Ukraine and Palestine: A double threat to US hegemony
The outcome of US-led conflicts in Ukraine and West Asia will have a profound impact on the developing world order
By MK Bhadrakumar | The Cradle | January 2, 2024
Geopolitical analysts broadly agree that the war in Ukraine and the West Asian crisis will dictate the trajectory of world politics in 2024. But a reductionist thesis appears alongside that views the Israel-Palestine conflict narrowly in terms of what it entails for the resilience of the US proxy war in Ukraine – the assumption being that the locus of world politics lies in Eurasia.
The reality is more complex. Each of these two conflicts has a raison d’être and dynamics of its own, while at the same time also being intertwined.
Washington’s neck-deep involvement in the current phase of the West Asian crisis can turn into a quagmire, since it is also tangled up with domestic politics in a way that the Ukraine war never has been. But then, the outcome of the Ukraine war is already a foregone conclusion, and the US and its allies have realized that Russia cannot be defeated militarily; the endgame narrows down to an agreement to end the conflict on Russia’s terms.
To be sure, the outcome of the Ukraine war and the denouement of the Israel-Palestine conflict, which is at the root of the West Asian crisis, will have a profound impact on the new world order, and the two processes reinforce each other.
Russia realizes this fully. President Vladimir Putin’s stunning ‘year-enders’ in the run-up to the New Year speak for themselves: daylong visits to Abu Dhabi and Riyadh (watched by a shell-shocked US President Joe Biden), followed by talks with Iran’s president and rounded off with a telephone conversation with the Egyptian president.
In the space of 48 hours or so, Putin touched base with his Emirati, Saudi, Iranian, and Egyptian colleagues who officially entered the portals of the BRICS on 1 January.
The evolving US intervention in the West Asian crisis can be understood from a geopolitical perspective only by factoring in Biden’s visceral hostility toward Russia. BRICS is in Washington’s crosshairs. The US understands perfectly well that the extra large presence of West Asian and Arab nations in BRICS — four out of ten member states — is central to Putin’s grand project to re-structure the world order and bury US exceptionalism and hegemony.
Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iran are major oil producing countries. Russia has been rather explicit that during its 2024 chairmanship of BRICS, it will push for the creation of a currency to challenge the petrodollar. Without doubt, the BRICS currency will be at the center stage of the grouping’s summit due to be hosted by Putin in Kazan, Russia in October.
In a special address on 1 January, marking the start of Russia’s BRICS Chairmanship, Putin stated his commitment to “enhancing the role of BRICS in the international monetary system, expanding both interbank cooperation and the use of national currencies in mutual trade.”
If a BRICS currency is used instead of the dollar, there could be significant impact on several financial sectors of the US economy, such as energy and commodity markets, international trade and investment, capital markets, technology and fintech, consumer goods and retail, travel and tourism, and so on.
The banking sector could take the first hit that might eventually spill over to the markets. And if Washington fails to fund its mammoth deficit, prices of all commodities could skyrocket or even reach hyperinflation triggering a crash of the US economy.
Meanwhile, the eruption of the Israel-Palestine conflict has given the US an alibi — ‘Israel’s self-defense’ — to claw its way back on the greasy pole of West Asian politics. Washington has multiple concerns, but at its core are the twin objectives of resuscitating the Abraham Accords (anchored on Saudi-Israeli proximity) and the concurrent sabotage of the Beijing-mediated Saudi-Iranian rapprochement.
The Biden administration was counting on the fact that an Israeli-Saudi deal would provide legitimacy to Tel Aviv and proclaim to the Islamic world that there was no religious justification for hostility towards Israel. But Washington senses that post-7 October it would not be able to secure a Saudi-Israel deal during this Biden term, and all that could be coaxed out of Riyadh is a door left ajar for future discussion on the topic. No doubt, it is a major blow to the US strategy to liquidate the Palestinian question.
In a medium term perspective, if the Russian-Saudi mechanism known as OPEC+ liberates the world oil market from US control, BRICS drives a dagger into the heart of US hegemony which is anchored on the dollar being the ‘world currency.’
Saudi Arabia recently signed a currency swap deal worth $7 billion with China in an attempt to shift more of their trade away from the dollar. The People’s Bank of China said in a statement that the swap arrangement will “help strengthen financial cooperation” and “facilitate more convenient trade and investment” between the countries.
Going forward, sensitive Saudi-Chinese transactions in strategic areas such as defense, nuclear technology, among others, will henceforth take place below the US radar. From a Chinese perspective, if its strategic trade is sufficiently insulated from any US-led program of anti-China sanctions, Beijing can position itself confidently to confront US power in the Indo-Pacific. This is a telling example of how the US strategy for the Indo-Pacific will lose traction as a result of its waning influence in West Asia.
The conventional wisdom is that preoccupation in volatile West Asia distracts Washington from paying attention to the Indo-Pacific and China. In reality, though, the waning influence in West Asia is complicating the capacity of the US to counter China both in the region as well as in the Indo-Pacific. The developments are moving in a direction where the credentials of the US as a great power are at an inflection point in West Asia – and that realization has leaked into other geographic regions around the world.
Way back in 2007, the distinguished political scientists John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, wrote with great prescience in their famous 34,000-word essay entitled The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy that Israel has become a ‘strategic liability’ for the United States, but retains its strong support because of a wealthy, well-organized, and bewitching lobby that has a ‘stranglehold’ on Congress and US elites.
The authors warned that Israel and its lobby bear outsized their responsibility for persuading the Bush Administration to invade Iraq and, perhaps one day soon, to attack the nuclear facilities of Iran.
Interestingly, on New Year’s Eve, in a special report based on extensive briefing by top US officials, the New York Times highlighted that “No other episode [as the war in Gaza] in the past half-century has tested the ties between the United States and Israel in such an intense and consequential way.”
Clearly, even as Israel’s barbaric actions in Gaza and its colonial project in the occupied West Bank are exposed and laid bare, and the Israeli state’s campaign to force Palestinian population migration are in full view, two of the US strategic objectives in the region are unravelling: first, the restoration of Israel’s military superiority in the balance of forces regionally and vis-a-vis the Axis of Resistance, in particular; and second, the resuscitation of the Abraham Accords where the crown jewels would have been a Saudi-Israeli treaty.
Viewed from another angle, the directions in which West Asia’s crisis unfolds are being keenly watched by the world community, especially those in the Asia-Pacific region. Most notable here is that Russia and China have given the US a free hand to navigate its military moves – unchallenged, so far, in the Red Sea. This means that any conflagration in the region will be synonymous with a catastrophic breakdown of US strategy.
Soon after the US defeat in Afghanistan in Central Asia, and coinciding with an ignominious ending of the US-led proxy war by NATO against Russia in Eurasia, a violent, grotesque setback in West Asia will send a resounding message across all of Asia that the US-led bandwagon has run out of steam. Among the end users of this startling message, the countries of ASEAN stand at the forefront. The bottom line is that the overlapping tumultuous events in Eurasia and West Asia are poised to coalesce into a climactic moment for world politics.
Europe under the unbearable yoke and heavy burden of the United States
By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – 01.01.2024
The latest round of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the current carnage inflicted by Israel on all Palestinians in Gaza, will continue for some time and end in another tragedy for the Palestinians. But in the long run, all these events will lead to huge negative consequences that all peoples of the Middle East, including the Israelis, will be experiencing for a long time. But while none of the parties in the world will benefit from the disaster, “European countries will particularly pay a higher price for the ongoing conflict,” notes the Iranian publication Tehran Times. Although the leaders of the European states are well aware of the erroneous nature of current US policy, they, like true American puppets, are forced to blindly and unconditionally follow Washington’s course.
History shows that there have been many cases where European countries have paid the price for US policy mistakes over the past two decades. One such striking example may be Europe’s erroneous policy towards the peaceful nuclear development issue of Iran. Until 2012, European countries were among Iran’s most important economic partners, if not the largest, and Iran was a very important market for European products. Iranians preferred German electronics and cars to similar products from elsewhere. But because of the illegal US sanctions against Iran, European companies withdrew from the Iranian market and eventually paid a heavy price for the loss of a very profitable and promising Iranian market. Today, the economic presence of European countries and their companies in Iran are almost non-existent.
The second such example could be the heavy-handed and brazen interference of the United States in the internal affairs of the Middle East over the past two decades. The Middle East, although not really peaceful, remained generally stable in the 1990s and early 2000s. Therefore, European countries were very ambitious in promoting economic integration with their Middle Eastern neighbors, since the security situation was acceptable. The Barcelona process of the 1990s was such a program for the integration of Europe and its neighbors on the other side of the Mediterranean Sea. But the first two decades of the 21st century witnessed the United States often intervening militarily in the internal affairs of a number of countries in the Middle East, including Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria. As a result of constant military actions, the states and peoples of the Middle East have been experiencing enormous regional upheavals for more than two decades, and, by all accounts, this region is the most turbulent in the world.
Several regional and non-regional players have, quite naturally, various disagreements with the United States in the field of strategy, ideology, politics and economy. However, it is the European countries that have been most seriously affected by the instability, since they are the immediate neighbors of the Middle East. The stream of refugees has increased the economic and social burden and caused divisions both at domestic and EU interstate levels. And in the distant future, they will face even more negative consequences, as European politicians will have to solve even more difficult tasks just to survive.
The third example could be the latest conflict between Israel and Palestine. The war, the carnage unleashed by Israel in the Gaza Strip, has already led to a very serious humanitarian catastrophe, since about 20,000 Palestinians have died so far, about two thirds of whom are women and children, and more than two million have been displaced and become homeless. If the war continues, there will be a more serious humanitarian catastrophe for both the Palestinians and other peoples of the region. More refugees are likely to arrive in European countries, which will add new difficulties to their economies. As some European politicians travel to Israel to demonstrate their support for Tel Aviv’s hardline policies, Muslims in these countries will become increasingly dissatisfied with the course of politicians. There will be new divisions within the EU, as some countries do not share the views of those who support Israel’s unwise policy of destroying the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip.
In general, if one knows his history, the United States has been making mistakes in the region, while the European countries have kept paying a high price for them. Then there is the question of whether the elites in Europe understand the scenario and the rationale behind it. The answer is a resounding yes. In fact, the various political concepts initiated by Europe have sufficiently indicated that Europeans are well aware of their aforementioned problem. But at the same time, they continue to make the same mistakes over and over again, or, as a Russian saying goes, they keep stepping on the same rake. Indeed, if God wants to punish someone, he takes away his mind.
In the early 2000s, European leaders proposed the concept of “negotiation diplomacy,” which, in their opinion, could allow them to shape the Middle East through an approach different from the United States’ policy of force. Thus, in 2003, French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder fiercely and decisively opposed the attempts of the United States to brazenly invade Iraq by falsifying documents and deceiving the world community. Over time, they were proved to be right, although they failed to stop the war, or rather the massacre of the civilian population of Iraq.
In the same year, three foreign ministers — of France, Germany and the United Kingdom — made a joint visit to Iran to find a solution to the Iranian peaceful nuclear development issue through their diplomacy, as opposed to the US approaches to economic sanctions and military pressure. The efforts of the European trio also proved to be correct, although they failed to change the US sanctions approach to solving the Iranian problem.
In 2010, the EU proposed a different concept of strategic autonomy, and the term itself indicated its intention to distance itself from the United States and reduce its dependence on the Americans in security matters. But, unfortunately, during this period, Europe did not make sufficient efforts to demonstrate the autonomous aspect of its policy. Instead, some European countries even sided with the United States in a policy that ultimately led to the infringement of their economic and security interests, as mentioned above.
It is true that Atlantic relations with Europe were based on cultural and historical ties, and they have not changed for a long time. But, on the other hand, European countries have really different interests. The Middle East is an immediate neighbor of Europe, yet is far removed from the United States, and anything bad that happens in the Middle East can negatively affect Europe. Logically speaking, it is unreasonable that the EU will always support the United States in all its risky plans.
Moreover, the current US policy towards the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, with millions of Palestinians already forced to leave their homes, obviously undermines justice, which should be one of the fundamental principles of the international order. The continuation of such a crisis will undermine the image not only of the United States, but also to an even greater extent of Europe, which neighbors the Middle East. In any case, it is high time for European leaders to develop a reasonable approach, balancing justice and its Atlantic obligations. Otherwise, if history is anything to go by, mistakes made under pressure from the United States can force Europe to pay an even higher and unaffordable price.
Western War Machine is in Panic Mode
By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – 01.01.2024
The sheer inability of the collective West to force Russia into submission in Ukraine plus the fast-changing global opinion about the West in the context of the latter’s support for Israel’s brutal war on the Gazans has put the so-called ‘liberal-democratic’ world into a panic mode. The White House has already said that it will run out of money to fund Ukraine into 2024 unless the US Congress gives approval for more funding. This has led the Western war machine – primarily led by the US – to anticipate a possible defeat. “There is no guarantee of success with us, but they are certain to fail without us”, a senior US military official told CNN recently. Without the military support, US officials now estimate, Ukraine would fall by the summer of 2024. But, in Western calculations, Ukraine’s fall does not just mean Russia’s victory; it also implies a possible collapse of NATO and the eventual downfall of the Western-dominated global political, economic, and security order.
A recent piece in the Wall Street Journal said,
“Even more important, Russia’s success in Ukraine would increase a threat to NATO’s Eastern flank—in particular the Baltic states and Poland. Outside of Europe it would embolden Moscow’s allies Iran and North Korea and provide a template for China for the military solution of the Taiwan dispute. In all those cases, the U.S. and NATO troops could find themselves in the midst of a military conflict of the sort that Ukraine fights today without direct involvement of NATO”.
Such prospects are causing severe problems. Germany, for instance, is considering shelving voluntary force and making a return to conscription. “I believe that a nation that needs to become more resilient in times like these will have a higher level of awareness if it is mixed through with soldiers,” said Jan Christian Kaack, the chief of the German Navy. This is in addition to the fact that the German army is too small to defend itself against any threat; hence, the renewed emphasis on conscription.
But Germany is not an exceptional case. In fact, it mirrors developments in the rest of Europe. The UK, otherwise known to possess one of the best fighting forces in the world, is running into some problems of a fundamental nature. The Sky News reported earlier in the year that, a senior US general “privately told Defence Secretary Ben Wallace the British Army is no longer regarded as a top-level fighting force”. It was further reported that the “The armed forces would run out of ammunition in a few days if called upon to fight” and that “The UK lacks the ability to defend its skies against the level of missile and drone strikes that Ukraine is enduring”.
On top of it is the fact that the Russian military position in Ukraine remains strong, making it a lot harder for the West to provide enough funding. The Biden administration is facing its own challenges vis-à-vis more funding for Ukraine. As far as Europe is concerned, a recent report showed that pledges for funding made in August 2023 fell by almost 90 percent compared to the same period last year.
This is war fatigue that is being compounded by a well-sustained Russian resolve to achieve its objectives. For the West, Vladimir Putin remains “stubborn”. As Putin recently reiterated, “There will be peace when we achieve our goals… Now let’s return to these goals – they have not changed. I would like to remind you how we formulated them: denazification, demilitarisation, and a neutral status for Ukraine.”
Speaking from a position of strength – and keeping in mind the war fatigue in the West – Putin further said that Russian forces are “improving their position almost along the entire line of contact. Almost all of them are engaged in active combat. And the position of our troops is improving along [the entire line of contact.]”. This being the case, Putin conveyed no ideas of making a compromise with the West over Ukraine. Speaking from the Russian perspective, it would make no sense to offer negotiations and, thus, turn Russian tactical victories into unsustainable settlements.
Clearly, Russia has no intention of withdrawing from its victories, which is why there is a panic, especially in Europe. If Russia continues to win and the US funding stalls, Europe will be left to fend for itself. Germany’s defence minister minced no words to express this fear last Saturday when he said that the US “was losing interest in European affairs and that security tensions in the Pacific would likely leave the European Union having to fend for itself”, adding that “One can assume that the USA will be more involved in the Pacific region in the next decade than it is today – regardless of who becomes the next president,” he said. His conclusion is: “This means that we Europeans must increase our commitment to ensure security on our continent.”
In a nutshell, for the US, if the war in Ukraine was to unify the West, it is beginning to have an exactly opposite effect. There lies a very strong reason for the US to reconsider its strategy. This reconsideration can go in two directions. First, the US can withdraw from its obsession with expanding NATO to include Ukraine. Second, the US can make one last push and make Ukraine fight for as long as it can, hoping that this might break Russia. The Biden administration favours the second option, which is why it is pushing for the US$61 billion aid package. But will a Republican victory allow this to happen? A Republican victory could not only end support for Ukraine but also leave Europe in a total lurch. Tough times ahead.
Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.
One more Canadian action to support Israel’s slaughter in Gaza
By Yves Engler | December 31, 2023
The symbolism of joining a military force to combat a government challenging Israel’s genocide is stark. But, criticism of Canada’s role in the US led Red Sea coalition has largely come from hawks wanting more. As I’ll detail, they are likely underplaying Canada’s assistance for what could significantly escalate fighting in the region.
In solidarity with Palestinians being brutalized, the Houthis in Yemen have seized multiple tanker ships connected to Israel. They’ve stated that they will stop vessels with cargo bound for Israel or owned by Israeli firms. A senior Houthi official, Mohammed al-Bukhaiti, announced that their attacks will end if Israel’s “crimes in Gaza stop and food, medicines and fuel are allowed to reach its besieged population.”
In response to the Houthis actions some major shipping firms have said they won’t load Israel bound cargo. Others have stopped shipping through the Red Sea.
The Houthis actions pressure Israel to stop the slaughter in Gaza. But, Washington is seeking to insulate the Jewish supremacist state from this pressure by building a multinational operation to protect commercial vessels traversing the Red Sea. Canada has joined Operation Prosperity Guardian and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently discussed the matter with Israeli minister Benny Gantz. According to Ynetnews, “The two also discussed ‘the need to strengthen regional architecture, focusing on naval power, to confront the threat of Iran’s proxies, the Houthis, who endanger the global economy with their terrorist acts in the Red Sea.’”
(Control over waterways has long been a source of Israeli vulnerability and one reason Tel Aviv has tried to draw the US and other Western nations into the region. In the lead up to Israel invading its neighbors in 1967 Canada hyped Egypt’s blocking of Israeli ships, which legitimated Israeli aggression. At the time Ottawa also supported a British and US proposal to establish a maritime force to protect Israeli shipping through the Strait of Tiran.)
Canada’s initially stated contribution to Operation Protection Guardian is only three officers. But, Canadian troops already assist the US across the region. In recent years a handful of Canadian troops have been stationed at US bases in Bahrain and Qatar while a ‘detachment’ of Canadians in Saudi Arabia has helped operate US AWACS spy planes.
Canada has a small military base in Kuwait. A few hundred Canadians have been stationed there in recent years to support the special forces deployed in Iraq as well as Canadian intelligence and air-to-air refuelling aircraft. Through NORAD hundreds of Canadian soldiers assist the US with monitoring the region.
Since 2002 Canada has had a regular naval presence in the Red Sea and Persian Gulf. The stated aim of Operation ARTEMIS is “to help stop terrorism and to make Middle Eastern waters more secure. These include the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden, the Gulf of Oman and the Indian Ocean.” During 2019 HMCS Regina commanded the 33-nation Combined Maritime Forces naval coalition patrolling the region. Two months ago HMCS Montreal returned to Halifax after sailing in the region.
Canada has a history of belligerent naval deployments in the Red Sea and Persian Gulf. In the lead up to the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq Canadian naval vessels led maritime interdiction efforts off the coast of Iraq. As such, Ottawa had legal opinion suggesting it was technically at war with that country. Canadian warships also deployed when the US bombed Iraq in 1998 and during the early 1990s war.
The Houthis’ willingness to directly oppose Israel’s policy helps explain why the US and Canada supported Saudi Arabia’s brutal seven-year war against them. In 2016 the Trudeau government justified permits for a massive armoured vehicle sale to the Kingdom on the grounds their fight against the Houthis was “countering instability in Yemen.” Then Global Affairs minister Stephane Dion signed a directive okaying the permits on the grounds “The acquisition of state-of-the-art armoured vehicles will assist Saudi Arabia in these goals, which are consistent with Canada’s defence interests in the Middle East.” Additionally, Ottawa repeatedly criticized the Houthis over the fighting while expressing support for the Saudi-backed President of Yemen Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi.
Today Canada has officially joined a military coalition combating one of the few governments/groups offering substantial solidarity to the Palestinians. It’s just one of the innumerable ways Canada has enabled Israel’s horrors.
But the US’ Red Sea coalition isn’t simply anti-Palestinian. It heightens the risk of a major regional war, which some Israeli officials want. That country has repeatedly bombed Lebanon and Syria in recent days and assassinated Iranian general Sayyed Razi Mousavi.
Despite the potential for escalation, Ottawa prefers to join the US campaign to suppress the Houthis than pressure Israel to end its slaughter. Shame.
Moscow Calls for Leveraging All Accumulated Experience for Solving Middle East Crisis

Sputnik – 29.12.2023
MOSCOW – Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova on Friday called for leveraging all the accumulated experience for solving the Middle East crisis under a Russia-proposed new mechanism of external support that would involve the regional countries.
In November, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov proposed the creation of a mechanism of external support to ensure the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, saying that it should be representative and involve the regional nations, which the Quartet on the Middle East had failed to do.
“A special updated mechanism is needed. You ask why is the Quartet not enough? I will quote Sergey Lavrov as saying that it has failed to represent the regional countries … The entire basis that has been built up should and can be leveraged,” Zakharova told the Rossiya 24 broadcaster.
The experience accumulated in the field includes, in particular, the results of special conferences, resolutions of the UN Security Council and meetings of the Quartet on the Middle East, the spokeswoman added.
The Middle East Quartet, comprised of the UN, the United States, the European Union, and Russia, was established in Madrid in 2002 to mediate the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. The Quartet’s activities aimed to develop the Palestinian economy and empower its institutions, as well as promote a two-state solution to the conflict.
In June 2023, Lavrov said that “collective diplomacy to facilitate the Arab-Israeli settlement has stalled,” mainly due to the decision of the US and the EU to “unilaterally suspend the activities of the Middle East quartet.”
On October 7, Palestinian movement Hamas launched a large-scale rocket attack against Israel from the Gaza Strip, while its fighters breached the border, opening fire on the military and civilians. As a result, over 1,200 people in Israel were killed and some 240 others abducted. Israel launched retaliatory strikes, ordered a complete blockade of Gaza and launched a ground incursion into the Palestinian enclave with the declared goal of eliminating Hamas fighters and rescuing the hostages. Over 21,300 people have been killed so far in Gaza as a result of Israeli strikes, local authorities said.
On November 24, Qatar mediated a deal between Israel and Hamas on a temporary truce and the exchange of some of the prisoners and hostages, as well as the delivery of humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip. The ceasefire was extended several times and expired on December 1.
US jets strike resistance sites in Iraq
The Cradle | December 26, 2023
US warplanes launched airstrikes against several sites belonging to the Kataib Hezbollah faction early on 26 December, in Washington’s latest response to ongoing drone and missile attacks launched by the Iraqi resistance on US bases in Iraq and Syria.
The strikes resulted in large explosions south of Iraq’s capital, Baghdad, an Al-Mayadeen correspondent reported. One was killed and over a dozen wounded, according to an official statement.
The US hit “three locations utilized by Kataib Hezbollah and affiliated groups focused specifically on unmanned aerial drone activities,” a US National Security Council spokesman said in a statement.
The attack “likely killed several Kataib Hezbollah militants,” according to CENTCOM.
The Iraqi government said in a statement that the attack “harms bilateral relations between the two countries and represents an unacceptable violation of sovereignty,” which “harms” Baghdad’s bilateral ties with Washington. The statement added that an Iraqi service member was killed, while 18 were injured, including civilians.
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said the attack was a response to ongoing Iraqi operations targeting US bases, in particular one attack on the Erbil air base on Monday, 25 December, which left three US soldiers wounded, including one in critical condition.
An Iraqi Ministry of Interior official told AFP that the US airstrikes targeted a Popular Mobilization Forces’ site in the city of Hillah, the capital of Babylon Governorate in central Iraq. A site in the Wasit Governorate was also targeted, resulting in the wounding of at least four people.
In a statement, leader of the Nabni Coalition Hadi al-Amiri stressed his “strong condemnation and denunciation of the repetition of the sinful American attacks that were embodied at dawn this day in the provinces of Babil and Wasit.”
On the afternoon of Christmas Day, the Islamic Resistance coalition in Iraq said in a statement that it targeted “the occupied Harir base near Erbil Airport in northern Iraq with drones.”
The statement vowed that the Iraqi resistance would continue the “destruction of enemy strongholds” in line with its goals of “resisting the American occupation” in Iraq and responding to “the Zionist entity’s massacres against our people in Gaza.”
The Iraqi resistance also struck the US Green Village base in northern Syria, the group said in a separate statement earlier that day.
Following Operation Al-Aqsa Flood and the start of the Gaza-Israel war in October, Iraqi resistance groups banded together under a single coalition. They launched near-daily attacks on US bases in both Iraq and Syria in solidarity with the Palestinian resistance and in rejection of Washington’s support for the Israeli assault on Gaza.
The attacks also aim to hasten the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq.
The US air force has launched several attacks in response. One strike in early December resulted in the killing of five Iraqi resistance fighters.
While the US presence in Iraq is coordinated with the government of Prime Minister Mohamed Shia al-Sudani, a political alliance of Shia parties represented in his parliament are staunchly opposed to it.
In 2020, following the assassination of Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani, Iraq’s parliament voted in favor of expelling the US from Iraq. The resolution specifically called for the cancellation of Iraq’s formal request for US military assistance against ISIS, which was issued in 2014.
Washington rejected the resolution and threatened to impose sanctions on Baghdad.
IRGC’s veteran military advisor in Syria martyred in Israeli strike

Press TV – December 25, 2023
A veteran member of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), who was serving as a military advisor in Syria, has been martyred in an Israeli airstrike in the Sayyeda Zeinab neighborhood of Damascus.
The senior IRGC commander, Seyyed Razi Mousavi, was martyred by the Israeli regime on Monday while on an advisory mission, Press TV’s correspondent in Damascus reported.
Mousavi was one of the companions of Iran’s top anti-terror commander, Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, who was assassinated by the US in Iraq four years ago.
General Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force of the IRGC, and his Iraqi trenchmate Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the second-in-command of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), were martyred along with their companions in a US drone strike on January 3, 2020.
The Israeli regime has for years targeted what it calls Iran-linked positions in Syria.
In a statement, the IRGC said Mousavi was martyred in a criminal missile attack by the “fake and child-killing Zionist regime” adding that the usurping and savage Israeli regime would undoubtedly pay the price for this crime.
US ‘Builds Trap for Itself’ in Red Sea
By Scott Ritter – Sputnik – 22.12.2023
On December 18, following a tour of the Middle East with stops in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and Israel, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced the establishment of Operation Prosperity Guardian, under the umbrella of Combined Task Force (CTF) 153, which focuses on security in the Red Sea, to protect maritime shipping.
Back on November 19, Yemen’s Houthi rebels, operating in solidarity with the Palestinians of Gaza, took over an Israeli-linked cargo ship, the Galaxy Leader. The Houthis announced that they would block all shipping transiting the Red Sea toward Israel—in effect establishing a blockade of Israel—until Israel allowed humanitarian aid into Gaza.
The Houthis have subsequently attacked numerous vessels passing through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, a narrow passageway leading into the Red Sea and further on to the Suez Canal, threatening global trade as major oil and shipping giants, including BP, MSC, Evergreen, OOCL, and Maersk, suspended operations through the Red Sea. The damage to the Israeli economy done by the Houthi blockage is estimated to run into the billions of dollars, and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has threatened to use military force against the Houthis if the United States does not intervene on its behalf.
CTF 153, which has operated under both US and Egyptian command, is tasked with international maritime security and capacity-building efforts in the Red Sea, Bab al-Mandeb, and Gulf of Aden. Its compliment of four ships—three US destroyers (the USS Carney, USS Mason, and USS Thomas Hudner) and the UK Royal Navy guided-missile destroyer HMS Diamond) have all been involved in intercepting Houthi missiles and drones fired against either Israel or merchant shipping operating in the Red Sea.
Austin also ordered Carrier Strike Group 2, consisting of aircraft carrier the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower and three escorts (a cruiser and two destroyers), to join up with CTF 153 as part of Operation Prosperity Guardian. Ohio-class submarine the USS Florida, equipped with 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles, is also operating in the region.
Austin announced that the US and UK would be joined by Bahrain, Canada, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Seychelles, and Spain as part of Operation Prosperity Guardian. Notable absentees include Arab nations like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Australia was asked to provide a warship, but offered [13] personnel only.
French Navy guided-missile frigate the FS Languedoc is already operating in the Red Sea and, like its US and UK counterparts, has been involved in the shooting down of Houthi drones and missiles. However, France has stated that the Languedoc will operate under French command, complicating its relationship with CTF 153.
Italy’s Defense Ministry has announced that it will deploy naval frigate the Virginio Fasanto the Red Sea. Its command relationship with CTF 153 remains unclear as of the present time.
The military problem facing CTF 153 is threefold. First, there is a need to establish a barrier defense against the Houthi missile and drone attacks. This will require that the guided missile destroyers and frigates establish a picket line along the eastern channel of the Bab al-Mandeb Straight which will screen shipping from any Houthi attack. Second, CTF 153 will need to engage in aggressive patrolling designed to deter and repel any Houthi efforts to repeat their hijacking of the Galaxy Leader. Lastly, CTF 153 will need to provide mine clearance capabilities to deal with any sea mines that the Houthis may place in the narrow waters of the Bab al-Mandeb.
These missions alone will be taxing, and difficult to accomplish. As things stand, while the CTF 153 ships have shot down dozens of Houthi drones and missiles, scores have gotten through, striking targets in Israel and hitting shipping in the Red Sea. Simply put, CTF 153 doesn’t have enough ships to adequately screen either Israel or maritime shipping from Houthi attack. And given the lack of mine warfare ships in the CTF 153 organization, any deployment of sea mines by the Houthis will effectively close the region from commercial shipping, and threaten military deployments in the area, until demining capability can be deployed.
The only way that Operation Prosperity Guardian could possibly keep the Bab al-Mandeb Straight open is to launch strikes against the Houthi capability of launching missiles and drones in hopes of interdicting them before they can be used. Here the plot thickens—the Houthis have made it clear that if attacked, they will expand the conflict to include Saudi and UAE oil production, threatening global energy supplies. Moreover, targeting mobile missile and drone launchers is no simple task—Saudi Arabia, using US intelligence support to assist in targeting, was unable to prevent the Houthis from launching missiles and drones against Saudi targets during the entirety of its ongoing conflict with the Houthis. The US would likely run into similar problems.
In short, by initiating Operation Prosperity Guardian, the US appears to have built a trap for itself, where it is damned if it doesn’t attack the Houthi (since the Red Sea would remain blocked to all Israeli traffic), and damned if it does (since it wouldn’t be able to stop the Houthi attacks, and such action would likely expand the scope and scale of the conflict to the detriment of US interests.)
Keep in mind that all of this could have been solved with a single phone call from US President Joe Biden to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu directing Israel to accept a ceasefire and allow humanitarian aid to be sent to the Palestinian residents of Gaza. Instead, the United States is destroying its moral standing in the world by openly facilitating the ongoing slaughter of Palestinian civilians at the hands of the Israel Defense Forces, while simultaneously undermining the credibility of US military deterrence by getting itself mired in a tar baby of its own making.
The deployment of the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower into the Sea of Aden comes on the heels of its brief foray into the Persian Gulf, where it was closely monitored by Iran. The US has also deployed a second carrier battlegroup, consisting of the USS Gerald R. Ford and its six escorts, in the eastern Mediterranean Sea. Meanwhile, the USS Carl Vinson and its five escorts operate just over the horizon, in the South China Sea.
Never in the history of the American Navy have so many carrier battlegroups been moved around the globe with so little impact.
The reality of modern warfare is that small nations and non-state actors such as the Houthis can be armed with modern military weaponry which negates the military impact of multibillion-dollar investments such as the carrier battlegroup. It costs the Houthis tens of thousands of dollars to fire its drones and missiles against Israel and maritime shipping; it costs the US Navy millions of dollars to shoot them down. Moreover, it costs the US navy hundreds of millions of dollars just to keep a carrier battle group deployed and operating, while the Houthis can credibly threaten to sink a carrier using weapons that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The final score card regarding Operation Prosperity Guardian has yet to be written. But the reality is that it will most likely not succeed in its mission of preventing Houthi attacks against either Israel or maritime shipping. This failure goes far beyond the issue of security for the Red Sea. The United States has long maintained that it could guarantee that if Iran ever sought to close the strategic Straight of Hormuz, the US Navy would be able to reopen it in a very short period. Operation Prosperity Guardian puts a lie to that claim. The fact is, the world balance of power has changed dramatically, and legacy systems like the carrier battlegroup are no longer the dominant means of power projection they once were. The US has, in effect, put all its eggs in one basket through its over-reliance upon the carrier battlegroup when it comes to force projection.
The looming failure of Operation Prosperity Guardian exposes the impotence of the US when it comes to being able to accomplish its plans for regional dominance in the Persian Gulf, South Pacific, and Taiwan, and signals a new era where the appearance of an American fleet of the shores of a far way land no longer inspires fear and intimidation. For a nation like the United States, which has premised so much of its foreign and national security on the notion of strength-based deterrence, the revelation that its military power projection capabilities are more bark than bite undermines its credibility as an ally and partner in a world largely defined by conflicts created by, or on behalf of, the United States.
Bahrain jails dissident for blasting Manama’s role in US-led anti-Yemen coalition

The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Cole (DDG 67)
Press TV | December 21, 2023
Bahraini authorities have ordered the seven-day detention of a leading opposition figure after he denounced the Al Khalifah regime’s participation in the US-led coalition against Yemen in the Red Sea.
Bahrain’s office of public prosecution ordered Ebrahim Sharif’s detention pending investigation for “spreading false news during wartime,” his family and lawyer said on Thursday.
Sharif, who heads the Wa’ad organization, in a series of posts criticized authorities in Manama for joining the coalition “without any consideration of the position of the Bahraini people who strongly support our besieged Palestinian people in Gaza.”
He was arrested on Wednesday. When asked about his case, the Bahraini government said “an individual” was being held for “allegedly supporting a proscribed terrorist organization.”
The charge against Sharif, a pro-democracy campaigner, can hold a prison sentence of up to 10 years.
Bahrain is the only state in the Persian Gulf region that has joined the US-led coalition established this week in response to Yemeni attacks on ships bound to the occupied Palestinian territories in the Red Sea.
Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, advocacy director at the UK-based Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD), said the Bahraini regime “wants to make an example of Sharif who is not alone in his criticism of Bahrain’s decision to the join the Americans.”
“Failure of the US administration to publicly denounce his arrest and push for his immediate release gives the green light to the Bahrain government to continue his detention,” Alwadaei said.
The Pentagon has announced a military coalition of 10 countries, including Britain and Spain, to counter the Yemeni forces that targeted ships bound for Israel in solidarity with the people of Gaza.
A series of strikes attributed to the Yemeni forces have been conducted in solidarity with the Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip. Yemen has already warned it will prevent the passage of all ships in the Red Sea bound to the occupied territories.
The leader of Yemen’s Ansarullah movement said in a televised speech broadcast live Wednesday that the armed forces will not hesitate to target US military warships in the Red Sea if Washington and its allies carry out military strikes against Yemen.
Bahrain’s main opposition group al-Wefaq National Islamic Society recently denounced human rights violations in the country.
Al-Wefaq has denounced Manama’s normalization of relations with Israel as “a crime.”
The opposition party has underlined that the normalization is in flagrant contradiction to Bahrain’s history and Islamic identity.
Bahrain and the Israeli regime established diplomatic relations in 2020 as part of the United States-brokered Abraham Accords.
Last month, the deputy speaker of Bahrain’s National Assembly said members of the legislative body were pressing to reverse the normalization following the regime’s devastating war in Gaza.
Abdulnabi Salman said Bahraini lawmakers were demanding an end to diplomatic relations with Israel.
The Persian Gulf country has witnessed numerous protests ever since the rapprochement.
The United States and Britain refrain from the criticism of human rights violations across Bahrain.
In July, British legislators were pressing the government to provide clear explanations why Bahrain has been removed from its list of human rights priority countries, accusing the government of putting its principles “up for auction” after sealing a billion-pound investment deal with the Persian Gulf state.
How Twitter Aided the Pentagon’s Covert Online Propaganda Campaign
Documents and emails from Twitter detail the extensive secret assistance the social media platform gave to CENTCOM’s influence operations
BY LEE FANG | DECEMBER 20, 2023
One year ago, I published my first investigation based on documents I obtained through the “Twitter Files.” I visited the San Francisco office of the social media company several times and took many notes. Below, I am republishing my initial investigation, which explores the secret assistance that Twitter gave to the Pentagon to assist with a fake account network used to manipulate Arabic-language communities in the Middle East. Twitter claimed that it shut down all state-backed influence operations, yet gave special tools to the U.S. military for its propaganda network.
TWITTER EXECUTIVES HAVE claimed for years that the company makes concerted efforts to detect and thwart government-backed covert propaganda campaigns on its platform.
Behind the scenes, however, the social networking giant provided direct approval and internal protection to the U.S. military’s network of social media accounts and online personas, whitelisting a batch of accounts at the request of the government. The Pentagon has used this network, which includes U.S. government-generated news portals and memes, in an effort to shape opinion in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, and beyond.
The accounts in question started out openly affiliated with the U.S. government. But then the Pentagon appeared to shift tactics and began concealing its affiliation with some of these accounts — a move toward the type of intentional platform manipulation that Twitter has publicly opposed. Though Twitter executives maintained awareness of the accounts, they did not shut them down, but let them remain active for years. Some remain active.
The revelations are buried in the archives of Twitter’s emails and internal tools, to which The Intercept was granted access for a brief period last week alongside a handful of other writers and reporters. Following Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter, the billionaire started giving access to company documents, saying in a Twitter Space that “the general idea is to surface anything bad Twitter has done in the past.” The files, which included records generated under Musk’s ownership, provide unprecedented, if incomplete, insight into decision-making within a major social media company.
Twitter did not provide unfettered access to company information; rather, for three days last week, they allowed me to make requests without restriction that were then fulfilled on my behalf by an attorney, meaning that the search results may not have been exhaustive. I did not agree to any conditions governing the use of the documents, and I made efforts to authenticate and contextualize the documents through further reporting. The redactions in the embedded documents in this story were done to protect privacy, not Twitter.
THE DIRECT ASSISTANCE Twitter provided to the Pentagon goes back at least five years.
On July 26, 2017, Nathaniel Kahler, at the time an official working with U.S. Central Command — also known as CENTCOM, a division of the Defense Department — emailed a Twitter representative with the company’s public policy team, with a request to approve the verification of one account and “whitelist” a list of Arab-language accounts “we use to amplify certain messages.”
“We’ve got some accounts that are not indexing on hashtags — perhaps they were flagged as bots,” wrote Kahler. “A few of these had built a real following and we hope to salvage.” Kahler added that he was happy to provide more paperwork from his office or SOCOM, the acronym for the U.S. Special Operations Command.
Twitter at the time had built out an expanded abuse detection system aimed in part toward flagging malicious activity related to the Islamic State and other terror organizations operating in the Middle East. As an indirect consequence of these efforts, one former Twitter employee explained, accounts controlled by the military that were frequently engaging with extremist groups were being automatically flagged as spam. The former employee, who was involved with the whitelisting of CENTCOM accounts, spoke under condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.
In his email, Kahler sent a spreadsheet with 52 accounts. He asked for priority service for six of the accounts, including @yemencurrent, an account used to broadcast announcements about U.S. drone strikes in Yemen. Around the same time, @yemencurrent, which has since been deleted, had emphasized that U.S. drone strikes were “accurate” and killed terrorists, not civilians, and promoted the U.S. and Saudi-backed assault on Houthi rebels in that country.
Other accounts on the list were focused on promoting U.S.-supported militias in Syria and anti-Iran messages in Iraq. One account discussed legal issues in Kuwait. Though many accounts remained focused on one topic area, others moved from topic to topic. For instance, @dala2el, one of the CENTCOM accounts, shifted from messaging around drone strikes in Yemen in 2017 to Syrian government-focused communications last year.
On the same day that CENTCOM sent its request, members of Twitter’s site integrity team went into an internal company system used for managing the reach of various users and applied a special exemption tag to the accounts, internal logs show.
One engineer, who asked not to be named because he was not authorized to speak to the media, said that he had never seen this type of tag before, but upon close inspection, said that the effect of the “whitelist” tag essentially gave the accounts the privileges of Twitter verification without a visible blue check. Twitter verification would have bestowed a number of advantages, such as invulnerability to algorithmic bots that flag accounts for spam or abuse, as well as other strikes that lead to decreased visibility or suspension.
KAHLER TOLD TWITTER that the accounts would all be “USG-attributed, Arabic-language accounts tweeting on relevant security issues.” That promise fell short, as many of the accounts subsequently deleted disclosures of affiliation with the U.S. government.
The Internet Archive does not preserve the full history of every account, but we identified several accounts that initially listed themselves as U.S. government accounts in their bios, but, after being whitelisted, shed any disclosure that they were affiliated with the military and posed as ordinary users.
This appears to align with a major report published in August by online security researchers affiliated with the Stanford Internet Observatory, which reported on thousands of accounts that they suspected to be part of a state-backed information operation, many of which used photorealistic human faces generated by artificial intelligence, a practice also known as “deep fakes.”
The researchers connected these accounts with a vast online ecosystem that included “fake news” websites, meme accounts on Telegram and Facebook, and online personalities that echoed Pentagon messages often without disclosure of affiliation with the U.S. military. Some of the accounts accuse Iran of “threatening Iraq’s water security and flooding the country with crystal meth,” while others promoted allegations that Iran was harvesting the organs of Afghan refugees.
The Stanford report did not definitively tie the sham accounts to CENTCOM or provide a complete list of Twitter accounts. But the emails I obtained show that the creation of at least one of these accounts was directly affiliated with the Pentagon.
One of the accounts that Kahler asked to have whitelisted, @mktashif, was identified by the researchers as appearing to use a deep-fake photo to obscure its real identity. Initially, according to the Wayback Machine, @mktashif did disclose that it was a U.S. government account affiliated with CENTCOM, but at some point, this disclosure was deleted and the account’s photo was changed to the one Stanford identified as a deep fake. The new Twitter bio claimed that the account was an unbiased source of opinion and information, and, roughly translated from Arabic, “dedicated to serving Iraqis and Arabs.” The account, before it was suspended last year, routinely tweeted messages denouncing Iran and other U.S. adversaries, including Houthi rebels in Yemen.
Another CENTCOM account, @althughur, which posts anti-Iran and anti-ISIS content focused on an Iraqi audience, changed its Twitter bio from a CENTCOM affiliation to an Arabic phrase that simply reads “Euphrates pulse.”
The former Twitter employee told me that they were surprised to learn of the Defense Department’s shifting tactics. “It sounds like DOD was doing something shady and definitely not in line with what they had presented to us at the time,” they said.
Twitter did not respond to a request for comment.
“It’s deeply concerning if the Pentagon is working to shape public opinion about our military’s role abroad and even worse if private companies are helping to conceal it,” said Erik Sperling, the executive director of Just Foreign Policy, a nonprofit that works toward diplomatic solutions to foreign conflicts.
“Congress and social media companies should investigate and take action to ensure that, at the very least, our citizens are fully informed when their tax money is being spent on putting a positive spin on our endless wars,” Sperling added.
FOR MANY YEARS, Twitter has pledged to shut down all state-backed disinformation and propaganda efforts, never making an explicit exception for the U.S. In 2020, Twitter spokesperson Nick Pickles, in a testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, said that the company was taking aggressive efforts to shut down “coordinated platform manipulation efforts” attributed to government agencies.
“Combatting attempts to interfere in conversations on Twitter remains a top priority for the company, and we continue to invest heavily in our detection, disruption, and transparency efforts related to state-backed information operations. Our goal is to remove bad-faith actors and to advance public understanding of these critical topics,” said Pickles.
In 2018, for instance, Twitter announced the mass suspension of accounts tied to Russian government-linked propaganda efforts. Two years later, the company boasted of shutting down almost 1,000 accounts for association with the Thai military. But rules on platform manipulation, it appears, have not been applied to American military efforts.
The emails obtained by The Intercept show that not only did Twitter whitelist these accounts in 2017 explicitly at the behest of the military, but also that high-level officials at the company discussed the accounts as potentially problematic in the following years.
In the summer of 2020, officials from Facebook reportedly identified fake accounts attributed to CENTCOM’s influence operation on its platform and warned the Pentagon that if Silicon Valley could easily out these accounts as inauthentic, so could foreign adversaries, according to a September report in the Washington Post.
Twitter emails show that during that time in 2020, Facebook and Twitter executives were invited by the Pentagon’s top attorneys to attend classified briefings in a sensitive compartmented information facility, also known as a SCIF, used for highly sensitive meetings.
“Facebook have had a series of 1:1 conversations between their senior legal leadership and DOD’s [general counsel] re: inauthentic activity,” wrote Yoel Roth, then the head of trust and safety at Twitter. “Per FB,” continued Roth, “DOD have indicated a strong desire to work with us to remove the activity — but are now refusing to discuss additional details or steps outside of a classified conversation.”
Stacia Cardille, then an attorney with Twitter, noted in an email to her colleagues that the Pentagon may want to retroactively classify its social media activities “to obfuscate their activity in this space, and that this may represent an overclassification to avoid embarrassment.”
Jim Baker, then the deputy general counsel of Twitter, in the same thread, wrote that the Pentagon appeared to have used “poor tradecraft” in setting up various Twitter accounts, sought to potentially cover its tracks, and was likely seeking a strategy for avoiding public knowledge that the accounts are “linked to each other or to DoD or the USG.” Baker speculated that in the meeting the “DoD might want to give us a timetable for shutting them down in a more prolonged way that will not compromise any ongoing operations or reveal their connections to DoD.”
What was discussed at the classified meetings — which ultimately did take place, according to the Post — was not included in the Twitter emails provided to The Intercept, but many of the fake accounts remained active for at least another year. Some of the accounts on the CENTCOM list remain active even now — like this one, which includes affiliation with CENTCOM, and this one, which does not — while many were swept off the platform in a mass suspension on May 16.
In a separate email sent in May 2020, Lisa Roman, then a vice president of the company in charge of global public policy, emailed William S. Castle, a Pentagon attorney, along with Roth, with an additional list of Defense Department Twitter accounts. “The first tab lists those accounts previously provided to us and the second, associated accounts that Twitter has discovered,” wrote Roman. It’s not clear from this single email what Roman is requesting – she references a phone call preceding the email — but she notes that the second tab of accounts — the ones that had not been explicitly provided to Twitter by the Pentagon — “may violate our Rules.” The attachment included a batch of accounts tweeting in Russian and Arabic about human rights violations committed by ISIS. Many accounts in both tabs were not openly identified as affiliated with the U.S. government.
Twitter executives remained aware of the Defense Department’s special status. This past January, a Twitter executive recirculated the CENTCOM list of Twitter accounts originally whitelisted in 2017. The email simply read “FYI” and was directed to several Twitter officials, including Patrick Conlon, a former Defense Department intelligence analyst then working on the site integrity unit as Twitter’s global threat intelligence lead. Internal records also showed that the accounts that remained from Kahler’s original list are still whitelisted.
Following the mass suspension of many of the accounts this past May, Twitter’s team worked to limit blowback from its involvement in the campaign.
Shortly before publication of the Washington Post story in September, Katie Rosborough, then a communications specialist at Twitter, wrote to alert Twitter lawyers and lobbyists about the upcoming piece. “It’s a story that’s mostly focused on DoD and Facebook; however, there will be a couple lines that reference us alongside Facebook in that we reached out to them [DoD] for a meeting. We don’t think they’ll tie it to anything Mudge-related or name any Twitter employees. We declined to comment,” she wrote. (Mudge is a reference to Peiter Zatko, a Twitter whistleblower who filed a complaint with federal authorities in July, alleging lax security measures and penetration of the company by foreign agents.)
After the Washington Post’s story published, the Twitter team congratulated one another because the story minimized Twitter’s role in the CENTCOM psyop campaign. Instead, the story largely revolved around the Pentagon’s decision to begin a review of its clandestine psychological operations on social media.
“Thanks for doing all that you could to manage this one,” wrote Rebecca Hahn, another former Twitter communications official. “It didn’t seem to get too much traction beyond verge, cnn and wapo editors promoting.”
CENTCOM did not initially provide comment to The Intercept. Following publication of this story, CENTCOM’s media desk referred The Intercept to Brigadier Gen. Pat Ryder’s comments in a September briefing, in which he said that the Pentagon had requested “a review of Department of Defense military information support activities, which is simply meant to be an opportunity for us to assess the current work that’s being done in this arena, and really shouldn’t be interpreted as anything beyond that.”
THE U.S. MILITARY and intelligence community have long pursued a strategy of fabricated online personas and third parties to amplify certain narratives in foreign countries, the idea being that an authentic-looking Persian-language news portal or a local Afghan woman would have greater organic influence than an official Pentagon press release.
Military online propaganda efforts have largely been governed by a 2006 memorandum. The memo notes that the Defense Department’s internet activities should “openly acknowledge U.S. involvement” except in cases when a “Combatant Commander believes that it will not be possible due to operational considerations.” This method of nondisclosure, the memo states, is only authorized for operations in the “Global War on Terrorism, or when specified in other Secretary of Defense execute orders.”
In 2019, lawmakers passed a measure known as Section 1631, a reference to a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act, further legally affirming clandestine psychological operations by the military in a bid to counter online disinformation campaigns by Russia, China, and other foreign adversaries.
In 2008, the U.S. Special Operations Command opened a request for a service to provide “web-based influence products and tools in support of strategic and long-term U.S. Government goals and objectives.” The contract referred to the Trans-Regional Web Initiative, an effort to create online news sites designed to win hearts and minds in the battle to counter Russian influence in Central Asia and global Islamic terrorism. The contract was initially carried out by General Dynamics Information Technology, a subsidiary of the defense contractor General Dynamics, in connection with CENTCOM communication offices in the Washington, D.C., area and in Tampa, Florida.
A program known as “WebOps,” run by a defense contractor known as Colsa Corp., was used to create fictitious online identities designed to counter online recruitment efforts by ISIS and other terrorist networks.
I spoke to a former employee of a contractor — on the condition of anonymity for legal protection — engaged in these online propaganda networks for the Trans-Regional Web Initiative. He described a loose newsroom-style operation, employing former journalists, operating out of a generic suburban office building.
“Generally what happens, at the time when I was there, CENTCOM will develop a list of messaging points that they want us to focus on,” said the contractor. “Basically, they would, we want you to focus on say, counterterrorism and a general framework that we want to talk about.”
From there, he said, supervisors would help craft content that was distributed through a network of CENTCOM-controlled websites and social media accounts. As the contractors created content to support narratives from military command, they were instructed to tag each content item with a specific military objective. Generally, the contractor said, the news items he created were technically factual but always crafted in a way that closely reflected the Pentagon’s goals.
“We had some pressure from CENTCOM to push stories,” he added, while noting that he worked at the sites years ago, before the transition to more covert operations. At the time, “we weren’t doing any of that black-hat stuff.”
