Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

How a war with Iran (for Israel) could crash the US economy

By Shivan Mahendrarajah | The Cradle | March 21, 2025

The “winds of war” are blowing toward Iran. This is the war for which Israeli donors Sheldon and Miriam Adelson, along with pro-Israel organizations such as AIPAC and the ADL, paid US President Donald Trump hundreds of millions of dollars over two election cycles.

But it’s not only the Israeli lobby banging the war drums; American Evangelicals – especially groups like “Christians United for Israel” – also support war, believing it will “save Israel” from the “Iranian menace.” Evangelical membership in the 119th Congress (2025–27) is high. War with Iran is not (yet) popular in the US, but – just as with Iraq – consent will be manufactured by Washington elites and the media.

Trump’s outreach to Russian President Vladimir Putin to resolve the Ukraine war partly aims to shift the Pentagon’s attention back to West Asia. He assumes that an early 2025 war with Iran will “save Israel” and secure his legacy, letting him focus on “America First” for the rest of his term.

But war with Iran could also backfire disastrously, sink his presidency, and derail the ambitions of 2028 Republican hopefuls like Marco Rubio and J.D. Vance. For starters, should the military campaign encounter any unforeseen backlash – which is highly likely, and the reason the Pentagon has assiduously avoided direct confrontation with Iran – the Democratic Party could retake both chambers of Congress after a US stock market crash and recession triggered by the war.

Iran’s military responses

Iranian leaders have vowed “devastating” retaliation for any attack on their soil. This would likely involve missile strikes against Israeli and US military targets – and possibly infrastructure and economic targets within the occupation state. If Israel uses tactical nuclear weapons against Iran’s nuclear facilities, Tehran will escalate further.

Whether or not nukes are used, war would shock the global economy, send oil prices soaring, and halt maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. The greatest impact will fall on countries most dependent on West Asian oil.

The US economy may be less affected in the short term. Its stock markets, already down 10 percent since Trump’s return to the White House, would decline further – but Trump is gambling that households will not feel the pain. But if the Islamic Republic launches economic warfare that “brings the war home,” political dynamics will change.

Economic warfare

Most Americans are detached from the notion and consequences of war because, since the Civil War, US wars have been fought far from its borders. Even during the World Wars, though American families faced personal loss, the nation did not endure widespread suffering – unlike Britain, which imposed food rationing from 1939 to 1954.

The “Global War on Terror” impacted some communities, but not the country. US troops often joked in Iraq: “We’re at war; America’s at the mall.” Americans kept spending and enjoying life, while Iraqis and US occupation soldiers endured the brutal costs.

Iranian leadership understands this disconnect. The US stock market is a tempting target. In 1929, at the start of the Great Depression, just 2.5 percent of Americans owned stock. Today, about 61 percent of US adults – roughly 160 million people – own shares through private accounts, pension schemes, or retirement plans.

Factoring in children in such households, roughly 200 million Americans are exposed to market fluctuations. Trillions more dollars are invested by corporations, universities, and foreign institutions. The exposure is deep.

The US economy is fragile. Mark Zandi, Moody’s chief economist, warned that the risk of recession is “uncomfortably high and rising.” On 19 March, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell kept interest rates steady, citing slowing consumer spending and growing uncertainty. Trump, fearing economic fallout, raged on Truth Social over the Fed’s refusal to cut rates. He announced retaliatory tariffs set to take effect on 2 April.

Household debt is rising – $18.04 trillion as of Q4 2024 – with increasing defaults on auto loans and credit cards. Americans, like the federal government, spend on credit. Investors borrow against their portfolios with margin loans. If stock values fall, forced selloffs to cover debts could intensify market collapse. “Margin calls” – demands for loan repayments – played a greater role in the ensuing economic turmoil than the 13 percent market drop on 28 October 1929.

The US economy is already strained, and consumers are over-leveraged. A large external shock could push it into a deep recession. Stock markets would plunge, wiping out pension savings and private wealth.

How far markets fall would depend on the force of Iran’s blow. The current 10 percent drop has already hurt. A deeper decline – say, 25 to 50 percent – would cripple the economy, spark layoffs and bankruptcies, and tighten credit. That would suppress consumer spending and crash the housing market, as in 2008.

Tehran’s targets

As Iranian leaders have often repeated, “If Iran cannot sell oil, no one will.” If US or Israeli forces strike Iranian tankers or infrastructure, Tehran is likely to target US economic interests and the oil sectors of any Persian Gulf Arab state that supports the attacks by allowing fighter jets, drones, or missiles to launch from their territories.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) may choose to strike Bahrain, which is an obvious military target since it hosts the US Naval Forces Central Command. In addition to military sites, Iran could target the Bahrain Petroleum Company’s refinery, which processes 270,000 barrels per day, along with its marine terminal and oil storage facilities.

The oil farm holds 14 million barrels – ample fuel for a dramatic strike. Iran could also destroy the King Fahd Causeway connecting Bahrain to Saudi Arabia to prevent Riyadh from sending ground troops to suppress unrest among Bahrain’s majority Shia population, as it did during the 2011 uprising.

In Iraq, too, US military bases will almost certainly come under fire. Beyond that, Iran-aligned factions within the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) may attempt to capture the 2,500 US troops still stationed there – not to kill them, but to take them as hostages.

Living captives would be far more valuable, creating a nightmare scenario for Trump and serving as a sharp reminder to Americans – who often forget the wars they once supported – that US troops remain in Iraq more than two decades after the 2003 invasion. These POWs would likely be scattered across the country, making coordinated rescue missions difficult and turning them into bargaining chips in any future negotiations.

Jordan, having allowed Israeli overflights last year in October during Iran’s retaliatory strikes and before that in April, is likely to do so again and could face significant retaliation. In addition to the Zarqa oil refinery, Iranian forces might strike political, military, and intelligence targets. Such attacks would certainly provoke unrest among Jordan’s population, the majority of whom are of Palestinian descent and already harbor grievances against their leadership for its collusion with Tel Aviv.

The UAE, if complicit in the attacks, could face military strikes on its energy infrastructure and power plants, as it experienced during its war with Yemen. The Emirates is particularly vulnerable due to its demographic makeup – about 88 percent of its population consists of foreign workers. If those workers flee following targeted attacks, the country’s economy would be brought to its knees.

Qatar and Oman are likely to be treated differently. Muscat, with its long-standing neutral foreign policy in the region, has maintained warm relations with Iran, and will not likely participate in a US military aggression. Doha also enjoys relatively good relations with Tehran, though it hosts the US Central Command’s (CENTCOM) Al-Udeid Air Base and worked to thwart Iranian interests in Syria. Iran might strike CENTCOM’s headquarters in West Asia, but is unlikely to target other Qatari assets.

Saudi Arabia presents a more complex scenario. Although both Russia and China have encouraged reconciliation between Iran and Saudi Arabia, the kingdom may not remain on the sidelines. If it does participate in hostilities, it would become a high-priority target.

Even if Riyadh stays neutral, Iran might still strike its East–West oil pipeline, which terminates at the port of Yanbu. That pipeline – built in 1982 to bypass the Persian Gulf – delivers over three million barrels per day to Europe.

Yanbu’s port, refinery, and export terminals, some of which are operated in partnership with western firms, would be natural targets. A simultaneous closure of the Strait of Hormuz and disruption of Red Sea traffic would block the export of roughly five million barrels per day. While former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter predicted oil prices could surge to $120 per barrel, Iran might be capable of pushing them as high as $200.

China, when retaliating against Trump’s tariffs, acted strategically. It imports just 7 percent of its pork from the US, but most pork producers are in Republican “red states.” Targeting that sector hurt Trump’s base directly.

While spiking oil prices and global economic turmoil would harm Iran’s allies and the Global South, Iran’s adversaries in the US, UK, Israel, and EU stand to lose the most. If Iran wages a smart economic war, even Evangelicals may start caring more about their grocery bills than hastening the reconstruction of the “Third Temple” and other end-times prophecies.

March 22, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | 1 Comment

Seyed Marandi: America Attacks Yemen – Has Trump Set Himself Up For Failure?

Glenn Diesen | March 19, 2025

Seyed Mohammad Marandi is a professor, analyst and advisor to Iran’s nuclear negotiation team

Follow me:

Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/

X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_DiesenPatreon:  

 / glenndiesen  

Support the channel:

PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenn…

Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng

Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f

March 20, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Trump’s ingenuity vis-à-vis Russia, Iran

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | March 10, 2025  

Through the past three year period, Moscow claimed that it faced an existential threat from the US-led proxy war in Ukraine. But in the past six weeks, this threat perception has largely dissipated. The US President Donald Trump has made a heroic attempt to change his country’s image to a portmanteau of ‘friend’ and ‘enemy’ with whom Moscow can be friendly despite the backlog of a fundamental dislike or suspicion. 

Last week, Trump turned to the Iran question for what could be a potentially similar leap of faith. There are similarities in the two situations. Both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian are quintessential nationalists and modernisers who are open to westernism. Both Russia and Iran face US sanctions. Both seek a rollback of sanctions that may open up opportunities to integrate their economies with the world market. 

The Russian and Iranian elites alike can be described as ‘westernists’. Through their history, both Russia and Iran have experienced the West as a source of modernity to ‘upgrade’ their civilisation states. In such a paradigm, Trump is holding a stick in one hand and a carrot on the other, offering reconciliation or retribution depending on their choice. Is that a wise approach? Isn’t a reset without coercion possible at all? 

In the Russian perception, the threat from the US has significantly eased lately, as the Trump administration unambiguously signalled a strategy to engage with Russia and normalise the relationship — even holding out the prospects for a mutually beneficial economic cooperation. 

So far, Russia has had a roller coaster ride with Trump (who even threatened Russia with more sanctions) whose prescriptions of a ceasefire to bring the conflict in Ukraine to an end creates unease in the Russian mind. However, Trump also slammed the door shut on Ukraine’s NATO membership; rejected altogether any US military deployment in Ukraine; absolved Russia of responsibility for triggering the Ukraine conflict and instead placed the blame squarely on the Biden administration; openly acknowledged Russia’s desire for an end to the conflict; and took note of Moscow’s willingness to enter into negotiations — even conceded that the conflict itself is indeed a proxy war. 

At a practical level, Trump signalled readiness to restore the normal functioning of the Russian embassy.  If reports are to be believed, the two countries have frozen their offensive intelligence activities in cyber space. 

Again, during the recent voting on a UN Security Council resolution on Ukraine, the US and Russia found themselves arrayed against Washington’s European allies who joined hands with Kiev. Presumably, Russian and American diplomats in New York made coordinated moves. 

It comes as no surprise that there is panic in the European capitals and Kiev that Washington and Moscow are directly in contact and they are not in the loop. Even as the comfort level in Moscow has perceptively risen, the gloom in the European mind is only thickening, embodying the confusion and foreboding that permeated significant moments of their struggle. 

All in all, Trump has conceded the legitimacy of the Russian position even before negotiations have commenced. Is an out-of-the-box thinking conceivable with regard to Iran as well?  

In substantive terms, from the Russian perspective, the remaining ‘loose ends’ are: first, a regime change in Kiev that ensures the emergence of a neutral friendly neighbour; second, removal of US sanctions; and, third, talks on arms control and disarmament attuned to present-day conditions for ensuring European and global balance and stability. 

As regards Iran, these are early days but a far less demanding situation prevails. True, the two countries have been locked in an adversarial relationship for decades. But it can be attributed entirely to the American interference in Iran’s politics, economy, society and culture; an  unremitting mutual hostility was never the lodestar, historically. 

A constituency of ‘westernists’ exists within Iran who root for normalisation with the US as the pathway leading to the country’s economic recovery. Of course, like in Russia, super hawks and dogmatists in Iran also have vested interests in the status quo. The military-industrial complex in both countries are an influential voice. 

The big difference today is that the external environment in Eurasia  thrives on US-Russia tensions whereas, the intra-regional alignments in the Gulf region are conducive to US-Iran detente. The Saudi-Iranian rapprochement, a steady and largely mellowing of Iran’s politics of resistance, Saudi Arabia’s abandonment of of jihadi groups as geopolitical tool and its refocus on development and reform as national strategies — all these mould the zeitgeist, which abhors US-Iran confrontation. 

This historic transformation renders the old US strategy to isolate and ‘contain’ Iran rather obsolete. Meanwhile, there is a growing realisation within the US itself that American interests in West Asia no longer overlap Israel’s. Trump cannot but be conscious of it.   

Equally, Iran’s deterrence capability today is a compelling reality. By attacking Iran, the US can at best score a pyrrhic victory at the cost of Israel’s destruction. Trump will find it impossible to extricate the US from the ensuing quagmire during his presidency, which, in fact, may define his legacy. 

The US-Russia negotiations are likely to be protracted. Having come this far, Russia is in no mood to freeze the conflict till it takes full control of Donbass region — and, possibly, the eastern side of Dniepr river (including Odessa, Kharkhov, etc.) But in Iran’s case, time is running out. Something has to give way in another six months when the hourglass empties and the October deadline arrives for the snapback mechanism of the 2015 JCPOA to reimpose UN resolutions to “suspend all reprocessing, heavy water-related, and enrichment-related activities” by Tehran. 

Trump will be called upon to take a momentous decision on Iran. Make no mistake, if push comes to shove, Tehran may quit the NPT altogether. Trump said Wednesday that he sent a letter to Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, calling for an agreement to replace the JCPOA. He suggested, without specifics, that the issue could quickly lead to conflict with Iran, but also signalled that a nuclear deal with Iran could emerge in the near future.

Later on Friday, Trump told reporters in the Oval Office that the US is “down to the final moments” negotiating with Iran, and he hoped military intervention would prove unnecessary. As he put it, “It’s an interesting time in the history of the world. But we have a situation with Iran that something is going to happen very soon, very, very soon. 

“You’ll be talking about that pretty soon, I guess. Hopefully, we can have a peace deal. I’m not speaking out of strength or weakness, I’m just saying I’d rather see a peace deal than the other. But the other will solve the problem. We’re at final moments. We can’t let them have a nuclear weapon.”

Trump aims at generating peace dividends out of any normalisation with Russia and Iran, two energy superpowers, that could give momentum to his MAGA project. But cobwebs must be swept away first. Myths and misconceptions have shaped contemporary Western thinking on Russia and Iran. Trump should not fall for the phobia of Russia’s ‘imperialistic’ ambitions or Iran’s ‘clandestine’ nuclear programme.

If the first one was the narrative of the liberal-globalist neocon camp, the second one is a fabrication by the Israeli lobby. Both are self-serving narratives. In the process, the difference between westernisation and modernisation got lost. Westernisation is the adoption of western culture and society, whereas, modernisation is the development of one’s own culture and society. Westernisation can at best be only a subprocess of modernisation in countries such as Russia and Iran.

Trump’s ingenuity, therefore, lies in ending the US’ proxy wars with Russia and Iran by creating synergy out of the Russian-Iranian strategic partnership. If the US’ proxy wars only has drawn Russia and Iran closer than ever in their turbulent history as quasi-allies lately, their common interest today also lies in Trump’s ingenuity to take help from Putin to normalise the US-Iran ties. If anyone can pull off such an audacious, magical rope trick, it is only Trump who can,   

March 10, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

UK eyes intelligence alliance to share data with Ukraine

Al Mayadeen | March 9, 2025

The UK government is considering forming a new intelligence-sharing subgroup within the Five Eyes alliance in reaction to US President Donald Trump’s actions toward Ukraine, the Daily Mail reported on Sunday, citing anonymous defense officials.

The requests for the effort apparently arose after the US suspended information collaboration with Kiev and prevented the UK and other allies from sending American intelligence to Ukraine.

A new proposed subgroup would greenlight intelligence cooperation without a US veto, according to the British daily.

According to the Daily Mail, the new project is not about abandoning Five Eyes but rather about establishing a new Four Eyes suborganization within it.

Simultaneously, US allies are mulling lowering the intelligence they share with Washington, citing worries about the administration’s conciliatory attitude to Russia, according to NBC News.

These include “Israel” and Saudi Arabia, as well as Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, and New Zealand, with the latter four being members of the US-led Five Eyes intelligence cooperation.

Officials in New Zealand, Australia, and Saudi Arabia declined to comment, while authorities in the United Kingdom, Canada, and “Israel” refuted the accusations.

The United States has temporarily suspended intelligence sharing with Ukraine following a notable rift between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky, CIA Director John Ratcliffe confirmed on Wednesday.

The decision follows a public row between the two leaders during a meeting in the Oval Office last week, which also led to the suspension of critical US military aid to Ukraine.

Speaking to Fox Business, Ratcliffe stated that the pause in intelligence cooperation is linked to Trump’s concerns about Zelensky’s dedication to the peace process with Russia.

“President Trump had a real question about whether President Zelensky was committed to the peace process,” Ratcliffe said. He noted that the suspension is temporary and expressed confidence that the US would soon resume its close partnership with Ukraine.

For Ukraine, which is engaged in a war with Russia, US intelligence support is as vital as military supplies. The sudden halt in assistance has shocked many Ukrainians, who rely heavily on American backing in their war with Russia.

March 9, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump displacement of Palestinians is unlikely, says former head of Saudi intelligence

MEMO | February 18, 2025

A former head of Saudi Arabian intelligence has ruled out the possibility of US President Donald Trump sending troops to “expel the Palestinians” from Gaza and liquidate the Palestinian cause. Prince Turki Al-Faisal called on people not to be disturbed by Trump’s statements.

He made his comment to Al-Arabiya channel on Sunday, adding that what Trump says is not necessarily what the world will do, because talk is easy, but action has its conditions.

“I doubt that [Trump] will consider sending an army to expel the Palestinians, so there is no need for confusion or chaos surrounding his statements,” said Al-Faisal. He described the comments as being suggestive of Trump’s “arrogance”.

The former Saudi official stressed the importance of a unified Arab position to confront the challenges related to the Palestinian issue. “If the Arabs stand as a group, no one will be able to influence it.”

Al-Faisal touched on this principle applying to the Palestinians as well. “It is better for our Palestinian brothers to leave the differences aside and to be one unit, rather than for things to be scattered as they are now. If there is a difference between the leaders, they must fix what is between them.”

Nevertheless, he insisted that a united Arab position is necessary even if the Palestinians differ. “This does not prevent the Arab world from taking clear, firm and strong positions, and the Arab world is required to stand as one unit.”

The prince described Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s statement about establishing a Palestinian state in Saudi Arabia as “disgusting arrogance”, and pointed out that the kingdom has already responded comprehensively to what was said.

February 18, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , | 1 Comment

With US Or Against US? America’s ultimatum to Arab leaders

By Robert Inlakesh – Al Mayadeen – February 18, 2025

For 15 months, the majority of the Arab and Muslim World’s leaders sat back as the first live-streamed genocide took place inside the land of Palestine. Praying for a return to the status quo that once supported their rules, they have now been faced with an ultimatum. Now, it’s time to pick a side.

While US President Donald Trump presented his idea of clearing out Gaza’s civilian population, taking control of the territory, and reconstructing it, he did so using the tone of someone believing such actions would be humanitarian in nature. In reality, what was being proposed was an invasion, mass murder, and ethnic cleansing.

To be clear, the likelihood of such an invasion occurring is slim, not least because it involves an enormous amount of planning to implement correctly and there is simply no evidence that any moves are being made in this direction. However, the threat of such a monstrosity alone has proven enough to instantly mobilise the Arab and Muslim nation’s leaderships in a way we have not witnessed in decades.

Suddenly, they woke up, after behaving as if the people of the Gaza Strip were not being mass murdered on an industrial scale, on the land of the Prophets, on the land of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Holy Sepulchre. Not even the invasion of Lebanon, the murder of some 3,000 people, nor the occupation of more Syrian lands, nor the threats of annexation in the West Bank, had mobilised these leaders. The screams of Gaza’s youths, the tears of Gaza’s mothers, the honor stripped from the tortured and raped, nothing registered.

But now, for the first time, we feel a pulse. Why? Because everyone’s head is on the chopping block. A glimpse was caught of what Donald Trump’s proposed future could cause and the likes of Jordanian King Abdullah II realised they are just another Arab in the eyes of the Israeli-US alliance, nothing more and nothing less. The only reason they remain is because they capitulate. This was Trump’s true message; it was not so much as a threat but a reminder.

Without delving too deep into the issue of an American invasion of Gaza, it would prove disastrous in so many ways that it seems unrealistic on the face of things. This is not least due to the enormous costs involved in a US occupation that could travel north of hundreds of billions in US taxpayer dollars, while the US soldier casualties would be high and place enormous domestic pressure on Trump. This would likely be America’s new Vietnam, as the star-spangled coffins would trigger outrage across the States.

A US invasion would also fail to achieve the objectives set out by Trump, because Palestinians will not leave willingly and this could easily turn into a situation where the US army picks up from where the Israelis left off; inflicting Genocide. If the ethnic cleansing would work partially, the destabilizing effects would be horrific.

As mentioned above, the majority of the leaders of Arab and Muslim nations may have stood aside and allowed the Gaza Genocide to unfold, yet their populations are now more motivated to defeat the Zionist occupiers than ever before.

Opening the ‘gates of hell’

When Hamas announced that it would postpone the weekly prisoner exchange arrangement until the Israelis allowed sufficient humanitarian aid to enter Gaza, in accordance with the ceasefire agreement, Donald Trump’s reaction was to threaten opening the “gates of hell”. Despite the threats that came from Trump and Netanyahu, the Israelis caved under pressure and were quickly set to allow the prisoner exchange to go ahead as planned.

Whether the US President is truly the mastermind behind his own rhetoric or not, which is quite frankly unlikely, reading between the lines has actually helped achieve four objectives:

  1.  The outrageous and illegal proposals that Trump has put forth have helped save the image of Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu in front of his extremist coalition.
  2. The rhetoric has therefore given the Zionist regime more wiggle room to reach the second phase of the agreement, as the more extreme elements in the regime now feel as if they will get to complete their ethnic cleansing, settlement, and occupation endeavors.
  3. Upon the initial conclusion of the ceasefire agreement, the momentum in terms of popular understanding of power dynamics – manufactured as a result of the ongoing media war – had Hamas painted as the victor and the Zionist regime a loser. Trump managed to suddenly shift the conversation and manipulate popular understandings of who is in control and “winning” the war.
  4. It has brought together the Arab and Muslim leaders who were previously inactive or distant from the post-war Gaza plan.

Donald Trump is actively speaking as if he is a more extreme Zionist fanatic than Netanyahu, but is yet to follow through on any of his threats. If he continues to speak in such a way, it is possible that the US will have to start following through on some of the President’s rhetoric, however, in order for Washington to maintain credibility.

The reality in the region is that the leaderships of West Asia are still trying to revert back to the status quo that existed pre-October 7, 2023. Now they are having to come to terms with the fact that this is no longer an option.

Although this may seem hyperbolic, the “Israel” that everyone knew from before is no more, it no longer exists. To those who have studied the issue closely, this was somewhat inevitable. Right now, we are living through a scenario that occurred prior to 1948, where the Zionist regime had to try and define itself. For some time, they managed through their military superiority to pacify those around them or overcome armed confrontations with brute force, all while developing their economy and pretending as if they were operating a European State in the Eastern Mediterranean.

This was never going to last, not least because the Palestinian to Jewish population inside the borders of historic Palestine had become roughly 50/50. On top of this, the fastest growing Jewish group has been the Haredim (Ultra-Orthodox), who do not serve in the army and don’t even believe in the worth of modern Nation States. Yet, all Israelis wanted the West Bank and to rule over occupied Jerusalem. With land concessions to the Palestinian Authority off the table, there were only ever going to be two options that the Zionists were going to have to choose from: Commit a genocide or mass ethnic cleansing; or both.

With the rise of right-wing nationalist religious fundamentalism, the secular-leaning right-wing system that modelled itself off of “Western Liberal Democracies” suddenly found itself under threat. Prior to October 7, 2023, this was a dominant theme in Israeli politics, where the religious ultra-nationalists were challenging the somewhat contradictory vision that was held onto by around half of the Israeli Jewish population.

What happened here is that the secular-leaning Israelis were trying to cling onto their delusion that they could simply live in a liberal Jewish supremacist Apartheid colony forever and expect a level of stability that they had long enjoyed due to the overwhelming power of their military. On the other hand, the extremist right-wing coalition of Benjamin Netanyahu that won power in late 2022 began to present an alternative vision in a way that hadn’t been done before.

Then came the wakeup call, Hamas launched Operation al-Aqsa Flood, and the Zionists were forced to wrestle with the fact that you cannot continue oppressing the Palestinian people and expect them to simply go away or give up on their struggle for national liberation. Because of the racist collective narcissism trained into the minds of the Zionist settlers, they reacted in the most emotional way possible. This is why Zionists in the West have also been working overtime to suppress any criticism; their racism is being challenged.

The knee-jerk reaction of the Zionists was to think “how dare these people challenge our supremacy”. For the first time in its history, the Zionist Entity had been militarily torn to pieces and proven incapable of overcoming an indigenous resistance force armed primarily with light weapons and self-produced armaments. US-Israeli supremacy in West Asia appeared to be crumbling, so the occupying entity and its imperialist backer responded in the only way they know how, mass murder.

What happened in Gaza was a frenzy of racist violence that was supposed to “teach a lesson” to the Arab and Muslim peoples that they will remain forever inferior. The genocide was calculated to send a message: resist our supremacy and you will die.

Two things are now happening:

  1. The “Israel” of the past died, now it is scrambling to redefine and recreate itself.
  2. The US is attempting to revive its efforts to transform the region through normalisation and the construction of new trade routes, but is going to do so using maximum force in order to put down any semblance of dissent.

So where does this all fit into Donald Trump’s crazy threats? It’s simple. The United States is projecting its intention to remodel the entire region. This message is clear, yet it won’t likely come through a US invasion of Gaza, rather from putting tremendous pressure on the nations of the region to capitulate and work as slaves of the US-Israeli alliance.

If Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia do not capitulate, their leaderships will be replaced by ones that do. In the event that either a US invasion of Gaza or mass ethnic cleansing occurred, Egypt would be destabilised and likely face a limited Israeli incursion into the Sinai, while the Jordanian government could be toppled, or at the very least the nation will be totally destabilised, then, in the backdrop, Saudi Arabia could also be in the cross-hairs.

Hundreds of thousands of Gazans being ethnically cleansed into the Kingdom of Jordan would inevitably birth a new Palestinian Resistance front also, which could happen regardless at this point.

The ethnic cleansing of Palestine between 1947-49 left a major scar on the Arab World as a whole, one that has never healed. What just occurred in Gaza is a much deeper wound that will inspire Resistance until the end of the Zionist regime. Although it is often not factored into the equation, the Israelis also murdered 3,000 people in Lebanon too, including the late Secretary General of Hezbollah, Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah.

A mistake often made by the imperialists and settler colonialists is assuming that because a population appears pacified today, it will also be tomorrow. In reality, revolutions and resistance movements take time, with mass mobilisation sometimes occurring due to what could be perceived as mere chance when it emerges.

Meanwhile, the US is now offering the same option to the Arab and Muslim World that was presented by George W. Bush Jr. upon his announcement of the so-called “War on Terror”: “You are either with us or with the terrorists!”

It may be presented in a different way, but the truth is that there is no way to play the role of holding a middle-ground position. Now is the time, submit to being a slave, even losing your territory, pride and stability; or you decide to resist. The problem for a nation like Jordan is that if you resist, you may also be overthrown.

Donald Trump’s comments for now were designed to force the Arab and Muslim leaders to come to a joint consensus and present an alternative plan to his insane proposal, which appears to be working. Interestingly enough, it appears as if this is actually helping to allow for the Gaza ceasefire to reach phase 2.

Unfortunately for these leaders, the Palestinian issue they now face is not over with Gaza. In the event of the Israelis annexing the West Bank, this could eventually trigger the downfall of the Palestinian Authority and/or initiate a major uprising. In such a scenario, the Israeli military could then seek to ethnically cleanse large swathes of the West Bank too. The destination of these displaced refugees could also end up being Jordan.

Even former US Secretary of State Antony Blinken warned, in his second last address about foreign policy, of the collapse of the normalization agreements between the Zionist regime and its neighbours in Amman and Cairo. Speaking at a conference organised by the Atlantic Council, Blinken used the first part of his speech to espouse pure Israeli propaganda, before speaking candidly on a few issues towards the latter half of his address. He stressed that without a so-called “Two-State solution”, the normalisation deals with Egypt and Jordan could collapse.

If a resistance front opens inside Jordan, it could be the beginning of the end for the Zionist regime. Jordan shares the largest, mostly undefended, land border with occupied Palestine. Once a major resistance movement is rooted there, the war would expand in such a way that no one is capable of predicting. It is also clear that the Zionists seek to continue their aggression against Iran, Yemen, and to degrade Hezbollah at all costs in Lebanon.

All of what is mentioned above will not likely just unfold overnight, everything takes time. Yet there is no question that the war is far from over.

February 18, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Zelensky ‘refuses to recognize’ Russia-US talks

RT | February 17, 2025

Kiev will not recognize any agreements that could be reached between Russia and the US during talks in Saudi Arabia, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky told journalists on Monday. The Ukrainian government will only acknowledge negotiations that involve Kiev’s representatives, he added.

Russia and the US have begun preparations for a meeting between presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump that is scheduled to take place in Saudi Arabia. On Monday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov announced that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Yury Ushakov, Putin’s top foreign policy aide, would travel to Riyadh to meet a US delegation and lay the groundwork for a presidential meeting.

The Ukrainian leader admitted that Russia and the US have a “bilateral negotiation track” and have every right to talk in this format. Peskov earlier told journalists that talks between Trump and Putin would also be devoted to the restoration of bilateral relations.

Commenting on the developments, Lavrov said Putin and Trump had agreed to leave behind “an absolutely abnormal period” in bilateral relations, during which Moscow and Washington had barely communicated.

Zelensky also plans to visit Saudi Arabia on Wednesday. He denied that his trip is in any way linked to the upcoming Trump-Putin talks or the meeting of US and Russian delegations, but admitted that he would discuss the issue with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

February 17, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Neocon think tanks persuading Trump to stomp down on West Asia

By Hassan Fakih | Al Mayadeen | February 13, 2025

Think thanks are making attempts to persuade the reinstated Donald Trump administration to take an iron fist approach to West Asia in light of news that US government bodies are making moves to begin pulling troops out.

The Vandenberg Coalition, an American neoconservative think tank headed by Elliott Abrams, a US politician who held foreign policy positions in the offices of presidents Ronald Reagan, George Bush, and Trump, published a report with their recommendations on how the 47th president should handle the region.

Mainly, the report seeks to have Trump’s administration ensure that the region remains in line with American interests by seeing to it that olive branches are not to be extended to nations like Iran, China, or Russia.

“To protect U.S. security and ensure America has the resources to deter and confront adversaries outside of the Middle East, we must implement new policies toward the region,” the report reads.

The think tank lays out multiple methods as to how the reinstated White House Administration should act towards all of the nations of West Asia, whether they house forces hostile to the US or are Gulf allies.

The report sees Iran as the major roadblock to expanding US power over the region. It calls the Islamic Republic “the greatest threat to American interests in the Middle East and the cause of most of the region’s security problems.”

The coalition calls on Trump to reinstate “maximum pressure” on the Islamic Republic in order to deter it from gaining influence.

On the economic front, it demands that Washington fully enforce existing US oil sanctions so as to prevent economic growth via business between Iran and China.

Hostile words alluding to military action against Iran are littered throughout the report. It notes that the US should make Iran “pay” in the case that allied Resistance Axis forces carry out operations against an invading American force and considers it an attack carried out by Tehran.

“Any attack on U.S. forces or military assets by proxies must be considered an attack by Iran so as to encourage deterrence,” the report read. “The proxy attacks will not cease until Iran is made to pay a serious price for them. That should be US policy, communicated unequivocally to Iran.”

The Washington Institute, another US neoconservative think tank, also states in a report that the US should increase pressure on Iran. Its author, Michael Singh, outrightly declares that Washington should look towards a military solution as a means to combat Tehran’s nuclear enrichment project in place of complex diplomacy.

“One of the difficulties with diplomatic resolutions to nuclear crises is that they require the sort of domestic buy-in that was not obtained in America for either the Agreed Framework or JCPOA,” Singh wrote. “Given Iran’s vulnerability and the advanced state of its nuclear program, the Trump administration would be remiss not to consider, and indeed prepare seriously for, military strikes against Iran’s nuclear program.”

In regards to other West Asian countries, the Vandenberg coalition says that the US should keep its presence and sphere of influence in Iraq and Syria to prevent Iranian-backed groups from gaining power, as well as to try and cut off growing ties with China and Russia.

It supports the Israeli annexation of Syria’s land and attacks on military sites, adding that Washington should back such military moves by Tel Aviv.

“America must strongly support Israel’s efforts to identify, secure, and destroy the former Assad regime’s military infrastructure and chemical weapons stockpiles,” the Vandenberg Coalition’s report reads. “The United States must continue to allow Israel to obliterate these sites and equipment lest militant groups seize them.”

As for Lebanon, the coalition says that the Lebanese Republic should be treated “as a state captured by Iran” so far as Hezbollah exists.

It claims that “Israel” is the only capable body that can “secure the Israeli-Lebanese border,” and condemns the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) by saying that they and other international organizations are too outspoken about “Israeli defensive actions.”

It wrongly justifies “Israel’s” occupation of Lebanese territory, done so under the guise of border protection, by pinning the blame on Hezbollah for breaking the 27 November ceasefire agreement.

The reality is that during the 60-day ceasefire, Israeli violations were north of 1,300; this includes the imposed ceasefire as well as breaches of UN Resolution 1701, with “Israel” targeting areas north of the Litani River. The counter continues to climb as the Israeli army is still bombing Lebanese territory during this extended ceasefire.

For its part, Hezbollah launched one “initial warning defensive response” against the Israeli army’s Ruwaysat al-Alam site after multiple violations by the Israeli forces.

The claim that “Israel” should stay in Lebanon is also a view held by the Hudson Institute’s Rebeccah Heinrichs, who claims Hezbollah’s presence in the south, generalizing the entire region and not just south of the Litani, is justification for “Israel’s” occupation of Lebanese territory.

When it comes to recommended actions against Palestine, the Vandenberg Coalition says that Gazan sovereignty should be replaced with overseers from volunteer Arab States vetted by the Americans, noting that “American policymakers should prohibit the participation of any entities with longstanding support for Hamas.”

The main goal for US foreign policy regarding Palestine, according to the think tank, is to “prioritize the security of Israel and our Arab partners,” Palestinian rights will only go so far as the Americans will allow them.

“Israel’s” Institute for National Security Studies’ Chuck Freilich gave the opinion that Trump should help with the idea of creating a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation instead of looking at a viable means for Palestinians to stay on their lands.

Trump seems to have taken this view, as he said during a February 5 presser with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that neighboring nations should absorb the Palestinians living in Gaza.

“Being in [Gaza’s] presence just has not been good, and it should not go through a process of rebuilding and occupation by the same people that have really stood there and fought for it and lived there and died there,” Trump said. “Instead, we should go to other countries of interest with humanitarian hearts, […] and build various domains that will ultimately be occupied by the million Palestinians living in Gaza, ending the death and destruction and frankly bad luck.”

The US president failed to mention “Israel” as being the reason for the death and destruction of the besieged enclave, instead, referring to them as “wonderful people.”

Normalization between “Israel” and Arab states is still also a significant goal of these recommendations. Both the American Vandenberg Coalition and the Israeli think tank, The Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, call for an expansion of the Abraham Accords under the guise of creating a strong network to combat Iran.

The coalition also declares that the US should remove “unwarranted” restrictions to arms sales with “Israel”, noting, “Arming Israel in a timely manner shows Iran and its proxies that the United States stands shoulder to shoulder with its ally.”

Even Gulf states that have taken positions very kind to America and “Israel” historically are being targeted as nations in need of American discipline.

Growing ties with China are listed as a reason for cracking down on Saudi Arabian, Qatari, and UAE ambitions, as the three nations have been in talks with Beijing on military matters, a subject which Washington sees as a notable threat.

Censorship of Saudi Arabian speech is also a part of the recommended acts, noting, “Saudi Arabia should be asked to stop rhetoric about Iran or Israel that creates any confusion about the Kingdom’s allegiances,” highlighting statements made at the 2024 Arab League in which Riyadh called on Washington to respect Iran’s sovereignty.

The Vandenberg coalition called on Trump to revoke Qatar’s Major Non-NATO Ally (MNNA) status due to its “overt support of Hamas and other Iranian-affiliated terrorist groups.”

In Yemen, there are calls for the Americans to conduct operations in the Red Sea to ensure the safe travel of ships, and “destroy Iranian ships,” as a means of fulfilling this goal.

It also calls for the US to discipline UN bodies operating in West Asia, the Vandenberg Coalition outrightly declares that Washington should “immediately cease all funding to UNRWA” and authorize UNIFIL to be able to independently search private property in South Lebanon to find weapon caches.

If UNIFIL doesn’t comply, the recommended act is for the US to halt all voluntary funding to the group.

The coalition states that the US should also “vet potential appointments of senior UN officials” in order to “prevent conflicts of interest.”

What these think tanks desire from Trump’s administration is for it to adopt a Henry Kissinger-esque view of America first policy towards West Asia, meaning that the US and its Israeli ally should always come before the natives of the land by any means necessary.

Trump’s vision of pulling out troops from the region is undesirable to these academic hawks because they view that without the policing of America, the region’s nations will turn their back to Washington and benefit adversaries like China or Iran.

Neoconservatives want a diplomatic strategy from Trump that sees the sovereignty of West Asian nations taking a back seat if they do not comply with America’s vision of the region.

We can expect that Trump will eventually comply in one way or another with the demands brought forward, as policymakers want to ensure that the US stays on the throne it commandeered following the collapse of the USSR by making Trump a Machiavellian prince.

February 13, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Saudi–Israeli normalization ‘delusion’

By Stasa Salacanin | The Cradle | February 5, 2025

On 4 February, when asked if the Saudis demand the establishment of a Palestinian state as a condition for recognizing Israel, US President Donald Trump, sitting alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office, swiftly replied: “No, they’re not.”

The Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs was also quick to respond, stating that its stance on the establishment of a Palestinian state remains “firm and unwavering,” insisting that Riyadh would make no deal with Tel Aviv otherwise:

“His Royal Highness (Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman – or MbS) emphasized that Saudi Arabia will continue its relentless efforts to establish an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, and will not establish diplomatic relations with Israel without that.”

The statement further stressed that the Saudi position on this is “non-negotiable and not subject to compromises.”

Despite the fervent optimism of Trump’s newly appointed foreign policy team, the much-touted Saudi–Israeli normalization agreement remains an elusive goal, just as it was for his predecessor, Joe Biden. While Washington insists that such a deal is potentially around the corner, a more sober analysis suggests the pathway to a deal remains rife with obstacles. 

Spanner in the works 

The Abraham Accords, brokered under Trump’s first term, were hailed in Washington as a historic breakthrough in West Asian diplomacy, bringing the occupation state into official relations with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan. Yet, the glaring absence of Saudi Arabia – the most influential Arab state – was the missing piece that the US and Israel craved most.

Biden’s tenure, rather than advancing Trump’s initiative, has arguably undermined it. His administration’s unyielding support for Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza and its brutal military campaign in Lebanon has alienated many Arab and Muslim states, further diminishing the likelihood of new normalization deals. 

Meanwhile, China has capitalized on Washington’s waning credibility, scoring a major diplomatic coup in 2023 by brokering a historic rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran – a relationship that, against the odds, remains intact.

Despite the changed reality on the ground, this US administration still believes that the deal between the world’s largest oil exporter and Israel is still attainable on its terms. Mike Waltz, the Trump administration’s new national security advisor, has stated that reaching a peace agreement between Riyadh and Tel Aviv is a “huge priority” for the new administration. 

Saudis caution: A deal on whose terms? 

While the Saudis drew a clear line and maintained it for a very long time by linking normalization with Israel to the establishment of a Palestinian state, neither Israel nor the new Trump administration have shown any willingness to accommodate Saudi intentions. 

Many of Trump’s supporters and major donors, such as Miriam Adelson, as well as the Israeli government, not only oppose any form of a Palestinian state, but are openly talking about annexing the entire occupied West Bank. Therefore, it is still unclear how Trump intends to reconcile two vastly opposing views and expectations and expand the Abraham Accords.

According to Giuseppe Dentice, an analyst at the Mediterranean Observatory (OSMED) of the Italian Institute for Political Studies “San Pio V,” Trump will likely fall back on his tried-and-tested approach – leaning on the Abraham Accords as a framework while resurrecting elements of his so-called “deal of the century.”

Dentice explains to The Cradle that the ultimate goal of such efforts is to sideline the Palestinian cause entirely, pushing it to the periphery of both regional and global agendas.

Moreover, many believe that the Trump administration will launch a crusade against the “global intifada” and those who dare to criticize Israel or insist on prosecuting Israeli war crimes.

This approach, Dentice contends, essentially forces a single option in the negotiations: Take it or leave it. 

“Trump’s aggressive approach to Riyadh could backfire for the US and its interests in the Middle East (West Asia), especially if the Al-Saud kingdom continues to reject these terms, risking closer alignment with the agendas of other international actors (such as China or Russia, if only in strategic or instrumental terms).”

Saudi investments in the US: Buying leverage or time?

Some observers speculate that Saudi Arabia’s recent announcement that Riyadh plans to invest $600 billion in the US over the next four years could be understood as a certain early bribe to Trump in return for easing his zealous pressure regarding the Saudi–Israeli normalization agreement and other geopolitical issues as well. 

While it is true that convincing the Saudis will be a tough nut to crack, Dentice, for one, does not believe that even such a significant economic commitment could distract or dissuade the new government from its goals. 

He believes that beyond the issue of normalization agreements with Israel, Riyadh wants to strengthen its understanding and cooperation with Washington, especially with this government. Nonetheless, it remains true that key figures associated with this administration, such as Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, could undermine Saudi processes and intentions through their own business relationships.

For Dr Paul Rogers, Emeritus Professor of Peace Studies in the Department of Peace Studies and International Relations at the College of Bradford, President Trump is far too unpredictable for anyone to conclude on the chances of a deal with Saudi Arabia, but his recent comments on the option of expelling the Palestinians from Gaza indicate a very close relationship with far-right Israeli political factions. 

Dr Rogers tells The Cradle that he suspects “that the Saudis will stay away from any kind of agreement, no matter what offer they make.”

Arab public opinion: A hard sell

Beyond geopolitical calculations, public sentiment in the Arab world remains a major obstacle to normalization. The rejection of a Palestinian state, coupled with an aggressive push for Saudi–Israeli ties, is widely viewed as an attempt to erase the Palestinian cause altogether – an agenda that lacks legitimacy among Arab and Muslim populations.

Furthermore, many observers believe that Israel’s war crimes and the genocide in Gaza have made it very difficult and uncomfortable for Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) to continue peace talks. 

But West Asian views against normalization precede even the brutal 15-month war. According to the Arab Opinion Index from 2022, for example, an average of 84 percent of citizens in 14 countries rejected diplomatic relations with Israel. These figures show that the Arab enforcers of the Abraham Accords ultimately failed to reach or sway wider Arab public opinion. 

The war in Gaza has only cemented anti-Israeli views in Saudi Arabia, and an unconditional normalization agreement with Israel would only increase the risk of destabilizing the crown prince’s image in the kingdom and abroad. It would also humiliate MbS, who has publicly condemned Israel’s actions in Gaza, recognizing them as a “genocide.”

A mirage in the desert 

Palestinian statehood is by no means a simple issue, even if an Israeli government supported the initiative, which the current one resolutely rejects. 

Palestinian national aspirations can lose momentum due to internal divisions, the lack of an organized leadership capable of addressing current and future challenges, and the faltering support of traditional Arab sponsors – notably the loss of Syria following the ousting of former president Bashar al-Assad by Al-Qaeda-linked extremists – Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) – who now form the new government. 

For all the speculation surrounding a Saudi–Israeli deal, the reality is that no proposal for Palestinian statehood has made meaningful progress in the past three decades. As a result, ad hoc unilateral initiatives have increasingly taken center stage, often yielding disastrous consequences. 

In this context, the push for a Saudi–Israeli accord seems less like a diplomatic breakthrough and more like a mirage conjured by Washington and Tel Aviv. 

Dentice believes that in such a context, and with the prospect of a possible Saudi–Israeli agreement, the Palestinians will have even less political relevance in the future. This will give space for radical and armed groups to gain ground and further exacerbate tensions on the Palestinian and Arab streets.

Trump’s aggressive tactics may succeed in strong-arming some leaders, but they are unlikely to change deep-seated regional attitudes. If anything, the pursuit of an agreement without major concessions for Palestinians could inflame tensions further, pushing the region into even greater instability. 

For now, the notion of a Saudi–Israeli deal may be more fantasy than fact – an illusion sustained by wishful thinking rather than political reality.

February 5, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump’s call for Palestinians’ relocation will threaten regional peace, Arab nations warn

Press TV – February 1, 2025

Major Arab nations have expressed their opposition to US President Donald Trump’s proposal to relocate Palestinians from Gaza and the occupied West Bank to neighboring Egypt and Jordan under any circumstances.

In a joint statement following a meeting in Cairo, the foreign ministers and officials from Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, the Palestinian Authority and the Arab League presented a unified stance against the US president.

They warned that such a move would threaten regional stability, risk spreading the conflict, and undermine prospects for peace and coexistence among its peoples.

“We affirm our rejection of [any attempts] to compromise Palestinians’ unalienable rights, whether through settlement activities, or evictions or annex of land or through vacating the land from its owners… in any form or under any circumstances or justifications,” the statement read.

The top diplomats emphasized that they were looking forward to working with Trump’s administration to achieve a just and comprehensive peace in the region, it noted.

Trump said last week that he had spoken with the king of Jordan about potentially building housing and moving more than 1 million Palestinians from Gaza to neighboring countries.

The US president added that he would like both Jordan and Egypt — which borders the battered enclave — to house the Palestinians displaced by 15 months of the Israeli regime’s genocidal war.

However, critics said that Trump’s suggestion would be tantamount to ethnic cleansing.

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi on Wednesday opposed the idea that his country would facilitate the displacement of Gazans and said Egyptians would take to the streets to express their disapproval.

Trump on Thursday insisted that Egypt and Jordan would accept displaced Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, despite the two nations having dismissed his plan to relocate Gazans there.

Jordan is already home to several million Palestinians, while tens of thousands live in Egypt. The foreign ministries of Egypt and Jordan have both rejected Trump’s suggestion in recent days.

February 1, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

New neocon manifesto: Keep US troops in the Middle East forever

The ‘Vandenberg Coalition’ wants Trump to prioritize Israel and maintain Iran as enemy number one

By Jim Lobe | Responsible Statecraft | January 28, 2025

A leading neoconservative for most of the last half century has released a comprehensive series of recommendations on Middle East policy for the new Trump administration nearly all of which are ideas that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud Party would happily embrace.

The 16-page report, entitled “Deals of the Century: Solving the Middle East,” is published by the Vandenberg Coalition, which was founded and chaired by Elliott Abrams, who has held senior foreign policy posts in every Republican administration since Ronald Reagan (except George H.W. Bush’s), including as Special Envoy for Venezuela and later for Iran during Trump’s first term.

Created shortly after former President Biden took office, the Coalition has acted as a latter-day Project for the New American Century, a letterhead organization that acted as a hub and platform for pro-Likud neoconservatives, aggressive nationalists, and the Christian Right in mobilizing public support for the “Global War on Terror,” the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and the move away from a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict, particularly under the George W. Bush administration in which Abrams served as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Near East and North African Affairs, surviving a number of purges of leading neoconservatives in that administration after the Iraq occupation went south.

The new report predictably calls for the new administration to “use all elements of [U.S.] national power” to prevent Iran, “the greatest threat to American interests in the Middle East and the cause of most of the region’s security problems,” from acquiring a nuclear bomb. It describes Israel as “our cornerstone ally in the region” to which Washington should provide all “the weapons it needs [to] help it win the war and prevent wider escalation.”

The recommendations also call for Washington to maintain its military presence in both Iraq and Syria, to suspend all aid to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) “until it demonstrates a willingness to oppose Hezbollah, accelerate U.S. arms sales and broaden intelligence cooperation with the UAE,” and enhance military and security cooperation with Saudi Arabia provided it “pivot[s] away from China and Russia.”

It also calls for the Saudis to “increase [its] foreign direct investment commitments in U.S industries,” and “cease public statements” critical of Israel and supportive of Iran. “…[En]hanced cooperation with Saudi Arabia,” the report insists, “should be contingent on their being unequivocal about what side they are on.”

Washington should also designate Iraq’s Iran-backed Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) and related militias as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) and stop engaging with them politically, and work with Yemen’s Saudi-backed Presidential Leadership Council against the Houthis whose designation as an FTO by the Trump administration last week was applauded in the report. On the new government in Syria, the report says that ongoing sanctions, which helped cripple the country’s economy, should not be lifted “unless the new government proves to be a responsible actor,” although it does not describe what that would mean in any detail.

Aside from Iran’s status as Enemy Number One in the report, special scorn was reserved for Qatar, which has played a central role in mediating between Israel and Hamas regarding the fate of Israelis held in Gaza and Palestinians detained in Israel. Similar contempt is reserved for the Palestinian Authority headed by Mahmoud Abbas, for various U.N. agencies, notably “the nefariousness [sic] UNRWA,” which has worked with Palestinian refugees and their families across the Middle East for more than 70 years, and for senior UN human rights officials who deal with the Israel-Palestine conflict in particular. Washington “should immediately cease all funding to UNRWA” and also to UNIFIL, the U.N. peacekeeping force deployed along the Lebanese-Israeli border unless its troops are given the authority and demonstrate the will to confront Hezbollah forces in the area.

As for Qatar, it “has worked to undermine U.S. interests by cooperating with Iran and sheltering terrorist groups like Hamas,” according to the report. “With much better friends like the Saudis, Washington no longer needs to tolerate destabilizing Qatari behavior,” and thus should move U.S. Central Command’s forward headquarters out of Qatar’s Al Udeid Air Base and revoke Doha’s “Major Non-Nato Ally status unless its behavior changes.” That status should be conferred on the UAE instead, according to the report, provided that it “reduce [its] reliance on Russian and Chinese vendors” of military equipment.

The report, which describes the politics of the Biden administration in the Middle East on more than one occasion as “appeasement,” mainly of Iran, reminds the reader that Trump declared only last month that “the Middle East is going to get solved,” a phrase that undoubtedly inspired the report’s title: “Deals of the Century: Solving the Middle East.” While the report says it was the product of a “working group of Middle East experts,” no names other than Abrams, Gabriel Scheinemann, and Daniel Samet, the latter two neoconservatives from the Alexander Hamilton Society, appear in the report. Normally, reports by letterhead organizations list their contributors.

In presenting what it calls “key American interests in the Middle East,” the report puts “preventing Iran from developing n nuclear weapon at the top of the list” but also expresses alarm at Chinese Communist Party inroads in the region, noting that CCP is Washington’s “key global adversary.” In an echo of the Global War on Terror, Washington, it says, should also “deny jihadi terrorists a safe haven,” a reference in part to the necessity, its authors feel, to retain U.S. forces in Syria and Iraq.

But “America’s alliance with Israel is central to U.S. interests in the region, given that it promotes American values within the Middle East and provides the first line of defense against Iranian aggression.” Moreover, Washington should try to expand the Abraham Accords, and “the Palestinian question must not impede Israel’s normalization with Arab and Muslim countries or otherwise compromise its security.” Washington must “ensure Israel has the tools to defend itself.”

Yet another interest is to expand access of our allies and partners in Europe and elsewhere to the region’s energy supplies, according to the report.

To increase pressure on Iran, Washington should not only reinstate a Trump’s “ maximum pressure” campaign, but include within it convincing Britain, France, and Germany to “snapback sanctions” against Tehran at the U.N. Remarkably perhaps, it offers the possibility of a new nuclear agreement that would “forbid Iranian uranium enrichment beyond the small amounts need for a civilian nuclear program,” something that the 2015 JCPOA, which Trump withdrew from in 2018, actually accomplished before Trump, under the influence of neoconservatives like Abrams, withdrew from in 2018. If a deal can be reached, according to the report, it should be dealt with as a treaty; that is, made subject to a 2/3 majority vote in the Senate.

With respect to the Palestinians in the wake of the last 15 months of war in Gaza, “American policy toward the Palestinians must prioritize the security of Israel and our Arab partners.” Washington “must impose standards for good governance. The U.S. should “allow an Arab trusteeship to control Gaza after the war.” In words that must warm Netanyahu’s heart, the report notes “the weakness and incompetence of the PA mean it cannot govern Gaza,” and “Israel will need to maintain security control to prevent Hamas from rebuilding but should not and does not wish to govern Gaza itself.”

Abrams has a long history with both Palestine and Gaza, notably during the Bush administration. After Hamas was an unexpected election victor over its rival Fatah in the 2006 elections – which were hailed as the freest and fairest elections in the Arab world at the time – Abrams and other senior officials encouraged the mounting of an armed coup against Hamas led by Fatah’s local leader and Abrams’ favorite Muhammad Dahlan which, in turn, sparked a brief civil war in the enclave in which Hamas emerged victorious and stronger than ever. After the fiasco, Dahlan moved to the UAE, and there has been much speculation that he stands to play a key role on behalf of the Emirates if the kind of “Arab trusteeship” alongside Israeli security forces is established as recommended by the report.

Perhaps the most novel recommendation is based on the report’s contention that Iran’s non-state allies in the region typically use non-combatants as human shields — an apparent endorsement of Israel’s defense of its bombing of apartment houses, schools and other buildings in Gaza and Lebanon during the past 15 months that have killed well over 46,000 people, most of them women and children. “The United States should propose a Security Council resolution that states the use of human shields is a crime under international law and that those who use human shields are responsible for the civilian deaths in which they result,” the report advised.

Jim Lobe is a Contributing Editor of Responsible Statecraft. He formerly served as chief of the Washington bureau of Inter Press Service from 1980 to 1985 and again from 1989 to 2015.

January 30, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Kushner’s Saudi-backed fund doubles stake in firm financing illegal West Bank settlements

The Cradle | January 17, 2025

Affinity Partners, the Saudi-funded hedge firm of President-elect Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, received approval from Israeli regulators to double its stake in Phoenix Financial Ltd., which funds the construction of illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian West Bank.

Bloomberg reported on 17 January that Affinity could buy an additional 4.95 percent stake in the financial services firm at 37.5 shekels ($10.3) a share.

Phoenix’s share price has surged over 50 percent to around 58.5 shekels apiece since mid-July, when Kushner’s Miami-based firm announced the $128.5 million deal to buy its initial 4.95 percent stake, Bloomberg noted.

Kushner has held up the deal as a sign of his company’s confidence in the war-racked country’s economy.

“Investing in Phoenix in July 2024 was a decision rooted in my belief in Israel’s resiliency and the fundamentals of Phoenix’s business,” Kushner said in a statement to Bloomberg.” Six months later, the increased value of our shares, reaffirms my conviction – both in Israel’s strength and the growing promise of Phoenix.”

Kushner founded Affinity, which has other investments in Israel, including a stake in S Shlomo Holdings’s car and credit division, with $2 billion in Saudi funding after leaving his role as senior White House advisor during the first Trump administration.

Kushner established a close relationship with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) while serving in the White House.

Kushner is the son-in-law of US President-elect Donald Trump and served as his senior White House advisor in his first term. Kushner played a pivotal role in the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and some Arab nations in 2020. Trump is now expected to try bringing Saudi Arabia into the accords.

In addition to receiving backing from Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF), Kushner raised an additional $1.5 billion from the Qatar Investment Authority and Abu Dhabi-based Lunate, bringing its assets under management to $4.6 billion.

Pheonix Financial has financed and insured construction projects throughout Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and the Syrian Golan Heights.

According to the NGO watchdog Who Profits, Phoenix owns an 80 percent stake in a large shopping mall in an illegal East Jerusalem settlement and stakes in various companies operating throughout other settlements.

Phoenix has also helped finance wind and solar projects in illegal Israeli settlements and provided financial services to the local councils of settlements, including the Beitar Illit and Oranit settlements in the West Bank.

Kushner’s investment in Pheonix comes just days before Trump is set to take office once again.

Israeli settler leaders celebrated Trump’s election and anticipate permitting them to annex the West Bank and greatly expand building settlements for Israeli Jews there.

The Israeli government is also seeking to expand the building of Jewish settlements in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights.

In December, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government announced it would invest more than $11 million to “encourage demographic growth” in the Golan, which Israeli forces first occupied in 1967.

Israel moved to expand its illegal occupation of Syrian territory in the Golan immediately after the Syrian government, led by president Bashar al-Assad, was toppled by militants from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the former Al-Qaeda affiliate, on 8 December.

January 17, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »