already ongoing war but also fears its expansion. Therefore, Beijing, alongside Russia and its allies in the region, is pushing to block any possibilities of a wider conflagration.

Besides the economic logic, a more social-cum-security logic is also at play for Beijing. Taking anti-Palestine and pro-Israel/pro-US positions can also put Beijing in the line of the fire of religious extremism. China has a sensitive “Muslim problem” in its Xinjiang region. Beijing believes that taking a pro-Palestine position will help it a) reinforce its pro-Muslim credentials, reform its image in the wider Muslim world and help against Western propaganda that accuses China of running “concentration camps”, and b) help prevent radicalisation from spreading within its borders. A pro-Israel position, on the contrary, could make Beijing a target of jihadi forces not only within its borders but also outside, i.e., in Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc.

This position also has a geostrategic calculus. This strategy is tied to what came to be known as China’s “new security architecture for the Middle East” that Foreign Minister Wany Yi unveiled in September 2022. The minister highlighted this vision, saying that the “new security concept” is based on common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security. More importantly, it seeks to establish the Middle Eastern countries’ dominant position (as opposed to as extraterritorial players), who not only abide by the purposes and principles of the UN charter but also directly boost regional security.

Boosting the Middle Eastern states as dominant players is a key element of China’s push for a multipolar world order. Therefore, by taking a pro-Arab position, Beijing is basically reinforcing the Arab world’s position vis-à-vis not only Israel but also the collective West so that the latter behaves in a way that takes these states’ interests into account while pushing for a just solution to what China considers the “core” issue affecting the region since the end of the Second World War.

Multiple interests are at stake that Beijing wants to protect by taking this pro-Arab position. Thinking otherwise, were Beijing to take a pro-Israel position, it would not serve any of these objectives. For instance, a pro-Israel position will directly boost Israel’s position vis-à-vis the Arab world. It might even encourage Israel to expand the war to implement its version of the “final solution” on the Palestinians. The war, in this context, is more likely to expand than in a situation where China (and Russia) stand with the Arab world and their anti-US/anti-Israel position might boost the Arab world’s national power potential that might deter Israel’s brutal pursuit of the so-called “Greater Israel” at the expense of millions of lives.

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

January 23, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Leave a comment

China Slams US, Issues Statement With Arab League Calling for Gaza Ceasefire

Sputnik – 16.01.2024

“The US, which is pouring fuel on the fire in the Israel-Palestine conflict, also wants to play the role of fireman,” read an article in Chinese media criticizing America’s “unconditional support for Israel.”

China released a joint statement with Arab League nations Sunday urging a ceasefire in Gaza and advocating a two-state solution to resolve the long running Palestine-Israel conflict.

The resolution emerged after Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi met Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul-Gheit in Cairo, Egypt.

The statement called for dialogue with Palestinian groups and a global peace conference to move towards implementing a two-state solution, advocating a “government of Palestine for the Palestinians.” The leaders urged the full implementation of resolutions passed by the United Nations which have long criticized the Israeli occupation of internationally-recognized Palestinian territory. The United States typically uses its influence and position on the UN Security Council to block and undermine resolutions criticizing Israel’s conduct.

The leaders also promoted the resumption of direct peace talks between the Israeli and Palestinian sides.

The statement then touched on recent US and UK-backed airstrikes against the Houthi movement in Yemen, which Chinese media criticized as an “escalation” of the situation and an attempt to distract from the broader conflict. Chinese media called for the respect of the “sovereignty and territorial integrity of Yemen,” a critique of the airstrikes that it noted lacked authorization by the UN.

Finally, China called for the sending of humanitarian aid to Palestinians, which it labeled an “imperative moral responsibility.” China insisted that the only way to ultimately safeguard commercial interests in the Red Sea is to achieve “a just settlement of the Palestinian issue.”

“We have a common responsibility to ensure the security of the Red Sea, and we will not be deceived by the US to fuel such tensions,” said Li Weijian, a researcher at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies.

China and Arab League countries also vowed to move forward on economic cooperation via China’s Belt and Road initiative during the meeting.

