Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Macron slapped down for cheap talk on Israel arms ban

By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 9, 2024

French President Emmanuel Macron got his marching orders with a smack on the head for daring to propose an arms embargo on Israel.

Israel’s obnoxious leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, reportedly mauled Macron in a phone call for having the nerve to make such a suggestion.

With his typical bluster and deceit, Netanyahu claimed that Israel was fighting for Western civilization against an “axis of evil” led by Iran and that Macron should be ashamed of himself for not backing Israel.

It seems that Monsieur President got the message and has now shut up.

Earlier, according to reports, the French leader said in an interview with French media that he would be pushing for a diplomatic solution in the region which would involve an international halt on arms exports to Israel: He said: “I think that today, the priority is that we return to a political solution, that we stop supplying weapons [to Israel] to lead the fighting in Gaza.”

Macron added: “Our priority now is to avoid escalation. The Lebanese people must not in turn be sacrificed, Lebanon cannot become another Gaza.”

In response, Netanyahu blew a gasket, claiming: “As Israel fights the forces of barbarism led by Iran, all civilized countries should be standing firmly by Israel’s side. Yet, President Macron and other Western leaders are now calling for arms embargoes against Israel. Shame on them.”

As a matter of legal fact, Macron’s call for halting arms exports is correct. The International Criminal Court has ruled that the Israeli regime’s offensive on Gaza could amount to genocide. Under the Genocide Convention, all states are obliged not to facilitate in any way another state that is engaged in genocide. That means that all weapons exports to Israel should be banned.

The thing is, though, Macron’s talk is cheap and lacking in genuine concern for ending the year-long horror in Gaza, which has now been extended to Lebanon. For a start, as Macron admitted, France has negligible arms exports to Israel. That is not due to any ethical stance by France. It is simply because it has not been a supplier of arms to Israel in recent years, although France crucially helped Israel develop nuclear weapons illegally in the early 1960s – a reprehensible legacy that continues to destabilize and menace relations in the region.

So an embargo on Israel, as called for by Macron, will not impact French business in the slightest. Given that, it is, therefore, an easy call by Macron for a halt to weapons sales.

The United States and Germany are the two main arms suppliers to Israel, accounting for nearly 70 and 30 percent of all imports.

What is of more interest to Macron is “exporting” French prestige to the rest of the world.

Since Israel launched its genocidal assault on Gaza one year ago, the French leader has said nothing about stopping the international supply of weapons to the Israeli regime even as the death toll has increased to more than 41,000 people, mainly women and children.

The United States has the predominant leverage over Israel. Over the past year, the U.S. has supplied an estimated $18 billion worth of weapons to Israel, including warplanes and heavy bombs. The slaughter could have been stopped almost immediately if the Biden administration had used its leverage. European leaders like Macron could have put pressure on the U.S. to do so, but they didn’t. That is the real shame.

However, lately, what concerns Macron more is the expansion of Israel’s genocide to Lebanon is an embarrassing blow to France’s international image and illusions of grandeur. After all, Lebanon is a former French colony in the Middle East carved from the Ottoman Empire by Britain and France under the Sykes-Picot agreement (1916).

Lebanon has been an independent nation since 1943. Nevertheless, Paris maintains a strong influence on the country’s politics and business under a presumed “special relationship.” It must be galling for Macron, who waxes lyrical about his ambition of renewing “France’s Greatness” and geopolitical importance, to see the former French colony being blasted apart by Israel.

Over 2,000 Lebanese civilians have been killed in Israeli air strikes over the past two weeks. The capital, Beirut, is pounded with impunity by heavy Israeli bombardment. Millions of people are being forcibly displaced – and the French state is doing nothing to alleviate the suffering and violation of Lebanon’s sovereignty. Not that France did much when Israel previously invaded Lebanon in 1982 and 2006. But this time, given that Macron has made such a song and dance about restoring La France, the impotence in Paris is all the more humiliating.

Macron’s call for an arms embargo was initially welcomed by Middle Eastern nations, including Lebanon, Egypt, Qatar, and, of course, the Palestinians.

It seems the French president is aiming to create pressure on the United States and Germany to exert leverage on Israel and for France to get the kudos. He won’t get much change out of that move, as Netanyahu’s slap-down showed.

But another reason for the feebleness is that the ultimate aim is not a principled call to stop the conflict in Gaza or Lebanon but rather to salvage France’s reputation as a diplomatic player. Vanity is not a sound basis for anything substantial or meaningful.

Macron and Biden had announced a joint statement on September 25 calling for a ceasefire in Lebanon. The Israeli regime rudely ignored that call and proceeded to escalate the violence with the assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut and intensified bombing of Lebanon.

Lebanon is being torn apart by Israeli aggression and France is seen as not being able to do anything about it. Neither having any political courage to do anything nor having any political clout.

Netanyahu is a despicable brute. But his slapping down of Macron is a priceless demonstration of how much of a non-entity the French leader is.

And by extension that applies to all the European so-called leaders who sit on their hands while the U.S.-backed Israeli regime murders with impunity.

October 10, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

France Continues to Supply Arms to Israel, Contrary to Macron’s Statements

By Iara Modarelli | 21st Century Wire | October 9, 2024

France’s stance on arming Israel has fluctuated significantly in recent days. President Emmanuel Macron initially made headlines by announcing a potential halt to weapons deliveries to Israel and claimed that providing arms while demanding a ceasefire was “inconsistent”. But he made a swift U-turn after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu published a video statement in response, publicly shaming Macron. France’s defense ministry later clarified that the supply of weapons to Israel would persist.

On Saturday, Macron told broadcaster France Inter: “I think that today, the priority is that we return to a political solution, that we stop delivering weapons to fight in Gaza”, and reiterated his concern over Israel’s horrific attacks on Gaza which are ongoing despite repeated calls for a ceasefire. The statement provoked an angry response from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who took to X (formerly Twitter) to condemn Macron’s remarks, calling them a “disgrace”. In the video response, Netanyahu claims: “As Israel fights the forces of barbarism led by Iran, all civilised countries should be standing firmly by Israel’s side. Yet, President Macron and other Western leaders are now calling for arms embargoes against Israel. Shame on them.”

On the same day, Macron’s office responded, claiming France is a “steadfast friend of Israel” and described Netanyahu’s reaction as “excessive and detached from the friendship between France and Israel”. After the heated exchange, BFMTV reported that France would continue sending weapons to Israel that it deems “defensive in nature”.

Netanyahu’s Threat? Warning Shot Fired Near French Gas Station After Macron’s Policy Shift

The French President’s U-turn seems to have revealed not only his failure to follow through on his words but also shed light on how France and the West’s policy decisions are constrained by foreign governments. His brief consideration, likely a strategic attempt to appease the international community critical of any government funding Israel’s ongoing bombing campaign in Gaza and Lebanon was reversed after France’s pressure to uphold alliances prevailed. Some now allege that Netanyahu later fired a warning shot by blowing up a building in the vicinity of French Gas Station TotalEnergies in southern Beirut.

The logistics of arms deliveries become even more complex when considering Jordan’s role as a crucial ally in supporting Israel, particularly in respect to the ongoing tensions surrounding air bases in Cyprus where the UK​, France and Germany have been extensively delivering weapons. The French operate a significant airbase in Jordan and NATO recently established its first-ever liaison office in the Middle East and North Africa.​ Given the circumstances surrounding Turkey’s warning against further invasions into Lebanon, it seems possible that Jordan is being viewed as a viable and necessary alternative for arms transportation.

France & Israel’s Strong Military Partnership

France’s connections with Israel, in economic aspects run deep. According to a 2023 defense report, France has issued 767 export licenses to Israel since 2015, underscoring the long-enduring military collaboration. Additionally, France exports about €20 million worth of military equipment to Israel annually amounting to a total value of €207.6 million of French arms sent to Israel between 2013 and 2022. Moreover, France granted export licenses worth €2.5 billion between 2014 and 2022 for Israeli defense purposes. Notably, the French defense giant Thales confirmed it supplied drone transponders to Israel this year. This partnership contradicts Macron’s claims and highlights a broader pattern of military support that persists despite his statements.

A newly published investigation by the Electronic Intifada confirms that France’s strong ties to Israel’s defense industry remain intact and suggests that Macron’s rhetoric does not translate into meaningful action. They uncover Thales significant influence on the European Union’s arms policy which directly contributes to agendas that promote militarization, raising international concerns about the EU’s commitment to human rights.

NATO’s SALIS Program and European Arms Trade Logistics to Israel

NATO’s SALIS (Strategic Airlift Interim Solution) program provides participating member countries, including France and Germany, with access to large, long-range Antonov AN-124 aircraft to transport oversized cargo; logistical support which is essential for moving military equipment, such as tanks, helicopters, and other defense assets.

Moreover, the broader context is that Israel’s military operations have now resulted in the deaths of over 186,000 Palestinians, according to a recent report by The Lancet, a peer-reviewed medical journal.

With no end in sight, these operations are sustained by a constant flow of arms from Western nations, particularly the United States and Germany. Since October 2023, the U.S. has dramatically ramped up its military aid, and Washington recently approved an additional $250 million in sales, which pushes the total US military supply to a record $17.9 billion since October 2023. Germany, the second-largest military supplier to Israel, has approved over $275 million worth of military exports since October.

October 9, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Paris prepares for World War III

Thousands of French soldiers ready to arrive in Romania for simulated conflict with Russia

Remix News | October 8, 2024

The next year will be crucial for the French army, which has undergone a major transformation in recent years to prepare for a possible conflict with Russia, reports Politico.

Next May, thousands of French soldiers will take part in a large-scale military exercise in Romania. The purpose of the exercise is to assess how quickly they can reach NATO’s eastern flank if necessary, which is crucial if Russian President Vladimir Putin were to attack an allied NATO country.

Hungarian news outlet Magyar Nemzet points out that the moves from France show “Paris is preparing for a world war. The pro-war French president has already come up with alarming plans in recent months, which could clearly lead to a war between NATO and Russia. As reported earlier, Emmanuel Macron did not rule out sending troops to Ukraine either.”

Regardless of the potential threats of an open conflict with Russia, NATO seems to be preparing for that possibility.

“We used to play war. Now, there’s a designated enemy, and we train with people with whom we’d actually go to war,” said General Bertrand Toujouse.

Such military exercises “are a strategic signal,” he added

In recent years, French ground forces have undergone a “profound transformation” to prepare for a conflict as intense as the war in Ukraine.

The main challenge is for French forces to reach Romania in such a short time.

“There is still no military Schengen, and we need to decisively improve military mobility in Europe,” said General Pierre-Éric Guillot.

The first troop deployment in Romania in 2022 has been hampered by bureaucratic hurdles, border control procedures and inadequate trains for transporting military equipment. The affected countries have since worked to eliminate these problems.

“We may still be hampered by a few customs measures, but we’ve made a lot of progress in diversifying our routes,” Guillot told reporters.

October 8, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

The Russia-China grains corridor will completely displace the US, Canada, Australia, and France

Inside China Business | August 31, 2024

Russia and China are developing a transnational grains corridor, connecting Russia’s enormous agricultural production to export markets in China, South Asia, and the Middle East. When complete, Russian production and shipments on this network will exceed 8 million tons per year. China is the world’s largest importer of wheat and grains, and in 2023 imported over 6 million tons of wheat from the United States, Canada, Australia, and France.

Large distribution hubs are being completed in China’s Northern and Central provinces, which will further transport Russian food exports within China, and on to other Asian countries.

The proposed BRICS grains exchange enjoys wide support across the bloc, and will accelerate the decoupling of Global South markets from the Western banking and trading systems, to the detriment of farmers in North America and Europe.

Resources and links:

The Sino-Russian Land Grain Corridor and China’s Quest for Food Security https://asiasociety.org/policy-instit…

BRICS countries back grain exchange idea, Russia says https://gulfbusiness.com/brics-countr…

Russia, China agree to build new grain hub on border https://www.world-grain.com/articles/…

Visual Capitalist, Visualizing the world’s largest consumer markets in 2030 https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-…

U.S. Dominance in Corn Exports on the Wane Due to Brazilian Competition https://farmdocdaily.illinois.edu/202…

The New Land Grain Corridor, website and infographics https://www.nlgc.ru/en/

Closing scene, Chinese rural area outside Guilin, Guangxi province

September 23, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Telegram Will Now Share Users’ IP Addresses and Phone Numbers With Governments in Response to Legal Requests

By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | September 23, 2024

Telegram, the messaging app that once positioned itself as the rebel’s answer to Big Tech surveillance, has made a sharp U-turn on the “we protect your data at all costs” highway. On Monday, the company quietly updated its privacy policy to allow for the disclosure of user information—like those precious IP addresses and phone numbers—to law enforcement, but only, of course, if they present a valid legal request.

As we all know, no one has ever stretched the definition of “valid” to fit their agenda, right?

This revelation comes hot on the heels of a little incident back in August, when Telegram’s CEO Pavel Durov found himself in handcuffs, detained by French authorities. What was the crime? Well, it appears Telegram was accused of playing hardball with French law enforcement, refusing to hand over data, leading to Durov’s arrest. It seems law enforcement didn’t take kindly to that level of noncompliance, especially after making 2,460 unanswered requests for information.

The Policy Flip-Flop

The new policy revision is a complete about-face from the one Telegram’s loyal fans were sold on. The old rules were crystal clear. Telegram might give up your details—your IP address and phone number—but only if you were a suspect in a terror case. The policy even reassured everyone that this kind of handover had never happened.

Not anymore.

Now, Telegram has widened the net. According to the newly revised policy, if you violate Telegram’s Terms of Service—you know, the thing no one ever reads—they may hand over your info if they get a “valid” order. The language is dripping with corporate hedging: “If Telegram receives a valid order from the relevant judicial authorities that confirms you’re a suspect in a case involving criminal activities that violate the Telegram Terms of Service, we will perform a legal analysis of the request and may disclose your IP address and phone number to the relevant authorities.”

Of course, Telegram is still committed to transparency—at least on paper. The company promises to disclose all such incidents in its quarterly transparency reports, which, conveniently, can be accessed via a dedicated bot.

Durov’s Declaration: Aimed at Who, Exactly?

Durov took to Telegram to tell users, “We have updated our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, ensuring they are consistent across the world.”

He continued, “We’ve made it clear that the IP addresses and phone numbers of those who violate our rules can be disclosed to relevant authorities in response to valid legal requests.”
Durov further added, “These measures should discourage criminals. Telegram Search is meant for finding friends and discovering news, not for promoting illegal goods. We won’t let bad actors jeopardize the integrity of our platform for almost a billion users.”

The French Connection

But what really forced Telegram’s hand? Let’s rewind to Durov’s August airport arrest, where things started to get clearer.

After allegedly over 2,400 ignored requests for data, French authorities had had enough. They brought in the National Gendarmerie to get to the bottom of Telegram’s refusal to cooperate.

Apparently, turning over data wasn’t an option until they started detaining CEOs.

September 23, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Russia Slams NATO’s ‘Reckless’ Rejection of Putin’s Red Line on Ukraine Attacks

Sputnik – 18.09.2024

MOSCOW – Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated on Wednesday that dismissing Russian President Vladimir Putin’s warnings about the dangers of Ukraine using Western weapons to attack Russian territory is both provocative and perilous.

“Such a ostentatious desire not to take seriously the statements of the Russian president is an absolutely short-sighted and unprofessional step,” Peskov told reporters.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg denied in an interview out on Tuesday that allowing Ukraine to use long-range Western weapons to strike deep into Russia would cross country’s “red line” despite warnings from Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“There have been many red lines declared by him [Putin] before, and he has not escalated, meaning also involving Nato allies directly in the conflict,” Stoltenberg told The Times newspaper.

Stoltenberg said that he supported the United Kingdom and France in their decision to lift restrictions on Kiev’s use of long-range weapons against Russia. He argued that their use by Ukraine would not draw the alliance into conflict with Russia.

Putin said that NATO countries were essentially deciding whether to get directly involved in the Ukrainian conflict. He warned that direct participation of Western countries in the conflict would change its nature, forcing Russia to respond to emerging threats.

Meanwhile, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto stated on Wednesday that Hungary is concerned about the potential use of long-range arms to strike Russia, as this would contradict Europe’s security interests and heighten the risk of escalation. He emphasized that “Hungary is interested in peace, and every step that threatens escalation makes us concerned,” adding that the use of long-range missiles against targets deep in Russia would “increase the threat of escalation,” which runs counter to European security interests.

September 18, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

How Britain Started the Vietnam War

By Kit Klarenberg | Global Delinquents | September 12, 2024

On September 2nd 1945, within hours of Imperial Japan’s Emperor Hirohito formally signing an instrument of surrender and ending World War II in the Pacific, Ho Chi Minh, leader of the Viet Minh, proclaimed the Democratic Republic of Vietnam’s foundation. Liberally citing passages from the 1776 US Declaration of Independence, Ho pledged that his newly-created state would never again be subject to foreign domination or exploitation, and evermore remain governed solely by and for its people.

Vietnam’s radical post-war euphoria was palpably captured by French photographer Germaine Krull, a French photographer who visited the country mere days later. In her diary, she observed how in Saigon, “all the streets were hung with large banners and all the walls and official buildings” bore revolutionary inscriptions. They declared; “down with French imperialism; down with the colonials; the era of colonization is over; down with slavery.” The Communist-dominated Viet-Minh’s “big red [flag] with the yellow star” could also be seen in profusion.

Japanese soldier hands over his sword to the British, September 1945

This was quite some contrast from the scenes that greeted Krull at Saigon airport. There, “an unusual situation prevailed”:

“It was being serviced entirely by the Japanese. They were doing everything: driving trucks and cars, standing guard, carrying luggage and refuelling. The British were in command of them and kept order… The Japanese performed their duties faultlessly and were perfectly disciplined.”

Krull had flown in on one of several “transport planes carrying British troops,” among them a sizeable detachment of “handsome, impeccable” Gurkhas, along with “their Scotch commanding officer.” Unstated by the photographer, their mission was to comprehensively crush the country’s dreams of independence, and re-establish France’s control over her colonial holding. Under its auspices, the “unusual situation” of Vietnam’s recently vanquished Japanese occupiers taking orders from and working alongside the British, until mere days earlier their sworn adversaries, was not restricted to Saigon airport.

Many decades later, Britain’s immediate post-war intervention in Vietnam remains virtually unknown. Yet, despite lasting just six months, the bitter conflict cost many lives, and effectively ignited the three-decade-long Vietnam War, which ended in embarrassing defeat for Western powers. The impact on the region, and wider world, endures for untold numbers of people today. It is a sordid, secret chapter in London’s recent history, urgently demanding re-evaluation.

That the British meant grave business in Vietnam is amply underscored by their Indian Army’s entire 20th Division’s deployment to the country. As journalist George Rosie reported in 1970, this force had “been at the very heart of the fighting” against Japan over Burma, and in turn control over the whole subcontinent. Across countless brutal battles, its units fought off “ferocious” attacks, “inflicting terrible casualties” on the enemy.

The 20th Division was particularly central to these efforts. By the end of World War II, Rosie recorded, “there was no more skilful, experienced and battle-hardened” unit in Burma. The Division was “probably the best division in one of the best armies in Asia.” Now, its soldiers were to target their well-honed proficiency in the art of killing against the Vietnamese. In all, 26,000 British soldiers along with 2,500 military vehicles were airdropped into Saigon for the purpose.

Three artillery regiments also arrived, while the Royal Air Force was on hand with 14 spitfires and 34 Mosquito fighter bombers in support. Backing this vast invading army were Vichy French and Japanese troops, who were provided with new weapons by their British counterparts. The official objective was to “maintain law and order and ensure internal security” in Vietnam. Still, the British and their conquered underlings were given explicit orders to savagely crush any and all local resistance, even if innocent civilians were killed:

“There is no front in these operations: we would be dealing with bands of guerillas… We may find it difficult to distinguish friend from foe… Also beware of ‘nibbling’ at opposition. Always use the maximum force available to ensure wiping out any hostile we may meet. If one uses too much, no harm is done. If one uses too small a force and it has to be extricated [sic], we will suffer casualties and encourage the enemy.”

Japanese soldiers repair an airfield, while British troops observe

Quickly, the Vietnamese began dying in vast numbers. However, this bloodsoaked incursion initially went entirely unremarked upon in the British media, and parliament, for several months. As such, the public at home remained completely in the dark about their Army waging another grand foreign entanglement, let alone in tandem with its World War II enemies. This conspiracy of silence continued until December 1945, when a joint letter authored by British soldiers in Vietnam, sent to then-Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin, was published by The Guardian:

“It appears that we are collaborating with Japanese and French forces against the nationalist forces of Viet Minh. For what purpose is this collaboration? Why are we not disarming the Japanese? We desire the definition of government policy regarding the presence of British troops in Indo-China.”

These bombshell disclosures attracted little interest, and were promptly forgotten. The signatories received a stern talking-to from a senior military official, and no further revelations about Britain’s covert war in Vietnam subsequently emerged. In the meantime, slaughter of innocent civilians continued apace. Much later, one of the signatories to the joint letter recalled of his time in the country:

“We saw homes being burned and hundreds of the local population being kept in compounds. We saw many ambulances, open at the back, carrying mainly – actually, totally – women and children, who were in bandages. I remember it very vividly. All the women and children who lived there would stand outside their homes, all dressed in black, and just grimly stare at us, really with… hatred.”

Come mid-January next year, the Viet Minh had learned lessons from launching large-scale attacks on British-led forces, which frequently ended with significant casualties due to their opponents’ superior firepower, and extensive use of machine guns. Hanoi’s freedom fighters thereafter adopted a raft of guerrilla tactics, including ambushes, assassinations, and hit-and-run raids on enemy patrols. It was the world’s first modern unconventional war. These strategies were devastatingly employed against French and US invaders over the next three decades.

Control of the mission was formally signed over by London to French generals at the end of March 1946, and most of her forces duly left Hanoi. France was emboldened by the perceived success of Britain’s intervention, believing Ho Chi Minh’s forces couldn’t withstand further onslaught from a “civilised”, professional army. This delusion led Paris to launch all-out war against Hanoi again in December that year. It ended in bitter defeat eight years later, and then the Americans stepped in.

For its part, in the post-World War II period, Britain waged a number of comparable, covert wars in every corner of the world, as its financial and military clout rapidly withered. In many cases, the US subsequently stepped in to fill London’s shoes, taking over management of far-flung crises and emergencies, and in the process Britain’s fallen empire. The past 80 years has been a neverending story of American struggle to master the dual legacies of colonialism and partition, bequeathed by its own former imperial overlord.

September 12, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

Durov still does not get it

By Stephen Karganovic | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 10, 2024

After being released on bail from a French prison, Russian entrepreneur Pavel Durov made several statements which indicate that he is labouring under grave illusions about the nature of his predicament. He described the action of the French authorities, which resulted in his arrest and detention on French territory, as “surprising and misguided.” He then went on to question the legal premise of his detention and subsequent indictment, which is that he could be held “personally responsible for other people’s illegal use of Telegram.”

It is disappointing to see a thirty-nine years old sophisticated cosmopolitan adult, traumatised as he must be by his recent experiences, reasoning like a child. One should have expected a person of Durov’s wealth to secure competent legal assistance to help him understand the legal “facts of life” pertaining to his case.

There are two basic facts that the lawyer selected by Durov to represent him should have explained to his client. Incidentally, that lawyer is extremely well wired into the French establishment and the judicial system which is persecuting his bewildered protégé. It would not be uncharitable to say that his loyalties are dubious.

The first and most fundamental of these facts is the political nature of the case. Durov’s predicament cannot be properly understood apart from that reality. Recognition of that fact does not exclude entirely the effective use of legal arguments and remedies but it marginalises their practical impact. The second important fact that a conscientious legal professional already in the first interview would have made clear to his client is that in the real world in which Durov is facing grave criminal charges, indulging intuitive notions of justice, including the premise that a person cannot be held criminally liable for third-party acts, is a naïve and utterly misguided approach.

Pavel Durov is a highly intelligent and, in his field, very accomplished individual. But on another level he is just a computer nerd and his incoherent actions and statements are proof of that. Contrary to what he seems to think possible, and as incompatible as that may appear to be with the concept of natural justice, under specific circumstances an individual can be criminally charged for the acts of third parties. Mechanisms that make that possible already are firmly in place. We would not necessarily be wrong to characterise those mechanisms as repugnant to the natural sense of justice, or even as quasi-legal. But formally they are well established and are integral components of criminal law. Tyrannical political systems are free to invoke those instruments whenever they decide to target a bothersome non-conformist such as Pavel Durov.

Whilst on the one track relentless pressure is undoubtedly being applied to the conditionally released but still closely supervised Durov to accede to the demands of deep state structures and turn Telegram’s encryption keys over to security agencies, on a parallel track the legal case against him is being constructed. It will be based on some variant or derivative of the theory of strict liability. The exact contours of that variant are yet to be defined as the case proceeds, and everything will depend on how the defendant responds to the combination of carrots and sticks that are now being put in front of him. Since no evidence is being offered to prove that acting personally in his capacity as Telegram CEO Durov was complicit in any of the incriminating activities listed in the charge sheet, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that some version of strict liability will be the vehicle of choice to make the accusations stick. Unless he capitulates, the objective is to put him away for a long time, or at least to threaten him credibly with such an outcome in order to exact his cooperation. Strict liability is a convenient tool because it offers many shortcuts to the Prosecution. It achieves the desired effect in the absence of proof of specific intent and regardless of the defendant’s mental state, thus eliminating for the prosecution major evidentiary hurdles.

Furthermore, from the beginning of the Durov case groundwork was notably being laid for the application of the Joint Criminal Enterprise [JCE] doctrine as developed by the Hague Tribunal, its category III to be precise. Even seasoned lawyers practicing at the Hague Tribunal were at a loss what to make of that legal improvisation. But their incomprehension did not prevent successive chambers from sentencing defendants to decades of prison, wholly or in part based on it.

Durov is being charged on 12 counts, including complicity in distributing child pornography, drug dealing and money laundering. It should again be recalled that it is not even alleged that Durov personally committed or intentionally participated in the commission of any of those offences. The charges stem from the accusation that Telegram’s lax moderation rules allow for the widespread criminal use of the platform by others, with whom it is not claimed that Durov entertained any direct personal link or that he was even aware of their existence.

But the marvellous feature of the category III JCE doctrine, specially invented by the chambers of the Hague Tribunal to accommodate the Prosecution in situations in which it could not contrive even the semblance of a nexus between the defendant and the crimes being imputed to him, is that it does not require any of those things. A vaguely inferred commonality of purpose, coupled with the assumption that the defendant should have been able to foresee but failed to prevent the illicit conduct of the third parties with whom he is being associated by the Prosecution, and with whom he needn’t have had direct communication or even personal acquaintance, serves as a sufficient link. If in the chambers’ considered judgment the defendant contributed substantially to generating conditions conducive to third-party unlawful conduct, that is enough. Proof that the third parties had committed the charged acts is sufficient basis to convict and no disavowal of criminal liability is practically possible.

If in relation to the third parties the defendant is situated in a position that the court deems culpable, nothing more is needed for liability for their conduct to be imputed to him.

The system’s prosecutors are eager to make those and perhaps some even more ingenious arguments to sympathetic judges. Woe to the person sitting in the dock.

That is precisely the general direction in which the Durov case is moving. In an ominous but highly indicative development, the French prosecutors are highlighting the alleged paedophile offences of an individual user of Telegram, who for the moment is identified cryptically only as “X,” or “person unknown,” and who is suspected of having committed crimes against children. The prosecution’s objective is to individualise and dramatise Durov’s guilt by connecting him to a specific paedophile case, the details of which can be disclosed later. If that sticks, some or all of the remaining charges in due course may even be dropped, without prejudice to the prosecution’s overarching goal of incarcerating Durov for a long period of time, unless he compromises. Paedophilia and child abuse alone merit a very lengthy prison sentence, without the necessity of combining them with other nasty charges.

In that regard, equally ominous for Durov is the activation, as it were on cue, of his ex-whatever in Switzerland, with whom he is alleged to have sired at least three out-of-wedlock children. Prior to his detention in France, Durov had capriciously terminated her 150,000-euro monthly apanage. This was a financial blow which naturally left her disgruntled and receptive to the suggestion of the investigative organs to come up with something to take revenge on her former companion. The woman is now accusing Durov of having molested one of the children that he had conceived with her. That is an independent and serious new charge whose potential for further mischief should not be underestimated.

Pavel Durov should stop wasting his time attempting to lecture his French captors on the wrongfulness of the persecution to which they are subjecting him. They are completely uninterested in the philosophical and legal principles to which Durov is referring. Like their transatlantic colleagues, who display juridical virtuosity by indicting ham sandwiches, with equal facility and with as little professional remorse French prosecutors are prepared to indict bœuf bourguignon, if that is what the system they serve demands of them. Far more than a legal strategy, Durov now needs an effective negotiating position (and perhaps also a crash course in poker) to preserve the integrity of his enterprise and to regain fully his freedom without sacrificing honour. For an excellent introduction to the Western rules based order, Durov need look no further than the woeful predicament of Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, the German-American lawyer who for months has been languishing in a German prison after being targeted on trumped-up charges for exposing the fraud of the recent “health emergency” that we all vividly recall.

Properly understood, the Durov affair should come as a sobering lesson not only for its principal but more importantly for the edification of the frivolous Russian intelligentsia who still entertain adolescent illusions about where the grass is greener and continue to nourish a petulant disdain for their own country, its way of life, and culture.

September 10, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

The Hidden Face of War. NATO Sponsored War Professionals in Russian Region of Kursk.

By Manlio Dinucci | Global Research | September 10, 2024

The Forward Observations Group, a private military company based in the United States, published a photo of its war professionals in the Russian region of Kursk, a presence confirmed by a video showing the destruction by the Russian armed forces of Forward Observations Group armoured vehicles and commandos in Kursk. This US military company, whose role is described by the authoritative Military Watch magazine as ‘very obscure’ (evidently, it is linked to US intelligence services), has been engaged for more than two years with Ukrainian forces against Russia with the task of carrying out special operations, including preparing attacks with toxic chemicals.

There is documented evidence that Ukraine is involved in the preparation of attacks with chemical and biological weapons. This US military company is not the only one operating covertly in the theatre of war against Russia. Based on precise documentation Military Watch writes:

‘Numerous facts have emerged about the role of military personnel from NATO member states (including Royal Marines and British SAS commandos) in supporting Ukrainian war operations against Russia. Military advisers, both logisticians and combatants, and other personnel have been operating since 2022 in the theatre of war with a range of newly delivered complex weaponry.’

This confirms that the Ukrainian armed forces are not only armed and trained by the US and NATO, but that US-NATO military companies and special forces operate directly in the theatre of war in command and management roles of sophisticated weaponry, such as long-range missiles and drones, for the use of which military satellite networks are needed, which Ukraine does not have.

At the same time, the US is deploying nuclear weapons (bombs and missiles) at intermediate range in Europe, increasingly close to Russia. Even the missile defence systems, which they deploy in Europe on the official grounds of protecting European populations from the ‘Russian nuclear threat’, are in fact prepared for nuclear attack. The two US Aegis Ashore sites in Poland and Romania and the US Navy destroyers operating in the Baltic and Black Sea are equipped with Lockheed Martin’s MK-41 vertical launch systems, which, as the manufacturer itself documents, can be used for any warfare mission, including nuclear attack on land targets.

Italy actively contributes to the preparation of nuclear war. Violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty, it hosts US nuclear weapons (the new B61-12 bombs), which the Italian Air Force is trained to use, and through Leonardo it manufactures nuclear weapons. Now Italy has pledged to build – together with France, Germany and Poland – ground-launched cruise missiles with a range of more than 500 km, i.e. a more advanced version of the US intermediate-range nuclear missiles deployed at Comiso in the 1980s, which were eliminated by the 1987 INF Treaty, a treaty that the US tore up in 2019.

*

This article was originally published in Italian on Grandangolo, Byoblu TV.

Manlio Dinucci, award winning author, geopolitical analyst and geographer, Pisa, Italy.

September 10, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia offsets Ukraine’s Kursk offensive

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | September 8, 2024 

Russian President Vladimir Putin has outwitted the West by his  response to Ukraine’s Kursk offensive one month ago, which was widely celebrated as a tipping point in the conflict. The conflict is indeed at a tipping point today, but for an entirely different reason insofar as Russian forces seized the folly of Ukraine’s deployment of its crack brigades and prized Western armour to Kursk Region to reach an unassailable position in the most recent weeks in the battlefields, which opens the door for multiple options going forward. 

On the contrary, the West finds itself in a ‘Zugzwang’, a situation found in chess whereby it is under compulsion to move when it would rather prefer to pass. 

Putin’s address to the plenary of the 9th Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok on Thursday was eagerly awaited for what he had to say on the conflict in Ukraine. Several things stood out. 

Putin no longer characterised the Ukrainian interlocutors as the ‘Kiev regime.’ Instead, he used the expression ‘Kiev government’. And he summed up: “Are we ready to negotiate with them? We have never given up on this.” Was he being a taunting poser, as the Kremlin leader who has tangoed with four American presidents already, expects a fifth with an “infectious” laugh, which makes him “happy.” 

On a serious note, though, Putin took note that the “official authorities” in Kiev have regretted that if only they had followed up on the “signed official document” negotiated with Russian representatives at the Istanbul talks in March 2022 “rather than obeyed their masters from other countries, the war would have come to an end long ago.” 

Putin implied that Kiev must regain its sovereignty. The conciliatory words were measured, possibly with an eye on the unravelling of  political alignments within the ruling dispensation in Kiev. That is to say, Putin rejects Zelensky’s Ukrainian settlement process, but is willing to revive negotiations on terms first discussed at talks in Istanbul in March 2022 at the start of conflict.

Putin went on to discuss potential mediators. He singled out 3 BRICS member countries — China, Brazil, and India. Putin said Russia has “trusting relations” with these countries and he himself is in “constant contact” with his counterparts with a view “to help understand all the details of this complex process.” 

Evidently, Putin is distressed that he is “constantly” being told by them about the human rights situation due to the conflict, Russia’s violation of Ukraine’s national sovereignty and so on. He regretted that they overlook the genesis of the conflict — the 2014 US-backed coup d’etat in Ukraine which was resisted by native speakers of Russian language, and over suppression of Russian culture and Russian traditions.

Fundamentally, Putin stressed, the West hoped to “bring Russia to its knees, dismember it… (and) they would achieve their strategic goals, which they had been striving for, maybe for centuries or decades.” In the given situation, therefore, Russia’s strong economy and military potential are its “main guarantee of security”. [Emphasis added.] 

In such a scenario, what are the prospects going forward? Putin is sceptical about the West’s intentions. Yet, conceivably, he pampered the three mediator-countries who are also Russia’s key BRICS partners at the forthcoming Kazan summit next month (which is expected to focus on an alternative payment system for international trade.) 

Moscow is wary that the BRICS partners are beating their luminous wings in the void without comprehending that the conflict in Ukraine is a civilisational war that has been going on for centuries since the Slavic peoples began developing their own Orthodox churches through more than half of Christian history.  

Putin is a master tactician. Therefore, he will insist that Russia is open to dialogue with Ukraine — which is, of course, also a statement of fact — given the growing pressure on Russia from the Global South. But Putin does not harbour any hopes of Zelensky meeting the pre-requisites conducive to peace talks, which Putin had outlined at a meeting with the senior officials of Russian Foreign Ministry on June 14. If anything, new ground realities have since appeared. 

This becomes clear from a TV interview Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov gave in Vladivostok after Putin’s speech. Lavrov drew the bottom line: “Vladimir Zelensky is not ready for honest talks. The West will not let him near them. They have set the goal, if not to dismember the Russian Federation (even though this was stated as a goal), then to at least radically weaken it and to inflict a strategic defeat on us. The West will not allow him to make steps towards us. Zelensky is no longer able to understand what meets the interests of the Ukrainian people, since he has repeatedly betrayed them.”

Zelensky himself is zigzagging. He took a hard line in remarks at the meeting of the so-called Ramstein Format hosted by the US on Friday that brought together generals and defence ministers from 50 countries to coordinate on arms supplies for Kiev. Zelensky lamented that prohibitions on firing long-range, Western-provided missiles and rockets into Russia persisted. He’s now taking his case to President Biden.

Zelensky’s attendance in person at the Ramstein event “highlighted the sensitivity of the moment in a new, more active phase of the war,” as the New York Times reported. The daily quoted a Ukrainian expert commenting that “The main task of Zelensky at Ramstein is to bring some adrenaline to the partners.” 

Indeed, the situation surrounding Zelensky is unenviable — the sluggish delivery of Western weaponry; Germany’s wavering stance during a budget crisis even as the eastern regions comprising former GDR openly opposes the war against Russia; France, an ardent supporter of the war, is caught up in a political crisis and an early presidential election next year may produce an anti-war leadership in Élysée Palace; the post-November 5 trajectory of US policies on Ukraine remain uncertain. 

Meanwhile, US-European differences have surfaced regarding Washington’s egotistic proposal that the EU give a $50 billion loan to Ukraine and ensure that Russia’s frozen assets remain frozen until Moscow pays post-war reparations to Ukraine. Washington estimates that this way, the US won’t be on the hook for repaying the loan if the Russian assets somehow are unblocked. (The rules governing existing EU sanctions, which need to be renewed every six months, allow a single country to unfreeze assets, which Washington believes jeopardises the loan.) 

In Donbass, events vindicate Putin’s strategy that a  crushing defeat on Ukrainian troops on the most crucial sectors of the front would inevitably lead to Zelensky’s entire armed forces losing combat capacity. In fact, signs of this happening are already there. 

Putin said with quiet confidence that Zelensky “accomplished nothing” from the Kursk offensive. The Russian forces have stabilised the situation in Kursk and started pushing the enemy from border territories while the Donbass offensive is “making impressive territorial gains for a long time.” In retrospect, Zelensky’s Kursk offensive turned out to be a Himalayan blunder, which has taken the war to a tipping point favouring Russia.

In this context, the extraordinary first-ever joint piece by the spy chiefs of CIA and Mi6 which appeared in Saturday’s FT shows that beneath  word play and hyperbole, the Anglo-American strategy is in a cul-de-sac. Bill Burns and Richard Moore cannot even bring themselves to articulate what Biden’s objectives are despite admitting that “staying the course is more vital than ever.” 

Burns and Moore hinted that covert (terrorist) operations by Krylo Budanov, Ukraine’s military intelligence chief, are the option left now in the proxy war. What a Shakespearean fall for a superpower!

September 8, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Durov Bombshell: Archaic Crypto Law Charges Reveal French Intel’s Access to Private Communications

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 06.09.2024

The Durov saga in France and the continued efforts by countries around the world to crack down on his popular cloud-based, end-to-end encrypted private messenger and social media software has divulged a string of embarrassing details about the sorry state of internet privacy and freedom of information.

Two of the six charges facing Telegram CEO Pavel Durov in France are grounded an obscure, never-used twenty-year-old law obliging companies providing cryptography tools to inform the French Cybersecurity Agency (French acronym ANSSI) and grant it access to the software’s source code and “a description of [its] technical characteristics.”

The 2004 law – uniquely blunt in its demand that companies divulge info about the tech tools used for private communications, is being used against Durov by accusing him of providing encrypted communications services “without certified declaration.”

The legal requirement also means, if it is applied evenly across the board, that the array of instant messengers available to French users, from WhatsApp and Signal to iMessage and the French-made Olvid ‘secure’ messenger used by the French government, do comply with ANSSI regulations, meaning French intelligence can potentially spy on any or all French users at any time.

Adding credence to this idea is the fact that Pavel Durov is reportedly the first-ever tech mogul to be charged under the 2004 law, and the fact that many big-name tech companies have been silent on the Durov case, with the exception of Proton CEO Andy Yen, who characterized the charges against the Russian-born tech mogul as “economic suicide” that’s “rapidly and permanently changing the perception of founders and investors” toward France.

“If sustained, I don’t see how tech founders could possibly travel to France, much less hire in France,” Yen wrote last week.

The law is also reminiscent of the case against WikiLeaks cofounder Julian Assange, who was threatened with decades of jail time by the US under the obscure Espionage Act of 1917, even though that he was not an American citizen, and a publisher, not a spy. Former president Donald Trump was charged under the same act in his classified documents case, which got thrown out by a judge in July.

September 7, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Iran’s UN mission rejects Western allegations of supplying ballistic missiles to Russia

Press TV – September 7, 2024

Iran has rejected allegations of supplying ballistic missiles to Russia as baseless and misleading. The allegations are leveled against Tehran by the US and its Western allies.

The mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations said on Friday that the country regards as inhuman any military assistance to parties of the Ukraine conflict that would increase damage to lives and infrastructure in Ukraine.

Therefore, not only does it not do so, but also invites other countries to stop sending weapons to the parties involved in the conflict, the mission said.

“The position of the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding the conflict in Ukraine has not changed,” the mission said after American, British and French envoys leveled coordinated accusations at Tehran concerning the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict during a UN Security Council meeting on August 30

The mission also called on other countries to follow suit and end the supply of weapons to the warring sides.

Iran’s permanent representative to the United Nations Amir Saeid Iravani previously also rejected the “baseless and misleading” accusations of the United States, England and France regarding Tehran’s role in Russia’s military campaign in Ukraine.

“The United States and its allies cannot deny the undeniable fact that sending advanced Western weapons, especially from the United States, has prolonged the war in Ukraine and harmed civilians and civilian infrastructure,” Iravani said.

He made the remarks in a letter sent to the UN chief and the Security Council’s president on Wednesday.

He said Iran “categorically rejects” any allegations suggesting its involvement in the sale, export, or transfer of arms in violation of its international commitments to Russia as “misleading, completely unfounded.”

Tehran has repeatedly dismissed Western allegations of its involvement in the Russia-Ukraine war.

Iran has called for a ceasefire, blaming the lingering conflict on Western arms supplies to Kiev.

Russia launched what it called a special military operation in Ukraine in February 2022 partly to prevent NATO’s eastward expansion after warning that the US-led military alliance was following an “aggressive line” against Moscow.

Russia has repeatedly warned against the flow of Western weapons to Ukraine, saying it prolongs the conflict.

September 7, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , , | Leave a comment