Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Israel and the politics of fragmentation: The hidden hand behind secessionist projects in Yemen, Somalia, and Libya

By Ahmed Asmar | MEMO | January 3, 2026

Israel’s malicious, meddling role in the Arab countries has long extended beyond direct military confrontation, as seen in Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria. For long, Tel Aviv has pursued a quieter yet dangerous strategy of encouraging fragmentation, weakening central states, and cultivating ties with separatist actors in fragile and war-torn countries. Today, this pattern is increasingly clear and visible in Yemen, Somalia, and Libya; three countries that suffer from prolonged conflicts, administrative collapse, and foreign interference. In each case, Israel’s footprint is not accidental; it serves a broader strategic doctrine aimed at dividing Arab countries, controlling critical waterways, and reshaping the regional balance of power to its advantage and dominance.

Yemen: secession as a gateway to normalisation

In Yemen, Israel’s indirect involvement surfaces through its alignment with the so-called Southern Transitional Council (STC), a secessionist entity seeking to reestablish an independent state in southern Yemen. While the Yemeni conflict is often framed as a regional proxy war, the STC’s leader, Aidarous al-Zubaidi, has openly, and on several occasions, signaled willingness to normalize relations with Israel. He publicly declared that recognizing Israel is not an obstacle if southern Yemen’s independence is achieved; an extraordinary statement that was slammed by many Yemeni public figures and politicians.

This declaration is not merely rhetorical. Yemen’s southern geography grants access to some of the most sensitive maritime corridors in the world, particularly near the Bab al-Mandeb Strait. For Israel, influence over forces operating near this chokepoint aligns with its long-standing objective of securing Red Sea navigation and countering its perceived regional adversaries. Supporting or encouraging secessionist forces in southern Yemen offers Israel a strategic foothold without formal military deployment, turning internal Yemeni fragmentation into a geopolitical asset, and posing a direct threat against the Arab countries, especially the littoral countries of the Red Sea – Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

Somalia: Somaliland and the militarisation of recognition

Somalia presents an even clearer case of Israel exploiting separatism for strategic gain. The self-declared Republic of Somaliland, unrecognised by the international community, has actively sought foreign backing to legitimise its secession. Israel’s contacts and recognition of Somaliland’s de-facto authorities mark a dangerous precedent in international relations, and against the international law and the UN charter.

The strategic motivation is transparent. Somaliland’s coastline also overlooks the Bab al-Mandeb Strait and the Gulf of Aden, one of the world’s most critical maritime corridors. Somalia’s President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud warned of the Israeli malicious plan behind such recognition, where he said that Israel seeks from recognising Somaliland to resettle Palestinians from Gaza, who experienced a two-year genocide, and most importantly, to host an Israeli military or intelligence base. These plans are added to the dangers of undermining Somalia’s territorial integrity and encouraging further fragmentations across the Horn of Africa.

Israel’s move to recognize a secessionist entity reflects how Israel exploits weak entities and divided states to move ahead with its expansionist and dominance strategies at the expense of the region and its people.

Libya: Haftar and the normalisation through the back door

Not far from the examples in Yemen and Somalia, in Libya, Israel’s role is more discreet but visible too. General Khalifa Haftar, who controls eastern Libya and has long sought international legitimacy, reportedly maintained contacts with Israeli officials as part of efforts to secure external backing. These interactions fit within a wider pattern of covert normalization between Israel and authoritarian or factional actors seeking foreign support in exchange for political concessions.

Libya’s fragmentation has turned it into fertile ground for foreign manipulation. Israel’s engagement with Haftar is surely not about peace or stability, but about influence, leverage, and having a close foot near its surrounding Arab countries.

Fragmentation as a strategic doctrine

Altogether, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya illustrate a consistent Israeli strategy: exploiting internal conflicts to advance a regional agenda based on fragmentation. This approach intersects with Israel’s ongoing territorial expansion and military aggression, from its occupation of Palestinian land to its violations of sovereignty in Syria and Lebanon. Fragmented Arab states are less capable of resisting Israeli policies and more exposed to normalization under opportunistic conditions.

Israel’s encouragement of secessionist movements is not about supporting self-determination; it is about redrawing the region into weaker, smaller entities incapable of collective action. This strategy directly threatens Arab national security as a whole, adding a new dimension to Israel’s expansionism.

At a time when the Arab world faces unprecedented challenges, recognising and confronting this hidden hand of fragmentation is essential. While ignoring Israel’s role in these secessionist projects risks allowing instability to become permanent, solely in favor of Israel in the region and beyond.

January 3, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Somali president rejects displacement of Palestinians from Gaza

MEMO | December 29, 2025

Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud has said Somalia will not accept any attempts to displace Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, describing such efforts as unacceptable and dangerous.

Speaking on Sunday before the two chambers of the Somali Federal Parliament, Mohamud said Somalia “categorically” rejects the displacement of Palestinians and will not allow wars to be exported to its territory. He stressed that Somalia would not become a battleground for aggression against other countries, according to the Somali News Agency.

Mohamud said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had committed “a grave violation” of Somali sovereignty, reiterating Somalia’s rejection of transferring Middle East conflicts onto Somali soil.

Separately, Somali Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre condemned Netanyahu’s announcement recognising the Somaliland region as an “independent and sovereign state”, calling the move “null and void” and without legal effect.

Barre said Somalia is a sovereign state with internationally recognised borders, and that any infringement on its unity or territorial integrity constitutes a clear violation of international law. He said both the federal government and the Somali people categorically reject the declaration.

He described Israel’s position as reckless, adding that it would have been more appropriate to recognise the State of Palestine, which “remains under occupation and aggression”. Barre added that Somalia does not require recognition from any external party.

Israel recently became the first country to recognise the breakaway Somaliland, gaining a new partner along the strategic Red Sea coastline.

December 29, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | Leave a comment

What Is Actually Behind Israel’s Recognition Of Somaliland?

The Dissident | December 27, 2025

Recently, Israel became the first country to recognize Somaliland, a breakaway region of Somalia that declared independence in 1991 but until now has not been officially recognized by any UN member state.

But what is Israel’s real motive behind this move?

One motive appears to be the fact that Israel has taken part in negotiations with Somaliland to use the region as a place to relocate Palestinians ethnically cleansed from Gaza by Israel.

The Israeli newspaper Ynet, writing about Israel’s Recognition Of Somaliland, noted that, “The territory has recently been mentioned as a possible destination for Gazans, with officials there saying they would be willing to absorb ‘one million Gazans,’ though no formal agreement has been announced.”

Israeli journalist Amit Segal wrote, “Israel announced today its official recognition of Somaliland as an independent, sovereign state, in a joint declaration signed by the leaders and in the spirit of the Abraham Accords,” and went on to boast that “Somaliland was supposed to — and may still — absorb Gazans.”

A report from the Financial Times from March of this year reported that during a meeting with U.S. officials and leaders of Somaliland, “Washington had raised the possibility of relocating refugees from the US and Gaza”, adding that, “Israel was ‘in conversations’ with countries around the world, including in Africa, about taking in Gazans”.

An August report from the Times of Israel wrote that, “Israel is in talks with five countries — Indonesia, Somaliland, Uganda, South Sudan and Libya — about the potential resettlement of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip” and added, “‘Some of the countries are showing greater openness than before to accepting voluntary immigration from the Gaza Strip,’ a diplomatic source tells the outlet, naming Indonesia and Somaliland in particular.”

It noted that, “Somaliland is a breakaway region of Somalia that is reportedly hoping to secure international recognition through the deal.”

Previously, the Israeli newspaper, The Jerusalem Post, reported that Somaliland Foreign Minister, Abdirahman Dahir Adan, “does not rule out absorbing Gazan residents” but said that, “the most important thing for us is to receive recognition”, signalling that Somaliland would agree to Israel’s ethnic cleansing plan in exchange for recognition Of Somaliland.

Journalist Kit Klarenberg noted that forcibly sending Palestinians from Gaza into Somaliland would amount to forcing them “in yet another open air concentration camp”, noting that, “In late 2022, mass protests broke out in the contested Somalian city of Las Anod. Somaliland security forces crushed the upheaval using lethal force, leaving dozens dead” and adding that, “Somaliland’s appeal to Israel and its Western puppet masters as a dumping ground for Gazans is obvious. A well-armed repressive domestic security apparatus stands ever-ready to brutally quell any and all local resistance”.

Furthermore, Israel’s recognition of Somaliland will be a strategic boost to Israel’s war against Yemen’s Ansar Allah, or the Houthis, the resistance militia, which had put a naval blockade on Israeli ships in the Red Sea, in an attempt to force Israel to end the genocide in Gaza.

Mark Dubowitz, an official with the Neo-con think tank “Foundation for Defense of Democracies,” boasted that Israel’s recognition of Somaliland will aid their war on Yemen, writing, “For those mocking why Israel would engage Somaliland: look at the map. Somaliland sits on the Gulf of Aden, next to the Bab el-Mandeb—a chokepoint for global trade and energy. Across the water are Iran-backed Houthis firing on Israel and shipping. Somaliland offers stability, ports, intelligence access, and a non-Iranian platform on the Red Sea. Similar reason why the U.S. has a military base in Djibouti.”

The Israeli newspaper Ynet reported that, Israel, “has strong strategic interest in Somaliland due to its long coastline and location in the Horn of Africa, close to Yemen” adding that, “One reason Israel has taken a keen interest in Somaliland is its proximity to areas controlled by Yemen’s Houthi rebels … Strengthening ties with Somaliland is viewed in Israel as a potential force multiplier against the Houthis”.

The outlet wrote that, “Somaliland lies near the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, a key global shipping lane. Amid clashes between Israel and the Houthis following the war in Gaza, and against the backdrop of a US operation against the Houthis this year, waters near Yemen have become a danger zone for commercial vessels … Somaliland’s Port of Berbera, about 250 kilometers south of Yemen, is considered strategically significant in this context”.

Another article in Ynet reported that, “Israeli intelligence officials say the Mossad has been active in Somaliland for years, laying the groundwork for the recognition through long-standing, discreet relationships with senior figures there. Mossad chiefs have maintained personal ties with Somaliland officials, and Israeli officials hope the agreement will encourage additional countries to pursue strategic relations with Israel as part of a broader regional alignment” because, “One key factor driving Israel’s interest is Somaliland’s proximity to areas controlled by the Houthis in Yemen” adding that, “Strengthening ties with Somaliland is seen in Israel as a strategic force multiplier against the Houthis.”

Reports in Israeli media show that Israel’s real motive behind recognition of Somaliland is to ethnically cleanse Palestinians in Gaza, and to have a strategic boost to its war against the Houthis, one of the only forces left willing to fight in solidarity with Palestinians.

December 27, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Hamas condemns ‘Israel’-Somaliland recognition

Al Mayadeen | December 27, 2025

The Islamic Resistance Movement – Hamas strongly condemned the announcement by the Somaliland administration on mutual recognition with “Israel”, describing it as a “serious precedent” and an attempt to gain “false legitimacy” from a fascist occupying entity.

In a statement, Hamas emphasized that “Israel” is responsible for ongoing war crimes and acts of genocide against the Palestinian people, and continues to face growing international isolation. The movement warned that the occupation’s plans, including the potential use of Somaliland as a destination for displaced Palestinians, represent a forced displacement campaign that Hamas fully rejects.

“Recognizing a separatist administration in Somaliland reflects the depth of the international isolation the Zionist entity suffers, due to the acts of genocide it has committed against our Palestinian people in Gaza,” the statement said.

The movement also commended Arab and Islamic countries that condemned the recognition, noting that it violates international law and threatens Somalia’s unity and sovereignty. Hamas further warned that such Zionist policies aim to destabilize Arab states, interfere in their internal affairs, and serve the broader colonial ambitions of “Israel”.

December 27, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Obama Paved the Way for Trump’s Venezuelan Killings

By Jim Bovard | The Libertarian Institute | December 3, 2025

The Trump administration’s killings of scores of Venezuelans are justifiably provoking outrage. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth recently proclaimed, “We have only just begun to kill narco-terrorists.” Donald Trump and Hegseth are cashing a blank check for carnage that was written years earlier by President Barack Obama.

In his 2017 farewell address, Obama boasted, “We have taken out tens of thousands of terrorists.” Drone strikes increased tenfold under Obama, helping fuel anti–U.S. backlashes in several nations.

As he campaigned for the presidency in 2007, then-Senator Barack Obama declared, “We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers.” Many Americans who voted for Obama in 2008 expected a seachange in Washington. However, from his first weeks in office, Obama authorized widespread secret attacks against foreign suspects, some of which spurred headlines when drones slaughtered wedding parties or other innocents.

On February 3, 2010, Obama’s Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair stunned Washington by announcing that the administration was also targeting Americans for killing. Blair revealed to a congressional committee the new standard for extrajudicial killings:

“Whether that American is involved in a group that is trying to attack us, whether that American has—is a threat to other Americans. We don’t target people for free speech. We target them for taking action that threatens Americans.”

But “involved” is a vague standard—as is “action that threatens Americans.” Blair stated that “if we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that.” Permission from who?

Obama’s first high-profile American target was Anwar Awlaki, a cleric born in New Mexico. After the 9/11 attacks, Awlaki was showcased as a model moderate Muslim. The New York Times noted that Awlaki “gave interviews to the national news media, preached at the Capitol in Washington and attended a breakfast with Pentagon officials.” He became more radical after he concluded that the Geoge W. Bush administration’s Global War on Terror was actually a war on Islam. After the FBI sought to squeeze him into becoming an informant against other Muslims, Awlaki fled the country. He arrived in Yemen and was arrested and reportedly tortured at the behest of the U.S. government. After he was released from prison eighteen months later, his attitude had worsened and his sermons became more bloodthirsty.

After the Obama administration announced plans to kill Awlaki, his father hired a lawyer to file a challenge in federal court. The ACLU joined the lawsuit, seeking to compel the government “to disclose the legal standard it uses to place U.S. citizens on government kill lists.” The Obama administration labeled the entire case a “State Secret.” This meant that the administration did not even have to explain why federal law no longer constrained its killings. The administration could have indicted Awlaki on numerous charges but it did not want to provide him any traction in federal court.

In September 2010, The New York Times reported that “there is widespread agreement among the administration’s legal team that it is lawful for President Obama to authorize the killing of someone like Mr. Awlaki.” It was comforting to know that top political appointees concurred that Obama could justifiably kill Americans. But that was the same “legal standard” the Bush team used to justify torture.   

The Obama administration asserted a right to kill U.S. citizens without trial, without notice, and without any chance for the marked men to legally object. In November 2010, Justice Department attorney Douglas Letter announced in federal court that no judge had legal authority to be “looking over the shoulder” of Obama’s targeted killing. The letter declared that the program involves “the very core powers of the president as commander in chief.”

The following month, federal judge John Bates dismissed the ACLU’s lawsuit because “there are circumstances in which the Executive’s unilateral decision to kill a U.S. citizen overseas” is “judicially unreviewable.” Bates declared that targeted killing was a “political question” outside the court’s jurisdiction. His deference was stunning: no judge had ever presumed that killing Americans was simply another “political question.” The Obama administration’s position “would allow the executive unreviewable authority to target and kill any U.S. citizen it deems a suspect of terrorism anywhere,” according to Center for Constitutional Rights attorney Pardiss Kebriae.

On September 30, 2011, a U.S. drone attack killed Awlaki along with another American citizen, Samir Khan, who was editing an online Al Qaeda magazine. Obama bragged about the lethal operation at a military base later that day. A few days later, administration officials gave a New York Times reporter extracts, a peek at the fifty-page secret Justice Department memo. The Times noted, “The secret document provided the justification for [killing Awlaki] despite an executive order banning assassinations, a federal law against murder, protections in the Bill of Rights and various strictures of the international laws of war, according to people familiar with the analysis.” The legal case for killing Awlaki was so airtight that it did not even need to be disclosed to the American public.

Two weeks after killing Awlaki, Obama authorized a drone attack that killed his son and six other people as they sat at an outdoor café in Yemen. Anonymous administration officials quickly assured the media that Abdulrahman Awlaki was a 21-year-old Al Qaeda fighter and thus fair game. Four days later, The Washington Post published a birth certificate proving that Awlaki’s son was only 16-years old and had been born in Denver. Nor did the boy have any connection with Al Qaeda or any other terrorist group. Robert Gibbs, Obama’s former White House press secretary and a top advisor for Obama’s reelection campaign, later shrugged that the 16-year-old should have had “a far more responsible father.”

Regardless of that boy’s killing, the media often portrayed Obama and his drones as infallible. A Washington Post poll a few months later revealed that 83% of Americans approved of Obama’s drone killing policy. It made almost no difference whether the suspected terrorists were American citizens; 79% of respondents approved of preemptively killing their fellow countrymen, no judicial niceties required. The Post noted that “77 percent of liberal Democrats endorse the use of drones, meaning that Obama is unlikely to suffer any political consequences as a result of his policy in this election year.” The poll results were largely an echo of official propaganda. Most folks “knew” only what the government wanted them to hear regarding drones. Thanks to pervasive secrecy, top government officials could kill who they chose and say what they pleased. The fact that the federal government had failed to substantiate more than 90% of its terrorist accusations since 9/11 was irrelevant since the president was omniscient.

On March 6, 2012, Attorney General Eric Holder, in a speech on targeted killings to a college audience, declared, “Due process and judicial process are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, it does not guarantee judicial process.” TV comedian Stephen Colbert mocked Holder, quipping “Trial by jury, trial by fire, rock, paper scissors, who cares? Due process just means that there is a process that you do.” One purpose of due process is to allow evidence to be critically examined. But there was no opportunity to debunk statements from anonymous White House officials. For the Obama administration, “due process” meant little more than reciting certain phrases in secret memos prior to executions.

Holder declared that the drone attacks “are not [assassinations], and the use of that loaded term is misplaced; assassinations are unlawful killings. Here, for the reasons I have given, the U.S. government’s use of lethal force in self-defense.” Any termination secretly approved by the president or his top advisers was automatically a “lawful killing.” Holder reassured Americans that Congress was overseeing the targeted killing program. But no one on Capitol Hill demanded a hearing or investigation after U.S. drones killed American citizens in Yemen. The prevailing attitude was exemplified by House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King (R-NY): 

“Drones aren’t evil, people are evil. We are a force of good and we are using those drones to carry out the policy of righteousness and goodness.”

Obama told White House aides that it “turns out I’m really good at killing people. Didn’t know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine.” In April 2012, The New York Times was granted access for a laudatory inside look at “Terror Tuesday” meetings in the White House:

“Every week or so, more than 100 members of the government’s sprawling national security apparatus gather, by secure video teleconference, to pore over terrorist suspects’ biographies and recommend to the president who should be the next to die.”

It was a PowerPoint death parade. The Times stressed that Obama personally selected who to kill next:

“The control he exercises also appears to reflect Mr. Obama’s striking self-confidence: he believes, according to several people who have worked closely with him, that his own judgment should be brought to bear on strikes.”

Commenting on the Times’ revelations, author Tom Engelhardt observed, “We are surely at a new stage in the history of the imperial presidency when a president (or his election team) assembles his aides, advisors and associates to foster a story that’s meant to broadcast the group’s collective pride in the new position of assassin-in-chief.”

On May 23, 2013, Obama, in a speech on his targeted killing program at the National Defense University in Washington, told his fellow Americans that “we know a price must be paid for freedom”—such as permitting the president untrammeled authority to kill threats to freedom. The president declared that “before any strike is taken, there must be near-certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured—the highest standard we can set.”

Since almost all the data on victims was confidential, it was tricky to prove otherwise. But NBC News acquired classified documents revealing that the CIA was often clueless about who it was killing. NBC noted, “Even while admitting that the identities of many killed by drones were not known, the CIA documents asserted that all those dead were enemy combatants. The logic is twisted: If we kill you, then you were an enemy combatant.” Killings are also exonerated by counting “all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants… unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.” And U.S. bureaucrats have no incentive to track down evidence exposing their fatal errors. The New York Times revealed that U.S. “counterterrorism officials insist… people in an area of known terrorist activity… are probably up to no good.” The “probably up to no good” standard absolved almost any drone killing within thousands of square miles in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Daniel Hale, a former Air Force intelligence analyst, leaked information revealing that nearly 90% of people who were killed in drone strikes were not the intended targets. Joe Biden’s Justice Department responded by coercing Hale into pleading guilty to “retention and transmission of national security information,” and he was sent to prison in 2021.

Sovereign immunity entitles presidents to kill with impunity. Or at least that is what presidents have presumed for most of the past century. If the Trump administration can establish a prerogative to preemptively kill anyone suspected of transporting illicit narcotics, millions of Americans could be in the federal cross-hairs. But the Trump administration is already having trouble preserving total secrecy thanks to controversies over who ordered alleged war crimes. Will Trump’s anti-drug carnage end up torpedoing his beloved Secretary of War Hegseth and his own credibility with Congress, the judiciary, and hundreds of millions of Americans who do not view White House statements as divine revelations handed down from Mt. Sinai?

December 3, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Peacemaker’ Trump beats Biden’s bombing record since return to office: Report

The Cradle | July 23, 2025

US President Donald Trump has ordered hundreds of airstrikes across West Asia and Africa since his return to office, carrying out more attacks in the first five months of his second term than former president Joe Biden did during his entire presidency, according to the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data (ACLED).

“In just five months, Trump has overseen nearly as many US airstrikes (529) as were recorded across the entire four years of the previous administration (555),” said ACLED President Clionadh Raleigh.

Among the countries bombed by Trump are Iran, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, and Yemen. The majority of strikes were carried out against Yemen.

“The US military is moving faster, hitting harder, and doing so with fewer constraints. Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and now Iran are all familiar terrain, but this isn’t about geography – it’s about frequency,” Raleigh added.

The surge in attacks contradicts Trump’s campaign promises, which framed him as “anti-war.”

In March this year, Trump renewed the Biden government’s campaign against Yemen with much greater intensity.

Months of brutal and deadly attacks struck the country in response to the Yemeni Armed Forces’ (YAF) naval operations against Israeli interests and its missile and drone strikes in support of Palestine.

Yemeni forces consistently responded to US attacks by targeting US warships in the Red Sea, during both Biden and Trump’s terms.

A ceasefire between Sanaa and Washington was reached in May, after the US campaign burned through munitions and failed to impact Yemeni military capabilities significantly.

However, the campaign took a heavy toll on civilians and compounded the humanitarian crisis the country has faced due to over a decade of war.

An investigation released by Airwars last month revealed that Trump’s war on Yemen killed almost as many civilians in less than two months as in the last 23 years of Washington’s military action in the country combined.

“In the period between the first recorded US strike in Yemen to the beginning of Trump’s campaign in March, at least 258 civilians were allegedly killed by US actions. In less than two months of Operation Rough Rider … at least 224 civilians in Yemen [were] killed by US airstrikes – nearly doubling the civilian casualty toll in Yemen by US actions since 2002,” it said.

In Iraq, Syria, and Somalia, Trump has also continued to strike what Washington says are ISIS and Al-Shabab targets.

Despite vowing to end “forever wars,” Trump has recently threatened to expand them.

On 22 July, the US president threatened to launch new attacks on Iran, after late June bunker-buster strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities which were carried out on behalf of Israel.

July 23, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Somaliland Offers Trump Red Sea Base in Exchange for Recognition

Sputnik – 13.04.2025

Somalia’s breakaway region of Somaliland wants to be recognized as an independent state by US President Donald Trump in exchange for leasing its Berbera port and airstrip to the US, media reported on Saturday.

In March, the Semafor daily newspaper reported that Somalian President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud had offered the US control over ports and airbases located in Somaliland and another breakaway region, Puntland, in an attempt to prevent Washington from recognizing them.

Somaliland, however, plans to strike a deal with Trump, offering the US to lease its airstrip and port, which will ensure smooth military and logistical access to the Gulf of Aden, in exchange for Washington’s recognition of its statehood, The New York Times reported.

The airstrip at the Berbera International Airport was built by the Soviet Union in the 1970s. Stretching for over 2.5 miles, it is the longest airstrip in Africa.

The Associated Press reported in mid-March, citing a US official, that the US was in talks with Somaliland to determine what it could offer in exchange for its recognition. The US is reportedly exploring options for resettling Palestinians from the Gaza Strip.

Somalia ceased to exist as a unified state in 1991 following the fall of dictator Siad Barre. The international community recognizes the federal government of Somalia, which controls Mogadishu and parts of the country.

April 13, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

How the US and Israel Destroyed Syria and Called it Peace

By Jeffrey D. Sachs | Common Dreams | December 12, 2024

In the famous lines of Tacitus, Roman historian, “To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire; and where they make a desert, they call it peace.”

In our age, it is Israel and the U.S. that make a desert and call it peace.

The story is simple. In stark violation of international law, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers claim the right to rule over seven million Palestinian Arabs. When Israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands leads to militant resistance, Israel labels the resistance “terrorism” and calls on the U.S. to overthrow the Middle East governments that back the “terrorists.” The U.S., under the sway of the Israel Lobby, goes to war on Israel’s behalf.

The fall of Syria this week is the culmination of the Israel-U.S. campaign against Syria that goes back to 1996 with Netanyahu’s arrival to office as Prime Minister. The Israel-U.S. war on Syria escalated in 2011 and 2012, when Barack Obama covertly tasked the CIA with the overthrow of the Syrian Government in Operation Timber Sycamore. That effort finally came to “fruition” this week, after more than 300,000 deaths in the Syrian war since 2011.

Syria’s fall came swiftly because of more than a decade of crushing economic sanctions, the burdens of war, the U.S. seizure of Syria’s oil, Russia’s priorities regarding the conflict in Ukraine, and most immediately, Israel’s attacks on Hezbollah, which was the key military backstop to the Syrian Government. No doubt Assad often misplayed his own hand and faced severe internal discontent, but his regime was targeted for collapse for decades by the U.S. and Israel.

Before the U.S.-Israel campaign to overthrow Assad began in earnest in 2011, Syria was a functioning, growing middle-income country. In January 2009, the IMF Executive Board had this to say:

Executive Directors welcomed Syria’s strong macroeconomic performance in recent years, as manifested in the rapid non-oil GDP growth, comfortable level of foreign reserves, and low and declining government debt. This performance reflected both robust regional demand and the authorities’ reform efforts to shift toward a more market- based economy.

Since 2011, the Israel-U.S. perpetual war on Syria, including bombing, jihadists, economic sanctions, U.S. seizure of Syria’s oil fields, and more, has sunk the Syrian people into misery.

In the immediate two days following the collapse of the government, Israel conducted about 480 strikes across Syria, and completely destroyed the Syrian fleet in Latakia. Pursuing his expansionist agenda, Prime Minister Netanyahu illegally claimed control over the demilitarized buffer zone in the Golan Heights and declared that the Golan Heights will be a part of the State of Israel “for eternity.”

Netanyahu’s ambition to transform the region through war, which dates back almost three decades, is playing out in front of our eyes. In a press conference on December 9th, the Israeli prime minister boasted of an “absolute victory,” justifying the on-going genocide in Gaza and escalating violence throughout the region:

I ask you, just think, if we had acceded to those who told us time and again: “The war must be stopped”– we would not have entered Rafah, we would not have seized the Philadelphia Corridor, we would not have eliminated Sinwar, we would not have surprised our enemies in Lebanon and the entire world in a daring operation-stratagem, we would not have eliminated Nasrallah, we would not have destroyed Hezbollah’s underground network, and we would not have exposed Iran’s weakness. The operations that we have carried out since the beginning of the war are dismantling the axis brick by brick.

The long history of Israel’s campaign to overthrow the Syrian Government is not widely understood, yet the documentary record is clear. Israel’s war on Syria began with U.S. and Israeli neoconservatives in 1996, who fashioned a “Clean Break” strategy for the Middle East for Netanyahu as he came to office. The core of the “clean break” strategy called for Israel (and the US) to reject “land for peace,” the idea that Israel would withdraw from the occupied Palestinian lands in return for peace. Instead, Israel would retain the occupied Palestinian lands, rule over the Palestinian people in an Apartheid state, step-by-step ethnically cleanse the state, and enforce so-called “peace for peace” by overthrowing neighboring governments that resisted Israel’s land claims.

The Clean Break strategy asserts, “Our claim to the land—to which we have clung for hope for 2000 years—is legitimate and noble,” and goes on to state, “Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon…”

In his 1996 book Fighting Terrorism, Netanyahu set out the new strategy. Israel would not fight the terrorists; it would fight the states that support the terrorists. More accurately, it would get the US to do Israel’s fighting for it. As he elaborated in 2001:

The first and most crucial thing to understand is this: There is no international terrorism without the support of sovereign states… Take away all this state support, and the entire scaffolding of international terrorism will collapse into dust.

Netanyahu’s strategy was integrated into U.S. foreign policy. Taking out Syria was always a key part of the plan. This was confirmed to General Wesley Clark after 9/11. He was told, during a visit at the Pentagon, that “we’re going to attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years—we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.” Iraq would be first, then Syria, and the rest. (Netanyahu’s campaign for the Iraq War is spelled out in detail in Dennis Fritz’s new book, Deadly Betrayal. The role of the Israel Lobby is spelled out in Ilan Pappé’s new book, Lobbying for Zionism on Both Sides of the Atlantic). The insurgency that hit U.S. troops in Iraq set back the five-year timeline, but did not change the basic strategy.

The U.S. has by now led or sponsored wars against Iraq (invasion in 2003), Lebanon (U.S. funding and arming Israel), Libya (NATO bombing in 2011), Syria (CIA operation during 2010’s), Sudan (supporting rebels to break Sudan apart in 2011), and Somalia (backing Ethiopia’s invasion in 2006). A prospective U.S. war with Iran, ardently sought by Israel, is still pending.

Strange as it might seem, the CIA has repeatedly backed Islamist Jihadists to fight these wars, and jihadists have just toppled the Syrian regime. The CIA, after all, helped to create al-Qaeda in the first place by training, arming, and financing the Mujahideen in Afghanistan from the late 1970s onward. Yes, Osama bin Laden later turned on the U.S., but his movement was a U.S. creation all the same. Ironically, as Seymour Hersh confirms, it was Assad’s intelligence that “tipped off the U.S. to an impending Al Qaeda bombing attack on the headquarters of the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet.”

Operation Timber Sycamore was a billion-dollar CIA covert program launched by Obama to overthrow Bashar al-Assad. The CIA funded, trained, and provided intelligence to radical and extreme Islamist groups. The CIA effort also involved a “rat line” to run weapons from Libya (attacked by NATO in 2011) to the jihadists in Syria. In 2014, Seymour Hersh described the operation in his piece “The Red Line and the Rat Line”:

“A highly classified annex to the report, not made public, described a secret agreement reached in early 2012 between the Obama and Erdoğan administrations. It pertained to the rat line. By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria.”

Soon after the launch of Timber Sycamore, in March 2013, at a joint conference by President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House, Obama said: “With respect to Syria, the United States continues to work with allies and friends and the Syrian opposition to hasten the end of Assad’s rule.”

To the U.S.-Israeli Zionist mentality, a call for negotiation by an adversary is taken as a sign of weakness of the adversary. Those who call for negotiations on the other side typically end up dead—murdered by Israel or U.S. assets. We’ve seen this play out recently in Lebanon. The Lebanese Foreign Minister confirmed that Hassan Nasrallah, Former Secretary-General of Hezbollah had agreed to a ceasefire with Israel days before his assassination. Hezbollah’s willingness to accept a peace agreement according to the Arab-Islamic world’s wishes of a two-state solution is long-standing. Similarly, instead of negotiating to end the war in Gaza, Israel assassinated Hamas’ political chief, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran.

Similarly in Syria, instead of allowing for a political solution to emerge, the U.S. opposed the peace process multiple times. In 2012, the UN had negotiated a peace agreement in Syria that was blocked by the Americans, who demanded that Assad must go on the first day of the peace agreement. The U.S. wanted regime change, not peace. In September 2024, Netanyahu addressed the General Assembly with a map of the Middle East divided between “Blessing” and “Curse,” with Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran as part of Netanyahu’s curse. The real curse is Israel’s path of mayhem and war, which has now engulfed Lebanon and Syria, with Netayahu’s fervent hope to draw the U.S. into war with Iran as well.

The U.S. and Israel are high-fiving that they have successfully wrecked yet another adversary of Israel and defender of the Palestinian cause, with Netanyahu claiming “credit for starting the historic process.” Most likely Syria will now succumb to continued war among the many armed protagonists, as has happened in the previous U.S.-Israeli regime-change operations.

In short, American interference, at the behest of Netanyahu’s Israel, has left the Middle East in ruins, with over a million dead and open wars raging in Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine, and with Iran on the brink of a nuclear arsenal, being pushed against its own inclinations to this eventuality.

All this is in the service of a profoundly unjust cause: to deny Palestinians their political rights in the service of Zionist extremism based on the 7th century BCE Book of Joshua. Remarkably, according to that text—one relied on by Israel’s own religious zealots—the Israelites were not even the original inhabitants of the land. Rather, according the text, God instructs Joshua and his warriors to commit multiple genocides to conquer the land.

Against this backdrop, the Arab-Islamic nations and indeed almost all of the world have repeatedly united in the call for a two-state solution and peace between Israel and Palestine.

Instead of the two-state solution, Israel and the U.S. have made a desert and called it peace.

December 13, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Imperial Assisted Suicide

By John Weeks | The Libertarian Institute | March 11, 2024

The United States Imperial Government (USIG) claims to be keeping the peace, underwriting the liberal, rules-based international order and safeguarding the global security architecture. This is not true. What the USIG is actually doing is killing people, helping get lots of people killed, and assisting foreign states as they commit corporate suicide. Israel’s ongoing, “plausibly genocidal” slaughter in Gaza and the West Bank is the latest example of this.

The United States is an empire and empire is murder-suicide. Since 9/11, U.S. soldiers have directly killed more than 400,000 civilians and indirectly contributed to the deaths of more than four million civilians. Meanwhile, more soldiers who served in the U.S. government’s Global War On Terror have committed suicide than have been killed in combat. Four times more.

The American People have not escaped suffering as the USIG and its empire have dished out catastrophic devastation in Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Pakistan, Egypt, Yemen, Libya, Syria, and Mali. The cost of living has exploded. Our infrastructure is in shambles. Public trust in government has collapsed. The military’s “recruitment landscape” is in free fall. And things are so bad at home the government has found a new job: attacking “tent cities” filled with “under-sheltered” people. Murder-suicide.

Then there are the vassal or “client” states. In the propaganda, the empire defends these states from…whatever. But in reality, it helps these states murder people all while creating the conditions for these states to kill themselves. This has been demonstrated recently in Afghanistan (state committed suicide), Ukraine (state is trying to commit suicide) and Israel (state is thinking about committing suicide).

In October, 2001, the USIG invaded Afghanistan and smashed the Taliban-controlled state. In its place was installed a new state with a new military, which Libertarian Institute Director Scott Horton describes:

“The new regime was also largely a coalition government of ethnic minorities, the Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Hazaras, being leveraged against the 40 percent plurality Pashtuns, dominant in the east and south of the country where the Taliban are from.”

This coalition regime could not exist without billions of U.S. dollars in its coffers, U.S. boots on the ground, and U.S. air power in the sky. As predicted by Horton, as soon as U.S. forces began their withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Afghan state (along with its military) immediately killed itself. The Taliban resurrected their state which the U.S. had smashed almost twenty years earlier.

In February 2014, the USIG backed a violent, neo-Nazi led coup in Ukraine. Instead of smashing the entire state, the coup overthrew President Viktor Yanukovych’s administration. Unlike Afghanistan’s anti-Taliban government in a box, the Ukrainian government under new management was capable of existing without a massive U.S. military presence. It was not, however, capable of winning a war with Russia. It took eight years, but the USIG managed to provoke a war with Russia.

Ukraine has been defeated but the imperial wizards in DC refuse to admit this truth and seek peace. There could have been a peace deal two years ago, when it was still fashionable for Americans to fly the Ukrainian flag outside their front doors, but the USIG crushed it. The Ukrainian state is bleeding out and continuing the war at this point puts the entire Ukrainian nation at risk. Russia could seize all of Ukraine and downgrade it from sovereign nation to a Russian aircraft carrier.

Israel has been fortunate to never have its state murdered or regime changed by the USIG. Quite the opposite; Israel has intervened in USIG affairs to a shocking extent. The Israel lobby wields massive influence in Washington DC, so much so that President Joe Biden is risking his re-election chances by refusing to stop producing Israel’s “plausibly genocidal” mass killing spree in Gaza.

This gleeful and live streamed spree of sadism has not been good for Israel. Its state is provoking the global community to view it as a deranged pariah, including the great powers of Russia and China. Even within America, the people want a ceasefire. We want it to stop.

Meanwhile, Israeli society is cracking. Approximately 200,000 Israelis have been displaced from their homes in the south and north of the country. The IDF has suffered thousands of casualties, the economy is destabilized, and fear has blanketed the land.

And now Israel is planning an invasion of southern Lebanon. Such an invasion would be a hoped for but unexpected gift to Hamas. Experts such as Col. Douglas Macgregor, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Lt. Col Daniel Davis, Alastair Crooke, John Mearsheimer and Robert Pape have all warned against the invasion. They have argued that Israel risks catastrophic fallout from such a move, from mass causalities to provoking a regional war and even suffering strategic defeat.

Israel supporters seem confident in its security state, despite its massive failure on October 7. Tel Aviv appears to be operating with the assurance that the U.S. military will step in with strike packages and boots on the ground if and when needed. And yes, DC will let American cities die while it views Israel as too big to fail.

But the empire is beset by incompetence and anyone who paid attention to the self-immolation of the Afghan state and the slow suicide of the Ukrainian state knows this isn’t going to end well.

Taiwan, watch your six.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Middle East and US Terrorist Activities

By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – 08.06.2023

Incredibly high civilian casualty rates from American-led military adventurism in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, Libya, and Somalia have been revealed in a new research by Brown University’s The Cost of War Project in the State of Rhode Island. The report provides direct data on the victims of the war in which nearly a million people were killed by the US efforts.

According to the study, another important aspect that has indirectly killed several million more people is the military destruction of the economy, public services, infrastructure and the environment, which increases the death toll long after the bombs have been dropped and increases over time. The report estimates that these factors contributed to more than 3.5 million deaths. This aspect requires more research, and the project specifically emphasizes that “the many long-term and underestimated consequences of war” need to be explored in more detail.

Another study shows that the number of direct casualties from wars that killed nearly a million people is an understatement, which the report again refers to by saying that “the exact death toll remains unknown.” In another section of the project’s report on the Iraqi death toll, it says that “estimates of the Iraqi war death toll have been particularly inconsistent. The Lancet 2006 estimated that approximately 600,000 Iraqis died as a result of military violence between 2003 and 2006.” The report goes on to say that the controversy over conflicting reports about the death toll in Iraq stems from news reports estimates, with some exaggerating the death toll while those who supported the illegal invasion downplayed the death toll.

The project cites a report in The Lancet that says the death toll in Iraq since 2003 and in the next three years alone reached 600,000 Iraqis. Various unbiased studies have been conducted, concluding that more than one million Iraqis were killed as a result of the US invasion and occupation of Iraq from 2003 to 2011.

Even the one million mark in Iraqi deaths could be considered an understatement when there were daily reports of almost daily terrorist bombings that killed hundreds of Iraqis. And then, add to that the US and DAESH era from 2014 to 2017, when hundreds of thousands more people were killed, and it’s not hard to imagine that over a million Iraqis have died and continue to die today as a result of the US so-called “war on terror.”

There is no doubt that the US military presence has brought nothing but insecurity and instability to West Asia. In January 2018, Leader of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Khamenei said: “What is important is that the corruptive presence of the US in this region must end… They (Americans) have brought war, discord, sedition and destruction to this region; they brought about destruction of infrastructures. Of course, they do this everywhere in the world… It must be stopped.”

The Cost of War Project’s latest study also warns that “these wars continue to affect millions of people around the world, who live with their consequences and die from them.” The report focuses on the impact of the wars unleashed by the United States on women and children, who “bear the brunt of these ongoing consequences.”

The report notes that while some people have died in combat, many more, especially children, have died as a result of the negative effects of wars, such as the spread of disease and damage to public services. “More research is needed on the impact of the destruction of public services by war, especially outside the health care system, on public health,” the report says. “Damage to water and sanitation systems, roads and commercial infrastructure such as ports, for example, has significant and important negative consequences.”

The study says that the wars and conflicts the United States has fought or been involved in under the pretext of supposedly fighting terrorism since September 11, 2001, clearly show that the consequences of the ongoing violence of war are so vast and complex that they cannot be measured. It should be noted that after the 9/11 attacks, the US waged wars and fomented conflicts, especially in West Asia, under the pretext of fighting terrorism. However, as a result of US military adventurism, there has been an extremely dramatic increase in terrorist groups that had no presence in West Asia or countries such as Somalia prior to Washington’s military intervention in the region.

In other words, the so-called “war on terror” has had the opposite effect from the stated goal of Pentagon’s campaign of instability in West Asia, which has allowed terrorism to flourish. In other words, and many experts agree, the presence of US troops and US policies in the Middle East and other parts of the world have only led to the direct growth of terrorism and terrorist organizations that have destabilized peace and tranquility in those parts of the world.

The report states that the damage and continued deaths caused by the wars mean that those who have unleashed them must take responsibility, including financial responsibility for repairing the damage caused. Suffice it to recall how the American clown of a Secretary of State Colin Powell shook some test tube of incomprehensible white powder on the UN podium and hysterically frightened the whole world with unthinkable troubles from Saddam Hussein. And that was the reason for the barbaric and unjustifiable attack on sovereign Iraq in 2003, from which the Iraqis are still unable to recover and rebuild their state.

Iraqis, and indeed millions of other people, still suffer from distress, pain and trauma in both current and former war zones, according to the study, which calls on the United States as well as its allies to ease the continuing loss and suffering of millions and provide the required “reparations, though not easy, and cheap.” It is something “imperative,” the report notes.

The project correctly and very justifiably blames the US for its role in the military adventurism it embarked on after 9/11, particularly the casualties inflicted during the American two-year war and the 20 year of occupation of Afghanistan. The report focuses on Afghanistan as an example of how people, particularly women and children, the most vulnerable in society, are dying because, despite the indiscriminate withdrawal (or rather shameful flight) of US troops, the damage Washington has done to Afghanistan’s vital services, such as its health sector, sanitation and other infrastructure over 20 years of war and occupation, means that Afghans are still dying today. “Although the United States withdrew military forces from Afghanistan in 2021, officially ending the war that began with its invasion 20 years ago, Afghans are suffering and dying from war-related causes today more often than ever,” the report notes alarmingly.

The Cost of War Project says that much more research is needed to gather more adequate data “to guide life-saving actions.” “More research is needed on the impact of the destruction of public services by war, especially outside the health care system, on public health,” the report notes. “Damage to water and sanitation systems, roads and commercial infrastructure such as ports, for example, has significant consequences.”

In the case of Somalia, for example, the US intervention and the ensuing war prevented the delivery of humanitarian aid, which, according to the study, exacerbated the famine. This is a natural disaster that could have been mitigated if the US had instead chosen to spend a huge amount of money on humanitarian aid programs instead of radicalizing the local population (and increasing terrorism and bloodshed) by bombing civilians with drones. The section of the report reads: “While all belligerents must be held accountable, in the causation sections this report addresses the relevant consequences of the actions of the United States, as the primary power responsible for all these crimes.”

Critics argue that if the United States had not fought wars against West Asian countries or provoked conflicts in the region, other parties would not have participated in any combat missions. In this case, the US should be solely responsible for the disturbing direct and indirect death toll resulting from its provocative and illegal military measures. Washington’s policy of intimidation, military adventurism and terrorism against peace-loving nations of the world must end. And this is the will and aspiration of peoples who want to live in peace and prosperity, without wars and aggressions, and to follow the path of building a new multipolar world, actively promoted by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

June 8, 2023 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Up to 4.5 Million Dead in ‘Post-9/11 War Zones’ – Study

By Will Porter | The Libertarian Institute | May 16, 2023

The far-reaching effects of America’s War on Terror may have contributed to the deaths of some 4.5 million people, according to new research by Brown University’s ‘Costs of War’ project. While many of the fatalities were the direct result of violent conflict, indirect causes such as economic collapse and food insecurity have taken a far greater toll.

Published on Monday, the study examines the long-term impact of the “post-9/11 wars” and the “devastating indirect toll” inflicted in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, Libya and Somalia – all nations subject to US military intervention since 2001.

“Some of these people were killed in the fighting, but far more, especially children, have been killed by the reverberating effects of war, such as the spread of disease,” the paper said. “These latter indirect deaths – estimated at 3.6-3.7 million – and related health problems have resulted from the post-9/11 wars’ destruction of economies, public services, and the environment.”

Though the researchers acknowledged that the true total figure remains unknown, the study reviews a wide range of factors contributing to mortality. Those include economic collapse and the resulting loss of livelihood for local residents, the destruction of health infrastructure and public services, environmental contamination, as well as other cultural effects of war that can lead to further violence down the line.

“While this research does not ascribe blame to any single warring party or factor, and neither does it suggest the full death count is quantifiable, a reasonable and conservative estimate suggests that at least 4.5 million people have died in the major post-9/11 war zones,” the study concluded.

It went on to stress that “body counts are complicated and controversial,” and that tallying deaths from indirect causes is even more difficult, suggesting its figures are merely a tentative estimate based on a variety of sources.

The researchers found staggering levels of child malnutrition in some of the affected countries, with Afghanistan and Yemen topping the list. In the wake of Washington’s two-decade military occupation, more than 3 million Afghan children are now experiencing wasting, a symptom of severe, potentially life-threatening malnutrition.

Last year, Doctors Without Borders warned of a “worrying increase” in Afghanistan’s malnutrition rates, citing “the suspension of international aid” as among the primary causes. A special representative for the United Nations, Dr. Ramiz Alakbarov, described the situation as “almost inconceivable,” adding that up to 95 percent of Afghans were “not eating enough food, with that percentage rising to almost 100 percent for female-headed households.”

UN emergency aid coordinator Martin Griffiths has also attributed the crisis in Afghanistan, in part, to international sanctions and the seizure of government bank accounts following the Taliban’s sudden rise to power in the summer of 2021.

The study found that more than 2 million children in Yemen were also suffering from wasting following eight years of brutal bombings by Saudi Arabia and its allies, which have all but crippled the country’s healthcare sector. Riyadh has received indispensable support from the United States throughout the conflict despite countless reports of attacks on civilians and infrastructure, including hospitals, clinics, homes, factories, farms and bridges. A UN estimate in late 2021 suggested some 377,000 people had been killed in Yemen since the war erupted in 2015, with 70 percent thought to be children under the age of 5.

The Costs of War authors said the study aimed to “convey the scale of the suffering” in the war-torn nations, stating the “urgent need to mitigate the damage” inflicted by US military interventions and their long-term and indirect consequences. They added that additional research is needed on the subject, voicing hopes such work could “prevent further loss of life,” as America’s post-9/11 wars “are ongoing for millions around the world who are living with and dying from their effects.”

May 16, 2023 Posted by | Militarism, War Crimes | , , , , , , | 2 Comments

US ramping up drone strikes in Middle East and Africa

Experts believe indiscriminate use of drones is the key contributor to overall instability across the troubled regions in which they’re deployed

By Drago Bosnic | August 23, 2022

Drone strikes have been an integral part of US aggression against the world for over two decades now. These strikes have been the mainstay of joint military-intelligence black ops, especially in the Middle East and Africa. From the mountains of Afghanistan to the deserts of Libya, US strikes drones have been sowing death and destruction, ever so euphemistically called “spreading freedom and democracy.” 

These drones, first used only for ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) missions, were modified for rudimentary strike roles and were first tested in former Yugoslavia, laying the groundwork for their later usage in various US invasions. The strikes were massively expanded under Barack Obama, with thousands being approved by his administration. After Donald Trump came to power, he officially reduced the number of drone strikes, although they now became more specific, with US intelligence services getting even more involved. However, since Joe Biden took office, it seems the trend has now been reversed and US drones are coming back in full force.

On August 19 conflict monitors drew attention to a series of US strikes in Somalia, which have escalated significantly in the last couple of months. These attacks have gained little to no attention in the US corporate mass media despite resulting in the deaths of more than 20 people.

“If you were unaware that we were bombing Somalia, don’t feel bad, this is a completely under-the-radar news story, one that was curiously absent from the headlines in all of the major newspapers this morning,” wrote Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, a senior adviser at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

Last Wednesday, Dave DeCamp, writing for AntiWar reported that the US AFRICOM (Africa Command) launched its second strike on Somalia in less than a week. AFRICOM claims the attack, which occurred in Beledweyne, “had killed 13 fighters belonging to the al-Qaeda-linked Somali militant group al-Shabaab, and that no civilians were harmed.” AFRICOM claims drone strikes also killed four al-Shabaab members in three separate operations near Beledweyne on August 9, two fighters near Labi Kus on July 17, and five militants in a June 3 bombing outside Beer Xani.

All of the aforementioned strikes have taken place since President Biden approved the redeployment of hundreds of special forces to Somalia in May, reversing an earlier withdrawal decision under the administration of former President Donald Trump. DeCamp noted that Trump’s withdrawal from Somalia merely “repositioned troops in neighboring Djibouti and Kenya, allowing the drone war to continue. But Biden has launched significantly fewer strikes in Somalia compared to his predecessor.”

According to the London-based Airwars monitoring group, US forces have targeted Somalia at least 16 times since Joe Biden took office, killing between 465 and 545 supposed militants. On March 13, a single US drone strike reportedly killed up to 200 alleged militants. Airwars claims there were civilian casualties in just one of the drone attacks under the Biden administration, conducted in June 2021. The attack on the southern town of Ceel Cadde killed a woman named Sahro Adan Warsame and seriously injured five of her children, according to local media reports. US forces have carried out at least 260 strikes in Somalia since 2007. The Pentagon has so far admitted killing five civilians and wounding 11 others, but Airwars claims 78-153 civilians, including 20-23 children, have died in US attacks.

“Bottom line, it’s been a long time since the United States was not bombing Somalia,” wrote Vlahos. “This comes after a particularly bloody period during the [so-called War on Terror] in which the CIA was using the country to detain and torture terror suspects from across North Africa. Whether this has ultimately been a good thing for the country or for the broader security of the region, one need only to look at the continued instability and impoverishment of the people,” she added, “and of course, the persistent presence of al-Shabaab itself.”

In addition to Somalia, recent reports indicate that US drones have been reactivated over Libya as well. The US shows no intention of stopping these strikes, with most now being relegated to intelligence services, such as the infamous CIA, with minimal civilian oversight. Many experts believe the indiscriminate use of these drones is a major, if not the key contributor to the overall instability across the troubled regions in which they’re deployed, as the terrorist activity which they’re allegedly there to stop is only exacerbated as a result.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

August 23, 2022 Posted by | War Crimes | , , , | 1 Comment

« Previous Entries