January 16, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Philippines Plans South China Sea Escalation With US Support

By Chimauchem Nwosu – Sputnik – 15.01.2024

Washington’s increased military activities in the South China Sea could potentially destabilize regional peace and stability, as Manila is influenced and urged by the US to follow the path of confrontation.

The Philippines’ top brass has stated its intentions to advance its bases in the South China Sea and increase its naval fleet and radars, despite thawing relations with its Chinese neighbor.

Romeo Brawner Jr., Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, told the press that his country wants to make its outposts in the area more habitable — a move bound to fuel tensions over disputed maritime borders.

Filipino President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has told the armed forces to seek the support of foreign militaries as it shifts focus from internal security to maritime defense.

The Philippines is a key US ally in the region and hosts its military bases, used during US wars in Vietnam and Korea.

But in recent times, Washington has shifted towards “great power competition” with China, co-opting Manila as a tool in its quest to “contain” Beijing.

Tensions between the Asian nations have intensified since October 4, 2023, with reports of Flippino ships defying Chinese Coast Guard warnings to pass through the Second Thomas Shoal in the Spratly Islands of the South China Sea on a resupply mission.

Early December last year, the Philippines established a monitoring base for its coast guard on Thitu Island in the disputed South China Sea. It also announced its intentions to increase joint patrols with the US and Australia in the area to curtail what it perceives as “pure bullying” by China, a Filipino official told media.

In response, Beijing has stated that such patrols potentially exacerbate a larger conflict that could plunge the region into chaos and criticized Manila’s plan as a provocation.

Chinese authorities have also accused the US of escalating tensions in the Asia-Pacific, especially in the South China Sea, and condemned Washington’s attempts to thwart China-Taiwan relations.

Washington insists that its ships will sail wherever they want in what it defines as international waters. The US has reiterated its resolve to defend the Philippines in the event of an attack, including in the South China Sea.

But China’s Foreign Ministry said heightened US military activities in the South China Sea further worsens the situation and subverts international law and its sovereignty.

“The US instigated and emboldened the Philippine side to infringe upon China’s sovereignty, which escalated maritime tensions. The Chinese side firmly opposes that,” Senior Colonel Wu Qian, spokesperson for China’s Ministry of National Defense, said during a news conference.

Despite the deteriorating tensions, Marcos has stated that the Philippines will continuously assert its rights in the South China Sea. “We shall continue to assert our rights in accordance with the Philippine Constitution and international law,” Marcos remarked. This follows Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s caution that ties between Beijing and Manila are “facing serious difficulties” and warned against colluding with “malicious external forces.”

January 16, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Taiwan: cross-strait brinkmanship to continue

BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | JANUARY 15, 2024 

Taiwan’s electoral laws provide for the candidate with the highest number of votes becoming the winner on a first-past-the-post basis, and it is a moot point that the incumbent Vice President William Lai from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) who secured only 40 percent of votes is still elected as the next president. 

The DPP suffered a setback in the legislative election too, losing its majority in the 113-seat legislature and falling behind the Nationalist Party (KMT). In effect, it is an electoral outcome akin to what prevails in France or Brazil, for instance, with the exception that both Emmanuel Macron and Lula da Silva won a majority of votes cast in the second round. 

Such hair-splitting may seem irrelevant but then, there are ‘local characteristics’ in the situation around Taiwan that add to the complexity of Sunday’s election result. 

Chinese President Xi Jinping has made ‘national rejuvenation’ a goal for Beijing to reach by mid-century — and,  bringing Taiwan under its control and reunifying China is part of that rejuvenation vision. In his New Year address, Xi Jinping insisted that the “reunification of the motherland is a historical inevitability.” 

In this narrative, mainland China and Taiwan were separated at a certain point in time because of being ‘a weak nation’, an issue that would be resolved when ‘rejuvenation’ is achieved. Therefore, the issue is a core question for the Chinese Communist Party’s legitimacy. 

On the other hand, Lai and the DPP see Taiwan as an independent country, whereas, the two main opposition parties who between them garnered 60% of votes in Sunday’s poll do not subscribe to such a stance. The Beijing-friendly Kuomintang (KMT) opposes Taiwan independence and advocates ‘pragmatic dialogue’ while the other rival, the Taiwan People’s Party, proposes engaging with Beijing and maintaining peace. 

In sum, the majority of Taiwanese public opinion falls short of endorsing independence for the country and also prefers the path of dialogue and engagement with Beijing rather than confrontation. Indeed, some analysts in Taiwan estimate that the result of the legislative election may eventually clear the way for policies to promote exchanges with the mainland, such as reducing restrictions on mainland students and tourists and even promote communication. 

Unsurprisingly, Beijing is extremely critical of Lai who once described himself as a “pragmatic worker for Taiwan independence” and whose vice presidential candidate also happens to be a famous figure in the Beltway, having served as Taiwan’s de facto ambassador to the US. 

The crux of the matter is that the Taiwan question cuts to the heart of a broader geopolitical rivalry between the US and China. Put differently, how Beijing is going to interpret the ascendance of a third successive government in Taipei led by the pro-independence DPP will be crucial. Will Beijing feel the need to up the stakes? That is a big question. 

To be sure, Sunday’s vote will not only decide Taiwan’s policy with Beijing for years to come, but also geopolitics in the Asia-Pacific region and US-China relations. Military tensions are already on the rise. Under Lai, who takes over as president in May, Washington will no doubt continue to regard Taiwan as a ‘like-minded’ partner. That, in turn, will complicate the fragile US-China relationship. 

And any surge in the US-China rivalry can only increase the strategic value of Taiwan for Washington, which will in any case continue to play the Taiwan card against Beijing, as it has been a low-cost, high-return game for the Americans to play — so far at least.  

By internationalising the Taiwan question, which is essentially China’s internal problem, and by drumming up a propaganda campaign against Beijing’s so-called assertiveness in the region and beyond, the US has thrown down the gauntlet at China’s diplomats who are quickly damned as ‘wolf warriors’ if they react robustly. 

Indeed, the strategy brought dividends insofar as the US’ Asia-Pacific allies Japan, Australia, South Korea and the Philippines, who depend on Washington to guarantee their security, as well as the NATO allies, to a lesser extent, who feel constrained to follow Washington’s lead on the Taiwan issue under the rubric of ‘collective deterrence’. 

The bottom line is, Washington realises that it is unrealistic and difficult for the US alone to respond to China’s material national power and needs to mobilise the assets of its allies and like-minded partners to strengthen ‘collective deterrence.’ 

In fact, the European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell last year called on European navies to patrol the Taiwan Strait to “show Europe’s commitment” to the region. 

However, interestingly, the countries of the Global South — the so-called ‘global majority’ — have remained unmoved and are unwilling to risk their China relations over Taiwan and are not in the least interested in taking sides in the US-China rivalry. 

Beijing knows that it is in a strong position vis-a-vis Taipei and that Lai has very few options and very little room for manoeuvring. Arguably, Beijing’s real challenge lies in showing its grave displeasure without going to war. It may require that Beijing expands its playbook without pushing regional allies further into the US camp. 

From the initial rhetoric, it appears that Beijing has not decided how to respond to the DPP victory. China’s full response may play out over months or years, but the likelihood is that the Taiwan election cannot change the direction of cross-strait relations, which also means that the dynamic of brinkmanship and stress will continue.

Reporting on Sunday’s poll, the New York Times wrote that “To Beijing, the (Taiwan) island is a remnant of its civil war that the United States has no business meddling with. To Washington, it (Taiwan) is the first line of defence for global stability… and the microprocessor factory for the world.” 

Indeed, in geo-strategic terms, the US sees Taiwan as a crucial link in the so-called first island chain that runs from Borneo to the Philippines, Japan and South Korea, where the American bases would curtail the deployment of Chinese presence in the western Pacific. 

But such a cold-war era containment strategy is dated, on the one hand, with the advent of new transport planes, strategic bombers, aircraft carriers and hypersonic missiles that have a multiplier effect on the Chinese military capabilities, while, on the other hand, the AI-driven military technology and machine learning may create lasting change across the national security enterprise. 

In fact, the San Francisco summit between President Joe Biden and Xi turned out to be AI’s ‘Oppenheimer moment,’ as the two leaders agreed to “work together to assess the threats posed by AI” with a view to develop concrete regulatory frameworks to prevent the potentially destabilising consequences of the rapid development of military AI outstripping international law.

When knowledge networks collide with any new technology, different futures tend to appear on the horizon that call for prudence and a more robust dialogue. Significantly, the surcharged Taiwanese elections did not discourage the US and Chinese defence officials from holding their ‘policy coordination talks’ at the Pentagon last week on Monday and Tuesday — the first such in-person meetings since before the coronavirus pandemic.

In a statement in Beijing, the Chinese defence spokesperson said on Friday that Beijing “expects the US side to develop a right perception of China, respect the core interests and major concerns of the Chinese side, and take concrete actions to work with China in the same direction to follow through the important consensus reached by the two heads of state in San Francisco.”

January 16, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

China Rebukes US State Dept for Sending ‘Gravely Wrong Signal’ to Taiwan

Sputnik – 14.01.2024

China resolutely opposes any official interaction between the US and Taiwan and any American interference in Taiwan’s internal affairs, regardless of the reasons, and calls on Washington to strictly adhere to the one-China principle and the joint communiques.

China has condemned the US State Department’s recent remarks on Taiwan’s election, saying they blatantly disregard the one-China policy and the agreed China-US joint communiques, the country’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Sunday.

“The US State Department’s statement […] also sends a gravely wrong signal to the ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces. We strongly deplore and resolutely oppose it, and have made serious representations to the US side,” the statement read.

Emphasizing the importance of the Taiwan issue to China’s core interests, the ministry reiterated that upholding the one-China principle is crucial to maintaining stable China-US relations and is a globally recognized norm in international affairs.

The ministry also warned US leaders against supporting Taiwan independence, the notion of “two Chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan,” and against using the Taiwan issue to contain China.

“China firmly opposes the US having any form of official interaction with Taiwan and interfering in Taiwan affairs in any way or under any pretext. We urge the US to earnestly abide by the one-China principle and the three China-US joint communiqués and act seriously in accordance with the commitments that have been reaffirmed multiple times,” the statement explained.

“We urge the US to stop interactions of an official nature with Taiwan and stop sending any wrong signal to the separatist forces for ‘Taiwan independence’,” it added.

Elections for Taiwan’s regional leader and members of parliament were held on Saturday with a 69.8% voter turnout, according to the local election committee. Lai Ching-te of Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was declared the winner leader’s election with 40.05% of the vote, with ballots from 17,759 of 17,795 polling stations counted. However, the DPP itself lost 11 parliamentary seats in the election. Lai will be inaugurated on May 20, 2024.

Congratulating Lai on his victory, the US State Department released a statement saying: “We also congratulate the Taiwan people for once again demonstrating the strength of their robust democratic system and electoral process.”

“The partnership between the American people and the people on Taiwan, rooted in democratic values, continues to broaden and deepen across economic, cultural, and people-to-people ties. We look forward to working with Dr. Lai and Taiwan’s leaders of all parties to advance our shared interests and values, and to further our longstanding unofficial relationship,” it added.

January 14, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

UNSC has not authorized force against Yemen; China urges all parties concerned to abide by international law

Global Times | January 13, 2024

China opposes any forcible transfer of the Palestinian people from the Gaza Strip, and all measures must be taken to alleviate the humanitarian catastrophe and make a cease-fire the most urgent task of the moment, China’s permanent representative to the UN Zhang Jun said during a UN Security Council conference on Friday local time.

An immediate ceasefire has become the overwhelming call of the international community, but a permanent member of UN Security Council (UNSC) has vetoed the consensus reached by the UNSC in this regard on various grounds, which is a blatant defiance of international fairness, justice and the authority of UNSC, Zhang said.

The UNSC failed to adopt a draft resolution on December 8, 2023 that would have demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza due to a veto cast by the US. Many countries expressed disappointment over the US veto of the Gaza-related draft.

It is a blatant double standard for some people to talk about the protection of human rights and the prevention of genocide while pretending to be deaf and dumb, covering up and diverting attention from the tragic situation in Gaza, Zhang remarked, “We must remove all interference and take vigorous action to quell the war, save lives and restore peace.”

In addition, Zhang stressed that that any forcible transfer of the Palestinian people must be firmly rejected.

Over the past three months, millions of Palestinian people have been forced to relocate repeatedly and were under constant threat to their lives, said Zhang, noting that China is gravely concerned about the “voluntary emigration” of Gaza people, which has been advocated by some Israeli politicians.

The horrific idea of displacing two million people from Gaza and turning it into a “safe zone” devoid of human habitation, if implemented, would constitute a grave crime under international law and completely destroy prospects for the “Two-State solution,” Zhang remarked.

The Chinese envoy called for all measures to be taken to alleviate the humanitarian catastrophe in the Gaza Strip.

Zhang said it was totally unacceptable for Israel to accuse the UN of not having the will and capacity to provide humanitarian relief when it was clear that Israel was accountable for the continued bombing and striking in Gaza and setting obstacles to the entry of humanitarian supplies.

He urged Israel to immediately cease its indiscriminate military attacks and destruction of Gaza.

UNSC resolutions 2712 and 2720 must be fully implemented, and Israel must fulfil its obligations as the occupying party to guarantee the safety of humanitarian workers and provide full cooperation with humanitarian relief efforts, Zhang said.

The envoy reiterated that a ceasefire must be implemented with the utmost urgency. “Only a ceasefire can prevent greater civilian casualties and humanitarian disasters and create conditions for the early release of all hostages; only a ceasefire can prevent the complete destruction of the basis of the Two-State solution; and only a ceasefire can prevent the entire Middle East region from being drawn into a catastrophe.”

Regarding the recent attacks launched by US and UK on Yemen against the Houthi rebels, which targeted Israeli-linked ships in the Red Sea, Zhang expressed concerns about the spillover effects of the Gaza crisis.

Zhang said at a UNSC emergency conference on the Red Sea situation on the same day that the UNSC has never authorized any country to use force against Yemen. The military action taken by the related countries runs counter to the UN resolution 2722, which the Security Council has just adopted.

The envoy warned that the Middle East region is on the brink of extreme danger, and what should be avoided now is reckless military adventurism. He added that what is needed most of all is calm and restraint to prevent further expansion of the conflict.

China urges all parties concerned, especially the influential powers, to abide by the Charter of the UN and international law, adhere to the direction of dialogue and consultation, and make practical efforts to maintain peace and stability in the Red Sea and the Middle East region, Zhang said.

The US carried out further strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen on Friday night a day after launching a coordinated multi-nation attack on nearly 30 Houthi locations.

January 13, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Is China hatching a sinister plot regarding the Israel-Gaza war?

Gaza Strip. © MOHAMMED ABED / AFP
By Timur Fomenko | RT | January 13, 2024

A recent Foreign Affairs article purports to expose “China’s game in Gaza,” accusing Beijing of “Exploiting Israel’s War to Win Over the Global South.”

The author alleges that “in calling for a two-state solution, refusing to condemn Hamas, and making symbolic efforts to support a ceasefire, [China] has taken advantage of global anti-Israeli sentiment in a bid to elevate its own standing in the Global South.”

This argument is interesting, because it is premised on the logic that the war on Gaza can end quickly if Beijing simply supports the US position, which the article claims is “to reconcile public support for Israel with private pressure to more carefully target its attacks in Gaza and to be more open to a political settlement with the Palestinians.” So let’s get this right, it’s the US that wants to end this conflict fairly and China is exacerbating it and therefore is at fault?

This kind of analysis is farfetched at best and outright dishonest at worst, and overall an insult to every observer’s intelligence. It really shows the lengths to which the mainstream cycle of journalists and think-tankers will go in order to not place any blame on Israel whatsoever, but to scapegoat third parties who do not in fact have a hand in the conflict. China has always taken a neutral position on the Israel-Palestine issue, though it recognizes the State of Palestine’s sovereign existence, and therefore advocates a two-state solution.

However, the situation really doesn’t need China at all in order to ferment an anti-Israeli and anti-US backlash across the Global South. The US and its allies have managed to do that all by themselves. China’s rhetoric on the issue has been inconsequential and certainly hardly provocative.

First of all, the Foreign Affairs article takes the misleading State Department position that the US is some kind of honest broker and mediator in the Israel-Palestine conflict that just wants the two sides to make up and get along. This is an absolute lie. All the US has offered is unconditional, uncritical and blanket support to Israel which Benjamin Netanyahu has calculated allows him to do whatever he wants, effectively consequence-free. Will the US actually sanction Israel? Will the US condemn Israel at the UN? Will the US stop arming Israel? Absolutely not, and he knows this, therefore anything Washington might claim in regards to sparing civilians or talking about a ceasefire is hollow because it is not backed up by any substance. Israel is allowed to do whatever it sees fit, because placing any restraints on it is domestically politically untenable in the US, as well as in allied countries such as the UK.

Therefore, even if it wanted to, how could China possibly end the conflict, let alone be responsible for it? It is the scenes of unprecedented, Western-backed slaughter and carnage in Gaza that are provoking outrage in the Global South, and the reality that Israel is a law unto itself. This backlash is entirely and exclusively Western-generated and there is no conspiracy nor agenda by China as a neutral player to exploit it. In fact, if China were serious, it would be actively whipping up anti-Israeli sentiment, but it is not doing so because Beijing for the most part is restrained and has little to say on third-party issues.

Rather, China’s alignment with the Global South is a historic trend given Beijing itself is a part of the Global South from the days of its revolutionary heritage, the common experience of colonialism, and therefore the desire to sustain sovereignty and independence from Western domination. This forms a common position with the states of the Middle East, Africa and Latin America on Palestine, with the latter being the most prominent example of Western-led colonial oppression in the world. The situation in Gaza is a Western-backed injustice and set of atrocities, which in turn reveals the double standards of these countries who purport to be the champions of freedom and human rights.

In this case, China doesn’t need to say anything regarding Gaza to inflame the Global South because the situation really is quite self-explanatory. The US is costing itself support throughout the Global South by showing that it is an enabler of genocide through the unconditional political and military backing it grants the Israeli state, yet here in Foreign Affairs we have the lopsided rendition that really it’s just all China’s fault, as usual.

January 13, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , | Leave a comment

West frustrated by Global South’s refusal to abandon Russia in secret US-G7 meeting on Ukraine

By Ahmed Adel | January 11, 2024

A secret meeting took place in December in the Saudi Arabian capital between the United States, Ukraine, its G7 allies and a small group of countries from the Global South to try to drum up support for Kiev’s conditions for resolving the conflict with Moscow. Russia was not invited to the meeting, and China decided not to send a representative, reported Bloomberg, whilst Brazil stressed any such meeting must have a Russian presence.

According to Bloomberg, the meeting’s secrecy was intended, in part, to make participating countries feel more comfortable joining, as it was believed that the smaller format would allow for a freer and more frank discussion on the so-called peace formula for Ukraine. However, according to people familiar with the meeting and interviewed by Bloomberg, there was no major progress as Ukraine and its G7 allies continued to resist calls from Global South nations to engage directly with Russia.

Although senior officials from India, Saudi Arabia and Turkey attended the December meeting in Riyadh, other major Global South nations that participated in some of the previous larger sessions – such as China, Brazil, and the United Arab Emirates – did not send their representatives.

Brazil, which presides over the G20 this year, contributed to the secret meeting with only a written statement prepared by the International Affairs advisor to the Presidency of the Republic, Celso Amorim. Brazil was invited but was unable to attend due to incompatibility in Amorim’s agenda.

According to Jamil Chade’s column on the Brazilian portal UOL, Amorim sent a letter to the authorities who mediated the December meeting in Riyadh and clarified Brazil’s disappointment in the conduct of the process since the meetings do not have the other party necessary, Russia, to reach an agreement.

“Initially, we were encouraged by the untapped potential of this group’s restricted format, which could eventually serve as a facilitator between the two conflicting sides […]. Our contribution aimed to promote direct or indirect dialogue between the two parties […],” the former minister of foreign affairs said.

“[But] as the conflict prepares to enter its third year, there is still no opening for dialogue or a credible prospect for an end to hostilities […] the willingness of the parties to engage in talks is critical for the success of our diplomatic efforts,” stated Amorim, pointing out that it was precisely this disposition that allowed the tension between Venezuela and Guyana to be prevented from becoming a hot war.

When contacted by UOL, Amorim explained that he was “considering” whether to go to Davos but was unsure.

“In our interaction with Russia and Ukraine, we constantly emphasise our belief that dialogue is essential for this process to produce results. We invite them to create diplomatic opportunities […] Brazil remains committed to renewing its engagement in the Copenhagen process, as soon as the parties are willing to start an authentic dialogue […],” added the Brazilian government in the letter.

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has already warned Zelensky that a peace process cannot be unilateral, while other emerging countries, mainly those from the Global South, have insisted that there is no way to endorse the Ukrainian plan without involving the Russians in the debates, writes the portal.

On January 14, Switzerland and Ukraine will host the fourth meeting in Davos to work on a solution to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. However, once again, the meeting’s agenda will be limited to the unrealistic peace plan of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and will not be attended by representatives from Moscow, thus ensuring its failure.

Under these conditions, Brazil is not wasting time on failed initiatives, especially when trade relations with Russia are booming. Last December, trade volume between Russia and Brazil grew 80%, reaching $1.6 billion for the first time, according to the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE).

Brazil acquired goods from Russia at the end of last year worth a total of $1.5 billion, which became the largest volume of purchases in modern history. The main import commodity was petroleum derivatives, at a record value of $1.1 billion. As a result, Moscow has become the South American country’s largest supplier of this commodity.

Latin America’s largest and most important country will not sacrifice trade relations with Russia or waste time with failed initiatives that will never eventuate because Zelensky has unrealistic demands on how to achieve peace, such as the full withdrawal of the Russian state from newly liberated territories and even Crimea, despite having no leverage to make such demands. In this way, there is little surprise that the secret meeting in Riyadh was destined only for failure.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

January 11, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

China’s COSCO halts shipping to Israeli ports: Israeli media

The Cradle | January 7, 2024

Chinese state-owned shipping company COSCO, the fourth largest in the world, has halted sailing to Israeli ports, Israeli media outlet Globes reported on 7 January, in the wake of attacks and attempted seizures of vessels heading to Israel via the Red Sea by Yemeni armed forces.

The Israeli report indicated that the Chinese firm did not disclose a reason for the policy change. COSCO’s offices in Israel have refused to comment on the development.

The Globes report attributed the decision to the close ties between China and Iran, which sells 90 percent of its crude oil exports to Beijing. Iran is a supporter of the Yemeni government and opposes Israel’s ongoing war on Gaza.

In a similar development, the Hong Kong-based OOCL halted all cargo deliveries to Israel last month, citing “operational problems.”

In the same month, other major shipping firms, including the Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) and CMA CGM, announced their decision to halt shipments to Israel one day after the Yemeni Armed Forces attacked two Israel-bound vessels.

Yemeni forces have been attacking Israeli-bound vessels in the Red Sea in response to Israel’s war on Gaza, which the Sanaa government views as genocide.

Washington and its allies in turn formed the Prosperity Guardian naval coalition and issued an ultimatum to Yemen’s Ansarallah-led government to stop their Red Sea operations or suffer the “consequences.”

Yemen’s actions have forced numerous leading shipping companies to instead travel around the Cape of Good Hope at the southern tip of Africa to reach Europe, extending the shipping times by two weeks and increasing costs.

On 31 December, US naval forces sank three Yemeni boats in the Red Sea, killing ten Yemeni naval soldiers.

From the onset of the Gaza conflict on 7 October, Yemeni military forces have targeted a minimum of 15 merchant vessels either bound for Israeli harbors or owned by entities associated with Israel.

January 7, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »