Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

‘Swarming’ the US in West Asia, until it folds

The US is so deeply mired in an unwinnable battle from the Levant to the Persian Gulf that only its adversaries in China, Russia, and Iran can bail it out.

By MK Bhadrakumar | The Cradle | January 29, 2024

Deterrence in defense is a military strategy where one power uses the threat of reprisal to preclude attack from an adversary, while maintaining at the same time the freedom of action and flexibility to respond to the full spectrum of challenges. In this realm, the Lebanese resistance, Hezbollah, is an outstanding example.

Hezbollah’s clarity of purpose in establishing and strictly maintaining ground rules that deter Israeli military aggression has set a high regional bar. Today, its West Asian allies have adopted similar strategies, which have multiplied in the context of the war in Gaza.

America, surrounded

While the Yemeni resistance movement Ansarallah is comparable to Hezbollah in certain respects, it is the audacious brand of defensive deterrence practiced by the Islamic Resistance of Iraq that is going to be highly consequential in the near term.

Last week, citing sources in the State Department and Pentagon, Foreign Policy magazine wrote that the White House is no longer interested in continuing the US military mission in Syria. The White House later denied this information, but the report is gaining ground.

The Turkish daily Hurriyet wrote on Friday that while Ankara is taking a cautious approach to media reports, it does see “a general striving” by Washington to exit not only Syria but the entire region of West Asia, as it senses that it has been dragged into a quagmire by Israel and Iran from the Red Sea to Pakistan.

Russia’s special presidential representative for the Syrian settlement, Alexander Lavrentiev, also told Tass on Friday that much depends on any “threat of physical impact” on American forces present in Syria. The swift US military exit from Afghanistan took place with virtually no advance notice, in coordination with the Taliban. “In all likelihood, the same may happen in Iraq and Syria,” Lavrentiev said.

Indeed, the Islamic Resistance of Iraq has stepped up its attacks on US military bases and targets. In a ballistic missile attack on Ain al-Asad airbase in western Iraq a week ago, an unknown number of American troops sustained injuries, and the White House announced its first troop deaths on Sunday when three US servicemen were killed on the Syrian-Jordanian border in strikes earlier that day.

Calling Beijing for help

This situation is untenable for President Joe Biden politically — in his re-election bid next November — which explains the urgency of the National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan’s meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Friday and Saturday in Thailand to discuss the Ansarallah attacks in the Red Sea.

US National Security Council spokesman John Kirby explained Washington’s rush for Chinese mediation thus:

“China has influence over Tehran; they have influence in Iran. And they have the ability to have conversations with Iranian leaders that — that we can’t. What we’ve said repeatedly is: We would welcome a constructive role by China, using the influence and the access that we know they have…”

This is a dramatic turn of events. While the US has long been concerned about China’s growing sway in West Asia, it also needs that influence now as Washington’s efforts to reduce violence are getting nowhere. The US narrative on this will be that the “strategic, thoughtful conversation” between Sullivan and Wang will not only be “an important way to manage competition and tensions [between the US and China] responsibly” but also “set the direction of the relationship” on the whole.

Meanwhile, there has been hectic diplomatic traffic between Tehran, Ankara, and Moscow, as Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi traveled to Turkiye, and the moribund Astana format on Syria last week got kickstarted. Succinctly put, the three countries anticipate a “post-American” situation arising soon in Syria.

A US exit from Syria and Iraq?

Of course, the security dimensions are always tricky. On Friday, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad chaired a meeting in Damascus for commanders of the security apparatus in the army to formulate a plan for what lies ahead. A statement said the meeting drew up a comprehensive security roadmap that “aligns with strategic visions” to address international, regional, and domestic challenges and risks.

Certainly, what gives impetus to all this is the announcement in Washington and Baghdad on Thursday that the US and Iraq have agreed to start talks on the future of American military presence in Iraq with the aim of setting a timetable for a phased withdrawal of troops.

The Iraqi announcement said Baghdad aims to “formulate a specific and clear timetable that specifies the duration of the presence of international coalition advisors in Iraq” and to “initiate the gradual and deliberate reduction of its advisors on Iraqi soil,” eventually leading to the end of the coalition mission. Iraq is committed to ensuring the “safety of the international coalition’s advisors during the negotiation period in all parts of the country” and to “maintaining stability and preventing escalation.”

On the US side, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said in a statement that the discussions will take place within the ambit of a higher military commission established in August 2023 to negotiate the “transition to an enduring bilateral security partnership between Iraq and the United States.”

Pentagon commanders would be pinning hopes on protracted negotiations. The US is in a position to blackmail Iraq, which is obliged, per the one-sided agreement dictated by Washington during the occupation in 2003, to keep in the US banks all of Iraq’s oil export earnings.

But in the final analysis, President Biden’s political considerations in the election year will be the clincher. And that will depend on the calibration by West Asia’s resistance groups, and their ability to ‘swarm’ the US on multiple fronts until it caves. It is this ‘known unknown’ factor that explains the Astana format meeting of Russia, Iran, and Turkiye on January 24-25 in Kazakhstan. The three countries are preparing for the endgame in Syria. Not coincidentally, in a phone call last Friday, Biden once again told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “to scale down the Israeli military operation in Gaza, stressing he is not in it for a year of war,” Axios‘ Barak Ravid reported in a ‘scoop’.

Their joint statement after the Astana format meeting in Kazakhstan is a remarkable document predicated almost entirely on an end to the US occupation of Syria. It indirectly urges Washington to give up its support of terrorist groups and their affiliates “operating under different names in various parts of Syria” as part of attempts to create new realities on the ground, including illegitimate self-rule initiatives under the pretext of ‘combating terrorism.’ It demands an end to the US’ illegal seizure and transfer of oil resources “that should belong to Syria,” the unilateral US sanctions, and so on.

Simultaneously, at a meeting in Moscow on Wednesday between the Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev and Ali-Akbar Ahmadian, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, the latter reportedly stressed that Iran-Russia cooperation in the fight against terrorism “must continue, particularly in Syria.” Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to host a trilateral summit with his Turkish and Iranian counterparts to firm up a coordinated approach.

The Axis of Resistance: deterrence means stability

Iran’s patience has run out over the US military presence in Syria and Iraq following the revival of ISIS with American support. Interestingly, Israel no longer abides by its “de-confliction” mechanism with Russia in Syria. Clearly, there is close US-Israeli cooperation in Syria and Iraq at the intelligence and operational level, which goes against Russian and Iranian interests. Needless to say, the backdrop of the imminent upgrade of the Russia-Iran strategic partnership also needs to be factored in here.

These developments are a vintage illustration of defensive deterrence. The Axis of Resistance turns out to be the principal instrument of peace for the issues of security that entangle the US and Iran. Clearly, there isn’t any method or any reasonable hope of convergence to this process, but, fortunately, the appearance of chaos in West Asia is deceiving.

Beyond the distractions of partisan argument and diplomatic ritual, one can detect the outlines of a practical solution to the Syrian stalemate that addresses the inherent security interests of the US and Iran that are embedded within an outer ring of US-China concord over the situation in West Asia.

Russia may seem an outlier for the present, but there is something in it for everyone, as the pullout of US troops opens the pathway to a Syrian settlement, which remains a top priority for Moscow and for Putin personally.

January 29, 2024 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Has International Law Survived, or Has the Western Political Class Killed It?

By Craig Murray | January 28, 2024 

In finding there is a plausible case against Israel, the International Court of Justice treated with contempt the argument from Israel that the case should be dismissed as it is exercising its right of self-defence. This argument took up over half of Israel’s pleadings. Not only did the court find there is a plausible case of genocide, the court only mentioned self-defence once in its interim ruling – and that was merely to note that Israel had claimed it. Para 41:

That the ICJ has not affirmed Israel’s right to self-defence is perhaps the most important point in this interim order. It is the dog that did not bark. The argument which every western leader has been using is spurned by the ICJ.

Now the ICJ did not repeat that an occupying power has no right of self-defence. It did not need to. It simply ignored Israel’s specious assertion.

It could do that because what it went on to iterate went way beyond any plausible assertion of self-defence. What struck me most about the ICJ ruling was that the Order went into far more detail about the evidence of genocide than it needed to. Its description was stark.

Here Para 46 is crucial

The reason this is so crucial, is that the Court is not saying that South Africa asserts this. The Court is saying these are the facts. It is a finding of fact by the Court. I cannot emphasise too strongly the importance of that description by the court of the state of affairs in Gaza.

The Court then goes on to detail accounts by the United Nations of the factual situation, quoting three different senior officials at length, including Philippe Lazzarini, Commissioner General of UNRWA:

This of course explains why the immediate response to the ICJ ruling was a coordinated attack by Israel and the combined imperialist powers on UNRWA, designed to accelerate the genocide by stopping aid, to provide a propaganda counter-narrative to the ICJ judgment, and to reduce the credibility of UNRWA’s evidence before the court.

The Court works very closely with the UN and is very much an entrenched part of the UN system. It has a particularly close relationship with the UN General Assembly – many of the Court’s cases are based on requests from the UN General Assembly. In a fortnight’s time the Court will be starting its substantive hearings on the legal position in the Occupied Territories of Palestine, at the request of the UNGA. There are five specific references to the UNGA in the Order.

The Court spent a great deal of time outlining the facts of the unfolding genocide in the Gaza Strip. It did not have to do so in nearly so much detail, and far too little attention has been paid to this. I was equally surprised by how much detail the court gave on the evidence of genocidal intent by Israel.

It is especially humiliating for Israel that the Court quoted the Israeli Head of State, the President of Israel himself, as giving clear evidence of genocidal intent, along with two other government ministers.

Again, this is not the Court saying that South Africa has alleged this. It is a finding of fact by the Court. The ICJ has already found to be untrue Israel’s denial in court of incitement to genocide.

Now think of this: the very next day after President Herzog made a genocidal statement, as determined by the International Court of Justice, he was met and offered “full support” by Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission and Roberta Metsola, President of the European Parliament.

When you take the detail of what the Court has found to be the actual facts of the case, in death and destruction and in intent, I have no doubt that this is a court which is currently minded to find Israel guilty of genocide once the substantive case comes before the Court.

All of Israel’s arguments were lost. Every one. The substantial effort Israel put into having the case dismissed on procedural grounds was brushed aside. So was self-defence. And in its findings of the facts, the Court plainly found to be untrue the Israeli lies about avoidance of civilian casualties, the responsibility of Hamas for the damage to infrastructure, and the access of relief aid to Gaza.

Those are the facts of what happened.

Do not be confused by the absence of the word “ceasefire” from the Court order. What the Court has ordered is very close to that. It has explicitly ordered the Israeli military to stop killing Palestinians.


That is absolutely clear. And while I accept it is tautologous, in the sense it is ordering Israel to obey a Convention which Israel is already bound to follow, there could be no clearer indication that the Court believes that Israel is not currently obeying it.

So what happens now?

Well, Israel has responded by killing over 180 Palestinian civilians since the Order was given from the International Court of Justice. If that continues, South Africa may return to the Court for more urgent measures even before the ordered monthly report from Israel is due. Algeria has announced it will take the Order to the UN Security Council for enforcement.

I doubt the United States will veto. There has been a schizophrenic reaction from Israel and its supporters to the ICJ Order. On the one hand, the ICJ has been denounced as antisemitic. On the other hand the official narrative has been (incredibly) to claim Israel actually won the case, while minimising the coverage in mainstream media. This has been reinforced by the massive and coordinated attack on UNRWA, to create alternative headlines.

It is difficult to both claim that Israel somehow won, and at the same time seek to block UNSC enforcement of the Order. My suspicion is that there will be a continuing dual track: pretending that there is no genocide and Israel is obeying the “unnecessary” order, while at the same time attacking and ridiculing the ICJ and the wider UN.

No matter what the ICJ said, Israel would not have stopped the genocide; that is the simple truth. The immediate reaction of the US and allies to the Order has been to try to accelerate the genocide by crippling the UN’s aid relief work. I confess I did not expect anything quite that vicious and blatant.

The wheels of God grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly small. The ICJ having flagged up a potential genocide so strongly, it may well fall to judges in individual nations to restrain international support for the genocide. As I explained in detail, the Genocide Convention has been incorporated into UK law by the International Criminal Court Act of 2001.

There will, beyond any doubt, have been minutes issued by FCDO legal advisers warning of ministers being at risk of personal liability in UK law for complicity in genocide now, should arms shipments and other military and intelligence cooperation with the Israeli genocide continue. In the US, hearings started already in California on a genocide complicity suit brought against Joe Biden.

Of course I wish this would all work faster. It will not. The UN General Assembly may suspend Israel from the UN. There are other useful actions to be taken. But this is a long slog, not a quick fix, and people like you and I continue to have a vital role, as everybody does, in using the power of the people to wrest control from a vicious political class of killers.

This was a good win. I am pleased that this course for which I advocated and lobbied has worked and increased pressure on the Zionists, and that my judgment that the International Court of Justice is not just a NATO tool like the corrupt International Criminal Court, has been vindicated.

It cannot help the infants killed and maimed last night or those to die in the coming few days. But it is a glimmer of hope on the horizon.

January 28, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Red Sea Crisis Is Opportunity for U.S. to Weaken Europe & China

By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 28, 2024

The Red Sea conflict is intensifying as is the impact on commercial shipping and the global economy, according to shipping news reports.

One might think that common sense would prevail here to solve the conflict diplomatically and quickly. If a ceasefire was called in Gaza to stop the horrendous slaughter of Palestinian civilians by Israel then that would end the restrictions imposed on shipping by Yemen.

Yemeni leaders have unequivocally said so. End the genocide and we will end the interdiction on shipping.

The moral imperative to immediately end the appalling suffering in Gaza is therefore a straightforward – not to say absolutely necessary – way to restore normal navigation through the Red Sea and for wider peace in the region. It’s not a dilemma. It’s not a conundrum. And it’s inexcusable to prevaricate.

The United States has the power to end the Israeli genocide. But the Biden administration has refused to exert its control over the Netanyahu regime.

Washington has opted to escalate the military aggression in the Red Sea by launching at least eight waves of air strikes since January 11 on Yemen – the poorest nation in the Arab region, having already suffered a genocidal war at the hands of the U.S. and Britain supporting Saudi Arabia’s aggression between 2015 and 2022.

The Yemenis have in turn defiantly warned that their operations to interdict shipping will continue until the genocidal siege on Gaza has ended.

Biden even admits that the military action to deter the Yemenis is limited in achieving its supposed objectives.

So, why continue to aggravate the situation and escalate potential conflict across the region? Not only will bombing Yemen not work, but it is also inflaming violence across the Middle East and risking a head-on confrontation with Iran which is allied with the Yemenis.

As Iranian Professor Mohammad Marandi points out in our interview this week a big incentive for the U.S. and its Israeli ally is to blow up the region as a reckless and nefarious way to conceal how disastrous the defeat in Gaza is for the Americans and their Israeli client regime.

But there may be more to it. Another incentive for taking a militarized response to the Red Sea crisis is the strategic gain that this gives the United States with regard to Europe and China.

The Red Sea shipping restrictions are hitting the European and Chinese trade most acutely. American economic interests are relatively unaffected.

It is estimated that about 60 percent of China’s exports to Europe are shipped through the Red Sea, according to the Washington DC-based Middle East Institute.

Put another way, Eurostat figures indicate that 20 percent of all EU imports come from Asia via the Red Sea.

Inevitably, the longer the insecurity and hostilities persist in the Red Sea, the worse will be the damage to Europe-China trade and their economies.

Reuters reports that China is urging Iran to rein in the actions of the Ansar Allah and Yemeni armed forces in the Red Sea. That indicates how severe the impasse is impacting Chinese trade with Europe.

The Europeans meanwhile seem oblivious to the damage that the United States’ policy is inflicting on their economies. The Europeans have meekly gone along with Washington’s militarized aggression against Yemen.

It is a long-term and deeply coveted goal for Washington to cleave European trade and political relations with China. China has become the European Union’s top trading partner, surpassing the United States in that historic role.

During recent Democrat and Republican administrations, Washington has vigorously sought to undermine European-Chinese relations. The Americans have reacted testily to any trade and investment pacts signed between the two.

The Red Sea crisis is thus a handy opportunity for the United States to kill two birds with one stone.

By ramping up the shipping problems through militarizing the conditions, the U.S. can weaken the economies of Europe and China while also sticking a very big wedge between the two.

In short-term American imperial calculation that is a tantalizing gain. The U.S. consolidates its hegemonic control over the weaker European allies while damaging China’s economic power.

This short-term zero-sum thinking by the American imperial planners is of course self-defeating in the long term from the far-reaching deterioration in the global economy and international peace and security. But long-term thinking about the common global good is not a priority for U.S. capitalist imperialism. One might even say they are fundamentally in opposition.

There is a close analogy here to the Ukraine crisis. Washington has pursued hostilities with Russia as a way to undermine European-Russian trade and their wider cultural and political relations. Washington calculates that such antagonism will bolster its hegemonic ambitions. The ideologically slavish European leaders have gone along with that policy even though it has resulted in an economic and security disaster for Europe.

The European leaders are either too stupid or too brainwashed to assess what is going on and how they are being manipulated by Washington for its selfish strategic interests.

If the European regimes had any independence or integrity they would not have gone down the path of conflict with Russia in Ukraine. But as it is, they have been had by Uncle Sam – big time. What’s more, they don’t seem to realize or even care.

Likewise, the same fate of shooting themselves in the foot is occurring over the Middle East crisis. The Europeans are backing a genocide in Gaza in deference to U.S. imperialist interests and the Israeli regime. That has rebounded with the Red Sea crisis that is set to hammer EU-China trade. Rather than seeking to resolve the conflict diplomatically, the Europeans are making it worse and in the process damaging their own international standing and strategic interests.

No wonder the Americans ultimately treat their European vassals with contempt. Because they are utterly spineless and clueless.

January 28, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Israel’s Day of Reckoning

BY JOHN J. MEARSHEIMER | JANUARY 27, 2024

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued its Order yesterday (26 January 2024) on the South African case against Israel involving possible genocide in Gaza.

Predictably, the coverage of the Order in the mainstream media in the West aims to spin the story in ways that are most favorable to Israel, which means minimizing or omitting those elements of the story that make Israel look bad and emphasizing that the ICJ did not order Israel to cease all military operations in Gaza.

Hardly anyone expected the ICJ to rule that Israel would have to stop all military operations in Gaza, since it is at war with Hamas, and the court cannot order Hamas to cease its military operations against Israel. What the ICJ did tell Israel, however, is that it must focus its offensive on Hamas, and not target the civilian population. After all, the genocide charge revolves around what Israel is doing to the civilian population in Gaza, not Hamas.

What really matters in the Order is what it says about Israel committing genocide. How could it be otherwise? Genocide is the crime of all crimes.

The Order clearly states that there is: 1) plausible evidence that Israel has the intent to commit genocide; and 2) there is plausible evidence that Israel is committing genocide.

In response to that dire situation the court ordered Israel to stop committing those acts that appear to be genocidal, and to preserve any evidence that bears on this matter, obviously for the trial ahead.

In short, the ICJ did not make a final decision on the charge of genocide against Israel, but said there is sufficient evidence at this point to believe there is a “real and imminent risk” of genocide, and therefore Israel must fundamentally alter its conduct of the war in Gaza.

I think this is a stunning outcome, especially when you consider the votes among the 17 members of the ICJ.

There were six separate votes on six provisional measures that Israel was instructed to obey.

Four of the votes were 15-2.

Two of the votes were 16-1.

Amazingly, the Israeli judge — who was recently appointed by Prime Minister Netanyahu — voted in favor of two of the measures.

The American judge, who is also the head of the ICJ, voted in favor of all 6 of the measures.

The only judge who voted against all six measures is from Uganda.

I watched the ICJ proceedings on 11-12 January 2024, and they were conducted in a professional and fair-minded manner.

Both the Israelis and the South Africans sent their “A” teams to the proceedings, and each took over three hours to lay out its arguments systematically and comprehensively.

Finally, I have read the ICJ’s 27-page Order, and it is an impressive document, which is not to say one must agree with all its conclusions.

This was not a kangaroo court.

It seems clear that yesterday was a black day for Israel, as the ICJ Order will leave a deep and lasting stain on its reputation.

January 28, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Iran condemns Israel’s allegations against UNRWA staff in Gaza

Press TV – January 28, 2024

Iran has condemned Israel’s allegations against several employees of the Palestinian refugee agency UNRWA as yet another “malicious” move and part of the regime’s “inhumane” treatment of the Palestinians.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kan’ani said on Sunday that Israel has leveled the allegations to justify its restrictions on humanitarian organizations active in the besieged Gaza Strip and the occupied West Bank.

He said the accusations also seek to make Israel get away with the unprecedented and heinous crime of killing at least 150 members of international institutions, such as UNRWA, since early October.

The Iranian official also deplored the move by Western countries to cut UNRWA funding against the backdrop of the Israeli allegations.

“Such a behavior practically means accepting the claims of a criminal regime, which, according to a ruling issued by the International Court of Justice, stands accused of genocide of the Palestinians and must be held accountable before this court and the world’s public opinion,” Kan’ani stated.

He said pressuring UNRWA and restricting its activities or preventing the delivery of humanitarian aid to the people who are suffering from critical war conditions and are facing the threat of genocide indicates nothing but the declaration of trust in the story of a war criminal.

Instead of announcing their decision to suspend funding for UNRWA, those countries had better halt their military and diplomatic assistance to Israel, the Iranian official said.

Iran calls on all freedom-seeking nations, particularly the Muslim countries, to resist Israel and make every effort to support the Palestinians, Kan’ani said.

The United States announced on Friday that it was halting funding to UNRWA because of the Israeli allegations against the agency’s 12 employees.

Canada and Australia followed suit and announced a similar funding pause to UNRWA, which is a critical source of support for people in Gaza.

On Saturday, Britain, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Scotland, and Finland joined the United States in pausing the funding.

Ireland and Norway, however, expressed continued support for UNRWA, saying the agency does crucial work to help the displaced Palestinians in Gaza.

Israel made the allegations on the same day the International Court of Justice issued an interim ruling on the emergency measures requested by South Africa in connection with the regime’s war on Gaza. In its interim ruling, the ICJ ordered Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent genocide in Gaza, saying the regime must ensure its forces do not commit genocide and also ensure the preservation of evidence of alleged genocide.

In a post on his X account on Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian hailed the ICJ ruling and reiterated Iran’s support for South Africa’s initiative.

January 28, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Here’s why the ICJ ruling on genocide is a crushing defeat for Israel

The Hague-based court has not called for a ceasefire and has no enforcement power, but its decision is resounding nonetheless

By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | January 28, 2024

The United Nations’ International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled on the case that South Africa had brought against Israel. Those who mistake realism for simplistic materialism – the ‘it’s only there if I can touch it’ variety – may underestimate the significance of that ruling. In reality, it is historic. Here’s why.

First, and most importantly, the court has ruled against Israel. South Africa’s well-prepared brief was over 80 pages long, closely argued, and very detailed. But its gist was simple: It had applied to the ICJ – which only handles cases between countries, not individuals – to find that Israel is committing genocide in its attack on Gaza, thereby infringing on fundamental Palestinian rights as brutally as possible.

Such a finding always takes years. For now, at this preliminary stage, South Africa’s immediate request was for the judges to decide that there is, in essence, a high enough probability of this genocide taking place to do two things: First, continue the case (instead of dismissing it) and, secondly, issue an injunction (in this context called “preliminary measures”) ordering Israel to abstain from its genocidal actions so that the rights of its Palestinian victims receive due protection.

The court has done both, with a majority of 15 to 2. One of the two judges dissenting is from Israel. Those voting, in effect, against Tel Aviv included even the president of the court, from the US, and the judge from Germany, a country that has taken a self-damagingly pro-Israel line. As to the Israeli pseudo-argument claiming ‘self-defense,’ the court rightly ignored it. (Occupying powers simply do not have that right regarding occupied entities under international law. Period.)

This is a clear victory for South Africa – and for Palestine and Palestinians – and a crushing defeat for Israel, as even Kenneth Roth, head of thoroughly pro-Western Human Rights Watch recognizes with commendable clarity.

It is true that the ICJ has no power to enforce its rulings. That would have to come through the UN Security Council, where the US is protecting Israel, whatever it does, including genocide. Yet there are good reasons why representatives of Israel have reacted with statements so arrogant and aggressive that they only further damage Tel Aviv’s badly damaged international standing:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for instance, has displayed his legal nihilism by dismissing as “outrageous” the closely reasoned finding of the court, at which Israel had every opportunity to argue its case. Israel’s far-right Minister of National Security, convicted racist and terrorist supporter Itamar Ben-Gvir, has derided the ruling with an X post simply saying: “Hague schmague.”

And, of course, as always, everyone not toeing Israel’s line is smeared as an “antisemite”: The ICJ is now joining the UN, the World Health Organization and, by now, almost everyone and everything outside the ideological bubble of Zionism on the list of those slandered in this manner.

Notwithstanding the ICJ’s lack of an army to compel Tel Aviv to obey the law, these outbursts of rage betray great fear. You may ask why. After all, the one thing the ICJ did not do was order a ceasefire. Some commenters have focused on that fact, to argue – gleefully on the side of Israel and its allies, with great disappointment on the side of Israel’s victims, opponents, and critics – that this vitiates the ruling.

They are wrong. As, for instance, the Palestinian legal expert Nimer Sultany (based at the London School of Oriental and Asian Studies) has explained, a direct ceasefire order was always unlikely. There are several reasons for that: The ICJ cannot issue such an order to Hamas, so issuing one to Israel alone would have been difficult in principle and, by the way, would also have provided ammunition for Israeli propaganda. Since only the UN Security Council could give teeth to the ICJ’s ruling, trying to decree such a one-sided ceasefire would have made it easier for the US to sabotage the Council by discrediting the court’s ruling as biased. Although it was consistent for South Africa to ask for a ceasefire at the ICJ, the best institution to order one is still the Security Council. And it is plausible to interpret the specific demands that the ICJ has made of Israel as practicable only under an official or de-facto ceasefire. Indeed, Arab countries are now, it seems, gearing up to take that position and use the court’s ruling to demand a ceasefire at the Security Council. This may very well fail again, but even that failure will serve to weaken the position of the US, Israel’s vital sponsor.

Beyond the issue of the ceasefire, there are other – and, from an Israeli perspective, probably more frightening – factors. For even if the US keeps shielding Israel, this is a bigger world. Western governments and politicians that have supported Tel Aviv unconditionally – with arms, diplomatic and public-relations cover, and by repressing Israel’s critics – will feel a chill: The UN Genocide Convention and the Rome Statute don’t just condemn perpetrating a genocide but also not preventing or being complicit in one.

With the ICJ now having confirmed at the very least that genocide is probable enough to merit a case and require immediate action, Joe Biden, Antony Blinken, Ursula von der Leyen, Olaf Scholz, Rishi Sunak, Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron, Annalena Baerbock, to name only a few, should start worrying: While the ICJ does not go after individuals, the International Criminal Court (ICC) does. Despite dragging its feet as much as it could, it is now especially likely to be compelled to open a full-fledged investigation.

In addition, cases can also be brought under national jurisdictions. All of this will take years. But it could end very badly for hubris-addled Western politicians who never imagined that such charges could escape their control (where they serve as politicized tools to go after African leaders and geopolitical opponents) and become their very own, potentially life-changing problem. In sum, the cost of siding with Israel has gone up. Not all but most politicians are solid opportunists. Tel Aviv will find it harder to mobilize its friends.

It is true that some Western governments and leaders, for instance, Canada or Rishi Sunak, have hurried to show their disdain for international law by attacking the ICJ’s ruling. But there’s an element of desperate bravado, of whistling in a darkening forest. And there’s a Catch-22 as well: Because, the more representatives of the West display their arrogance, the more they alienate the world. They may think that they are relieving Israel’s isolation. In reality, they are joining it on its downward trajectory: They are showing, once again, that their touted “rules-based order” is the opposite of the equal rule of international law for all.

Non-Western powers like China and Russia that have long resisted the hypocrisy of that ‘rules-based order’ and are not complicit in Israel’s atrocities, are earning global good will and geopolitical advantage. Hence, their positions and strategy will be confirmed by the ICJ ruling. This, as well, will weaken Israel further in the international arena.

If the world is bigger than the US or the West, it also contains much more than politics in the narrow sense of the term. In the realm of narratives, this is also a harsh setback for Israel and its supporters: Those who arrogantly dismissed the South African case as baseless or “a mockery,” for instance in The Economist, are now paying with their credibility. Their value as weapons in Israel’s struggle for global public opinion is reduced.

Last but not least, the domains of politics and narratives intersect, of course, with that of war: It is inevitable that those fighting Israel with arms will feel encouraged, and rightly so. For forces such as the Palestinian Resistance, the Ansar Allah (Houthi) movement de facto ruling Yemen, Hezbollah, and Iran, this ICJ ruling coincides with Israel’s military failure in Gaza: For while its troops have massacred civilians (and obsessively recorded proud evidence of their crimes that is now coming to haunt them), they are far from either “eradicating Hamas” (the putative war aim) or freeing the hostages by force. Seeing that Israel’s international isolation is getting worse, its opponents will have ever less reason to give up.

This, in short, was a great setback for Israel. Its political model, combining apartheid, militarism, and a might-makes-right outlook, is not ‘working’ any longer, not even on its own terms. The future is not predictable. That Israel will be in worsening trouble is.

Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul.

January 28, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Palestine slams Peru for allowing citizens to fight alongside Israel in Gaza

Residential areas of Gaza at the border line between Israel and Gaza after Israeli attacks continue in Israel on January 10, 2024. [Mostafa Alkharouf – Anadolu Agency]
MEMO | January 27, 2024

The Palestinian Foreign Ministry criticized Peru on Saturday for allowing its citizens to fight with the Israeli army in its war on Gaza, Anadolu Agency reports.

This statement followed Peru’s condolences for a soldier killed during the war.

In a tweet on its official account, Peru’s Foreign Ministry said on Wednesday: “The Peruvian government regrets the death of Yuval Lopez, a Peruvian-Israeli citizen who served as a reservist in the Israeli Defense Forces.”

Palestine, in its statement, interpreted Peru’s acknowledgment as “permitting its citizens to participate in the genocide committed by the Israeli occupation against the Palestinian people in Gaza. This was seen through the case of Israeli soldier Yuval Lopez, who held both Peruvian and Israeli citizenships, and the Peruvian government expressed condolences for his death.”

The Palestinian ministry said it expected Peru to “revoke the citizenship of its citizens who hold Israeli citizenship and are involved in the conflict, instead of offering condolences after their deaths and praising them.“

Palestine considered “these times crucial in determining countries’ actual positions on humanity, commitment to international law, and humanitarian law.”

Furthermore, Palestine renewed its call for all countries to “verify the citizenship status of individuals in the Israeli state and the possibility of their participation in these crimes.”

It emphasized that the involvement of citizens of these countries in the aggression on Gaza means their direct participation in this attack against the Palestinian people.

There has been no immediate response from Peru to the statement from the Palestinian Foreign Ministry.

Despite the International Court of Justice’s provisional ruling, Israel continues its onslaught on the Gaza Strip where at least 26,257 Palestinians have been killed, mostly women and children, and 64,797 injured since Oct. 7, according to Palestinian health authorities.

​​​​​​​The Israeli offensive has left 85% of Gaza’s population internally displaced amid acute shortages of food, clean water, and medicine, while 60% of the enclave’s infrastructure was damaged or destroyed, according to the UN.​​​​​​​

January 27, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

ICJ lands stunning blow on Israel over Gaza genocide charge

A different Biden approach could have shaped war efforts and prevented this from happening in the first place

BY TRITA PARSI | RESPONSIBLE STSTECRAFT | JANUARY 26, 2024

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) just ruled against Israel and determined that South Africa successfully argued that Israel’s conduct plausibly could constitute genocide. The Court imposes several injunctions against Israel and reminds Israel that its rulings are binding, according to international law.

In its order, the court fell short of South Africa’s request for a ceasefire, but this ruling, however, is overwhelmingly in favor of South Africa’s case and will likely increase international pressure for a ceasefire as a result.

On the question of whether Israel’s war in Gaza is genocide, that will still take more time, but today’s news will have significant political repercussions. Here are a few thoughts.

This is a devastating blow to Israel’s global standing. To put it in context, Israel has worked ferociously for the last two decades to defeat the BDS movement — Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions — not because it will have a significant economic impact on Israel, but because of how it could delegitimize Israel internationally. However, the ruling of the ICJ that Israel is plausibly engaged in genocide is far more devastating to Israel’s legitimacy than anything BDS could have achieved.

Just as much as Israel’s political system has been increasingly — and publicly — associated with apartheid in the past few years, Israel will now be similarly associated with the charge of genocide. As a result, those countries that have supported Israel and its military campaign in Gaza, such as the U.S. under President Biden, will be associated with that charge, too.

The implications for the United States are significant. First because the court does not have the ability to implement its ruling. Instead, the matter will go to the United Nations Security Council, where the Biden administration will once again face the choice of protecting Israel politically by casting a veto, and by that, further isolate the United States, or allowing the Security Council to act and pay a domestic political cost for “not standing by Israel.”

So far, the Biden administration has refused to say if it will respect ICJ’s decision. Of course, in previous cases in front of the ICJ, such as Myanmar, Ukraine and Syria, the U.S. and Western states stressed that ICJ provisional measures are binding and must be fully implemented.

The double standards of U.S. foreign policy will hit a new low if, in this case, Biden not only argues against the ICJ, but actively acts to prevent and block the implementation of its ruling. It is perhaps not surprising that senior Biden administration officials have largely ceased using the term “rules-based order” since October 7.

It also raises questions about how Biden’s policy of bear-hugging Israel may have contributed to Israel’s conduct. Biden could have offered more measured support and pushed back hard against Israeli excesses — and by that, prevented Israel from engaging in actions that could potentially fall under the category of genocide. But he didn’t.

Instead, Biden offered unconditional support combined with zero public criticism of Israel’s conduct and only limited push-back behind the scenes. A different American approach could have shaped Israel’s war efforts in a manner that arguably would not have been preliminarily ruled by the ICJ as plausibly meeting the standards of genocide.

This shows that America undermines its own interest as well as that of its partners when it offers them blank checks and complete and unquestionable protection. The absence of checks and balances that such protection offers fuels reckless behavior all around.

As such, Biden’s unconditional support may have undermined Israel, in the final analysis.

This ruling may also boost those arguing that all states that are party to the Genocide Convention have a positive obligation to prevent genocide. The Houthis, for instance, have justified their attacks against ships heading to Israeli ports in the Red Sea, citing this positive obligation. What legal implications will the court’s ruling have as a result on the U.S. and UK’s military action against the Houthis?

The implications for Europe will also be considerable. The U.S. is rather accustomed to and comfortable with setting aside international law and ignoring international institutions. Europe is not.

International law and institutions play a much more central role in European security thinking. The decision will continue to split Europe. But the fact that some key EU states will reject the ICJ’s ruling will profoundly contradict and undermine Europe’s broader security paradigm.

One final point: The mere existence of South Africa’s application to the ICJ appears to have moderated Israel’s war conduct. Any plans to ethnically cleanse Gaza and send its residents to third countries appear to have been somewhat paused, presumably because of how such actions would boost South Africa’s application. If so, it shows that the Court, in an era where the force of international law is increasingly questioned, has had a greater impact in terms of deterring unlawful Israeli actions than anything the Biden administration has done.

Trita Parsi is the co-founder and Executive Vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

January 27, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Leave a comment

US, UK jets bomb Yemen’s main oil export terminal

The Cradle | January 27, 2024

Yemen’s Al-Masirah TV reported on 27 January that US and UK warplanes bombed the port of Ras Issa, the country’s main oil export terminal, located in Hodeidah province.

The news followed an announcement by the US Central Command (CENTCOM), which claimed: “On Jan. 27 at approximately 3:45 a.m. (Sanaa time), US Central Command Forces conducted a strike against a Houthi anti-ship missile aimed into the Red Sea and which was prepared to launch. US Forces identified the missile in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen.”

No casualties have been reported from the latest US-led aggression on Yemen.

The attack came a few hours after the country’s armed forces carried out a successful operation against the Marshall Islands-flagged and UK-linked Martin Luanda oil tanker in the Gulf of Aden, setting the vessel on fire.

No deaths or injuries were reported among the crew as a US navy ship was providing assistance, CENTCOM said.

The attack on the oil tanker was described as “a victory for the oppression of the Palestinian people, and a response to the US-UK aggression against Yemen” by armed forces spokesman Brigadier General Yahya Saree.

Singapore-based multinational commodity trading company Transfigura confirmed the Martin Luanda was operated on its behalf and that it was carrying Russian naphtha “bought below the price cap in line with G7 sanctions.”

“We are aware of reports that the M/V Marlin Luanda, a Marshall Islands-flagged tanker, has sustained damage from an attack in the Gulf of Aden. Current reports suggest no casualties, and nearby coalition vessels are on the scene,” a UK government spokesperson said following the attack.

Shortly after the attack, the Free Spirit vessel, chartered by Swiss-based Dutch multinational energy and commodity trading company Vitol to carry crude oil, did a U-turn before reaching the Gulf of Aden, according to data from LSEG Shipping Research.

Although US, UK, and Israeli-linked vessels are being forced to avoid the Red Sea altogether thanks to Sanaa’s pro-Palestine operations, Saudi and Chinese shipments are continuing to transit the vital waterway unimpeded.

January 27, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Israel clinches new US arms deal as Gaza atrocities mount

The Cradle | January 26, 2024

The US is finalizing three major military aircraft sales to Israel, as it continues to bomb Gaza, across a series of meetings led by the director general of the Israeli Defense Ministry, Eyal Zamir, Haaretz reported on 25 January. 

Progress was made toward purchasing 25 F-35 fighter jets, 25 F-15 fighter jets, and a new squadron of Apache attack helicopters, possibly involving 12 units. These jets and helicopters will reportedly be paid for using the US aid provided to Israel. 

Zamir, alongside other officials, held a series of meetings in Washington with senior Pentagon and State Department officials. The Israeli officials met with arms dealers, namely Lockheed Martin, manufacturer of the F-35, and Boeing, manufacturer of the F-16 and Apache. 

Haaretz reports that the sale “demonstrated the urgent need to deploy attack helicopters to hit enemy targets and to assist [Israeli army] ground forces.”

The F-35 and F15 purchases will be carried out after completing previous purchases of a second F-35 squadron. The third F-35 group will arrive in Israel from 2027 onward, and the new F-15s will be received a year later. The Apaches are expected to arrive in Israel within two years. 

Alongside the procurement of jets and helicopters, Israel has also increased its aerial munitions purchases, costing hundreds of millions of dollars, that are expected to arrive shortly. 

These arms are needed to both replenish their quickly depleting stockpile in the fight against Palestinian resistance forces in Gaza as well as to prepare the front in the north against the Lebanese resistance group Hezbollah. 

The US has voiced concerns over its potential need to stretch an already thin ammunition stockpile to support Israel as well as continue its support for Ukraine. 

Israel’s new proposed budget has increased its weapons spending budget by an extra $8.3 billion, now projecting it to a historic high of about $37 billion. 

Israel has been carrying out a brutal bombing campaign on the Gaza Strip since their war on the besieged enclave began in October. To date, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, at least 26,083 Palestinians have been killed and with over 64,000 injuries.

January 26, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

US enlists extremists to attack Russian troops in Syria: Official

The Cradle | January 26, 2024

The Russian President’s Special Envoy to Syria, Alexander Lavrentiev, has accused Washington of directing Syrian armed groups to carry out attacks against Russian troops in the country. 

“There are indications that the Americans are specifying tasks for their forces from among the Syrian armed opposition to inflict the greatest amount of damage on Russian military forces in Syria,” Lavrentiev said on 26 January. 

Lavrentiev added these attacks are planned not only against Russian forces in southern Syria but also in what is known as the Idlib de-escalation zone northwest of the country – patrolled by Russian and Turkish forces in line with a 2018 agreement. 

“[The US] has begun … supplying [extremist groups] with modern weapons and modern drones so that it can carry out raids, including on the Hmeimim base.” 

Hmeimim is a Russian-operated military base located southeast of the Syrian city of Latakia. Hostile, unidentified drones have approached the Hmeimim base in the past. 

On 3 October, Idlib-based extremists launched a drone towards a crowded military college in the city of Homs, killing dozens of civilians and graduating officers. 

Russian officials have repeatedly accused the US of harboring and training extremist militants in Syria, particularly inside Washington’s Al-Tanf military base. 

Russian and Syrian officials have also accused US forces of providing ISIS with logistical support and allowing it to operate from the 55-kilometer area surrounding the Al-Tanf base. 

Lavrentiev’s comments come as ISIS is making a resurgence in Syria. Despite losing the majority of its territory in the country, the group’s cells operate in the Syrian desert – geographically linked to Al-Tanf and the 55-kilometer zone around it – carrying out frequent hit and run attacks against Syrian troops, civilians, farmers, and truffle harvesters. 

This marked resurgence in ISIS activity coincides with ongoing attacks on US bases in Syria and Iraq by Iraqi resistance factions in support of Gaza and in rejection of US support for Israel. 

Since October, the Iraqi resistance has launched at least 153 attacks on the US bases.

US officials are reportedly also in talks to establish a time-table with the Iraqi government for a withdrawal of their troops from Iraq. 

However, sources told Reuters that the talks “are expected to take several months, if not longer, with the outcome unclear and no US troop withdrawal imminent.”

As US bases in Syria come under fire, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) – a US-backed Kurdish militia which helps oversee Washington’s occupation of the country’s oilfields – has also been facing a widespread rebellion since last August, waged by Arab tribes with Syrian government backing. 

January 26, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

The UN and Israel are on the same page

The Palestinian anti-colonial struggle is legitimate

By Ramona Wadi | MEMO | January 26, 2024

Even in the midst of Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians, the UN Secretary-General is still pursuing the defunct two-state paradigm. While addressing the UN Security Council earlier this week, Antonio Guterres called for an end to Israel’s occupation of Palestine, while calling out Israeli officials on their rejection of the two-state “solution”. However, if this so-called solution is defunct as a result of Israel’s colonial expansion which the UN allowed — as it is — what exactly is Israel rejecting and what is Guterres upholding?

“The right of the Palestinian people to build their own fully independent state must be recognised by all,” Guterres stated. “And any refusal to accept the two-state solution by any party must be firmly rejected.”

At this point, rejecting the two-state diplomacy means rejecting a defunct hypothesis. Guterres, however, continued: “What is the alternative? How would a one-state solution look with such a large number of Palestinians inside without any rights and dignity? This would be inconceivable.”

There are many implications to Guterres’s statement, none of which are favourable for Palestinians. Primarily, he is assuming that the one-state concept emanates solely from the Israeli colonial narrative, which would see a single colonial entity established over the entirety of Palestine. Moreover, by promoting the two-state paradigm, Guterres is advancing the one-state colonial reality for Israel, for the simple reason that the UN is completely behind Israel in its endeavours. This is besides the fact that two states are no longer viable, not to mention still unfavourable for Palestinians in terms of land ownership and liberation, even if it were still possible to achieve.

The secretary-general’s rhetoric gives Palestinians no options. The two-state “solution” is defunct, which means Palestinians can aspire to nothing in that regard. A one-state colonial reality only entrenches the current reality and leaves Palestinians exposed to even more Israeli colonial terrorism. However, there is an alternative, and one which Guterres pretends does not exist. It’s called decolonisation.

This is a fact which the UN and Guterres have eliminated completely from their discourse because it doesn’t suit the two-state propaganda. In a post-colonial era, Palestinians are still living a colonial reality and decolonisation is the only viable option for a population which was ethnically cleansed in 1948 and is now experiencing genocide in a tiny besieged enclave. The UN has done nothing but talk about another humanitarian ceasefire — even though in November that led to an increase in Israel’s killing of Palestinian civilians — and remind the world that Palestinians deserve nothing better than rhetoric about “two states”. Essentially, Guterres is stating that Palestinians are undeserving of political rights, of their land, and of liberation, which takes the UN full circle back to when it endorsed partition in 1947 based on colonial superiority and indigenous subjugation. The UN and Israel are on the same page.

When Guterres states that everyone must recognise the Palestinians’ right to build their independent state, does he include himself in the equation? And when he speaks of the two-state “solution”, does he realise that the UN is thus condoning the ethnic cleansing since 1948 and the deprivation of Palestinians of their land? Just like Israel, the UN endorses the colonial approach and implementation, and just like Israel, Guterres is depriving Palestinians of their political rights by refusing to promote the only viable solution: decolonisation.

January 26, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »