Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Netanyahu Ordered the 2003 Invasion of Iraq

Tales of the American Empire | January 2, 2025

Recent revelations prove the primary reason for America’s 2003 unprovoked invasion of Iraq was because Israel wanted seven Muslim nations destroyed to allow for its expansion. This war was part of a plan for Greater Israel. This Zionist plan to massively expand Israel was ignored by sane people for decades because it is unrealistic and would require the ethnic cleansing of tens of millions of native Arabs.

The key proponent of this plan is long-time Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. There is no doubt that he is mostly responsible for the 2003 American invasion of Iraq. Netanyahu is now demanding the corrupt American government make Greater Israel possible by helping destroy Lebanon and Iran.

________________________________________________

Related Tale: “Stealing Oil from Iraq”:    • Stealing Oil From Iraq  

Related Tale: “Conquering the Middle East”:    • Conquering the Middle East  

“Greater Israel: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East”; Michel Chossudovsky; GlobalResearch; June 7, 2020; https://www.globalresearch.ca/greater…

“A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm”; Wikipedia; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clean…

“One way to counter Iran’s aggression. Change the map of the Middle East”; Fox News Opinion; Michael Makovsky; December 28, 2017; https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/one-w…

“CIA Spy on 9/11, Enhanced Interrogation, AI, Jeffrey Epstein | John Kiriakou |”; Dalton Fischer; YouTube; November 19, 2023;    • CIA Spy on 9/11, Enhanced Interrogati…  

“CMD CMSgt Dennis Fritz: Why the US Invaded Afghanistan and Iraq”; Judge Napolitano; YouTube; October 30, 2024;    • CMD CMSgt Dennis Fritz  :  Why the US…  

“Oil Wars: Exposing US Foreign Policy in Middle East | Gary Vogler Interview”; Counter Currents; YouTube; October 12, 2024;    • Oil Wars: Exposing US Foreign Policy …  

“Worth the Price?” New Film Shows How Biden Played Leading Role in Push for U.S. to Invade Iraq; Democracy Now; February 18, 2020;    • “Worth the Price?” New Film Shows How…  

Related Tales: “Conquering the Middle East” playlist:    • Conquering the Middle East  

January 2, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , | 1 Comment

Imperial hubris (and its consequences) in Syria

By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 1, 2025

The Syria story, it seems, is not so simple as ‘President Assad fell’ and the ‘technocratic Salafists’ rose to power.

At one level, the collapse was predictable. Assad was known to have been influenced by Egypt and UAE for some years past. They had been urging him to break with Iran and Russia, and to shift to the West. For some 3-4 years he had been incrementally signalling and implementing such a move. Iran especially faced increasing obstacles over operational matters in which they were co-operating with Syrian forces. His shift was meant as a message to Iran.

The financial situation of Syria – after years of U.S. Caesar sanctions, plus the loss of all agricultural and energy revenues seized by the U.S. in occupied north-east Syria – was catastrophic. Syria simply had no economy.

No doubt, reaching out to Israel and Washington was presented to Assad as the only practical exit to his dilemma. ‘Normalisation’ could lead to the lifting of sanctions, they implored him. And Assad, according to those in touch with him, (even at the eleventh hour before the HTS ‘invasion’) was believing that Arab States close to Washington would have opted for his continued leadership, rather than see Syria fall prey to Salafist zealots.

To be clear: Moscow and Tehran had warned Assad that his army (as a whole) was too fragile, too underpaid, and too penetrated and bribed by foreign intelligence services, to be expected to defend the state effectively. Assad also was warned repeatedly about the threat from Idlib jihadists planning to take Aleppo, but the President not only ignored the warnings – he rebutted them.

He was offered a very large external military force not once, but twice, even in ‘the last days’, as Jolani’s militia were advancing. Assad refused. “We are strong”, he told an interlocutor on the first occasion; yet shortly afterwards, on a second occasion, he admitted: “My army is running away”.

Assad was not abandoned by his allies. It was by then too late. He had flip-flopped once too often. Two of the principal actors (Russia and Iran) were frustrated and rendered unable to help – absent Assad’s consent.

A Syrian who knew the Assad family, and who spoke with the President at some length just prior the Aleppo invasion, had found him surprisingly sanguine and unflustered – assuring his friend that there were forces enough (2,500) in Aleppo to deal with Jolani’s threats, and hinting that President Sissi might be ready to step in with aid for Syria. (Egypt of course feared Muslim Brotherhood Islamists taking power in a former secular Ba’athist state).

Ibrahim Al-Amine, editor of Al-Akhbar, noted a similar perception by Assad:

“Assad seemed to have become more confident that Abu Dhabi was capable of resolving his problem with the Americans and some Europeans, and he heard a lot about economic temptations if he agreed to the strategy of exiting the alliance with the resistance forces. One of Assad’s workers, who stayed with him until the last hours before he left Damascus, says that the man was still hoping for something big to happen to stop the armed factions’ attack. He believed that “the Arab and international community” would prefer that he remain in power, rather than Islamists take over the administration of Syria”.

Yet, even as the Jolani forces were on the M5 highway linking to Damascus, the wider Assad family and key officials were making no efforts to prepare for a departure, or to warn close friends to think about such contingencies, the interlocutor said. Even as Assad was heading to Hmeimin en route to Moscow, no advice to ‘get out’ was sent to friends.

The latter said that they did not know after Assad’s silent departure to Moscow who exactly, or when, ordered the Syria army to stand down and to prepare for transition.

Assad briefly visited Moscow on 28 November – a day after the HTS attacks in Aleppo province and their swift advance south (and a day after the ceasefire in Lebanon). The Russian authorities have said nothing about the content of the President’s meetings in Moscow, and the Assad family said that the President had returned tight-lipped from Russia, too.

Subsequently, Assad departed finally to Moscow (either on 7 December, after despatching a private plane on multiple flights to Dubai, or on 8 December) – again telling virtually nobody in his immediate and family circle that he was departing for good.

What caused this out-of-character mindset? No one knows; but family members have speculated that Bashar Al-Assad had been seriously disorientated emotionally by the grave illness of his wife, Asma, to whom he is devoted.

Put frankly, whilst the three main players could see clearly the direction events were heading (the fragility of the state was no surprise), nevertheless, Assad’s denial mindset and the consequent speed of the military dénouement was the surprise. That was the true ‘black swan’.

What triggered events? Erdogan has for several years demanded that Assad firstly negotiate with the ‘legitimate Syrian opposition’; secondly that he re-draft the Constitution; and thirdly that he meet face-to-face with President Erdogan (something Assad consistently refused to do). All three powers pressed Assad to negotiate with the ‘opposition’, but he would not, and nor would he meet with Erdogan. (Both loathe each other). Frustration on these counts was high.

Erdogan now indisputably ‘owns’ ‘former-Syria’. Ottoman irredentist sentiment is ecstatic and demanding more Turkish revanchism. Others – the more secular city dwellers of Turkey however – are less enthused by the display of Turkish religious nationalism.

Erdogan however, may well be (or may soon be) experiencing buyer’s remorse: Yes, Turkey stands tall as Syria’s new landlord, but he is now ‘the responsible’ party for what happens next. (HTS is plainly exposed as a Turkish proxy). Minorities are being killed; brutal sectarian executions are accelerating; sectarianism becoming more extreme. There is still no Syrian economy in sight; no revenues, and no fuel for the gasoline refinery (previously supplied by Iran).

Erdogan’s espousal of a re-branded and westernised al-Qaeda always risked proving to be paper-thin (as the sectarian killings are cruelly demonstrating). Will Jolani manage to impose his al-Qaeda-in-a suit makeover across his heterodox followers? Abu Ali al-Anbari, al-Baghdadi’s top aide at the time (2012-2013), gave this scathing appraisal of Jolani:

“He is a cunning person; two-faced; adores himself; does not care about his soldiers; is willing to sacrifice their blood in order to make a name for himself in the media – glows when he hears his name mentioned on satellite channels”.

In any event, one clear outcome is that Erdogan’s ploy has re-ignited formerly (and mostly) quiescent Sunni sectarianism and Ottoman imperialism. The consequences will be many and will ripple across the region. Egypt is already anxious – as is King Abdullah in Jordan.

Many Israelis see themselves as the ‘winners’ from the Syrian up-ending – since the Axis of Resistance supply line has been severed at its middle. Israeli security chief Ronan Bar was most likely briefed by Ibrahim Kalin, Turkish Head of Intelligence, when they met in Istanbul on 19 November on the expected Idlib invasion – in time for Israel to institute the Lebanon ceasefire, and to obstruct the passage of Hizbullah forces into Syria (Israel immediately bombed all the border crossings between Lebanon and Syria).

Nonetheless Israelis may discover that a re-kindled Salafist zealotry is not their friend – nor ultimately to their benefit.

Iran will sign the long-awaited defence accord with Russia on 17 January 2025.

Russia will concentrate on the war in Ukraine and stay aloof from the Middle East quagmire – to focus on the slow global restructuring that has been happening, and on the Big Picture attempt to have Trump in due course come to acknowledge Asian ‘Heartland’ and BRICS security interests, and to agree on some frontier to the Rimland (Atlanticist) security sphere, such that cooperation on issues of global strategic stability and European security can be agreed.

(Part One of this piece can be viewed on Conflicts Forum’s Substack).

January 1, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | 1 Comment

Israel and the United States: Who Rules the Roost?

By Dr. M. Reza Behnam | Palestine Chronicle | December 8, 2024 

We had several other people in the country (USA), even among the Jews,the Zionists particularly, who were against anything that has to be done if they couldn’t have the whole of Palestine and everything handed to them on a silver plate so they wouldn’t have to do anything. It couldn’t be done. We had to take it in small doses. You can’t move 5 or 6 million people out of a country and fill it up with 5 or 6 million more and expect both sets of them to be pleased….don’t think that the decision to recognize Israel was an easy one. I had to make a compromise with the Arabs and divide Palestine.”

President Harry S. Truman, 1945-1953

The Palestinian catastrophe in the United States began with the 33rd president and has continued with the 47th.

And then there was one, or two—one country, two systems. The political, economic, military and intelligence “interests” of the United States and Israel have become intertwined and often indistinguishable since President Truman decided to officially recognize Israel in 1948.

President Joe Biden has repeatedly stated, “I am a Zionist.” With that avowal, he placed the government and the American people firmly in the Israeli camp, linking the United States to apartheid, genocide and crimes against humanity.

Fifty-seven years ago, the United States chose to inextricably link its interests with an apartheid entity. And since then, for Biden and many in Washington, Israel has become a religion. Very few American politicians, especially since the 1990s, have had the mettle to challenge Israel’s dominance over US policy in the Middle East.

Israel’s leaders are well-practiced in manipulation. They have a long history of insolence toward their number one patron. Americans and US policy in the Middle East have been seen as naive and easily exploited, said Uri Dromi, who served as spokesman for the regimes of Yitzhak Rabin (1974-77; 1992-95) and Shimon Peres (1984-86).

American presidents engage in public rebukes and short-term responses to Israel’s brutal actions, but rarely, if ever are there consequences. The following encounters are just a limited edition of instances when US politicians have buckled under Israeli pressure.

The interactions, for example, between President Ronald Reagan (1981-89) and Prime Minister Menachem Begin (former Irgun terrorist) were fraught. On June 7, 1981, Israel used US warplanes to destroy Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor without informing President Reagan.

Instead Begin called Jerry Falwell, founder of the Moral Majority, to inform him of the impending attack. Begin and his Likud Party had been cultivating ties to evangelical leaders like Falwell to build the alliance between US evangelical Christians and Israel. Today there are more than 30 million Christian Zionists in the United States.

As a US “ally,” Reagan expected Israel to consult when planning measures that would impact US strategic interests in the region. The administration temporarily suspended the delivery of additional F-16 jets and supported a UN Security Council resolution denouncing the attack on an International Atomic Energy Agency-approved nuclear reactor. Despite Begin’s rejection of US proposals and refusal to apologize, the White House lifted the suspension of the F-16s deliveries in August 1981.

Reagan faced another affront a few months later in December 1981, when again, without informing the president, Begin illegally annexed the captured Syrian Golan Heights. The slight came shortly after the two countries had signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on strategic cooperation, written specifically so that Israel would no longer surprise the United States.

In response to the annexation, the United States suspended the MoU and imposed limited economic sanctions on Israel. Begin then accused the United States of anti-Semitism and “pointed out” that the United States had a strong Jewish community and millions of Christians supportive of Israel. The underlying message of electoral consequences was not lost on Reagan. Like measures taken after the Osirak attack, the penalties imposed on Israel were merely temporary window dressings.

George H.W. Bush, who succeeded Reagan in 1989, experienced his measure of clashes with then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir (former Zionist leader of the right-wing Stern Gang) and Benjamin Netanyahu, who was deputy foreign minister at the time.

The Bush administration was the last to “seriously” negotiate peace. Pro-Israel lobbies, both Jewish and Christian, in the United States did their best to sabotage the 1991 comprehensive peace conference in Madrid.

Bush’s secretary of state, James A. Baker, came under fire for negotiating directly and officially with Palestinians. He was also criticized for leveraging US aid to stop Israel’s expanding colonization of the occupied West Bank and for calling on Israel to lay aside its expansionist policies and unrealistic vision of a Greater Israel.

Frustrated by Israeli intransigence, Baker reportedly referred to Tel Aviv’s stalwart supporters in the US Congress as “the little Knesset.”

The Madrid Conference failed to produce results. Although Palestinians were essentially asked to negotiate with their Israeli occupiers, little was asked of Israel. To get Shamir to attend, the United States accepted Israel’s conditions that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) be excluded, that the Palestinian delegation be subject to Israeli approval, and that Palestinian independence and statehood not be addressed.

The famous confrontation in 1991 over US loan guarantees to Israel was yet another example of its insouciance about bypassing the executive to achieve its aims.

Shortly after America’s war against Iraq in 1991, Israel sought an additional $10 billion in loan guarantees from Washington to help populate Palestinian land with Jewish emigres from the former Soviet Union. The White House wanted assurances that the money would not go toward the building of additional “settlements,” and threatened to withhold funds until it received guarantees.

Recalling the event years later, Baker explained that the clash between the two governments resulted because Prime Minister Shamir had threatened that if the administration did not provide the funds, he would bypass the executive and take his case directly to Congress. Baker said he responded, “you’re damn well not going to do that. You can’t go around the President of the United States.”

The Jewish right to this day views Baker as toxic. The Jewish Press, a religiously conservative pro-Israel newspaper, described him as one of the most “reviled” public figures in Israel and among American Jews.

Although the administration eventually yielded on the loan issue, President Bush remained convinced he lost re-election in 1992 because of the pro-Israel lobby campaign against him.

The willingness to enter into political struggles with Israel’s leaders and their Washington supporters and to seriously ask something of Israel essentially came to an end with the election of President Bill Clinton (1993-2001).

The Madrid Conference paved the way for the Oslo Accords (1993 and 1995) negotiated during the Clinton presidency. For the Palestinians, it was a sham. For Israel, it consolidated domination over Palestinians and their land.

Israel can be more thoroughly understood by observing the conduct of incumbent prime minister and international fugitive, Benjamin Netanyahu. It has been his mission since the early 1990s to expand illegal colonies in occupied Palestine, prevent the creation of a Palestinian state and crush Palestinian resistance.

Netanyahu thinks of the United States as gullible. A former Israeli minister who worked with him remarked that in cabinet discussions whenever someone raises the question of how America would act, Netanyahu says “Leave the Americans to me.”

To show America who’s the boss, Netanyahu has embarrassed presidents Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden.

One of Netanyahu’s first acts as prime minister in 1996 was to sabotage the Oslo Accords, antagonizing President Clinton who had helped negotiate the agreement. After his first meeting with Netanyahu, Clinton let loose, saying “Who the f**k does he think he is? Who’s the f***ing superpower here?”

By the time Netanyahu’s first term ended in 1999, the Oslo agreements had collapsed and Zionist colonies were firmly entrenched.

Netanyahu’s contemptuous approach toward the United States was in full view in a secretly recorded video of a conversation he had with colonists in their house in the occupied West Bank in 2001. In it, he bragged that he had deceived Clinton into believing that he was implementing the agreement, that he knew how to manipulate Americans, and that he had essentially put an end to the Oslo Accords.

The video was taped during the second intifada (Palestinian uprising) when the Israeli military was crushing the resistance. Netanyahu talked about hitting Palestinians “hard” many times so that “the price will be unbearable.”

A skeptical colonist asked him if he worried about what the United States and the world would think and say of Israel “hitting Palestinians hard.” Netanyahu responded:

“The world will say nothing… that we are defending ourselves…  I know what America is. America is a thing that can be easily moved… moved in the right direction. The Americans will not bother us. Let’s suppose that they will say something… So they say it. Eighty percent of Americans support us. It’s absurd. We have such support there!”

Netanyahu’s belligerence intensified during the presidency of Barack Obama. His flippancy toward Obama was unabashed during a tense public meeting in the Oval Office in May 2011.

The meeting took place a day after Obama had attempted to revive the stalled peace process, where he stated that the borders between Israel and Palestine should be based on 1967 lines, with some adjustments for existing Zionist colonies.

Netanyahu bluntly responded, “It’s not going to happen,” Israel would never return to 1967 borders, warning Obama not to chase “illusions” of peace. He then brazenly lectured the president on the history of the region. After the meeting, Obama’s national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, said: “I have never seen a foreign leader speak to the president like that, and certainly not in public… ”

Netanyahu used the Oval Office exchange during his 2019 campaign by releasing a campaign video in which he boasted of how he stood up to Obama and stared him down.

An additional insult came on 3 March 2015. On that date, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of the US Congress (for the third time), excoriating the Obama administration’s signature foreign policy initiative—the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) or Iran nuclear deal. He had come to Washington at the invitation of then-Republican House Speaker John Boehner. The White House was not informed of the arrangements.

Although the relationship between the two leaders was fraught, Obama was one of the most pro-Israel presidents, giving it more money and arms than any of his predecessors. Before leaving office, Obama approved one of the largest military aid packages yet: $38 billion for the next ten years.

Netanyahu repaid President Obama’s favors with a number of slights. During his campaign for re-election in 2012, for example, he endorsed the president’s opponent, Republican Mitt Romney. In addition, Netanyahu also embarked on a very public and intense campaign to sabotage the Iran nuclear agreement. That was finally accomplished in May 2018, when President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the JCPOA.

With the election of Biden in 2021, the pro-Zionist/pro-Israel sentiment of the US regime has become more pronounced.

In service to Israel, the Biden administration has spent more than $22 billion on military aid and made more than 100 military aid transfers and weapons sales to Israel from October 7, 2023, to September 30, 2024. Another $680 million arms sales deal was recently approved. And for the fourth time (November 20, 2024), the administration vetoed UN Security Council resolutions calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.

Our history reveals that some American politicians in the past exhibited the ethical and moral courage necessary to speak and write on the pitfalls of following Israel uncritically. There have not been many. Among the few, Arkansas Senator J. William Fulbright stands out. In his 1989 book, The Price of Empire, he wrote:

“The (Israel) lobby can just about tell the president what to do when it comes to Israel. Its influence in Congress is pervasive and, I think, profoundly harmful to us and ultimately to Israel itself… So completely have many of our principal officeholders fallen under Israeli influence that they not only deny today the legitimacy of Palestinian national aspirations, but debate who more passionately opposes a Palestinian state…,” adding,

“AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and its allied organizations have effective working control of the electoral process. They can elect or defeat nearly any congressman or senator that they wish, with their money and coordinated organizations. They are the really important power to negotiate within the Middle East if you want an agreement.”

Senator Fulbright served for 30 years, 15 of those as Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.

Another critic of Israeli arrogance was Admiral Thomas Moorer. He was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1970 to 1974. Republican Congressman Paul Findley of Illinois recalled Moorer’s comments on page 161 in his book, They Dare to Speak Out:

“I’ve never seen a president… stand up to them (the Israelis)… They always get what they want. The Israelis know what’s going on all the time… If the American people understood what grip those people have on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens don’t have any idea what goes on.”

The political climate in Washington has gone from bad to worse since Findley served in Congress from 1961 to 1983. His recollections on page 84 of his book are noteworthy:

“Today, on Middle East issues at least, independence and courage are almost unknown… Since the establishment of modern Israel in 1948, only a handful of senators have said or done anything in opposition to the policies of the government of Israel. Those who break ranks find themselves in difficulty.”

George Ball, US Under Secretary of State (1961-1966), also spoke frankly when he discussed Israel and its relationship with US politics and American politicians. In a 1988 CBS “60 Minutes” report on AIPAC influence on US politics, he remarked: “Practically every congressman and senator says his prayers to the AIPAC lobby.”

Amnesty International, in December 2024, released its well-documented 293-page report, “You Feel like You Are Subhuman: Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza.” In a warning to all, it stated: “Our damning findings must serve as a wake-up call to the international community: “This is genocide. It must stop now.”

The State Department’s response to the report: “What I can say as a spokesperson for the US government and as a spokesperson of this administration is that the findings of the accusations of genocide, we continue to believe those to be unfounded.” The non-response bears witness to America’s complicity in genocide and the continuous catastrophe for Palestinians.

Caveat lector: As long as Israel and its lobbies have ownership over America’s Middle East policy, Palestinians will experience more of the same indifference and injustice, the region will be thrown into more chaos, the American public will continue to be red-pilled and international law will become worthless.

Dr. M. Reza Behnam is a political scientist specializing in the history, politics and governments of the Middle East.

December 31, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Syria’s terrorist rulers committing ethnic cleansing in Christian town: Rights group

Press TV – December 29, 2024

A rights advocacy organization says Christians have been threatened by the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) militant group to evacuate the southwestern Syrian town of Maaloula, in what has been decried as an act of ethnic cleansing.

“Syrian Christians in the ancient Christian town of Maaloula, Syria, are being threatened to leave the town by the AlQaeda/ISIS terrorists that have taken over Syria,” the Iraqi Christian Foundation said in a post on X on Sunday.

“An ethnic cleansing is happening in this ancient Christian town where Aramaic is still spoken. Pray for the Christians of Syria,” the rights organization added.

The mission of the Iraqi Christian Foundation is to advocate for the human, legal, and political rights of Iraqi Christians and other Christians across the West Asia region.

The organization also provides humanitarian aid to Iraqi and Syrian Christian genocide victims.

Other rights activists earlier warned about the lack of Internet access or communication and the unfolding of a massacre in Maaloula, the last town in Syria where Aramaic — Jesus Christ’s language — is still spoken.

The HTS administration, which led the onslaught that toppled Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his government earlier this month, has repeatedly claimed to respect the beliefs and rights of all sects and religions in Syria.

Tens of thousands took to the streets in Latakia, Tartus, Homs, Hama, and Qardaha in condemnation of the militants’ desecration of an Alawite shrine in Aleppo last week, but the HTS violently attacked them, leading to deadly confrontations.

The HTS is among the militant organizations that have taken on Syria over the past dozen years with massively deadly and devastating effects on the country’s people.

Since March 2011, Syria has been gripped by a campaign of militancy and destruction sponsored by the US and its allies.

December 29, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , | Leave a comment

Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service: US, UK special forces directing attacks on bases in Syria

Press TV – December 28, 2024

Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) says US and British special services are plotting a series of terrorist attacks on Russian military bases in Syria, following the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad’s government by militant groups earlier this month.

“British intelligence agencies are working out plots to stage a string of terrorist attacks against Russian military installations in Syria. The schemes seek the recruitment of Daesh Takfiri terrorists, who new authorities in Damascus have set free in the aftermath of Assad’s downfall,” the press office of the SVR said in a statement on Saturday.

The statement noted that the outgoing administration of US President Joe Biden, and the British leadership intend to prevent the establishment of stability and security across Syria.

“In a broader sense, they are pursuing the goal of maintaining a state of chaos” in West Asia,” the press office stated.

The SVR highlighted that the US and Britain seek to maintain their dominance and achieve their geopolitical objectives in the region “based on the odious concept of a rules-based order.”

“However, the fiendish plot is challenged by the presence of Russian forces on the Mediterranean coast of Syria, which still majorly contributes to the preservation of regional stability,” the Russian intelligence agency said.

The statement also indicated that the United States plans to continue the occupation of Syria’s oil-rich regions east of the Euphrates River under the pretext of fighting Daesh terrorists, emphasizing that Washington has no intention of withdrawing from those areas.

Back on December 13, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov said Moscow had established direct contacts with the Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) in a bid to maintain its military bases in the Arab country despite the fall of the Syrian government.

Russia hopes to keep its military bases in Syria as they are important in the fight against terrorism, Interfax news agency quoted Bogdanov as saying.

The senior Russian diplomat noted that contacts with HTS were “proceeding in a constructive fashion.”

Bogdanov said Russia hopes the group will fulfill its pledges to “guard against all excesses,” maintain order, and ensure the safety of diplomats and other foreigners.

December 28, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Iran FM: China visit marks ‘new chapter’ in strategic ties, heralds ‘golden’ era

Press TV – December 27, 2024

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says his visit to China will open a “new chapter” in strategic cooperation between the two countries and herald a “golden” era for bilateral relations.

Araghchi made the remarks in an article published by China’s official People’s Daily newspaper on Friday, on the day that he was to head to Beijing at the invitation of his Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi.

“The next golden 50 years of Iran-China relations will demonstrate that this visit marks the beginning of a new chapter of strategic cooperation between the two countries,” he wrote.

The top Iranian diplomat also noted that Iran and China have long engaged in “practical cooperation” to promote multilateralism and develop indigenous values, adding that both sides have defended each other’s fundamental interests in international forums.

He also hailed “pragmatic” Iran-China ties, citing close political and defense coordination, exchange of high-level delegations, as well as cooperation in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the BRICS group of emerging economies, and the Beijing-brokered deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia in March 2023.

“Iran and China share common interests and concerns not only at bilateral and regional levels, but also at the trans-regional and international levels,” he emphasized.

“While firmly believing in the significance of multilateralism and the benefits of joint cooperation towards the prosperity of human society, both countries keep cooperating closely in multilateral mechanisms, including the SCO and the BRICS.”

China is Iran’s largest trade partner. Both states are subject to different levels of illegal sanctions imposed by the US.

The two countries signed the long-term strategic partnership deal in March 2021 to reinforce their long-standing economic and political alliance.

In his article, Araghchi said that West Asia is facing numerous challenges, the core of which is the Palestine issue.

The humanitarian crisis in Gaza, caused by the Israeli genocide and supported by some world powers, has been exacerbated by the inaction of the international community and irresponsible behavior of some parties, he noted.

Iran and China believe that an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and the delivery of humanitarian aid are now the most important priorities, he said.

The Iranian foreign minister further referred to the recent developments in Syria, urging respect for the country’s unity, national sovereignty, and territorial integrity.

Tehran, he pointed out, believes that the Syrian people should decide the future of their country without destructive intervention or external imposition.

“We are witnessing unprecedented changes in the world that have simultaneously created complex “opportunities” and “challenges” and put countries at a historical crossroad, where they must choose between confrontation/cooperation, exclusion/inclusion, closeness/openness, chaos/peace,” he said.

“Some states are trying to restrict and force others to choose their desired values ​​and interests by distorting the facts, falsely dividing the world into democratic and non-democratic, and resorting to sanctions, pressure and double standards. However, Iran and China will always stand on the right side of history and by the side of development, prosperity, cooperation, and friendship between the countries of the Global South in a bid to counter unilateralism and bullying.”

December 27, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Lavrov warns Israel against ‘sowing a storm’ in Syria

RT | December 26, 2024

Israel should refrain from solving its geopolitical problems at the expense of war-torn Syria, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has cautioned. Reckless actions by the Jewish state could erode the security framework in the Middle East, he warned, during an online press conference on Thursday.

Lavrov stressed that Russia insists on Syria remaining an independent country following the demise of former President Bashar Assad, reiterating that Moscow maintains contact both with Damascus and other regional partners. “The disintegration of Syria must not be allowed,” he said.

In light of this, the minister urged Israel, which has established a so-called ‘buffer zone’ in internationally recognized Syrian territory, “to understand its responsibility in these collective [stabilization] efforts and refrain from ensuring its security at the expense of others.”

“One cannot expect to destroy all military facilities in a neighboring country and then live in peace and harmony forever. This is like sowing a storm that will inevitably come back to haunt those who engage in such actions.”

After Assad’s removal and subsequent asylum in Russia, Israel has launched multiple airstrikes across the border, targeting Syrian airbases, weapons depots, and other military facilities to prevent arms from reaching “the wrong hands.” West Jerusalem claimed to have destroyed 70-80% of its neighbor’s strategic military capabilities, with the Syrian navy essentially being eliminated as an operational force.

According to Lavrov, another facet of Syria’s well-being hinges on the situation in the oil-rich eastern part of the country. The US, the minister charged, has “illegally occupied a significant part of the territory, including areas with major oil fields and fertile lands,” adding that revenues from the export of these resources is being funneled to “separatist structures” that the Americans have created in the country.

He also addressed remarks by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who recently vowed to “bury” Kurdish militants – whom Ankara considers terrorists – in Syria if they fail to lay down their arms. “We understand the legitimate concerns of the Turkish leadership… regarding security along the border,” Lavrov said, adding that Türkiye’s “legitimate security interests must be ensured in a way that preserves Syria’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and unity.”

Earlier media reports claimed that Türkiye and the new leadership in Damascus were considering a joint military operation to expel Kurds from border areas if they failed to integrate with the Syrian military. Russian President Vladimir Putin did not rule out that Ankara could proceed with such an action, while urging both sides to resolve their differences peacefully.

December 26, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , , , | Leave a comment

“Greater Israel” Metastasizes

By Kevin Barrett | American Free Press | December 22, 2024

“Israel is a cancer on the Middle East.” Resistance leaders across the region have used that metaphor for generations. The Zionists who dominate American politics, finance and media have attacked it as inappropriate.

But is the metaphor inaccurate? Cancer occurs when a diseased cell or cells begin uncontrollably expanding at the expense of neighboring cells and organ systems. Israel, a malignant body of extremist fanatics implanted into the heart of the Middle East, keeps mindlessly and voraciously expanding, not unlike a virulent tumor. Such pathological Zionist growth has caused untold pain, suffering, and hardship for the people of Palestine, the region, and the world.

Let’s chart Israel’s malignant growth. The original version of modern Israel, as set forth in the Balfour Declaration (1917) consisted of a mere “Jewish homeland” (not a state) guaranteed not to impinge on the rights of non-Jews—who constituted the vast majority of the population and owned virtually all of the land of historic Palestine. After the invading Jewish terrorists began running amok, as recounted in Thomas Suarez’s magisterial State of Terror: How Terrorism Created Modern Israel, Britain rewarded them with the 1937 Peel Commission partition plan, which would have created Israel on 33% of Palestine, leaving the other 67% for Palestinians.

The Peel Commission plan was outright theft. Palestinians owned well over 90% of the land of Palestine, yet the Commission wanted to steal almost one-third of their land and hand it to Eastern European Jewish terrorist invaders. But even such grand larceny wasn’t enough for the Zionists. They held out for more, and got it in 1948 by bribing US President Truman with a suitcase containing two million dollars in cash (as recounted by John F. Kennedy to Gore Vidal). That bribe, and others like it, produced the UN’s partition plan, which almost doubled the size of the Peel Commission’s Israel.

But even that outrageous robbery did not satisfy the Zionist terrorists, who immediately began massacring Palestinians and invading territory outside their UN borders. When the Nakba (Palestinian Holocaust) was over, untold thousands of Palestinians were dead, and more than 750,000 survivors had been robbed of their land and property and forced into exile as permanent refugees. After perpetrating the 1948 holocaust the Zionists refused to return to their UN-approved borders, which would have given them more than 55% of Palestine, and instead continued occupying almost 80%.

But even that didn’t satisfy them. The Zionist leadership spent the next two decades plotting what would become the 1967 war of aggression, in which they stole another 77,000 square kilometers consisting of the West Bank including Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, and the Sinai Peninsula. Together, those stolen territories are almost four times the size of pre-1967 Israel.

After 1967, Zionist leaders split between those willing to return stolen territory in return for peace, and those dedicated to endless wars of expansion. With the assassination of the land-for-peace Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, the issue was definitively settled in favor of the “forever wars” party.

Rabin was an anomaly—a mere speed bump on the road to Greater Israel. The Zionist leadership has always tacitly agreed that Israel will keep expanding to its Biblical mandate and beyond. David Ben-Gurion defined Zionism’s goal as follows: “to create a Jewish state in the whole of the Land of Israel.” That “whole” includes Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan, and part of Egypt, Syria, Iraq, northern Arabia, and arguably Turkey. Such conquests will require genocidal war against those countries and peoples.

2024 will go down in history as the year the Zionist cancer metastasized, sending its toxic tendrils even further into northern Gaza, the West Bank, southern Lebanon, and Syria. Netanyahu’s minister Smotrich is calling for the full annexation of the West Bank and Gaza and the murder or expulsion of all Palestinians from historic Palestine. That process is already underway as northern Gaza is being emptied and Israel has grabbed a full 6000 acres of the West Bank. Meanwhile Israel is violating its ceasefire agreement with Lebanon in an attempt to steal all of south Lebanon up to the Litani River. And in the wake of the US-Turkish-Israeli overthrow of the Syrian government, Israel has massively attacked Syria and grabbed vast swathes of Syrian land.

The ever-expanding cancer of Zionism poses a clear and present danger to the region and the world. The driving force behind Zionism is a virulent version of Jewish messianic millenarianism whose endgame is a Jewish military leader conquering not just the region, but the whole world, and then establishing a Jewish global dictatorship based in Occupied Jerusalem.

First they came for the Palestinians. Israel’s neighbors are next. But this isn’t just a regional problem. Metastasizing Israel threatens all of us.

December 23, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Righty Tighty: A Simple Way Donald Trump Can End the Ukraine and Israel Wars

By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | December 22, 2024

Upon his inauguration as president, Donald Trump will become the leader of a United States executive branch mired in two major wars via its continuing pumping of money, weapons, and intelligence into support of the Ukraine and Israel governments. Trump has declared his opposition to the continuation of these wars. But, how can he end them?

The means by which Trump can end the wars is simpler than many Americans think. This means just does not come to mind for many Americans because it is far removed from the course US presidents have tended to pursue over the last few decades.

Righty tighty. That’s it. Taking the US out of these wars is as simple as turning off a standard outdoor water faucet. President Joe Biden has turned the handle all the way lefty loosey. Trump should just turn it back all the way. Shut off the money flow. Shut off the weapons flow. Shut off the intelligence flow.

And there is no good reason for Trump to take his time about it. He should turn off the flow of aid in all forms promptly in his presidency.

Doing so would comport with Trump’s stated objectives regarding the Ukraine War and the Israel War during his campaign and since. Trump has repeated his promise to end the Ukraine War in a day. He has also commented on multiple occasions that he wants the Israel War over before he is even sworn in as president. Without US support, Ukraine and Israel lack the means to continue their wars. Deprived of the means to continue fighting in anywhere near the strength they have, both governments will immediately find themselves in a new situation where their best option is to seek peace.

Without critical US support, the Ukraine government will negotiate what it will give up in its loss to Russia. Meanwhile, Israel, also deprived of critical US support, will have to pare its ambition in its multifront war. Their only other option is suicidal fighting on in a lost cause. Sober military members would probably put a stop to that. No matter, it was never the cause — lost or otherwise — of America anyway.

What about negative political repercussions for Trump from his ending US participation in the wars?  Such participation lacks popular support, so ending it would seem a plus for Trump’s popularity. Further, since Trump won the presidential election portraying himself as the “peace candidate,” even people who dislike his extraction of the US from the wars would not be very convincing complaining of Trump acting inconsistently or hypocritically. Indeed, Trump could proclaim that his action is a promise kept.

There is even a political urgency for Trump to turn the faucet handle righty tighty. If he continues supporting the wars for weeks or, worse, months or even years, the wars will become Trump wars as they have been Biden wars. Americans would feel relief when Trump after significant delay terminates US involvement, but any effort then to praise him as a man of peace will be met with justified skepticism. There would be blood on his hands.

If President Trump quickly turns off the faucet for the Ukraine War, the defeat of Ukraine will be accelerated. Trump can portray such as the much-needed termination of Biden’s deadly folly, reminding Americans as Trump has over the past couple years that the entire conflict would have been avoided had Trump been president. Trump can also claim victory in stopping the killing of people — Ukrainian and Russian — something he has pointed to as his primary objective.

In turning off the war support for the Israel government, Trump is in a different position as he has expressed his particularly strong support for this government. But, Trump, as with the Ukraine war, has also expressed his strong desire for the carnage in the Israel War to end. Trump, when shutting off the faucet, can declare victory for Israel. He can claim the defeat by Israel of Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon. He can claim also Israel’s elimination of threat posed to it from Syria. The war is over and won can be his message.

Trump will surely face difficult challenges as president, but on the major issues of the Ukraine War and Israel War, the solution is simple: righty tighty.

December 23, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

The Israeli Hit List – Iran Remains

If Americans Knew | December 18, 2024

The seven countries that the U.S. continues to meddle with and antagonize have a shared history and connection: Israel and the Zionists who pushed for the Jewish state want them to be destabilized, weakened, or eliminated. Jeffrey Sachs is a world-renowned economics professor, bestselling author, innovative educator, and global leader in sustainable development. Sachs serves as the Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, where he holds the rank of University Professor, the university’s highest academic rank. From 2001-18, Sachs served as Special Advisor to UN Secretaries-General Kofi Annan (2001-7), Ban Ki-moon (2008-16), and António Guterres (2017-18). Alison Weir is the founder of If Americans Knew and president of the Council for the National Interest, which works for “U.S. Middle East policies that represent the highest values of our founders and our citizens and that work to sustain a nation of honor, decency, security, and prosperity.” Weir is also author of the book, Against Our Better Judgment: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel.

Source videos:

Jeffrey Sachs on Piers Morgan    • “WHY Are We Doing Netanyahu’s Bidding…  

Alison Weir’s speech February 2017    • Israel-Palestine: Essential facts on …  

Alison Weir – Iraq Tribunal: The Israel Connection – 2022    • Iraq Tribunal: The Israel Connnection…  

Alison Weir’s speech September 2019    • Alison Weir Visits Clovis Community C…  

Donald Trump on the invasion of Iraq 2016    • Does Trump think George W. Bush lied …  

General Wesley Clark on Democracy Now    • Gen. Wesley Clark reveals 2001 plan t…  

General Wesley Clark’s speech at the Commonwealth Club of California    • Gen. Wesley Clark reveals 2001 plan t…  

Benjamin Netanyahu in Congress 2002    • Israeli Perspective on Conflict with …  

December 21, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The fall of Syria: A NATO, Zionist and Gulf state operation

By David Miller | Al Mayadeen | December 21, 2024

The day after the ceasefire with Hezbollah was announced on 26 November the so-called Syrian rebels launched their offensive.

But this was not just an isolated coincidence. Not only were fighters attacking Syria from the North, but two other fronts were opened at the same time showing clear co-ordination.

From the North East the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (or SDF) attacked.

And from the South, there is a relatively new grouping called the Southern Operations Room.

Who were these groups and who is backing them?

First, in the North, were two groups. The first is the Syrian National Army the rebranded name for former constituents of the Free Syria Army, a collection of militias most of which have been supported directly in the past by the US.

Then there is Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham the rebranded name of the Nusra Front, the former Al Qaeda franchise. It is reportedly the strongest and largest so-called rebel group in Syria. Its leader Abou Mohammed al Jolani, has been successively the deputy leader of Islamic State in Iraq, the founder of the Nusra Front in Syria, a defector to Al-Qaeda who then rebranded HTS as something separate from Al-Qaeda. This is even admitted by the mainstream media as in this report from NBC:

When Syria’s vicious civil war erupted in 2011, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI), sent Jolani to Syria to establish the Al-Nusra Front, a branch of Al Qaeda. Their conflict escalated two years later. Jolani rejected Baghdadi’s calls to dissolve the Nusra Front and merge it with ISI to form ISIS. Instead, he pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda, which later disassociated itself from ISIS. The Nusra Front then became Al Qaeda’s Syria affiliate and later battled ISIS for supremacy in the battle against Assad.

Both HTS and the SNA are being supported directly by Turkiye.

Turkiye obviously has its own interests but as a NATO member, it is under the leadership of the US. Jolani is himself effectively a US asset as well. Here is Aaron Zelin the chronicler of Takfiri groups for Zionist regime asset WINEP:

HTS and its leader, Abu Muhammad al-Jolani, have sought to garner support from the United States and other Western governments over the past years in a bid to get themselves removed from terrorist lists. Although that has yet to occur, their overtures did not fall on deaf ears, at least during the Trump administration.

Zelin quotes a spring 2021 interview with Frontline by former US special representative James Jeffrey, which noted that he had “engaged with the group via backchannels while serving in President Trump’s State Department. He also noted that Washington had stopped targeting Jolani in August 2018.” In his view, “HTS was the least bad option of the various options on Idlib, and Idlib is one of the most important places in Syria, which is one of the most important places right now in the Middle East.”

In his long interview, Jeffrey also noted that

  • We got Mike Pompeo to issue a waiver to allow us to give aid to HTS
  • I received and sent messages to HTS
  • Messages from HTS: “We want to be your friend. We’re not terrorists. We’re just fighting Assad.”
  • The US was “supporting indirectly the armed opposition”
  • “It was important to us that HTS not disintegrate”
  • It was important “to ensure that nobody somewhere in the terrorist bureaucracy would decide to take a shot at [Jolani]… that would have been bad.”
  • “Our policy was, … to leave HTS alone.”
  • “Syria, … is the pivot point for whether [there can be] an American-managed security system in the region.”
  • [The] Abraham Accords, … was, … encouraged by what we were doing in Syria and elsewhere.”
  • And the fact that we haven’t targeted [HTS] ever, the fact that we have never raised our voice to the Turks about their cohabitation with them … “It’s just like [Turkiye] in Idlib. We want [Turkiye] to be in Idlib, but you can’t be in Idlib without having a platform, and that platform is largely HTS. Now, … HTS is a U.N.-designated official terrorist organization. Have I ever or has any American official ever complained to [Turkiye] about what [they’re] doing there with HTS? No.”
  • HTS “are the least bad option”

In the North East of Syria, Kurdish fighters of the Syrian Democratic Forces are a proxy for the US, which is in occupation of Syrian oil fields there. US officials refer to this part of Syria as being “owned” by the US with its “local partner” the SDF. The US has a smallish number of troops there and appears to depend on the roughly 100,000 Kurdish forces who enable them to steal almost all of Syria’s oil.

In the south of Syria, a seemingly new grouping emerged. The Southern Operations Room, reportedly a merger of a coalition of Sunni and Druze groups, announced its creation on December 6. Staggeringly they were reportedly the first to reach Damascus. According to reports, these fighters would appear to be related to the previous Southern Operations groupings created by Jordanian & US intelligence agencies.

The CIA covert operation Timber Sycamore was run out of Amman in Jordan and involved the transfer of weapons, including from Saudi Arabia to the Jordanian intelligence agency for onward transmission to Syrian rebel groups. The agency is known as the General Intelligence Directorate. In fact, as Salon reported in 2016, “the CIA essentially created the GID to help shield the Jordanian monarchy from internal and external threats.” Fighters from the Southern Operations Room were the first to reach Damascus on the 7th of December and may have been involved in the widely seen footage of armed rebels removing large numbers of boxes from the Syrian Central Bank.

So, all four of the supposedly disparate “rebel” forces would appear to be backed directly or indirectly, by the US, even though some (especially HTS/SNA and the Kurdish SDF) seem to have contending interests in some areas.

The HTS forces are famously murderously sectarian, and more evidence of this quickly emerged. At a geopolitical level, they are directly helping the Zionists to continue the genocide. Let’s remember that the Zionists have been undertaking continuous strikes on Syria over the last year. The “rebels” even appeared to credit the Zionists with successfully supporting their march on Damascus, In advance of the ceasefire announcement they carried out further attacks, which are continuing. The Zionists themselves were quite open about how useful the alleged ‘uprising’ is.

“From Israel’s perspective, the rebel advance in northern Syria further isolates Iran and Hezbollah”, said Avi Melamed, a former Israeli intelligence official and Arab affairs adviser to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

Many of the weapons Hezbollah used against “Israel” in the recent war were transferred to them via Syria, according to Marco Moreno, a former senior officer in the IOF’s Human Intelligence Unit 504.

The rapid advance of HTS and the SNA has been enabled by Israeli strikes against Resistance groups that support the Syrian government.

According to Melamed: “This ongoing Israeli pressure, coupled with the rebel offensive, weakens the ‘Axis of Resistance’ and challenges Iran’s hegemonic ambitions.”

The extraordinary speed of the ending of the Assad government begs all sorts of questions about what happened and the significance of the events.

It is no surprise that “Israel”, the US, Turkiye and other supporters of Western power should celebrate, but the significant outpouring of positive sentiment from Muslims was perhaps more surprising.

The failure to appreciate the geopolitics of it all and to apparently blithely accept the victory of takfiri terrorists is disturbing for those who see the importance of Muslim unity.

More will likely become clear in the future, but for now, we can say that it appears that an agreement was reached between Russia, Iran, some Gulf states and the US. This allowed the Assad family to exit with some apparent guarantees on an orderly transition, including an order from the Syrian government side for the Army to stand down, and commitments from some of the opposition about avoiding looting and attacks on minorities, desecration of religious shrines and the like. The deal will also reportedly allow Russia to maintain its air and Naval base in Syria, but it is not clear how that will turn out.

The apparent support for the so called “revolution” in sections of the Muslim community in the UK and elsewhere is an indication of the success of propaganda and misinformation much of it from the West and the Zionist entity.

Despite myriad assertions, it is not true that the Palestinian armed factions opposed Assad. With the exception of the Hamas Political Bureau between 2012 and 2020, every Palestinian Resistance faction supported Assad including the PFLP, PFLP-GC, DFLP, PIJ, PLA, Liwa Al Quds, and Fatah al-Intifada.  It is true that elements of the Hamas politburo (in Qatar – particularly Khaled Mesh’aal), was always closer to the Qatari/Turkish line and broke with Assad from 2012-20.

However, the targeting of Hamas leaders by the Zionist entity has been based particularly on those who support the Axis of Resistance, because they are the ones perceived as a threat. The most obvious example is Yahya Sinwar. Some of them still remain. Those at the sharp end of confronting the Zionist genocide knew more than anyone, how much their supplies of weapons and other equipment depended on Assad’s support.

From the other side, it’s also true that Bashar al-Assad, was made repeated offers by King Abdallah of Saudi Arabia and others to accrue huge personal benefits if he gave up on Palestine and Lebanon, and cut ties with the Resistance. He refused. Even up until the last days of his rule, the UAE’s Islamophobic Zionist dictator Mohammed bin Zayed made Bashar an offer on behalf of the US to cut the Axis of Resistance in return for the US keeping him in power. He refused.

He was made such offers because Syria was the backbone of Palestine and the Lebanese Resistance, without which both will find it very difficult to recover from a logistical perspective. The arms, money, and intelligence that are essential to fighting guerrilla warfare on a serious scale require state support, and Syria under Bashar was the land bridge for all of those supplies reaching Lebanon and Palestine. Which is why they were assiduously bombed by the Zionists.

David Miller is an investigative researcher, broadcaster, and academic. He is the founder and co-director of the lobbying watchdog Spinwatch and editor of Powerbase.info.

December 21, 2024 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Syrian ‘end-game’ will change the Middle East

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – December 20, 2024

The fall of the Assad regime in Syria may have been a geopolitical loss for Iran (and Russia), but the fact that Islamists have overthrown the regime threatens both Iran and Arab states, creating prospects for their cooperation in the near future and minimising whatever gains the ‘winners’ of this ‘end-game’ may have made.

The ‘Winners’ and the ‘losers’

There are clear ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ in the fall of the Assad regime in Syria. But geopolitics is a very dynamic field in which gains and losses are hardly one-sided. In some ways, the fall of the Assad regime – and the inability of Iran to rescue its key ally in the region – may have been an outcome of Israel’s war on Palestine and Hezbollah, but it does not necessarily mean a permanent weakness of Iran and a permanent gain for Israel. For now, Israel is consolidating this gain by a) seizing Syrian territory, and b) bombarding the Syrian military positions to decimate its ability to launch any counter-offensive at all.

In other words, Israel’s steps show a clear direction. First, it weakened Hezbollah by engaging it in a brutal war. Second, it is now supporting the Islamist takeover of Syria. The Islamists have declared that they have no problem with Israel as their neighbour. Israel’s Netanyahu, on the other hand, has already claimed the credit for “reshaping” the Middle East.

Another clear ‘winner’ is Turkey, which had long wanted Assad to go. For years, the Turkish military had been maintaining a direct presence in Syria’s Idlib province, which also happened to be the main province under (partial) control of the so-called “rebel” Islamists. For years, Turkish forces shielded these groups from the Syrian (and Iranian and Russian) strikes and offensives. In addition, the fact that Turkey allowed these groups to conduct trade across the Turkish border provided these groups with economic support too. Now that Assad is gone, Turkey finds itself in a much better position than it was earlier to counter Kurdish groups.

But there are no ‘losers’

All of this apparently translates into crucial geopolitical gains for Israel (Washington) and Ankara, except there are no permanent ‘losers’ here. The fall of the Assad regime has brought to power a well-known Islamist group globally designated as terrorist. It is said to be only previously allied with al-Qaeda, but the way it controlled Idlib for years provides a sufficiently sound snapshot of where the group stands as an ultra-orthodox network, with serious questions remaining about whether the group was ever able to shun its ideological past.

Still, there is little denying that the ability of armed Islamists to overthrow Assad and capture power has upset not only Tehran but also Riyadh, Doha, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait, and even Cairo. All of these states previously faced actual, or prospects, of popular discontent during the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. All of these states are Muslim-majority states, which makes them vulnerable to groups operating both regionally and domestically to overthrow monarchies and/or existing regimes. Can any of them face similar prospects as Syrians did? Let’s not forget that the “rebels” first emerged in Syria in the wake of the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. If the end of the Asad regime is the continuation of the same ‘movement’, there is no denying that it can reach other states too. A clear logic for these states to cooperate with each other against this Islamist threat, backed as it is by Turkey and Israel, exists.

Therefore, while Iran may have become ‘isolated’ and the fall of the Assad regime may have blocked its ability to support Hezbollah via Syria, Iran’s prospects of developing new – and deeper – relations with the Arab world have also increased manifold. Therefore, while Netanyahu might be right in claiming that he is “reshaping” the Middle East, the new shape might not be exactly to his liking. The coming together of Iran and Arab states would directly undermine Israeli ability to defeat Iran in the short and long run.

Iran and the Arab world

They are already cooperating. Iran, Saudia, Qatar, and Iraq were all quick to oppose Israeli incursions into Syrian territory. A Saudi official statement called the Golan Heights “occupied” territory. This is not an isolated development triggered by Israeli actions. It is an outcome of an ongoing policy convergence between Riyadh and Tehran vis-à-vis Israel. On Nov. 11 at a summit of Islamic nations in Riyadh, the Saudi crown prince called on the international community, i.e., the US mainly, to compel Israel to “respect the sovereignty of the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran and not to violate its lands.” At the same gathering, he described the Israeli war on Palestine as “collective genocide.”

In Egypt, the fall of the Assad regime has brought back echoes of the fall of the Mubarak regime more than a decade ago. When the present Egyptian ruler overthrew the government of Mohammad Morsi, a Turkish ally, Erdoğan said he would never talk to Sisi. Yet, he met Sisi twice in 2024. The fact that Turkey is now backing Islamists – and it has always supported the Egypt-based Muslim Brotherhood – there is yet again every reason for Egypt to align its policies in ways that might help keep the Islamists at bay. This way includes closer ties with the rest of the Arab world, plus Tehran.

Quoting senior Western diplomats, a recent report in Middle East Eye described the situation as particularly unravelling for the UAE, which has “been unnerved by the US’s manoeuvring to open backchannels of communication to HTS via Turkey”.  The report also mentions the UAE’s efforts to “broker talks between the government of Bashar al-Assad and the US. The UAE wanted to strike a grand bargain to keep the Assad family in power”. The only reason why the UAE wanted Assad to stay in power was that the alternative to Assad would cause more damage to Emirati interests than any potential benefits. The Islamists are that alternative now that no one, except the Turks and the Israelis, wants.

Therefore, a logical response of these states (Arab and Iran) is to develop coordinated action to thwart any prospects of an Islamist revival, including the revival of the Islamist State, which has a sizable presence in Afghanistan. This is probably the only way that the Arab states can collectively outmanoeuvre Turkey and Israel. There is also little denying that any effort to deepen Gulf-Iran cooperation will be squarely seen as a welcome development in Moscow and Beijing, both of which have vital interests in the region.

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

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »