Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

What’s Behind Saudi Crown Prince’s Demand to Israel Not to Attack Iran?

MBS Trumps Adelson

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 13.11.2024

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, also referred to as MBS, warned Israel against attacking Iran at an Arab League and Organization of Islamic Cooperation Summit in Riyadh on November 11.

The crown prince specifically said that the international community should make Israel “respect the sovereignty of the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran and not to violate its lands.”

“This is certainly an interesting development,” Mehran Kamrava, professor of government at Georgetown University Qatar, tells Sputnik.

Kamrava outlined possible reasons behind the crown prince’s move:

  • Trump’s decision to appoint anti-Iran politicians to key foreign policy positions could embolden Israel to step up attacks against Iran and ignite a larger regional war. “What we’re seeing is an attempt by Saudi Arabia to signal its displeasure and disapproval of a potential expansion of the conflict,” the pundit says.
  • MBS laid the groundwork for de-escalation, giving Iran the opportunity “to gracefully back out” of the conflict with Israel.
  • “Iran has now renewed popularity in the proverbial Arab street because of it being the only regular army to have attacked Israel after 1973,” the professor continued, suggesting that MBS’s words were also a show of support to Tehran.
  • “This is part of a broader regional sign that is being sent to Washington” with regard to its overall Middle Eastern policy, according to Kamrava.

Meanwhile, in October, Saudi Arabia and Iran held joint naval drills in the Sea of Oman. MBS and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian spoke on the phone a day before the summit. On November 10, Saudi Arabia’s top military official visited Tehran to meet with his Iranian counterparts.

These signals are “important” and “significant”, the pundit emphasizes.

November 13, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , , | 1 Comment

Saudi crown prince demands Israel not attack Iran

MEMO | November 12, 2024

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman yesterday demanded Israel respect Iran’s sovereignty and refrain from attacking its territory, highlighting the friendly relations between Riyadh and Tehran.

Speaking at the Joint Arab-Islamic Extraordinary Summit in Riyadh, Bin Salman stressed that the international community must force Israel to “respect the sovereignty of the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran and not attack its territory.”

Saudi Arabia and Iran have maintained high-level contact as part of efforts to contain Israel’s war on Gaza.

That diplomatic outreach led to the first phone call between Bin Salman and then-Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, just five days after the war broke out.

In October, Saudi Arabia announced it had conducted naval exercises with Iran and other countries in the Gulf of Oman.

Bin Salman and current Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian spoke on the phone on Sunday ahead of yesterday’s summit.

November 12, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Trump to pull US out of Paris climate agreement – NYT

RT | November 10, 2024

US President-elect Donald Trump is seeking to overhaul energy and environmental policies, aiming to dismantle the so-called “woke” agenda and eliminate programs that impede the country’s economic growth, The New York Times has reported, citing sources familiar with the matter.

Trump’s energy and environment transition team has already prepared “a slate of executive orders and presidential proclamations on climate and energy,” according to the article published on Friday. The measures reportedly include the US abandoning the Paris Agreement – an international treaty on climate change adopted in 2015.

Reshaping the boundaries of the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments in southern Utah to open up land for drilling and mining is also on the agenda. The protected area was expanded by US President Joe Biden in 2021.

Donald Trump’s team is also reportedly set to scrap Biden’s so-called environmental justice initiatives, which favor clean-energy development and pollution reduction. This involves ending the suspension of permits for new natural-gas export terminals, among other things.

The publication noted that Trump is planning to appoint an “energy czar” to replace Biden’s “climate tsar.” The role will be dedicated to streamlining policies related to oil, gas, and coal production in order to boost supply rather than limit demand. North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, who previously helped open millions of acres of public land for fracking, and former energy secretary Dan Brouillette, are being considered for the post.

Further plans include relocating federal agencies including the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) out of Washington. Previously Trump argued that such federal departments and agencies should be moved to “places filled with patriots who love America.”

“This is how I will shatter the deep state,” he said in a campaign video last year.

While EPA employees disagree with the move, Trump’s allies say that the transition model is based on Biden administration policies in reverse, when “hundreds of staff” were hired on day one to implement climate-change initiatives.

“They have the model of what Biden did the first day, the first week, the first month,” said Myron Ebell, who led the transition of the EPA under Trump’s first term. “We’ll look at what Biden did and put a ‘not’ in front of it.”

At the United Nations climate talks last year, the US and other nations agreed on transitioning away from oil, gas, and coal to combat climate change. The initial calls for a complete “phaseout” of fossil fuels were rejected by major oil exporters such as Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

One of Trump’s election promises was to end renewable energy projects, calling them a “hoax” and arguing that affordable energy is critical to the US economy.

November 10, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | Leave a comment

Iran-Arab Rapprochement Gains Ground

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – November 6 2024

Israel’s escalation in Gaza and Lebanon has severely hindered U.S. efforts to expand the Abraham Accords by bringing Saudi Arabia into the fold.

When Israel began its brutal war on Gaza following Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, the Arab-Israel peace deal became nearly impossible. Washington, however, did not abandon its efforts to pursue expanding the Abraham Accords by getting Saudi Arabia to sign them. However, Washington’s inability to control Netanyahu’s war has undermined its efforts to convince Saudi Arabia.

Simultaneously, this overall failure has also negatively affected Washington’s ability to drive a wedge between Iran and Saudi Arabia to undo the Beijing-mediated normalisation between the two erstwhile rivals in the Middle East. Instead, this normalisation seems to have found new grounds in the wake of Israeli expansion of the war into Lebanon against Hezbollah. Riyadh, as reports show, categorically denied Israel the leeway it needed to execute its plans to attack Iran’s oil and nuclear facilities. How Saudi Arabia reached this conclusion is an outcome of, among other things, Iran’s active diplomacy.

Iran-Arab Normalisation

According to a recent report in Reuters, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE explicitly gave Washington an ‘enough is enough’ call when they asked it to stop Israel from attacking Iran’s oil and nuclear facilities. Simultaneously, all three of these states have also closed their space for Israeli jets and missiles to cross to attack Iran. As the report mentions,  “the moves by the Gulf states come after a diplomatic push by non-Arab Shi’ite Iran to persuade its Sunni Gulf neighbours to use their influence with Washington amid rising concerns Israel could target Iran’s oil production facilities”.

The fact that Arab states conveyed Iran’s message – and explicitly took Tehran’s side – reveals many things. But, most importantly, it shows their ability to transcend the US-imposed narrow confines of ‘sectarian rivalry’ to follow a radically alternative line of foreign policy – one that prioritises long-term regional goals. In other words, while Arab states may have failed to bring Israel’s war on Gaza to an end, they have certainly succeeded in denying Israel an easy way to impose another war in the region – a war, if it breaks out, will affect Arab states more than the Gaza war.

It has turned out to be a source of confidence for Iran to confront Israel. The Foreign Minister of Iran recently noted Iran’s readiness to respond to any hostile actions by the Zionist regime, stating, “We are not seeking to escalate tensions or war.”

No Anti-Iran Alliance

In terms of regional politics, the Arab states’ refusal to become a party to tensions between Iran and Israel means that Washington – and Israel – will not be able to establish an anti-Iran regional alliance, which was one of the goals of The Abraham Accords. Thanks to the proactive diplomacy of China and Russia, Arab states no longer share with Washington and Israel the anti-Iran enthusiasm that, until recently, defined the very core of Arab geopolitics in the region. This is one of the reasons why the US and Saudi Arabia have not been able to finalize their otherwise ‘history making agreement’.

For one thing, if Saudi Arabia has openly declared its intentions to not engage Iran in a military fight, Washington sees no potential benefit arising out of this pact vis-à-vis the security of Israel and its ability to manipulate regional politics to its advantage and at the expense of its global rivals.

This failure, in many ways, has to do with how Washington behaved in 2019 when Saudi oil facilities came under Houthi attacks. The US failed to ‘protect’ Saudia Arabia – something that created an opening for China to push for an alternative to war.

For the Saudis as well, signing this treaty in the present context has become a lot more complicated than it would have been in a context with no Israeli war on Gaza and no prior Saudi-Iran rapprochement. Riyadh understands that tying its defence deeply with Washington via a treaty means it will have to, for instance, offer its space for the US/Israel to launch strikes on Iran. It would also mean Saudi Arabia exposing itself – once again – to Iran and Iran-backed Houthis. It also means Saudi Arabia going back to the past insofar as its ties with Iran are concerned and insofar as its plans to push for a multipolar order, both in the region and worldwide, are concerned. From the Saudi perspective, this treaty not only offers (an illusion of) protection but also comes with (the very real possibility of) a new phase of military conflict.

Alternatives to Washington

Middle Eastern states having become assertive vis-à-vis Washington’s dictates has also to do with the fact that the US is no longer the only global player in the region. Russia and China are already two major players that these states have deep ties with. Beijing, for instance, reportedly invested US$152 billion in the Middle East and North African (MENA) region between 2013 and 2021.

Russia’s sale of advanced missile and air defence systems to countries like Turkey and Iran showcases its willingness to deepen its defence with the region, presenting itself as an alternative to Washington. The availability of alternatives allows Arab states to better position themselves vis-à-vis Washington.

Will this pattern be permanent in the region? This is a key question. The Middle East, as it stands, is unlikely to see any major internal shift in terms of one state singularly dominating the region. Still, the region itself is surely moving towards a system that has multi-alignment as its central feature. It means Arab states are not necessarily becoming anti-US; it means they are diversifying in ways that give them a lot more leverage to manoeuvre and protect their interests. It means they are becoming stronger both regionally and globally.

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

November 6, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Neutral for now: Persian Gulf states’ gamble in the Iran-Israel showdown

With Iran’s vow to retaliate against Israel, Persian Gulf states face a delicate balancing act – caught between asserting autonomy and increasing dependence on US security, all while the Resistance Axis enjoys unprecedented popularity in the region.

By Mawadda Iskandar | The Cradle | November 4, 2024

The signs of an impending Iranian response to Israel’s airstrike on Iranian military interests last month are becoming clearer. Official statements from Tehran suggest a military retaliation is inevitable and could occur before the US elections on 5 November – with some reports indicating it may be launched from Iraqi territory to curb the cycle of back-and-forth escalations that began on 1 April following Tel Aviv’s targeting of the Iranian consulate in Damascus.

Both sides are seeking to establish a new deterrence balance, albeit with very different aims. Iran, whose sovereignty has been repeatedly violated, warns of the danger posed by Israel’s expansionist ambitions in the region, while Israel, as the aggressor, seems intent on dragging the entire region into chaos, banking on unwavering US support.

Two distinct camps have emerged: on one side, the Israeli-US alliance and its supporters, and on the other, the countries of the Resistance Axis, which have launched the “battle of unity” in support of Gaza. Caught between these factions is a third group, one that seeks neutrality, unwilling to pick a side for fear of compromising its own interests.

The US is struggling to maintain influence, while Israel is playing what may be its final card. The question remains: where do the Persian Gulf states stand?

Airspace restrictions and Gulf diplomacy

The Persian Gulf states have unanimously condemned Israel’s 26 October strikes on Iranian sites, which came in response to Tehran’s own retaliatory missile attacks earlier last month following high-profile assassinations of resistance leaders carried out by the occupation state.

Statements from the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, the UAE, Kuwait, and Oman condemned these strikes as violations of Iranian sovereignty, escalating tensions in an already volatile West Asia.

Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar have taken a firm stance, refusing to allow Israel to use their airspace to launch further strikes against Iran, a position echoed by Jordan, which was prompted to officially deny it had allowed Israel to use its airspace to attack the Islamic Republic.

This reassured Tehran, which had threatened a forceful response against any country that facilitated Israeli attacks. These diplomatic messages coincided with Iran opening new channels of dialogue, including President Masoud Pezeshkian’s meeting with GCC officials, followed by Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi’s diplomatic tour that included Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Oman, Jordan, Egypt, and Turkiye.

Despite Amman’s claim that its airspace was not used in the recent attack, videos have emerged documenting Israeli fighter jets over Jordanian skies. Similarly, Saudi Arabia claimed its airspace was not used during the strikes, raising questions about how Israeli planes refueled over such long distances. Israel subsequently admitted to using refueling aircraft to bypass Persian Gulf airspace restrictions.

Speaking to The Cradle, Lebanese military analyst Omar Maarabouni contends that “In principle, and based on and in connection with the recent Israeli attack, a group of Gulf countries, led by Saudi Arabia, stated that they prevented the Israelis from passing through their airspace, and this is something that Iranian radar can confirm or deny, and indeed the official Iranian statement confirms that these aircraft did not pass through Gulf airspace.”

Maarabouni adds that agreements between the US and Persian Gulf states are defensive in nature, allowing these states to prevent US bases from being used offensively against Iran, especially since improved relations with Iran are now in their interest. Regarding alternative Israeli plans, Maarabouni says:

“It is quite clear that Israeli planes took the path associated with Syria and then Iraq towards Iran, and therefore we are talking about a distance of 2,000 km back and forth, and this is what Israel was keen to avoid over the issue of refueling, as F-35 and F-15 aircraft can travel distances exceeding 2,200 km without the need to refuel.”

Jordan, he says, meanwhile, finds itself in an awkward position, having claimed that Iranian missiles breached its sovereignty, despite such missiles traveling at altitudes beyond the limits recognized under international airspace law. As Maarabouni points out:

“The one who violated Jordanian sovereignty is Israel, which fired air defense missiles into Jordanian airspace to intercept Iranian missiles, but it is unclear why Jordan has adopted the responsibility of blaming the violation of its sovereignty on both Iran and Israel.”

Oil on the frontline 

Persian Gulf states are wary of being dragged into the escalating conflict, especially as they attempt to close the chapter on their failing Yemen war, which backfired horribly following devastating attacks on Saudi Arabia’s prized Aramco facilities in 2019.

These strikes exposed the vulnerability of the “oil for protection” security framework under US patronage. In their recent overtures to Iran, GCC states also urged Washington to pressure Israel against targeting Iranian oil infrastructure, warning of disastrous consequences for global energy markets.

Sources in the Persian Gulf, speaking on condition of anonymity, inform The Cradle that while the Gulf states were aware of the timing of Israel’s attack, they were ready to mediate with the US if the situation escalated.

Following the attack’s failure, these states rushed to issue condemnatory statements, emphasizing their unwillingness to be drawn into direct hostilities against Tehran, despite their quiet acceptance – and even encouragement – of actions that might undermine Iranian influence or its nuclear ambitions. The Persian Gulf monarchies are eager to shield themselves from any backlash amid rising global anger over the atrocities in Gaza and Lebanon, which have put normalization efforts with Israel on hold.

US intervention: A double-edged sword

The White House has warned Iran against retaliating to Israeli strikes, stating that the US would support Israel if attacked and floating the notion that Washington “can’t restrain” Tel Aviv in the event of further attacks from Iran.

Former hawkish US national security advisor John Bolton boasted that Israel would use Persian Gulf airspace if needed, and that “these governments may complain about this, but frankly, they see Iran as a strategic threat because of its nuclear program, as well as Iran’s old support for terrorists, not only Hezbollah and Hamas, but the Houthis and Shia militias in Iraq.”

The Persian Gulf states now find themselves caught between their desire for autonomy and their dependency on US security guarantees – particularly in light of the numerous US bases spread across their territories, which primarily serve to protect Washington’s [or rather Israel’s] regional interests.

Agreements between the US and Persian Gulf states grant American forces access to airspace, ports, and military bases in these countries, providing logistical support for regional operations. While Gulf states have formally rejected offensive US operations from their territories, they still allow defensive activities.

Qatar, the only official non-NATO ally of the US, hosts the largest concentration of US forces at Al-Udeid and Al-Sailiya bases. Kuwait ranks second in terms of the quantity and quality of US assets located at four bases: Camp Doha, Arifjan, Ali al-Salem, and Buehring.

The UAE has three US bases, Al-Dhafra, Fujairah, and Jebel Ali Port, all of which provide logistical support services. As for the US facilities in Saudi Arabia, they are Eskan Village and Prince Sultan Air Base, which offer the provision of air and missile defense systems and the use of military aircraft. Bahrain hosts three bases: Juffair, Sheikh Isa, and Muharraq, and Oman hosts a similar number: Al-Masna, Thumrait, and Masira.

All of these countries fall under the domain of US Central Command (CENTCOM), which works to “counter the Iranian threat.”

Last year’s Operation Al-Aqsa Flood has reignited the debate over Persian Gulf security dependence on Washington. Experts argue that the current escalation between Iran and Israel will force Gulf states to find a balance between their diplomatic rapprochement with Tehran on the one hand, and their commitment to a US-led regional security alliance on the other.

The US has sought to reassure Persian Gulf leaders, offering assistance in defending against any potential Iranian aggression. To back up its words, the US approved a $440 million sale of TOW missiles to Riyadh and authorized the sale of over $2.2 billion in weapons and ammunition to Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

Balancing public condemnation with covert cooperation

Investigative journalist Bob Woodward’s new book War, which sheds light on recent GCC–Israeli dynamics, reveals that regional rulers, including those of the UAE, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, unanimously agree – in private – on the need to eliminate Hamas, while working quietly to minimize public backlash over their covert cooperation with Israel.

After last October’s Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, Persian Gulf states condemned the attack but later launched diplomatic efforts to prevent regional tensions from escalating further. Notably, these developments have disrupted key projects, including normalization with Israel and economic diversification plans, particularly in Saudi Arabia.

Iranian journalist Mohammad Gharavi tells The Cradle that the events of 7 October, 2023 strained what had been positive Saudi-Iranian relations:

“The Iranians believed that a positive relationship would have a positive impact in terms of supporting the Palestinian cause, but the Saudi position was neutral despite the historical opportunity that could have been invested at home and in the Islamic environment. Unfortunately, the Palestinian issue is the prominent point of contention with the GCC, which is why we are sending messages that the opportunity is ripe to change this course.”

He describes Saudi–Iranian relations as having made significant advancements in terms of coordination and cooperation since the two neighboring states struck a rapprochement deal in Beijing last year:

“Iran’s reassuring messages, as well as warnings not to go too far in cooperating with the Americans and Israelis to antagonize Iran or using air, land and sea spaces to direct hostile action against it, were influential and positive and can be built upon in the coming stage, as it reflects the determination of the two countries to put aside differences in the interest of the security of the two countries and protect the strategic alliance with China and others for what it holds of economic dimensions.”

Ultimately, the Persian Gulf states remain neutral – for now. Their future course, however, will depend on visible and tangible US assurances. If such guarantees are secured, the Gulf may be willing to align more openly against Iran, given that their interests clash with those of the Resistance Axis, which promotes regional independence and self-determination – ideas that resonate with the Arab masses throughout West Asia.

November 4, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Israel’s ‘zugzwang’ moment with Iran

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | October 28, 2024  

A senior US official told Washington Post that the toned-down early morning Israeli strike Saturday on military targets in Iran was a “proportional strike,” which “was moderate enough to quiet the conflict without provoking Iran into a counterattack.” 

However, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted in a speech on Sunday: “We hit hard Iran’s defence capabilities and its ability to produce missiles that are aimed at us. The attack in Iran was precise and powerful, and it achieved all its objectives.”

But within Israel itself, there is scepticism. Israel’s most popular news outlet Channel 12 called the operation insignificant and demonstrated Iran’s status as a major power in the region. Netanyahu has not released any reliable documentation to back up his claim, which he usually does. 

NourNews lampooned that Israeli psychological war against Iran has not worked. Israel hoped to stir up panic that there might be an attack on Iran’s nuclear installations but normal life continues in Iran. It appears that Israel was neither inclined to carry out an extensive attack nor was incapable of conducting such an operation without greater American involvement — or both. Iran’s attack on October 1 badly exposed the weakness of Israeli air defence system.  

So, the bottom line is that Israel may have succeeded in conducting a limited predawn operation against Iran without excessively increasing the chances of an all-out war.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said on Sunday that the “evil committed by the Zionist regime two nights ago should neither be downplayed nor exaggerated”. Khamenei added: “Of course, our officials should be the ones to assess and precisely apprehend what needs to be done and do whatever is in the best interests of this country and nation. They [the enemy] must be made to realize who the Iranian people are and what the Iranian youth are like.”

Khamenei’s remark suggests that an immediate military response is not planned. Indeed, Tehran has been playing down the Israeli strike, saying it caused limited damage. 

The foreign ministry said in a statement on Saturday that given Iran’s “inherent right of legitimate defence” under UN Charter, “Tehran will utilise all material and spiritual capabilities of the Iranian nation to defend its security and vital interests, and firmly stand by its duties towards regional peace and security.” 

The statement drew attention to Israeli operations in Gaza and Lebanon, but, notably, kept silent on any Iranian response to Saturday’s air strike. 

Iran will no doubt weigh the unprecedented diplomatic support from the regional states. This is a moment that Tehran cherishes, as apparent in Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s words: “Since yesterday [Saturday] until now, we are regularly receiving messages from different countries, the statements they issued, the level of condemnation from different countries both in the region. It is really remarkable that it took place at this international level.”

Other statements at the military level played down the Israeli attack saying the air defences intercepted it successfully and only “some limited damage was caused in some areas, the dimensions of which are being investigated.” The public mood in Tehran is one of high expectations from the Pezeshkian government on the economic front. 

Javad Zarif, former foreign minister and current strategic adviser to the government, also made no direct threat of retaliation, saying, “The west should move away from its outdated and dangerous paradigm. It must condemn Israel’s recent acts of aggression and join Iran in efforts to end the apartheid, genocide and violence in Palestine and Gaza, and in Lebanon. Recognising Iran’s confident resolve for peace is essential; this unique opportunity should not be missed.” [Emphasis added.] 

The Israeli strike did not take Tehran by surprise. In a “scoop”, Axios reported that Israel sent a message to Iran on Friday ahead of its air strikes warning the latter not to respond in “an attempt to limit the ongoing exchange of attacks between Israel and Iran and prevent a wider escalation.”

The message from Tel Aviv conveyed through third parties “made it clear to the Iranians in advance what they [Israelis] are going to attack in general and what they are not going to attack.” 

Apparently, the US pressured Israel to calibrate its proposed attack as a “proportionate response”. This becomes hugely important in the downstream, as the Biden Administration’s efforts will continue to prevent conflict between Israel and Iran escalating into a confrontation. 

To be sure, Iran will press ahead on the diplomatic track. Interestingly, the Jerusalem Post newspaper highlighted that Araghchi’s hectic tours of regional capitals are “important because he is not only visiting countries that are close to Iran historically or where Iran has interests, such as Lebanon or Iraq; rather, he is doing outreach to countries that have peace with Israel and which are close to the West, such as Jordan and Egypt… 

“This shows how Iran is gaining influence in Jordan and Egypt. Egypt and Iran have been on a road to reconciliation, for instance. In addition, Iran and Saudi Arabia have reconciled with China’s backing. Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince was also in Cairo this week, illustrating how a triangle of ties between Cairo and Tehran is emerging.” 

Meanwhile, Tehran will closely watch the November 5 presidential and Congressional elections in the US. In the event of a Kamala Harris presidency, the resumption of nuclear negotiations is highly likely. On the contrary, a Donald Trump presidency may presage a difficult 4-year period ahead, but here too, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s proximity with Trump to calm down tensions between Washington and Tehran should be factored in.

A paradigm shift cannot be ruled out, either. Trump is a quintessential pragmatist who disregarded criticism to engage North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un in a dramatic turnaround, and is not known to be enamoured of Zionism.

Trump boasted on Wednesday of almost daily conversations with Netanyahu. “Bibi called me yesterday, called me the day before,” Trump said. Trump had already reported a telephone conversation with Netanyahu on Saturday, claiming that the latter “wants my view on things.” 

Conceivably, Trump’s repeated call for Israel to swiftly defeat Hamas and wrap up the war in Gaza, stems from the apprehension that otherwise, if he wins the upcoming November 5 election, a clash with Iran may become unavoidable. 

The US is a far superior military power compared to Iran. But this is a war of attrition that is being fought on multiple fronts. And there is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare. Trump abhors open-ended US military interventions. And Iranians are known to be highly nationalistic and subjugating them is impossible. 

A prolonged war can result in US retrenchment from West Asia and the destruction of Israel — and may jeopardise Trump’s mesmerising MAGA movement.  

Against this tumultuous backdrop, what are Israel’s options? There seems to be no way out of the war in West Asia but the catch is, it won’t be the sort of war Israel is hoping for, let alone can win. 

Seymour Hersh wrote in Substack on Tuesday, “I’ve heard nothing from contacts in Beirut close to Hezbollah — whose troops are putting up a stiff fight as they did in Hezbollah’s 2006 war against Israel — that suggests anything other than a long war ahead…” 

Israel is a small country and it keeps its head above water thanks to American money. It lacks the capacity to wage a war with Iran on its own steam. The Israeli planes reportedly flew to Iran through US-controlled air space in Syria and Iraq!

The situation is turning into a ‘zugzwang’ in real life for Israel. Anything that Israel does will only make the situation worse, and it doesn’t have a choice not to make a choice, either.

October 28, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | 2 Comments

The Arabs are transparently displaying their crossover to multi-alignment in a US-led Middle Eastern war

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | October 12, 2024 

Reuters reported on Friday quoting three sources in the Persian Gulf that the regional states are lobbying Washington to stop Israel from attacking Iran’s oil sites as “part of their attempts to avoid being caught in the crossfire.” The exclusive Reuters report singled out Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar as also refusing to let Israel fly over their airspace for any attack on Iran. 

These moves come after a diplomatic push by Iran to persuade its Sunni Gulf neighbours to use their influence with Washington. Saudi Arabia has drawn the bottom line to the Biden Administration that it is determined to pursue the track of normalisation with Iran that began with the rapprochement brokered by China in March 2023. This affirmation, well into the Iranian-Saudi détente’s second year, puts paid to any residual hope that Arab states may eventually join a ‘coalition of the willing’ against Iran. 

The big picture here is that the Gulf states are positioning themselves to be among the key contributors to the ongoing power diffusion in their region — and globally. Tehran and Riyadh have found ways to responsibly share the neighbourhood. Suffice to say, the Arab world is already in the post-US and post-West era.

Now, this also signals Riyadh’s unease about Israel continuing its war on Gaza and Saudi frustration with the US for refusing to pressure Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government into accepting a ceasefire. 

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi was in Riyadh on Wednesday and was received by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The Saudi readout said they discussed bilateral relations and regional developments as well as the “efforts exerted towards them.” The meeting was attended by Saudi Defense Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman, Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan bin Abdullah and Minister of State and National Security Advisor Dr. Musaed bin Mohammed Al-Aiban. 

Araqchi also held talks with Prince Faisal. “Discussions focused on relations and explored ways to strengthen them across various fields,” the Saudi report said. Only the previous day, Prince Khalid had spoken with his American counterpart Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin. 

The Saudi Press Agency reported Tuesday that the two defence ministers “discussed the latest regional and international developments, efforts to de-escalate tensions in the region, and ways to ensure regional security and stability.” 

Clearly, the Saudis are on the ball, quite aware that they can assume a pivotal role in restoring calm and preventing the spillover of the conflict into the region. The ground beneath the Israel-Iran standoff is shifting in systemic terms. 

The military implications are profound when the Gulf States close their airspace to Israel (and the US) for operations against Iran. The Israeli jets will now have to take a circuitous route via the Red Sea and circumvent Arabian Peninsula to approach Iranian airspace, which of course will necessitate mid-air refuelling and all that it entails in such a sensitive operation that may have to be undertaken repeatedly. In a ‘missile war,’ Iran may prevail.   

How far the coordinated move by the Persian Gulf States to get the US to de-escalate the situation will work remains to be seen, as it depends largely on Netanyahu mellowing, of which there are no signs. Nonetheless, President Joe Biden did his part by calling Netanyahu on Wednesday. But the White House readout neatly sidestepped the main talking point between them. 

It stands to reason, though, that the call from Biden did have some effect on Netanyahu. The New York Times reported that Israel’s security cabinet convened on Thursday during which Netanyahu discussed with senior ministers “the overall plan for Israel’s retaliation.” 

The results of the meeting were not released. And Times concluded its report by taking note that “analysts still say neither side appears interested in all-out war.” Indeed, the Gulf states’ anxiety has become a key talking point between the US officials and Israeli counterparts. 

After the call from Biden, Netanyahu asked Defence Minister Gallant who was scheduled to visit Washington to stand down. Meanwhile, the US Central Command chief General Michael Kurilla came to Israel for “a situational assessment.” Lloyd Austin followed through on Thursday with a call to with Israeli defence minister Yoav Gallant but the focus was on Lebanon. No doubt, the Biden administration is pulling many strings in Tel Aviv. 

Netanyahu is known to be a realist himself. The point is, Tehran is explicit that Tel Aviv will pay a heavy price for any further hostile action. The warning will be taken seriously as Israeli military and intelligence — indeed, Netanyahu himself — have just had a preview of Iran’s deterrent capability. 

Second, the price of oil has already begun going up and that is something Candidate Kamala Harris wouldn’t want to see happening. 

Third, as for nuclear facilities, Iran has dispersed them to all parts of the country and the critical infrastructure is buried deep in the bowels of mountains that are hard to reach. 

To be sure, Iran’s missile strike on October 1 carried also showed that it has superb intelligence to know what to target, where and when. In a tiny country like Israel, it is difficult to hide — although Tehran may not stoop so low as to decapitate opponents. 

Suffice to say, all things taken into account, a terrible beauty is born in the Middle East: How far will the US go to rescue Israel? 

The beginning of an alignment of the Arab states, as evident this week, refusing to be part of any form of attack on Iran and the signs of ‘Islamic solidarity’ bridging sectarian divides — these are, quintessentially, to be seen as tipping points. This is the first thing. 

Secondly, this isn’t going to be a short, crisp war. Colonel Doug Macgregor, an astute US combat veteran in the Gulf War and former advisor to the Pentagon during the Trump administration and a noted military historian, aptly drew the analogy of the Thirty Years’ War in Europe (1618-1648), which began as a battle among the Catholic and Protestant states that formed the Holy Roman Empire but evolved in time and became less about religion and turned into a political struggle, more about which group would ultimately govern Europe, and ultimately changing the geopolitical face of Europe. 

To quote from a 2017 essay by Pascal Daudin, an ICRC veteran who was deployed in major conflict situations such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Central Asia, Caucasus, Saudi Arabia and the Balkans, the Thirty Years’ War turned into “a complex, protracted conflict between many different parties –- known in modern parlance as State and non-State actors. In practice, it was a series of separate yet connected international and internal conflicts waged by regular and irregular military forces, partisan groups, private armies and conscripts.” (here)

True, a Middle Eastern War in the current setting already has combatants, bystanders and onlookers who, as the conflict evolves into a latter-day Crusade, are bound to jump in — such as Turkey and Egypt. 

It will most certainly exhaust Israel — and vanquish the US presence in the Middle East — although a protracted war may prompt an intellectual upheaval that would ultimately bring about the Enlightenment to the region, as the Thirty Years’ War did to Europe. 

October 12, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | 2 Comments

As the West tries to silence RT, the Global South speaks out

The US-led “diplomatic campaign” to suppress RT worldwide is not getting the warm reception Washington hoped for

By Anna Belkina | RT | September 28, 2024

The United States government has recently issued new sanctions against RT, with the State Department announcing a new “diplomatic campaign” whereby – via US, Canadian, and UK diplomats – they promise to “rally allies and partners around the world to join us in addressing the threat posed by RT.”

In other words, the plan is to bully countries outside of the Collective West into shutting off their populations’ access to RT content in order to restore the West’s almost global monopoly on information. Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa appear to be of particular concern to the State Department’s James Rubin, as it is in those regions where US foreign policy has failed to find universal purchase.

As Rubin said during a press conference, “one of the reasons… why so much of the world has not been as fully supportive of Ukraine as you would think they would be… is because of the broad scope and reach of RT.”

Clearly not trusting anyone outside of the Western elite circles to think and decide for themselves which news sources people should or should not have access to, Rubin promised that the US will be “helping other governments come to their own decisions about how to treat” RT.

The statement reeks of patronizing and neo-colonialist attitudes, especially when you consider the countries that are being targeted.

Therefore, it has been reassuring to observe over the past couple of weeks the diversity of voices that have spoken out against this latest US-led crusade.

The Hindu, one of India’s newspapers of record, was among the first, reporting that while “US officials have spoken to [India’s] Ministry of External Affairs about joining their actions” against RT, “government officials said that the debate on sanctions is not relevant to India, while a former diplomat said that banning media organizations showed ‘double standards’ by Western countries.”

This position was seconded by Indian business newspaper Financial Express : “India is unlikely to act on this request [to ban RT], given its longstanding friendly relations with Russia and its own position on media censorship… In India, RT enjoys significant viewership, with its content reaching a large number of English-speaking audiences and also expanding its reach through a Hindi-language social media platform. RT has grown in popularity in India and other parts of the world, claiming that its main mission is to counter the Western narrative and offer Russia’s perspective on global affairs.”

In the Middle East, Saudi Arabia’s Okaz paper said, “it is paradoxical, that when [free] speech becomes a threat to the US and the West, they impose restrictions on it, as it happened with the ban on RT under the pretext of lack of transparency, spreading false information, interfering in internal affairs and inciting hatred – something that Washington and the West themselves do in relation to other countries.”

Leading Lebanese daily Al Akhbar wrote: “despite all the attempts to ban it… RT continues to broadcast and causes concern among supporters of imperial wars. These efforts also demonstrate the hypocrisy of their authors and their false claims about ‘freedom of speech’ and ‘freedom of the press,’ among their other loud proclamations. They claim that RT is a ‘mouthpiece of disinformation,’ but if this is so, then why is there such fear of it? If the channel really is spreading lies, won’t the viewers be able to notice? [This only works] if Western rulers view their citizens as simple-minded and easily deceived, which in turn explains the misinformation coming from every side of the Western media.”

It is safe to say that “Western rulers” view with such disregard and distrust not only their own citizens, but most of the world’s population… But I digress.

In Latin America, Uruguay-based current affairs magazine Caras y Caretas praised RT for “maintain[ing] a truthful editorial line, beyond being a state media outlet, and [it] has increased its popularity and credibility by exposing a perspective that makes it creative, original and authentic… RT has helped open the eyes of a very large part of the world’s population and of increasingly numerous governments and countries. That is the reason for the sanctions that the US and hegemonic media conglomerates such as Meta and Facebook have imposed on RT and its directors, adjudicating against them with the charges that are not believable, and are ridiculous. The statements of top US administration officials claiming to be defenders of press freedom and accusing RT of being a front for Russian intelligence is only an expression of impotence in the face of an alternative narrative to the hegemonic imperialist story.”

Rosario Murillo, the vice president of Nicaragua, sent RT a letter of support. In it, she berated the US authorities for their actions against the network, asking when they will “learn that the aggressions that they shamelessly call Sanctions, (as if they had divine powers to dispense punishments)… have no more sense than establishing their claims to the position [of] dictators of the World.” She praised RT’s “work and the creative, thoughtful, illustrative, sensitive and moving way” that RT “manage[s] to communicate.”

A number of African outlets have also spoken out about the hypocrisy of America’s global censorship. Nigerian newspaper The Whistler summarized the latest Western media diktat and its colonialist undertones thusly: “The Americans got into some quarrel with Russia and then shut down this Russian news channel. An order signed by some American politician in Washington got the European company supplying Multichoice to stop streaming RT… The result? We in Nigeria woke up one day to find we could no longer watch RT on TV or stream them on Facebook because of some drama happening in Washington and Moscow. Imagine the audacity! It was a decision made by Americans and Europeans without asking anybody here in Africa how we felt about it. They decided what we could and could not watch on our own TVs.”

It is heartening to see that so many different countries, with incredibly varied politics, societies, and cultures, speaking out against Washington’s imposing its world order on them. They prove that RT’s voice continues to be not just necessary, but welcomed and sought after.

Last night, as part of RT’s response to the actions of the US government, the bright green RT logo lit up the facade of the US Embassy building in Moscow with the message: “We’re not going away.”

Not in the US, not in the West at large, not in other parts of the world.

See you around!

September 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

Soft normalization: Saudi Arabia quietly engages with Israel

By Mawadda Iskandar | The Cradle | August 20, 2024

Despite Israel’s ongoing brutal assault on the Gaza Strip and its 2.4 million Palestinians, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) continues to pursue a controversial deal to normalize relations with the occupation state. Riyadh has persisted in deepening relations with Tel Aviv in multiple sectors despite receiving ‘death threats’ from opponents of normalization in the kingdom.

So why, then, does the crown prince insist on trudging down this unpopular path unless he believes that establishing ties with Israel is crucial for securing his ascendency to the Saudi throne?

Earlier this week, Politico revealed new details about these secretive negotiations, including multiple US commitments to Riyadh. These US assurances range from security guarantees through a treaty to assistance with a civilian nuclear program and economic investments in technology.

However, Tel Aviv remains resistant to including a credible path for establishing a Palestinian state as part of a deal, a key demand from the Saudis.

A history of quiet diplomatic moves

Normalization with Saudi Arabia is no less important for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has considered the deal a major diplomatic goal since before his re-election in 2022. Prior to last year’s Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, Netanyahu believed the deal was imminent.

Today, the situation remains complex, with the deal’s fate hanging in the balance due to conflicting conditions and demands set by Saudi Arabia, the US, and Israel.

The roots of normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel stretch back several decades, with a history of covert diplomatic dealings often referred to as ‘soft normalization.’

Since his appointment as Riyadh’s ambassador to Washington in 1983, Prince Bandar bin Sultan Al-Saud laid the groundwork for this gradual rapprochement, meeting with Israeli political and security leaders over the years. His successor, Turki al-Faisal, continued these efforts, becoming a key point man in Saudi–Israeli contacts.

Anwar Eshki, who served as his predecessor and was an adviser to Prince Bandar, participated in seminars promoting normalization and paid his first visit to the occupied territories in 2016.

A pivotal moment in this covert relationship took place in 2019 when MbS hosted a delegation of evangelical figures supporting the Zionist project led by Joel Rosenberg. The meeting, along with subsequent secret talks between MbS and Netanyahu in NEOM in 2020, marked a notable step toward open normalization. Over time, such meetings and visits became routine, with Saudi officials and citizens increasingly engaging with Israel, including making public visits to the occupied territories.

Repressive measures and strategic interests

The two states share several strategic goals. Saudi Arabia is opposed to the regional Axis of Resistance, which includes Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Ansarallah, Hamas, and other non-state actors, and has implemented repressive measures against the Palestinian resistance. The kingdom has for years targeted supporters of Hamas and individuals funneling funds to the Palestinian territories. This includes the arrest of more than 60 Palestinians in 2019, some of them Hamas officials and Saudi nationals who received lengthy prison terms.

As recently as May, Saudi Arabia stepped up its campaign to arrest social media users in the kingdom who attacked Israel online – this after more than 34,000 Palestinians had been killed in relentless Israeli airstrikes on population centers.

From the sidelines, Saudi Arabia has also supported the normalization efforts of Bahrain and Sudan while offering the occupied West Bank-based Palestinian Authority (PA) economic incentives to collaborate further with Israel.

Since its inception, the kingdom has utilized Islam to legitimize its political actions, and this Saudi soft normalization with Israel is no exception, with Muhammad bin Abdul Karim bin Abdulaziz Al-Issa, Secretary General of the Muslim World League, playing a key role in promoting religious normalization.

Since 2017, Al-Issa has championed the cause of interfaith dialogue as a gateway for furthering religious ties with Israel. His 2020 visit to Auschwitz and subsequent meetings with Israeli and Jewish leaders were part of this broader strategy.

US Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating Anti-Semitism, Deborah Lipstadt, also met with Saudi officials in the kingdom, and a delegation of American Jewish leaders visited to promote normalization. Areas of soft normalization included Saudi Arabia’s hosting of Rabbi Yaakov Herzog, a former Israeli artillery soldier and an extremist Zionist advocate of the demolition of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. The rabbi seeks to stir controversy through his activities, including a visit to the mosque and the cemetery of martyrs of Uhud in Medina.

Security and economic ties with Israel 

Unsurprisingly, Riyadh and Tel Aviv have worked to enhance their security cooperation – a significant aspect of their relationship today. As the world’s largest arms importer, Saudi Arabia has sought to enhance its military capabilities through deals with the occupation state, including acquiring Israel’s flawed Iron Dome air defense system. Security relations have included joint military exercises and cooperation on cybersecurity, with Saudi Arabia relying on Israeli spyware to monitor and control opposition within the kingdom.

Speaking to The Cradle, dissident Saudi author and political analyst Fouad Ibrahim says:

Saudi Arabia views normalization as more than just a political project, as it also includes an economic project and a strategic project related to the future of the throne in Saudi Arabia.

Economic normalization is crucial for MbS’s coveted Vision 2030 project, which aims to transform the kingdom’s economy and institute social liberalization. The deal with Israel includes opening Saudi airspace to Israeli flights and encouraging Israeli investment in Saudi heritage sites. Jared Kushner, the architect of the 2020 Abraham Accords, has played a prominent role in these efforts, working to establish an investment corridor between Riyadh and Tel Aviv.

Among the most ambitious projects is the fiber optic cable linking Tel Aviv to Persian Gulf countries, as well as a planned railway expansion that would connect Saudi Arabia to Israel via Jordan. Ibrahim contends that the Palestinian resistance’s Al-Aqsa Flood operation last October disrupted these plans, placing a whole host of these economic projects in jeopardy:

The Al-Aqsa Flood came and thwarted this project and disrupted it for an unknown period. Therefore, the Saudi regime, along with the US and the Israeli entity, was the first to feel that the Al-Aqsa Flood was directed primarily at the normalization project in the region.

Softening stance leading to soft normalization 

Cultural and media strategies have played an advanced role in acclimating Saudis to normalization with Israel. Since the events of 11 September 2001, Saudi Arabia has worked on revising its education curricula, gradually removing references to Israel as an enemy and promoting a more neutral stance on the occupation state. Art and media have also played a role, with Saudi TV channels airing programs that subtly promote peace with Israel.

The media, in particular, has been a powerful tool in shaping public perception, with Saudi outlets often hosting Israeli officials and broadcasting reports from within the kingdom. This propaganda campaign has aimed to create a climate conducive to normalization, although public support for such a move has fluctuated, especially after the events of 7 October.

At the heart of the crown prince’s Vision 2030 is his desire to position Saudi Arabia as a global sports hub. The Public Investment Fund, Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund, leads this expansive project by purchasing major foreign sports franchises and hosting international sporting events in the kingdom.

The sports sector has been yet another tool of soft normalization, paving the way for official Israeli teams to appear in Saudi Arabia, where they raise the occupation state’s flag and sing its national anthem. Official matches and competitions are held between Saudi and Israeli players, and the Saudi national football team has even participated in matches held in the occupied West Bank.

As is now glaringly evident, Riyadh’s efforts toward normalization with Tel Aviv have been multifaceted, involving diplomatic, religious, security, economic, cultural, and media strategies. While these efforts have made significant progress over the years, the future of this delicate relationship remains uncertain, especially with rapid developments in the region-wide resistance against the occupation state in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza.

The underlying strategic interests that drive Riyadh’s approach to Israel – security, economic growth, and regional influence – suggest that these efforts will continue, albeit with tweaks and adjustments, so as not to invite reprisals from the Resistance Axis, not least the Yemeni Armed Forces on Saudi Arabia’s restive southern border.

August 20, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | 4 Comments

Failure of US policy in the Middle East

By Veniamin Popov – New Eastern Outlook – 10.08.2024 

The dramatic events of late July in the Middle East are a clear indication of the failure of American policy in the region.

The Americans, staking their hopes on being able to sweep the Palestinian problem under the carpet, have miscalculated and as a result not only has their influence been weakened, but there is now a real possibility of a new full-scale war.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has made nearly a dozen visits to Middle Eastern countries since October 2023, and the only result has been that the mass murder of Palestinians is continuing. The much-publicized “Biden Plan” to resolve the crisis has simply been shelved. All USA’s actions in the Middle East have merely served to exacerbate the situation.

The likelihood of an Iranian response to the Netanyahu government’s actions has brought the entire region to the brink: according to the New York Times, Israel could not fight a war for long alone, so Washington must decide whether to go to war with Iran, along with Israel.

The governments of the Arab countries are aware of the dangers of the situation: as the Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani puts it, political assassinations and the ongoing attacks on civilians in the Gaza Strip during peace talks make us question how mediation can be successful if one side kills the negotiators from the other side. To achieve peace, there is a need for serious partners, and a position of disregard for human life is unacceptable.

Washington is trying to create a military bloc

The American administration tried its best to forge a military alliance between the Arab monarchies and Israel, and to this end it did all it could to woo Riyadh. Today, this strategic plan appears to be an ill-considered fantasy, but Washington is still seeking to create some sort of bloc, with the latest initiative being an economic grouping tentatively named I2U2, consisting of India, Israel, the United Arab Emirates and the United States.

The US is also trying to create an important economic corridor from India to Europe via the Middle East, also known as IMEC (India—Middle East—Europe Economic Corridor). It was designed to promote closer trade and energy ties between the European Union and India, with the help of US allies in the Persian Gulf. The goal is to help India distance itself away from China’s attempts to sideline New Delhi from its One Belt, One Road infrastructure initiative. while creating a grand pro-American economic alliance stretching from the EU through Saudi Arabia and the UAE all the way to India—a grouping that would also isolate Iran. The founding partners of the IMEC are the US, EU (France, Germany and Italy), Saudi Arabia, the UAE and India.

The American plan was to give military weight to these intersecting alliances by forging a mutual defense treaty with Saudi Arabia and also normalizing Saudi-Israeli relations. America’s allies in the Middle East—Jordan, Egypt, UAE, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain—would thus serve as an anti-Iranian alliance.

Current events make it clear how unrealistic the calculations of the US are. In this regard, it is worth remembering the words of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who described Muslim countries that normalize relations with Israel as “betting on a losing horse,” before adding that “the definitive stance of the Islamic Republic is that the governments which prioritize the gamble of normalization with the Zionist regime will incur losses… Today, the situation of the Zionist regime is not one that should motivate closeness to it; they should not make this mistake.”

The decline of the US is also evident in its foreign policy

Washington officials frequently display wishful thinking—notable in this regard is an article dated August 2, 2024 by University of Texas professor Gregory Gause III, published in the Foreign Affairs magazine. He argues that the real prospects for a US-Saudi security deal are very elusive, and that Riyadh should hardly be expected to “take Washington’s side Against China and Russia.”

The well-known US American political scientist John Mearsheimer believes that the US, through its unconstructive actions and miscalculations, “has itself played a decisive role in destroying its own world dominance.”

The renowned French scientist Emmanuel Todd, in a recent interview with the Berliner Zeitung, emphasized that trust in the United States around the world is declining because “the West, with America at its center, is experiencing internal disintegration, and we can see the decline of the West at various levels—if we look not at the GDP inflated by the service sector, but at the real industrial and agricultural production of the West, we can see a huge weakness… here the failures in education, especially in the United States, are even more alarming. Educational attainment there has been falling since 1965, there has been a decrease in the number of students, and tests show that IQ levels are dropping. Today in America they often train not engineers, but lawyers and stockbrokers.” Perhaps this can help to explain the huge failures of US foreign policy, including in the Middle East.

Renowned US economist Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University has repeatedly stressed that America’s meddling in the Middle East destabilizes the region and provokes mass suffering. Professor Sachs also believes that changes taking place around the world make it reasonable to expect that “a comprehensive peace in the Middle East based on a two-state solution is still achievable.”

 

August 10, 2024 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

US Military Exports Skyrocketing as Washington Continues to Fuel Global Conflicts

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 09.08.2024

The US’ arms exports have risen dramatically since 2022 and may top $100 billion by the year’s end, according to the Pentagon.

In fiscal year (FY) 2022, sales through the US government’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS) system jumped to $49.7 billion from $34.8 billion in FY2021; in FY2023, this number rose again to around $66.2 billion.

So far, FMS sales are already above $80 billion for FY2024, as per the Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

Still, the total value of transferred weapons, services and security cooperation activities conducted under the Foreign Military Sales system in FY2023 was $80.9 billion, representing a 55.9% increase from a total of $51.9 billion in FY2022.

In 2024, the US State Department unveiled government-to-government FMS sales for FY2023, which required congressional notification:
Poland:

  • AH-64E Apache Helicopters – $12 billion;
  • High mobility artillery rocket systems (HIMARS) – $10 billion;
  • Integrated air and missile defense (IAMD) battle command systems (IBCS) – $4 billion;
  • M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks – $3.75 billion.

Germany:

  • CH-47F Chinook helicopters – $8.5 billion;
  • AIM-120C-8 advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles (AMRAAM) – $2.9 billion.

Norway:

  • Defense articles and services related to the MH-60R multi-mission helicopters – $1 billion.

Czech Republic:

  • F-35 aircraft and munitions – $5.62 billion.

Bulgaria:

  • Stryker vehicles – $1.5 billion.

Australia:

  • C-130J-30 aircraft – $6.35 billion.

Canada:

  • P-8A aircraft – $5.9 billion.

South Korea:

  • F-35 aircraft – $5.06 billion;
  • CH-47F Chinook helicopters – $1.5 billion.

Japan:

  • E-2D advanced Hawkeye (AHE) airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft – $1.381 billion.

Kuwait:

  • National advanced surface-to-air missile system (NASAMS) medium range air defense systems (MRADS) – $3 billion;
  • Follow-up technical support – $1.8 billion.

Qatar:

  • Fixed site-low, slow, small unmanned aircraft system integrated defeat system (FS-LIDS) – $1 billion.

In addition to that, direct commercial sales (DCS) between foreign nations and US defense contractors jumped from $153.6 billion in FY2022 to $157.5 billion for FY2023. These sales included unspecified military hardware, services and technical data.

The US State Department provided a glimpse on what major DCS Congressional Notifications included in FY2023:

  • Italy – For the manufacturing of F-35 wing assemblies and sub-assemblies – $2.8 billion;
  • India – For the manufacturing of GE F414-INS6 engine hardware – $1.8 billion;
  • Singapore – F100 propulsion system and spare parts – $1.2 billion;
  • South Korea – F100 propulsion system and spare parts – $1.2 billion;
  • Norway, Ukraine – National advanced surface to air missile systems (NASAMS) – $1.2 billion;
  • Saudi Arabia – Patriot guided missile – $1 billion.

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) highlights that arms exports by the US rose by 17% between 2014–18 and 2019–23. The US share of total global arms exports increased from 34% to 42%. Between 2019 and 2023, the US delivered major arms to 107 states, which was more than the next two biggest exporters combined, as per SIPRI.

The largest share of US arms went to the Middle East (38%), mostly to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and Israel.

US arms exports to states in Asia and Oceania increased by 14% between 2014–18 and 2019–23; 31% of all US arms exports in 2019–23 went to the region with Japan, South Korea and Australia being the largest buyers.

Europe purchased a total of 28% of US arms exports in 2019–23. US arms exports to the region increased by over 200% between the 2014–18 and 2019–23 periods. Ukraine accounted for 4.7% of all US arms exports and 17% of those to Europe.

The institute projects that the US will continue to ramp up military sales in 2024 and beyond, with the focus on combat aircraft, tanks and other armored vehicles, artillery, SAM systems and warships.

August 9, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Jordan, Qatar, KSA balk at US-led ‘peacekeeping force’ for post-war Gaza: Report

The Cradle | August 7, 2024

Jordan, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia have reportedly refused requests to take part in a US-led “peacekeeping force” for Gaza once Israel’s genocide of Palestinians comes to a stop, according to informed sources who spoke with the Times of Israel.

One of the sources told the Israeli outlet that troops from the Arab nations would be seen to be “protecting Israel from the Palestinians.”

The reported positions of Aman, Doha, and Riyadh contrast starkly with those of the UAE and Egypt, which have reportedly expressed willingness to participate in the effort.

Abu Dhabi made this position public last month when Lana Nusseibeh, the country’s Permanent Representative to the UN and special envoy of the Emirati Foreign Ministry, penned an op-ed for the Financial Times (FT) in which she called for the establishment of a “temporary international mission” in Gaza.

“Any ‘day after’ effort must fundamentally alter the trajectory of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict towards the establishment of a Palestinian state that lives in peace and security with the state of Israel … A first step in such an effort is to deploy a temporary international mission that responds to the humanitarian crisis, establishes law and order, lays the groundwork for governance and paves the way to reuniting Gaza and the occupied West Bank under a single, legitimate Palestinian Authority (PA),” Nusseibeh declared.

The UAE in June hosted a secret gathering with US and Israeli officials to discuss plans for Gaza after the genocidal war ends. Abu Dhabi has also stepped up joint efforts with Tel Aviv since 7 October to construct military and intelligence infrastructure on the Socotra Archipelago off the coast of Yemen.

During trips to Qatar, Egypt, Jordan, and Israel in June, US State Secretary Anthony Blinken reportedly informed officials that Washington had received “support from Cairo and Abu Dhabi for the creation of a force that would work alongside local Palestinian officers” in Gaza, the Times of Israel reports.

“Blinken told counterparts that the US would help establish and train the security force and ensure that it would have a temporary mandate so that it could eventually be replaced by a fully Palestinian body, the third source said, adding that the goal is for the PA to eventually take over full control of Gaza. Blinken clarified, though, that the US would not be contributing troops of its own, the officials said,” the report adds.

August 7, 2024 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »