Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Will Trump Deliver Peace?

Glenn Diesen | January 11, 2025

I had a conversation with Professor Jeffrey Sachs and Alexander Mercouris about the possibility of Trump delivering peace in the Middle East and Ukraine. Trump recently posted a video of Professor Sachs criticising the presentation of international conflicts as a struggle between democracy and authoritarianism. In the video, Professor Sachs also scolded Netanyahu and blamed Israel for America’s wars in the Middle East over the past 30 years (Netanyahu will reportedly not attend Trump’s inauguration). Trump has also recognised that NATO expansionism was the source of the proxy war in Ukraine, and has been vocal about his desire to end the proxy.

These actions give some reason for cautious optimism that peace can be achieved at a time when the world appears to be heading toward major wars. The false narratives that conflict in the world derives from a struggle between democracy and authoritarianism create a dangerous Manichaean worldview. Peace then requires good defeating evil, while compromise and workable peace are derided as appeasement. Anyone contesting the Manichaean worldview can be accused of betraying liberal democratic values. Trump has many flaws, but his greatest strength is his ability to say what he wants and break away from the West’s ideological narratives and Manichaean worldview. By recognising the security interests of rival powers (a big taboo in the West), Trump can also mitigate these concerns as the foundation for any durable peace.

Jeffrey Sachs, Alexander Mercouris & Glenn Diesen on the Duran:

January 12, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Video, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , , | 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

War in Sudan and its Grim Prospects

By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – November 29, 2024

Russia used its veto power in the UN Security Council (UNSC) to block a draft resolution calling for an end to the 20-month war in Sudan and the commencement of negotiations between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

The draft resolution, widely seen as neo-colonial in its design, was proposed by the UK, which holds the UNSC presidency on Sudan, and Sierra Leone, a non-permanent UNSC member, which London appears to have pressured into supporting Western interests in this instance.

Reasons for the Russian Veto

During the drafting process leading up to the vote, several concerns regarding the wording were raised. However, following the vote, it became clear that constructive proposals from UNSC members were disregarded, and their legitimate concerns were not adequately addressed. The Chinese representative stressed that any UNSC resolution or action must “respect the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of Sudan.” He warned that, “Imposing external solutions will only worsen the situation and will neither help end the war nor protect the civilian population.”

Explaining the outcome of the vote, the Russian representative stated: “The main problem with the British draft lies in its misunderstanding of who bears responsibility for protecting the civilian population, as well as border control and security within the country.” According to the Russian representative, “this should be exclusively a matter for the Sudanese government.” He further accused British diplomats of “clearly denying Sudan this right.” He concluded, “Our country will continue to consistently use its veto power to prevent such occurrences against our African brothers.”

Sudanese Support

According to Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the draft resolution’s wording violated Sudan’s sovereignty. An Arab diplomatic source at the UN explained al-Burhan’s position, stating that the draft “implied an equivalence between the SAF and the RSF, which is something al-Burhan could not accept, especially now that the army is making gains on the ground and receiving stronger political support regionally and internationally.”

Many diplomatic sources in the region agree that the draft resolution failed to reflect the balance of power on the ground, which, according to one, has “definitely shifted in favour of the SAF.” The army currently controls much of Sudanese territory, and al-Burhan enjoys greater international recognition than the RSF and its leader, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, also known as Hemeti. They point out that Hemeti heads the RSF, a militia created in 2013 by Omar al-Bashir to protect his brutal regime and responsible for numerous atrocities, particularly in Darfur. Hemeti, along with other RSF figures, has been accused by international humanitarian organisations of ethnic cleansing targeting non-Arab tribes in West Darfur.

The Rift Between al-Burhan and Hemeti

Al-Burhan appointed Hemeti as his deputy on the Transitional Sovereign Council (TSC) formed after the overthrow of al-Bashir. This move drew criticism from the African Union, which stated that it was “a very bad sign, showing that al-Bashir’s successors were attempting to recreate his dictatorial regime, albeit under a democratic façade.” The TSC, it seems, was designed more for the internal distribution of power within al-Bashir’s clique than for any other purpose.

The conflict began in mid-April 2023. Following al-Bashir’s removal, al-Burhan and Hemeti initially joined forces, seizing control but allowing for limited power-sharing with civilians. However, when al-Burhan dismissed the interim civilian government in October 2022, Hemeti seized the opportunity to oppose al-Burhan, claiming the move was “anti-democratic.” According to Arab diplomatic sources, including those who served in Khartoum, Hemeti’s pronouncements on democracy ring hollow. In reality, they say, Hemeti has always aspired to power and believed he could strike a deal with the civilian government to replace al-Burhan as commander-in-chief.

Sudan’s problems are largely driven by regional powers vying for control of the country’s natural resources and exploiting its strategic location. It’s no secret that an Arab capital, with significant investments and interests in Sudan, pushed the West to draft a self-serving resolution which they attempted to sneak through the UNSC. They failed! However, the West remains undeterred, continuing its sophisticated attempts to bring Sudan entirely under its control.

Attempts to Resolve the Conflict

The international community has been closely monitoring the situation in Sudan since the conflict began and, over the past year, has been working with like-minded regional partners to create an opportunity for peace. Cairo, a view shared by Ankara and Tehran, believes that the best chance for peace lies in a unified Sudanese army under a single command, arguing that “otherwise, the country will simply move from one war to another.” Over the past 11 months, a series of meetings have been held in Cairo with representatives from Sudan’s armed, political, and religious forces, aiming to forge a united front capable of cooperating with the SAF based on power-sharing and stability. As the SAF has made military gains against the RSF, the number of Sudanese actors willing to participate has increased. Many believe it is only a matter of time before the RSF is forced to acknowledge its weakening position, despite the support it receives from regional allies.

Since the start of the war, 11 million Sudanese have been displaced. The UN estimates that half are children, the majority of whom lack access to basic nutrition. Furthermore, a further 15 million Sudanese are suffering from food insecurity and a lack of access to essential healthcare.

It was only in mid-August that significant UN humanitarian aid reached Sudan via the Adre crossing point connecting Darfur to Chad. According to the UNHCR, just over 50% of the $2.7 billion budget required for humanitarian assistance in Sudan has been secured in 2023. The UN believes that “Sudan needs more than just immediate humanitarian aid; it needs a proper and workable peace plan. This is what we are working on, and we have the support of several global and regional capitals.”

According to David Patteritt, US envoy to Sudan, outgoing US President Joe Biden is making every effort to secure a deal on Sudan before leaving office on 20 January. However, according to Cairo’s Al-Ahram, this deadline is overly optimistic. The newspaper warns that “we’ll be lucky to see any movement by then, and a deal will take considerably longer,” suggesting that much will depend on the stance of US President Donald Trump’s new administration.

It is therefore abundantly clear who is fanning the flames of civil war in Sudan, attempting to profit from the Sudanese people’s suffering. But this is the 2020s, and neo-colonial politics, however alluringly packaged, no longer hold sway.

Victor Mikhin is a Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences (RANS).

November 29, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | Leave a comment

“Political Engineering” From Abroad Is Responsible For The Sudanese Crisis

BY ANDREW KORYBKO | APRIL 27, 2023

Russian Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Anna Yevstigneyeva shared her thoughts earlier this week about the root cause of the Sudanese Crisis. According to her:

“We must state that the current Sudanese crisis was largely caused by an external interference in Sudanese sovereign affairs, attempts at forced political engineering in the country and imposing democratic recipes on it.

Security sector reform in the country was among the most complicated issues that required elevated attention and a thorough negotiations process. At the same time, we saw that many external actors tried to enforce the transfer of authority to civil powers artificially, and imposed a number of decisions that were not supported among broader population.

Some states widely promoted the political framework of 5 December 2022, but it failed to become an inclusive platform for various Sudanese forces. This format left behind some of Sudan’s political heavyweights. Such an approach could hardly help to promote a comprehensive settlement.”

The present piece will now elaborate more on why she’s right, which is important to understand since such “political engineering” from abroad can result in more crises elsewhere in the coming future.

Former Sudanese President Bashir was a long-time foe of the US, which supported his ouster in early 2019 after a military coup took advantage of an incipient Color Revolution. Chief General Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan from the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (“Hemedti”) of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) cooperated to this end but then fell out with one another afterwards. Their resultant feud greatly complicated Sudan’s post-coup political transition to civilian rule.

The US diplomatically intervened in this process on the pretext of “protecting democracy”, which enabled it to unprecedentedly deepen its influence in Sudan. With this inside view into that country’s most sensitive political affairs, it learned just how serious the divisions were between Burhan and Hemedti as well as between the military and the population. This insight would have informed its policymakers that meddling in Sudan’s transition posed a very real risk of provoking conflict.

That cynically seems to be precisely what the US was hoping for in hindsight so as to artificially manufacture a crisis that could subsequently be exploited to push back against Russian influence there exactly as was explained at length in this recent analysis here. To that end, it pressured Sudan to accelerate its security sector reform on the grounds that this would speed up its democratic transition, but which was intended all along to force Burhan into making a power play against Hemedti.

Had there been no such reform in the first place or if it was decoupled from the transition to civilian rule, then those two influential figures might have peacefully worked out their differences or at least agreed not to interfere in the other’s economic and security affairs. In that scenario, however, the US would have feared that the continued existence of Hemedti’s independent power center within the armed forces could be taken advantage of by Russia/Wagner to pose a latent threat to its influence in Sudan.

That’s not to suggest that Russia/Wagner had any such intentions, but just to point out the fears that influenced US policymakers to plunge Sudan into crisis by pressuring it to accelerate security sector reform with the intent of provoking a “deep state” war. Burhan was assessed by them as being much more reliable than Hemedti, especially since the former is considered an Egyptian proxy while the latter admitted that he used to have “a good relationship” with Wagner prior to them being sanctioned.

The US didn’t expect Hemedti to put up such an impressive fight, having likely calculated prior to the outbreak of this artificially manufactured crisis that the RSF would either be swiftly subordinated to the SAF or dissolved. That outcome would have much more smoothly expanded the US’ influence in Sudan, but the conflict that Burhan’s power play against Hemedti sparked can also be exploited by it to this end too, albeit at a reduced pace and with the risk of weakening US influence.

If the US-backed SAF are defeated or enter into some sort of peace deal with the RSF that preserves the second’s independent power center, then this “deep state” war that the US artificially manufactured wouldn’t advance its strategic interests. The former scenario would be counterproductive to the aforesaid while the latter would restore the status quo ante bellum and thus leave open the possibility of Russia/Wagner working through the RSF to curtail the expansion of US influence in Sudan.

Nevertheless, the US would prefer the second scenario if forced by circumstances to choose between them, which could explain why it’s urgently calling for a ceasefire after the SAF underperformed and didn’t come anywhere close to meeting policymakers’ expectations. They might calculate that it’s better to have a lull in fighting that safeguards US influence in Sudan and possibly creates the opportunity for the SAF to subvert the RSF through non-kinetic means under the cover of the democratic transition.

In any case, it’s unlikely that the US will leave the RSF alone since its policymakers have already arguably concluded – whether rightly or wrongly – that it’s the greatest threat to their country’s influence in Sudan. This assessment suggests that it’ll continue working against that group’s interests one way or another, which it’s already begun doing through its information warfare campaign fearmongering about the RSF’s ties with Russia/Wagner.

Accusations of war crimes might soon follow, after which sanctions could be imposed too. It also can’t be ruled out that the US would support a more direct Egyptian role in the conflict if Burhan appears on the brink of defeat and Hemedti refuses to cut a power-sharing deal with him. A direct US intervention is also possible under the “humanitarian intervention”/“Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) pretext. Observers should therefore closely monitor this “deep state” war for any signs of these scenarios unfolding.

Returning to Yevstigneyeva’s analysis of this conflict’s origins, which was elaborated throughout the present piece, the importance lies in the fact that the meddling model that she described can be applied against other countries too. US pressure on them to implement security reform, especially in those countries undergoing democratic transitions from military rule, could spark similar crises as Sudan’s. Upon becoming aware of such demands, one can likely predict the next New Cold War battleground.

April 27, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

A Senior Pentagon Official Strongly Implied Impending “Mission Creep” In Sudan

BY ANDREW KORYBKO | APRIL 23, 2023

The US evacuated a little less than 100 of its diplomats, their families, and a “small number” of other countries’ diplomats from the Sudanese capital of Khartoum on Saturday. The mission was launched from a base in nearby Djibouti, refueled in neighboring Ethiopia, and then spent less than an hour on the ground before departing that war-torn country. That could have closed the book on the US’ military involvement in Sudan had a senior Pentagon official not told reporters about what’s being planned next.

CNN reported that Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict Chris Maier said the following in a call with journalists sometime after the evacuation ended:

“In the coming days, we will continue to work with the State Department to help American citizens who may want to leave Sudan. One of those ways is to potentially make the overland routes out of Sudan potentially more viable.

[The Department of Defense] is at present considering action that may include use of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities to be able to observe routes and detect threats.

Secondly, the employment of naval assets outside the port of Sudan to potentially help Americans who arrive at the port, and third, the establishment at the US Africa Command in Stuttgart deconfliction cell focused particularly on the overland route.”

Instead of washing its hands of this “deep state” war that risks turning into a civil and even international war, the US is getting drawn into “mission creep” on the pretext of evacuating its remaining citizens.

CNN mentioned in their report that “Officials told staffers (from the State Department) that there could be an estimated 16,000 Americans in Sudan, most of whom are dual nationals.” This means that foreign-born US citizens who returned to their homeland for whatever reason are being exploited as the “justification” for redirecting intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities there, possibly deploying naval assets to its main port, and creating a “deconfliction cell” for managing events.

In simple English, the Pentagon will likely use a combination of drones, electronic means, and satellites to spy on the Sudanese Armed Forces’ (SAF) Rapid Support Forces (RSF) opponents, after which they’ll dispatch warships to Port Sudan that’ll be organized by AFRICOM’s newest (warfighting) “cell”. Those vessels can either carry armed aid (irrespective of whether it’s disguised as humanitarian aid) for the SAF and/or be capable of conducting their own offensive actions against the RSF under certain conditions.

The so-called “overland routes out of Sudan” that the Pentagon wants to “make… potentially more viable” could be sold to the public as a “humanitarian corridor” but will in reality function as a means for supplying the SAF. The “deconfliction” element of this equation purely refers to the contact that the US also has with the RSF, whom Undersecretary of State for Management John Bass said on Saturday “cooperated to the extent that they did not fire on our service members in the course of the operation.”

In the emerging context of “mission creep”, the Pentagon could simply warn the RSF not to impede the creation of these “overland routes out of Sudan” just like they stayed out of the way during Saturday’s evacuation under threat of being bombed on “humanitarian” pretexts if they don’t. The American public could easily be manipulated into supporting this action if they’re misled to believe that “Russian-/Wagner-backed insurgents/terrorists are holding approximately 16,000 US citizens hostage in Africa”.

Therein lies the importance of the latest narrative being pushed by the Mainstream Media (MSM) suggesting that this entire conflict is Russia’s fault, the false claims of which were reviewed and analyzed in this piece here. Basically, the US sees an opportunity to proverbially kill multiple birds with one stone on a Russophobic basis, which could ultimately result in them putting Moscow on the backfoot in Africa and securing a symbolic victory in this little-discussed but hugely significant New Cold War front.

Policymakers don’t truly care about those Americans that are stranded in Sudan, especially since the majority of them are thought to be dual nationals, but they see a chance to exploit the “humanitarian” optics as part of a larger power play against Russia. The first step was to safely evacuate US diplomats since it’s those citizens who lives are truly valued by the government after it invested a considerable sum in each of them over the course of their careers. Everyone else is expandable in their view.

Now that its “VIPs” are out of harm’s way, the US can up the ante in Sudan on a “humanitarian” pretext as part of its latest anti-Russian proxy war. There’s still the possibility that it’ll reconsider, but events are quickly moving in that direction as evidenced by what the earlier mentioned senior Pentagon official revealed to the media on Saturday about the US’ impending “mission creep”. If it goes ahead with this scenario, then precedent shows that Sudan might become the next Libya, or perhaps even worse.

April 23, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Here’s Why The US Is Trying To Pin The Blame For Sudan’s “Deep State” War On Russia

BY ANDREW KORYBKO | APRIL 21, 2023

Debunking The Latest Fake News Narrative

CNN published an exclusive piece on Thursday alleging that “Evidence emerges of Russia’s Wagner arming militia leader battling Sudan’s army”. They claim that satellite imagery shows increased Russian military transport activity between Libya and Syria in the run-up to Sudan’s “deep state” war. According to CNN, this confirms rumors that General Haftar is supplying Rapid Support Forces’ (RSF) leader General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (“Hamedti”) with surface-to-air missiles (SAM) on behalf of Wagner.

The Wall Street Journal published their own exclusive piece the day prior on Wednesday alleging that “Libyan Militia and Egypt’s Military Back Opposite Sides in Sudan Conflict”, so these two stories complement one another. Both Hamedti and Wagner have denied these claims, however. The Sudanese Ambassador to Russia also confirmed that “Russia is a friendly country to us so we have been in direct contact with [the] Russian Foreign Ministry since the very beginning of those events last Saturday.”

That diplomat’s reaffirmation of Sudan’s close ties with Russia is especially important since he represents the government that’s internationally recognized as being led by Chief General Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, who commands the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and is one of the two figures vying for power. At present, Khartoum therefore doesn’t extend credence to the emerging US-led Western Mainstream Media (MSM) narrative that Russia is arming the RSF via Haftar-Wagner, but that could soon change.

Preconditioning The Public For Another Proxy War  

Unless the present three-day Eid ceasefire holds and leads to the start of peace talks that ultimately end this “deep state” war, which is unlikely since both sides made clear their intent to completely destroy the other, then this conflict is expected to resume in the near future. Should the SAF fail to defeat the RSF and possibly even be placed on the backfoot, then Burhan might gamble that it’s in his best interests to parrot the MSM’s anti-Russian accusations in an attempt to receive direct Western military support.

That scenario isn’t all that far-fetched either considering that the Associated Press and Politico both cited unnamed officials on Thursday to report that the US is assembling additional troops in nearby Djibouti to prepare for the possible evacuation of Americans from Sudan. This pretext could easily be exploited to arm the SAF and/or attack the RSF, especially if the Pentagon claims that the latter tried stopping its operation by building upon last week’s claim that its forces shot at an armored US diplomatic vehicle.

In the event that Burhan repeats the MSM’s emerging anti-Russian narrative and promises to rubbish Sudan’s naval base deal with Moscow upon defeating the RSF, then the Biden Administration can “justify” its military intervention on the basis of “defending Sudanese democracy from a Kremlin coup”. The public would then be told that the latest conflict was sparked by Russia’s support for the “insurgent” RSF, which the MSM would attribute to its interests in defending Wagner’s mining operations there.

American Meddling In Russian-Egyptian Relations

This would predictably precede an unprecedented but preplanned information warfare campaign painting Russia as a “destabilizing” force in Africa, which would be aimed at counteracting its hitherto highly successful efforts at presenting itself as a force of stability in support of legitimate governments. The purpose of this aforesaid operation would be to erode Russia’s newfound “Democratic Security” appeal across the continent with a view towards reversing the decline of Western influence there.

Furthermore, Burhan’s potentially opportunistic piggybacking on the earlier described emerging anti-Russian narrative could have serous implications for Moscow’s ties with Cairo due to the perception of them backing opposite sides in Sudan’s “deep state” war. Russian-Egyptian relations have recently been beset by scandal upon the latest Pentagon leaks alleging that Cairo abandoned its supposedly secret plan to supply rockets to Moscow under pressure from Washington and agreed to arm Kiev instead.

Considering this context, the scenario of Egyptian-backed Burhan blaming Russia for sparking the latest conflict could therefore lead to the rapid deterioration of Russian-Egyptian ties, especially if Cairo decides to indirectly retaliate against Moscow by curtailing its investment rights in Port Said. Those two signed an additional agreement on this industrial zone last month, which was first approved in 2018 and is supposed to help Russia expand its economic engagement with the broader region.

Punishing The Emirates For Its Close Relations With Russia

That goal could be jeopardized if Egypt decides to punish Russia through these means in response to Burhan opportunistically piggybacking on the MSM narrative in an attempt to obtain direct Western military support against the RSF. Furthermore, the UAE’s ties with Egypt and the US could also become much more complicated in that event too since Abu Dhabi is accused of backing reportedly RSF-allied Haftar, being favorable disposed to that armed Sudanese group, and secretly allying with Russia.

The last-mentioned accusation was brought to the public’s attentions as a result of the previously mentioned Pentagon leaks, which were denied by the UAE but coincided with the weakening of its ties with Washington that are partially over that Gulf country’s growing ones with Moscow. There are more factors at play than just the Russian-Emirati relationship, but the point is that the UAE’s problems with the US could be amplified by the MSM if Burhan accuses Russia of arming the RSF via Haftar-Wagner.

It also deserves mentioning that America’s other ulterior interest in its incipient propaganda campaign against Russia in Sudan is to complicate its geopolitical opponent’s logistical connections with the Central African Republic (CAR), which owes its continued existence as a state to Moscow’s military support. The Kremlin largely relies on transit across Sudan in order to supply its forces and its ally’s there, but this could be cut off if Burhan jumps on the anti-Russian bandwagon and revokes Moscow’s privileges.

The Chadian Connection

Lastly, another strategic factor behind this latest information warfare offensive against Russia is that it could ruin that country’s surprisingly solid relations with regional military heavyweight Chad. As explained in this recent analysis here, N’Djamena ended up expelling the German Ambassador earlier this month for meddling instead of the Russian one despite the US telling its counterparts in late February that Moscow is using Wagner in the CAR and Libya to arm anti-government rebels against it.

The Associated Press cited an African analyst from a Western risk assessment firm in their article on Thursday about 320 SAF troops fleeing to Chad to claim that this development could prompt N’Djamena into taking those forces’ side in Sudan’s “deep state” war. According to Benjamin Hunter, “N’Djamena is likely to oppose (Dagalo) due to fears that RSF dominance in Darfur could empower Chadian Arabs to unseat the (president’s) regime. Many within (Dagalo’s) Rizeigat tribe live across the border in Chad.”

If Chad becomes embroiled in Sudan’s “deep state” war on Burhan’s side, then it might be susceptible to Western suggestions that jumping on the anti-Russian bandwagon like he would have already done in this scenario could lead to them suspending their regime change campaign against N’Djamena. Should that happen, then this regional military heavyweight might also support any potentially forthcoming rebel/terrorist offensive that its historical French partner could soon plot against Russia in the CAR.

Concluding Thoughts

Putting everything together, the US plans to achieve the following strategic objectives by introducing the narrative that Russia is arming the RSF:

1. Entice Burhan to extend credence to these claims in exchange for US military support;

2. Demand that he also rescinds Russia’s naval base rights and cuts off its overflight access to the CAR;

3. Consider direct support to the SAF on the pretext of commencing an “evacuation operation” in Sudan;

4. Discredit Russia and the UAE’s African engagement policies by framing both as “destabilizing forces”;

5. Attempt to provoke a crisis in Russia’s relations with Sudan’s Chadian and Egyptian neighbors;

6. Exploit the above scenario to assemble a regional coalition for pushing back against Russia in Africa;

7. Encourage Chad to support a French-backed rebel/terrorist offensive in the Russian-allied CAR;

8. Plot a copycat proxy war in Russian-allied Mali in order to crush the Kremlin’s influence in the Sahel;

9. Perfect this new Hybrid War method prior to employing it all across the continent;

10. And thus turn Africa into the top proxy war battleground of the New Cold War.

The US therefore has many reasons to push this fake news campaign, though it’s unclear whether it’ll ultimately achieve any of its envisaged objectives or not.

April 22, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , , , | Leave a comment

UK Embassy Sought to Pay Sudanese Students to Protest Against Russia

By Wyatt Reed | Sputnik | March 4, 2023

Britain’s Embassy in Sudan attempted to pay students who had studied abroad in Ukraine to participate in anti-Russian protests, a new report indicates.

Sudanese outlet Al-Rakoba wrote Friday that its staff spoke with an unnamed student who reports being approached by British embassy officials, who urged him to help put together an organization called the “Association of Sudanese Students in Ukrainian Universities” which would engage in anti-Russian provocations outside Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The student in question, who “refused to reveal his name for security reasons” according to the report, reportedly said the Brits offered the students money as well as protection from Sudanese authorities if they participated in the alleged plot.

As some of those contacted by the UK’s diplomatic staff have participated in anti-government protests, they were told they would be shielded from prosecution, Al-Rakoba writes.

Just how successful the British embassy officials were in their apparent efforts is unclear — as is the identity of the culprits. But British intelligence officers are known to use diplomatic cover which employment at their embassy provides to carry out their clandestine activities.

If true, it wouldn’t be the first time the Brits organized chaos in the streets of a foreign land to effect their political will.

Decades ago, former MI6 officer Norman Darbyshire spilled the beans about his personal role in overseeing the bloody 1953 coup in Iran, which overthrew its democratically-elected prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh.

“My brief was very simple,” Darbyshire revealed. “Go out there, don’t inform the ambassador, and use the intelligence service for any money you might need to secure the overthrow of Mossadegh by legal or quasi-legal means.”

After bragging that he spent “vast sums of money, well over a million-and-a-half pounds,” Darbyshire added, “I was personally giving orders and directing the street uprising.”

March 4, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Why Arabs Bolster Energy & Security Cooperation With Russia in Defiance of Western Sanctions

By Ekaterina Blinova – Samizdat – 19.01.2023

Arab countries have not joined the anti-Russian sanctions, despite pressure from the West, as Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stressed during his press conference this week. What’s behind the Arab world’s resilience?

“The policy of the West in the East has gone bankrupt,” political analyst Vladimir Ahmedov told Sputnik.

“[Middle Eastern players’] trust in the United States, the leading western European states – the former colonizers who had colonies in this region – has already been largely lost,” the specialist in the modern history of Arab countries and senior research fellow at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences continued.

New major players have entered the global arena: China, India, Iran, Turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, the scholar emphasized.

Ahmedov believes that the sanctions imposed against Russia are dictated by purely political considerations of a narrow circle of the western political elite. Meanwhile, the system of international relations and the world order has been undergoing changes, and the indirect proof of this is the position taken by the Arab countries, according to him.

“Russia’s policy in the East at the present time, and Russia’s policy in the world in general, has changed in comparison with the 1990s and the beginning of the 2000s,” the researcher continued. “Now it is a resolute policy aimed at defending [Russia’s] national state interests and the national interests of third countries. It impresses the countries of the East and, above all, the countries of the Middle East, which have been waiting for such a policy for a long time. This policy is in great demand in the East and therefore it meets with approval and understanding.”

In light of this, Russia’s efforts to mediate the Israeli-Palestine conflict as well as those in Syria and Iraq – mentioned by Lavrov during his Wednesday presser – are steps in the right direction, according to the scholar. In addition, Russia’s military presence in Syria serves as a stabilizing factor, he added.

Meanwhile, the West’s Ukraine strategy looks like nothing so much as its previous Middle Eastern policies. The West is using Ukrainians much in exactly the same way it previously used Arabs in order to reach its geopolitical objectives, and Middle Eastern players are well-aware of that, according to the researcher.

“Russia is not fighting against Ukraine or the fraternal Ukrainian people, but against the West, which wants to dismember Russia, belittle its role, minimize it, and so on,” Ahmedov said. “And [the Western policy] does not meet with any approval from the political elites of the East, who themselves suffered from it previously.”

Opportunities in the Middle East and North Africa

“The region of the Middle East and the Arab world in general is of tremendous importance in the world system in terms of geography, demography, a powerful energy market, the world’s oil and gas pantry and as a very important transport artery. Therefore the attention to this region will only grow,” Ahmedov emphasized.

The region develops its position by becoming an influential energy actor, echoed Ramy El Kalyouby, a visiting lecturer at the School of Orientalism of the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE).

“Gulf countries profited a lot from oil prices increase, and at some moment the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s oil revenues jumped to more than $1 billion daily,” El Kalyouby told Sputnik. “Egypt is also getting its chance to become an important gas supplier to the EU after discovering a few huge fields in the Mediterranean.

The academic singled out Egypt, the world’s biggest wheat importer. According to El Kalyouby, Russia can help Cairo replace a deficit of Ukrainian wheat, open its markets for Egyptian fruits and vegetables, and provide more tourists.

“There is also a project of a Russian industrial zone in Egypt that would help Russia to get around sanctions by changing the origin of products, and also to profit from the African Union free trade zone,” the lecturer highlighted.

Last year, the construction of Egypt’s first nuclear power plant was launched on July 20 in El Dabaa, Matrouh Governorate, by Russia’s State Atomic Energy Corporation Rosatom.

The El Dabaa NPP is meant to be the cornerstone of Egypt’s energy diversification policy, allowing Cairo not only to cover its own electricity needs, but also to provide energy to its neighbors. On November 19, the main construction phase for Unit 2 of the NPP began in the northern African country.

“Gulf countries could cooperate with Russia in the regulation of the oil market, although this becomes more difficult, as Russia provides important reductions on Urals oil,” El Kalyouby continued, adding that “Russia also remains a key actor in Syria as a mediator between Damascus and Ankara.”

Regional Security

Nonetheless, the Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA) region is continuing to suffer from local conflicts stemming from the bitter consequences of the Arab Spring, according to Ahmedov. The scientist noted that the reformatting of political systems of these countries is still going on while the common regional security system has not been formed yet.

Russia shares the same “geopolitical space” with the countries of the region and its objectives there include not only maintaining working ties with Middle Eastern players but also to protect its “soft underbelly” from extremist and terrorist elements reinvigorated by the Arab Spring havoc, the researcher explained.

In addition, Russia’s experience as a power broker in the region could come in handy for the West, since the latter has proven incapable of solving regional conflicts on its own, continued the scientist. According to him, European countries have no other alternative but to deal with Russia in the Middle East in the future if they want to ensure their security in the Mediterranean and Southern Europe.

Ahmedov noted that while Moscow cannot ensure a complete comprehensive settlement and stabilization of the situation in the Middle East, it can help regional players reach these goals.

“Russia can make a certain contribution to ensuring the system of regional security with the participation of other states,” he said. “We have excellent relations with Iran. And in this regard, of course, the Arab countries are interested in Russia in terms of softening the Iranian policy towards the Arab countries, which causes concern today in the Arab world. We have excellent relations with Turkey, which also plays a very important role as a major regional actor or player in this region, just like Iran. And therefore, in this case, we have a lot of advantages that we can realize. We have long-standing ties with Palestine since Soviet times. And therefore, in this case, we have a lot of advantages that we can realize.”

Russia has a long and successful record of work in the region, according to the scientist: in the 1960-1980s the USSR provided the primary industrialization of many MENA countries, including Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Algeria, Sudan, and Yemen. While developing ties with the region, Russia can build upon its expertise and best practices of the past, Ahmedov concluded.

January 19, 2023 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Former Qatar PM: ‘Israel, Arab state planned last Sudan military coup’

MEMO | November 13, 2021

Former Head of Qatar’s Ministerial Council Hamad Bin Jassim Al-Thani revealed on Friday that Israel and an Arab state had planned the latest military coup in Sudan.

In a series of tweets commenting on Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan’s announcement of the formation of a new sovereign council, he posted: “The hands of the Israeli occupation along with the hands of a state from the region are behind this.”

Twitter users commenting on his tweet noted that the Arab state he referred to was the UAE, adding that several leaks relating to the issue have proven this.

“What happened in Sudan is a result of initial planning, cooperation and coordination between Israel and an Arab state,” Al-Thani tweeted.

“Unfortunately, this state claimed in the international meetings that it had changed its policies and started to concentrate only on economy and development,” he added.

The former senior Qatari official asserted that he did not reveal “this fact” to make headlines and stressed the importance of respecting peoples’ will.

November 13, 2021 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Following Normalization with Israel, US Removes Sudan from State Sponsor of Terror List

Palestine Chronicle | December 14, 2020

The United States on Monday formally removed Sudan’s state sponsor of terrorism designation, 27 years after putting the country on its blacklist, the US embassy in Khartoum announced.

“The congressional notification period of 45 days has lapsed and the Secretary of State has signed a notification stating rescission of Sudan’s State Sponsor of Terrorism designation is effective as of today (December 14), to be published in the Federal Register,” the US embassy said on Facebook.

President Donald Trump announced in October that he was delisting Sudan, a step desperately sought by the nation’s new civilian-backed government as the designation severely impeded foreign investment.

The Trump administration promised to remove Khartoum from the terror list and restore its sovereign immunities – meaning it would no longer be exposed to lawsuits in US courts – if it agreed to normalize ties with Israel.

As part of a deal, Sudan also agreed to pay $335 million to compensate survivors and victims’ families from the twin 1998 attacks on US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, carried out when dictator Omar al-Bashir was welcoming Al-Qaeda, and a 2000 attack on the USS Cole off Yemen’s coast.

Trump sent his notice to Congress on October 26 and, under US law, a country exits the terror list after 45 days unless Congress objects, which it has not.

December 14, 2020 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , | Leave a comment

PLO: US puts pressure on Sudan to settle Palestine refugees

MEMO | September 28, 2020

The United States is putting pressure on Sudan to accept settling Palestine refugees on its soil, member of the PLO’s Executive Committee, Bassam Al-Salhi, was reported saying by Anadolu yesterday.

“Special sources told me that the ongoing normalisation talks between Washington, Israel and Sudan include Sudan’s possibility to resettle [Palestine] refugees on its soil as part of the deal of the century,” Al-Salhi said, in reference to the US ‘peace deal’ for the region.

He stated that “this is part of the conspiracy against the Palestinian cause,” stressing the issue between Israel and Sudan goes beyond the normalisation of ties.

The PLO official called on Sudan “to reject being dragged into these American-Israeli plans in order to maintain its interests and future.”

Resettling Palestine refugees had been raised dozens of times by Israel and the US mainly in Egypt and other host countries; however, Al-Salhi said, proposing to resettle them in Sudan is new.

Sudan did not issue an immediate comment on the remarks, but the country’s officials have several times denied reports about the possible normalisation of ties with Israel despite several meetings between Sudanese and Israeli officials.

September 28, 2020 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

US asks Sudan to normalize ties with Israel in return for coming off terror list

Press TV – September 26, 2020

The United States is pressing Sudan to establish diplomatic relations with Israel in return for removal of the Northeast African country from a US list of states that sponsor terrorism.

Three Sudanese government officials familiar with the matter, however, told Reuters news agency on Thursday that Khartoum is resisting the linkage of the two issues.

“Sudan has completed all the necessary conditions” an official said on condition of anonymity. “We expect to be removed from the list soon.”

Back in 1993, the US designated Sudan as a state sponsor of terrorism, cutting it off from financial markets and strangling its economy over allegations that the government of former longtime leader Omar al-Bashir was supporting “terrorism.”

Sudan’s interim government took power last year after Bashir was overthrown by the army following mass popular protests. It is set to remain in office until elections in 2022.

Sudanese officials argue that their country’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism is now undeserved as Bashir’s regime has been toppled, and Sudan has cooperated with the US on counter-terrorism ever since.

Earlier this week, US officials indicated during talks with Chairman of the Sovereignty Council of Sudan, General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, that they want Khartoum to follow the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain in establishment of ties with the Tel Aviv regime.

“Sudan made clear to the American side that there is no relationship between removing Sudan from the terror list and exploring relations with Israel,” another Sudanese government source stated.

Even if a normalization deal is struck between Sudan and Israel, the US Congress must still pass a necessary legislation to restore Sudan’s sovereign immunity.

Sudan wants the legislation passed before it reaches a $335 million financial settlement with victims of al-Qaeda terror attacks on US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.

Sudan’s lawyers in the United States said it had already paid an additional $72 million to victims of the families of 17 US sailors, who were killed during an attack on the USS Cole while it was docked in Yemen’s Aden Port in 2000. The attack was apparently sponsored by slain al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden who was living in Sudan prior to the attack.

“We want to ensure the passing of the immunity law so that we can put an end to the settlements matter,” a Sudanese official said.

In February, Sudan’s ruling council head Abdel-Fattah al-Burhan met with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Uganda, sparking anger among politicians and public at home, where anti-Israel and pro-Palestine sentiments run high.

Sudan has been widely tipped to be the next Arab country that would normalize ties with Israel after the UAE and Bahrain agreed to do so as part of US-brokered agreements.

Netanyahu signed agreements with Emirati Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan and Bahrain’s Foreign Minister Abdullatif Al Zayani during an official ceremony hosted by US President Donald Trump at the White House on September 15.

Palestinians, who seek an independent state in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, with East Jerusalem al-Quds as its capital view the deals as betrayal of their cause.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas protested the normalization deals with Israel, saying they will be fruitless as long as the United States and the Israeli regime do not recognize the rights of the Palestinian nation and refuse to resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees.

Kuwait reiterates unswerving support for Palestinian cause, nation

Meanwhile, Kuwaiti Prime Minister Sheikh Sabah al-Khalid Al Sabah highlighted on Friday that his country firmly supports Palestinians in their struggle to achieve their inalienable rights and to establish an independent sovereign state with Jerusalem al-Quds as its capital.

Addressing the General Debate of the 75th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, Sabah emphasized that “the Palestinian cause still has a central, historical and pivotal place in our Arab and Muslim worlds.”

He noted that Kuwait’s principled and firm position is to support the Palestinian people in their struggle to obtain their legitimate rights.

The Kuwaiti prime minister then underscored the significance of resumption of so-called peace negotiations between Palestinians and the Israeli regime, stating that the talks should bring an end to the Israeli occupation and lead to creation of an independent Palestinian state on the borders before June 4, 1967, with East Jerusalem al-Quds as its capital.

Bahraini regime forces arrest poet critical of normalization with Israel

Separately, Bahraini regime forces have arrested a literary figure after he criticized the tiny Persian Gulf kingdom’s normalization with the Israeli regime.

Bahraini activists said the forces arrested the poet Abdul Hussein Ahmed Ali, days after he published a poem in condemnation of the deal, the Arabic-language Bahrain Mirror news website reported.

“I am not flattering to those who speak this day … Let them hear my words far and wide … Bahrainis are proud, honorable and noble, and do not accept the pledge of allegiance to a criminal and a perpetrator,” a part of the poem read.

September 26, 2020 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »