China-led multipolarity has accelerated the decline of the American era, the war in Gaza may end it altogether.
By Mohamad Hasan Sweidan | The Cradle | January 24, 2024
What is unfolding today in West Asia — the Gaza war and its regional expansion — cannot be viewed separately from the international transformations that have grown in momentum over the past few years. Today, the transition to multipolarity is the underlying factor shaping the decisions and policies of most countries, particularly those of the great powers.
The timing of Israel’s devastating military assault on Gaza coincides with heightened US attention on its great power competition for Washington, this conflict has much wider geopolitical significance beyond West Asia. In this context, the US has assumed, and will continue to play, a pivotal role in Gaza and its environs, unlike its powerful peers in China and Russia.
According to statistics published by the China Society for Human Rights Studies, the US initiated 201 of the 248 armed conflicts that took place since the end of World War II, often engaging in these wars via US-led alliances and/or proxies.
For decades, Washington has led these conflicts by very ably forming, then leading, and directing broad alliances to achieve its political and military objectives. But that ability notably shifted in December 2023, signaling a sharp decline in this capability.
In response to Yemen’s Ansarallah-aligned armed forces’ Red Sea blockade of Israeli-linked vessels, the US Department of Defense announced the formation of “Operation Guardian of Prosperity … to uphold the foundational principle of freedom of navigation” in those waters, initially consisting of a coalition of ten countries, most of them insignificant partners.
Protecting Israel or maintaining maritime dominance?
The coalition proved shaky from the get-go, with only the US and Britain actively involved in military strikes on Yemen. The reluctance of key European countries France, Spain, and Italy to join the naval alliance indicated a growing skepticism among the US’s traditional partners — both western and West Asian — about Washington’s commitment and capability to defend its allies in any impactful way.
Interestingly, more than eight further countries reportedly joined the coalition, but demanded anonymity, given the potential political fallout from associating with Washington and Tel Aviv.
Crucially, the Pentagon’s stated purpose of securing navigation in the Red Sea does not align with the actual threat presented, revealing ulterior motives behind US actions. The Yemenis have repeatedly confirmed that they only intend to inhibit the passage of Israeli-owned or destined vessels — and that all other ships are free to pass.
In short, the US/UK-led coalition is acting as a naval arm for Israeli military forces, seeking specifically to ensure unimpeded access for ships heading to Israeli ports via the Bab al-Mandab Strait. That’s not a position many other states will get behind if they want to maintain freedom of transport for their own shipping vessels.
Ultimately, the American show of force in these waterways seeks to consolidate US naval dominance, which war-torn Yemen, West Asia’s poorest country, has contested.
As outlined in the National Security Strategy for 2022:
The US “will not allow foreign or regional powers to jeopardize freedom of navigation through the Middle East’s (West Asia) waterways, including the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab al Mandab, nor tolerate efforts by any country to dominate another — or the region — through military buildups, incursions, or threats.”
According to media reports following massive US airstrikes against Iraqi targets on 23 January, Iraqi resistance factions will now also follow Yemen’s suit by implementing a blockade of Israeli ports in the Mediterranean Sea.
Current events are spiraling out of Washington’s control as onlookers increasingly question the utility and competence of US naval leadership in the world’s important waterways. Equally, there is recognition that other formidable forces and states have emerged, challenging US control over key global straits. In the words of British politician and writer Walter Raleigh, “Who rules the seas rules the world.” Under Sanaa’s watch, the US no longer can claim rule over the Red Sea or even its adjacent waterways.
Great power competition amid the Gaza war
The current scenario in West Asia, particularly post-Al-Aqsa Flood and the Gaza war that followed, coincides with a shift in Washington’s focus toward competition with China and its proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. As outlined in the US intelligence community’s annual threat assessment last year, this transition has already affected strategic goals, leading to a sharp decline in western support, especially from the US, for Ukraine. The Biden administration faced challenges in securing Congressional approval for a new aid package for Kiev, which directly competed for dollars against Tel Aviv’s military campaign in Gaza.
Despite assurances from western leaders during visits to Ukraine in October, their statements came without tangible material support, leaving President Volodymyr Zelensky in the proverbial dust. Quite unexpectedly, China has emerged as a potential peacemaker in this European conflict, with Kiev openly requesting Beijing’s involvement in mediation talks, and the US itself open to Chinese mediation to mitigate the escalation in West Asia.
The Chinese are well aware that there are no simple, face-saving exits for the US from the Gaza war it has championed and that the conflict’s metamorphosis into a regional one mires the US deeper into West Asia — and away from the Asia-Pacific.
Although China seeks to increase its presence in West Asia, it is very careful not to bog itself down in the region’s many issues. But Washington’s request that Beijing use its influence to sway Iran from conflict escalation makes clear that the US is no longer “the biggest power” in the region.
Why Israel opposes multipolarity
Following Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, US financial and military support for Israel has reached a critical stage, presenting two options for Washington. The first involves imposing some control on Israeli actions, given that the war’s timing has been unfavorable to US strategic interests, particularly in a critical election year. The second option, favored by the Washington elite, is to continue its unwavering support to Tel Aviv, even at the risk of damage to its global image.
Sustained global outrage over the Gaza war, coupled with the landmark genocide case filed against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), shows that Washington’s ability to cover for Israel is diminishing rapidly. Again, this reflects the global shift in the balance of power toward multipolarity, which is marked by the widespread decline of American influence.
But the US support for the Gaza genocide has had dramatic domestic repercussions, too. Polls show a major shift in the attitudes of young Americans, especially university youth, who will make up the ranks of America’s future leaders.
A Harvard-Harris poll published on 17 January reveals that 46 percent of respondents aged 18-24 believe that Hamas’ actions on 7 October can be justified because of the injustice to which the Palestinians are subjected. The same poll shows that 43 percent of the same group support Hamas in this war, and that 57 percent believe that Israel is carrying out massacres in Gaza. The most staggering poll result of all, though, has to be the one in December (conducted by the same pollsters) in which 51 percent of young Americans believe a final solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is for Israel to end and be given to Hamas and the Palestinians.
While Israel remains a direct US interest in West Asia, Washington’s commitment to Tel Aviv’s security has already become a growing burden and increasingly difficult to justify. As the region’s Axis of Resistance expands its battle with Israel on new, multiple frontlines, the US will need to reallocate ever-expanding resources and focus on matching its international rivals in further-flung geographies.
Ukraine was a test run compared to this Gaza war and the immense, direct toll it is taking on US alliances, domestic politics, and the American image globally. For Israel, this presents an existential crisis beyond measure, as Washington is forced to compete with other great powers, none of whom are ideologically driven to support Zionism as part of their foreign policies.
Lavrov debunks US claim on Ukraine talks
RT | January 23, 2024
Moscow has never closed the door to dialogue to end the Ukraine conflict, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday, reiterating that the country’s key goal remains stopping NATO’s unchecked expansion towards its borders.
In a rare interview with CBS News in New York, where he arrived to take part in UN meetings on Ukraine and the Middle East, Lavrov rejected a recent claim by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who alleged that Moscow has shown no “willingness… to engage, to negotiate in good faith” to end the conflict with Kiev.
“It’s not true,” Lavrov stressed, adding that Russia has always been ready to discuss “any serious proposal” that addresses the situation on the ground and the root causes of hostilities. Moscow is also willing to reach a solution “which would guarantee legitimate national interests of Russia and the Ukrainian people,” the diplomat stated.
Lavrov reiterated that Russia is prepared to listen to anyone interested in establishing “justice” in relations between Moscow and Kiev. He insisted, however, that this would require the West to stop its policy of “using Ukraine as an instrument of war against Russia.”
Lavrov recalled that Russia has long voiced concerns about NATO expansion. “The goal is very simple… we’ve been warning publicly since 2008… that NATO’s expansion against all promises [to Russia and the Soviet Union]… was going too far,” he said.
At a 2008 summit in Bucharest, NATO leaders declared that Ukraine would eventually become part of the alliance, sparking a backlash from Russia, which has traditionally viewed the US-led military bloc’s expansion towards its borders as an existential threat.
In December 2021, weeks before the start of the Ukraine conflict, Moscow submitted a draft of security guarantees to the US and NATO, demanding that the West ban Kiev’s accession to the bloc and retreat to its borders as of 1997. The overture, however, was rebuffed.
Officials from Moscow and Kiev said the two sides were close to reaching a peace deal early in the Ukraine conflict, with a key Russian demand being that the neighboring country recommit to neutral status and abandon its NATO ambitions. According to numerous reports, the process was derailed by then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who convinced Ukraine to continue fighting.
DC Think Tank: House Could Kill Ukraine Aid Bill
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 23.01.2024
House Republicans could block a hefty Ukraine aid package even if a bipartisan border security and immigration deal is passed, suggests the latest report by the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.
Republican and Democratic senators have engaged in a series of negotiations regarding President Joe Biden’s proposed $100 billion package for Ukraine. Senate leaders, Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), have expressed optimism about the bipartisan Ukraine aid-border security agreement’s prospects.
Last year, the multi-billion package for Ukraine, as well as aid for Israel and the island of Taiwan, became stuck in the US Congress after the GOP deemed the border security issue to be an absolute priority.
According to Blaise Malley, a reporter for Responsible Statecraft and a former associate editor at The National Interest, it is uncertain whether the House of Representatives would align with the upper chamber’s position, despite the bipartisan agreement on border issues being on the horizon.
Malley referred to House Speaker Mike Johnson’s firm stance with regard to the implementation of sweeping migration reforms and his concerns about Ukraine aid oversight and Kiev’s strategy.
“We need the questions answered about the strategy, about the endgame and about the accountability for the precious treasure of the American people,” Johnson told journalists after a January 17 meeting with President Biden and other congressional leaders at the White House. The House speaker also stressed that the border issue should still come first. Rep. Johnson has a record of consistently voting against Ukraine aid in the past.
A GOP conference on Ukraine aid is due to be held on January 24 following the request by a group of Senate Republicans, led by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Malley noted, adding that support for further bankrolling Ukraine is beginning to steadily wither among House Republicans.
What’s more, some GOP lawmakers even threatened to introduce a “motion to vacate” against the incumbent House speaker, if he allows another package of Ukraine aid to pass.
“Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene tells me ‘I would introduce the motion to vacate myself’ if Speaker Johnson passes funding to Ukraine,” Axios congressional reporter Andrew Solender tweeted on January 17.
Last October, the so-called Freedom Caucus forced then-Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy to step down after Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida forced the vote on the “motion to vacate.”
According to Malley, Speaker Johnson is unlikely to go against the Freedom Caucus for many reasons, one of which is that it may upend his relations with leading Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.
But that is not all: the multi-billion aid bill, which also includes at least $10 billion for Israel, has come under scrutiny from some Democratic congressmen who are seeking to obligate Tel Aviv to observe human rights in its war against Gaza. Since the conflict started, 25,105 Palestinians have been killed in the region, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry.
The RS reporter pointed out that 18 Senators on January 19 announced their support for an amendment to the national security supplemental that would require “that the weapons received by any country under this bill are used in accordance with US law, international humanitarian law and the law of armed conflict.”
“The path to passing this legislation is filled with roadblocks and question marks,” Malley wrote. “Biden has implored Congress to approve his proposal as soon as possible, but even as incremental progress is made, final passage still appears to be a ways away.”
Belgium to Allocate $663Mln to Ukraine From Profits Made From Russia Frozen Assets – Reports
Sputnik – 23.01.2024
BRUSSELS – Belgium will allocate 611 million euros ($663 million) to help Ukraine in 2024 from the profits received from the frozen assets of Russia, La Libre newspaper reported on Tuesday, citing Defense Minister Ludivine Dedonder.
The funding will be provided from the interests on the accounts of Russia’s frozen assets in the country, the newspaper reported.
Last year the US proposed G7 working groups to look at possible ways to seize $300 billion in frozen Russian assets. The EU, and the UK have stressed that the money received via the confiscation would not be easily accessible and would also be insufficient to cover Ukraine’s reconstruction needs. Besides, the countries have noted that the confiscation of Russian assets should not occur to the detriment of providing financial support to Kiev in 2024.
Moscow has maintained that any attempt to confiscate its frozen assets would violate international law. The Russian Foreign Ministry has dismissed the freezing of Russian assets as theft.
“Those who are trying to initiate this, and those who will implement it, must understand that Russia will never leave those who did this alone. And it will constantly exercise its right to a legal battle, internationally, nationally or otherwise. And this, of course, will have — both Europeans and Americans understand this very well — it will have legal consequences for those who initiated and implemented it,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said commenting on the issue.
Last year, Russian President Vladimir Putin dubbed the West’s asset seizure an “unseemly business,” and stressed that “stealing other people’s assets has never brought anyone good”.
The U.S. Steals Syrian Oil, and the Kurds Sell It to Israel at a Discount in Erbil
By Steven Sahiounie | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 22, 2024
Iran’s Revolutionary Guard (IRG) claimed responsibility for missile attacks on an Israeli “spy headquarters.” Kurdish businessman Peshraw Dizayee and four of his family members were killed in the attack on their home on January 16 near the U.S. Consulate in Erbil, in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region (IKR).
Dizayee was the owner of the Falcon Group, which is a business involved in oil and gas, agriculture and security. The IRG claimed its missiles targeted a “Mossad headquarters”.
“No U.S. facilities were impacted. We’re not tracking damage to infrastructure or injuries at this time,” a U.S. official said in response to the recent attack.
Prime Minister of the IKR, Masrour Barzani, condemned the IRG attacks on Erbil.
The Oil business in Erbil
The oil business is thriving in IKR, and the Falcon Group was part of it. Kurdish oil has been exported to Israel, Italy, France and Greece through a secretive trade depending on pre-pay deals.
Israel buys much of its oil from Erbil, and Israel depends on the heavily discounted crude, making it a key customer. The oil is discounted to Israel because it is free, as the source is the stolen Syrian oil. 40% of Israel’s oil supplies were from IKR in the first three months of 2023, which doubled the amount in 2022.
Israel received its first substantial seaborne crude oil shipment from the IKR in 2014, which is the same time the U.S. occupation forces arrived in Syria. Israel was reportedly importing as much as three-quarters of its crude oil needs from the IKR by mid-2015.
Israeli refineries and oil companies imported almost $1 billion worth of Kurdish oil between May and August of 2023, according to shipping data, trading sources and satellite tanker tracking, which represents about 77 % of average Israeli demand, which runs at roughly 240,000 barrels per day. More than a third of all of the northern Iraqi exports, which are shipped from Turkey’s Mediterranean port of Ceyhan, went to Israel over the period.
According to anonymous sources, it was a Mossad agent who first traveled to Erbil to negotiate the deal to buy oil from IKR, which was facilitated by U.S. officials.
The U.S. Consulate in Erbil
The new U.S. Consulate General building in Erbil, near the attack carried out by Iran, is the biggest consulate complex built by the U.S. Embassies and Consulates are under the U.S. State Department, but the consulate in Erbil has a connection to the U.S. Department of Defense, demonstrating the strategic importance of the region for Washington, with a U.S. military base also in IKR.
Irvin Hicks, Jr., the U.S. Consul General in Erbil, stated in January 2023, that the new 800-million-dollar consulate building is a clear statement that the “United States of America is not going anywhere.”
The U.S. first opened a diplomatic office in Erbil in February 2007, and later upgraded to a consulate general in 2011, the same year the U.S.-NATO attack on Syria began for regime change, under the Obama-Biden administration.
The U.S. embassy in Baghdad was built in 2009 and is its biggest mission compound in the world at a cost of $750 million. Iraqi Kurdistan and the Iraqi central government in Baghdad operate separately, as the Kurds are a semi-autonomous region.
Erbil has 30 consulates, six honorary consulates, and six foreign trade offices, with the Japanese consulate the latest to open on Jan. 11.
“Opening more than 30 consulates is not normal,” Iranian Brigadier General Mohammad Hossein Rajabi criticized. Most of these consulates are used for espionage activities.”
Iran views the foreign offices as having the potential to carry out plans aimed at destabilizing the security of Iran, by hosting Iranian separatist groups and bases aligned with Israeli intelligence agency Mossad.
The Iraqi response to the Genocide in Gaza
“On October 20, 2023, the Department ordered the departure of eligible family members and non-emergency U.S. government personnel from U.S. Embassy Baghdad and U.S. Consulate General Erbil due to increased security threats against U.S. government personnel and interests,” according to the State Department’s Iraq travel advisory.
Iraqis have taken to the streets to protest the U.S. complicity in the genocide being committed in Gaza by Israel. U.S. President Joe Biden has defied the American values of human rights and international law by continuing to send weapons to Israel to promote the wholesale slaughter of the Palestinian civilians of Gaza, even in the face of international criticism which has lowered the image of America as a beacon of freedom to a joke.
Protests have taken place outside of the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, and military groups which are under the central government of Iraq have fired rockets and armed drones at U.S. troops based in Anbar and near Erbil multiple times. Baghdad does not recognize Israel; however, the IKR are aligned with the U.S., and sell the stolen oil from Syria to the prime U.S. ally, Israel.
The U.S. invaded and destroyed Iraq in 2003, and occupied the country for years until a withdrawal. When ISIS reared its ugly head, the Baghdad government requested U.S. troops to come to help in the fight against ISIS, which saw its defeat at the hands of Iraq, Syria, Russia, and the U.S. The Iraqi parliament ordered the U.S. troops to leave after the defeat of ISIS in 2017, but the Department of Defense refused. The Prime Minister of Iraq has recently ordered the U.S. troops to leave immediately following the U.S. assassination of Mushtaq Jawad Kazim al-Jawari in Baghdad on January 4, an Iraqi military commander who was instrumental in the defeat of ISIS.
The PKK in Syria and Erbil
The PKK aligned SDF in north east Syria is U.S. supported. The U.S. military in Syria are occupying the largest oil field in Syria, which prevents the Damascus government from using the oil to provide electricity to the Syrian people, who suffer with just 3 hours of electricity per day.
In December 2023, 44-tanker convoy carrying oil stolen from Syria traveled clandestinely to U.S. bases near Erbil. Just days before, U.S. forces took 95 tankers of oil and a truckload of stolen Syrian wheat to IKR. The Syrian wheat fields are also in the area the U.S. troops occupy and the area is controlled by Kurds who are aligned with the IKR.
Farhan Jamil Abdullah, head of the Syrian Oil Company, said in July that as a result of the U.S. sanctions and military occupation in Syria, oil production has decreased to 15,000 barrels per day from 385,000 barrels before 2011.
Firas Hassan Kaddour, the Syrian Oil Minister, said in July that the losses of the energy sector in Syria are close to 100 billion U.S. dollars.
The main oil field of Al Omar and Conoco in Syria are producing oil which is shipped in tankers by the U.S. Army and refined at Kar Oil Refinery in Erbil.
The U.S. sponsors the SDF militia in Syria which is dominated by the YPG. The YPG is the Syrian branch of the PKK, a group recognized by Turkey, as well as the U.S. and the EU, as a terrorist organization, who have killed more than 40,000 persons over decades.
Turkey has condemned the U.S. alliance with the SDF and YPG, and considers the U.S. is financing terrorism.
The commander of the SDF is General Mazloum Kobani, who is also a member of the PKK. His real name is Ferhat Abdi Sahin, is one of Turkey’s most wanted terrorists. Kobani was chosen by the U.S. as their military ally and it is at Kobani’s command that the stolen Syrian oil is loaded into tankers.
Erdogan has demanded for years that the U.S. must stop supporting the SDF, YPG, and to stop encouraging the Kurds to establish an independent homeland in north east Syria on the border with Turkey, which is a NATO member, and ally of the U.S., housing an American military base there.
Faced with looming defeat in Ukraine, NATO wants WW3 to prevent it
By Drago Bosnic | January 22, 2024
Lasting nearly half a century, the (First) Cold War brought the world to the edge of a new abyss, one that would’ve made WW2 look like a bloodless skirmish in comparison. Despite not starting it, in order to prevent the total destruction of the world, Russia initiated its end. It willingly dismantled the Warsaw Pact and the USSR, renouncing immense power, a historically unprecedented move no other superpower in history ever made. And how did the political West see it? Merely as a sign of supposed “weakness”. Not only did the US-led belligerent power pole proclaim victory in the ideological struggle (Moscow renounced communism), but it also wanted a total defeat for Russia and its people. In the 30+ years, everything the United States and its vassals and satellite states did was in line with this goal. The world’s most aggressive military alliance expanded approximately 1000 km to the east.
It should be noted that this was done despite clear promises “not to move an inch” toward Russian borders. Even many Western politicians, experts and pundits expressed concern and protested NATO’s eastward expansion, warning that this would inevitably force Moscow to respond. However, leaked information suggests this is precisely what the political West wanted, as evidenced by revelations published by WikiLeaks. How do we know this is true? Well, its founder is suffering a horrible fate for publishing the secret data. And yet, despite the world knowing all this, NATO is determined not only to continue its aggression, but is also openly escalating it. Namely, on January 18, Dutch 4-star Admiral Rob Bauer, Chairman of NATO’s Military Committee, publicly stated that the belligerent thalassocractic alliance is preparing for war with Russia and that people in Europe should do so as well.
Bauer is one of the highest-ranking NATO officials and his announcement should be taken extremely seriously. Although he assessed that the coming conflict would happen in the next 20 years, the moves that the belligerent alliance is making indicate that such a conflict could come at any point. Following a meeting of NATO defense ministers in Brussels, Bauer told reporters that Western governments should start preparing for war with Russia, including by training civilians how to act when it starts.
“We have to realize it’s not a given that we are in peace. And that’s why we are preparing for a conflict with Russia. […] But the discussion is much wider. It is also the industrial base and also the people that have to understand they play a role,” he said, adding: “It starts there. The realization that not everything is plannable and not everything is going to be hunky dory in the next 20 years.”
Apart from demanding everyone in Europe to get ready for war with a nuclear-armed superpower, Bauer pointed out the example of Sweden, a de facto NATO member for decades at this point. Namely, he praised Stockholm for enforcing ludicrous and pompously announced measures for a mythical Russian invasion, an eventuality that’s effectively beyond any real possibility. However, the Scandinavian country needs to justify its unpopular NATO membership somehow, so it’s putting up this laughable “show of force”.
“We need to be readier across the whole spectrum. You have to have a system in place to find more people if it comes to war, whether it does or not. Then you talk mobilization, reservists or conscription,” he said, adding: “You need to be able to fall back on an industrial base that is able to produce weapons and ammunition fast enough to be able to continue a conflict if you are in it.”
In line with Bauer’s announcement, NATO is to launch a massive military exercise, dubbed Steadfast Defender 2024. Scheduled to begin on January 31, it will include at least 90,000 troops, making it NATO’s largest military exercise since the end of the (First) Cold War. It should be noted that the belligerent alliance officially restarted the conflict in 2022, after decades of its crawling aggression pushed Russia to respond in Ukraine. This was done after numerous US-orchestrated destabilization projects in the former Soviet Union and elsewhere, all of which were aimed against Moscow. NATO itself is merely an extension of America’s strategy of the so-called “full spectrum dominance” and the same goes for the European Union which has repeatedly proven its subservience to US interests. To accomplish its strategic goals, Washington DC is ready to support all sorts of extremist ideologies and individuals.
Worse yet, in an attempt to defeat Russia, it has shown willingness to use banned weapons such as biological (including deadly pathogens) and AI-powered. The latter are particularly important as Americans are increasingly uninterested to serve in the US military, especially as the belligerent thalassocracy is adopting an extremist ultra-liberal ideology that’s simply repulsive to anyone remotely sane. America’s decline is unstoppable at this point, so its political elites are pushing the entire world into yet another abyss, one that it would likely never get out of. Washington DC’s virtually simultaneous aggression against several global and regional powers is making it nearly impossible to prevent such a horrible scenario. This includes pushing the world into a commodities crisis, which can also be interpreted as “preparing everyone” for war, as Bauer already stated. This is an important segment of America’s global strategy.
US actions in the Asia-Pacific, the Middle East and Latin America also indicate other countries will be targeted, including China, Iran and Venezuela. However, with its unrivaled strategic arsenal, new hypersonic weapons, as well as resurgent conventional military power, precisely Russia is NATO’s top rival. Unable to fight Moscow directly, the US-led belligerent alliance is using proxies and creating new ones to enforce its so-called “containment” strategy against the Kremlin. This includes the reactivation of the old members of its WWII-era geopolitical (and increasingly ideological) predecessor. Fully aware it can’t take the Eurasian giant head-on, to this end, the political West is stoking Russophobia everywhere it can, as it needs to create enemies on Russian borders. It’s important to note that the warmongers in Washington DC don’t care about the destructive consequences for Europe.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
Lawmakers Push Funding to Replace Weapons Used in Yemen
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | January 21, 2024
As the White House has started an open-ended and unauthorized war in Yemen, some members of Congress are pushing for legislation that would provide funding to replace the munitions dropped on the Middle East’s poorest nation.
Politico reports, “As American warships burn through expensive missiles against Houthi targets in the Red Sea and Yemen, lawmakers, lobbyists, and the Navy are angling to use a multibillion-dollar national security supplemental to replenish the military’s inventory of munitions.”
In November, the Houthis announced that Yemeni forces would target Israeli-linked shipping in the Red Sea until Tel Aviv ends its military campaign in Gaza. Two weeks ago, President Joe Biden, without consulting Congress, authorized strikes on the Houthis.
In response, the Houthis began targeting American-linked shipping transiting the region. The White House is ordering attacks on Yemen nearly every day. However, the White House claims it is not at war with Yemen, and it does not need Congressional authorization for the operations.
Biden’s war in Yemen could drag on for some time. US officials told the Washington Post the administration has “no end date” and “little exit strategy” for its military operations in Yemen. President Biden has admitted that the strikes are not deterring the Houthi attacks.
Additionally, the US operations against Yemen are expensive. Washington has combated drone and missile attacks from Yemen on ships in the Red Sea by using expensive interceptors to down the inexpensive Houthi munitions. The White House has largely relied on ship-fired Tomahawks to hit targets in Yemen. Some lawmakers worry the operations against the Houthis will impact Wasington’s ability to dominate the globe.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said fighting in Yemen means Congress needs to add further spending for munitions to a supplemental military funding package. “As I’ve warned for weeks, using million-dollar missiles to defend against thousand-dollar drones strains an already insufficient inventory of long-range capabilities,” he added. “The supplemental is our chance to expand our capacity to meet the national security challenges we face.”
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) argued that additional missiles are needed to confront China. “We’re looking — one of the parts of the supplemental is to make sure we have the rounds we need, whether it’s [the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile] or possibly things like [the] Tomahawk that we have for the Western Pacific.” He continues, “And that is a capability we would need if we ever got in a conflict with China.”
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) said “a big plus up” in munitions funding is imperative for Tomahawks, Naval Strike Missiles, and Harpoons. He also explained that the weapons are needed for global dominance. “And those kinds of weapons systems are critical everywhere, Taiwan in particular,” the Senator said.
Politico notes that Pentagon officials and lobbyists for arms makers are also pushing for increased funding for munitions production in a supplemental defense spending bill.
Why Are Almost 40 Percent of US Nuclear Attack Subs Out of Service?
By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 21.01.2024
Eighteen fast attack submarines are being temporarily decommissioned for repairs, a move that is fraught with far-reaching consequences for the US, experts told Sputnik.
On January 21, 1954, the USS Nautilus, the world’s first nuclear-powered submarine, was launched at the Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics Shipyard in Groton, Connecticut.
SIxty-nine years later, a congressional report has revealed that something has gone wrong with the US Navy’s nuclear-powered fast submarine fleet. Of the 49 multi-purpose attack submarines (SSNs) in the navy, 18 are currently out of service for repairs, per the report.
So how did this happen? Sputnik explores.
What’s in the Report?
As of 2023, at least 37% of the entire fleet of SSNs have been temporarily decommissioned for repairs, according to previously undisclosed navy data published by the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
The report cited 18 SSNs that are either in depot maintenance or awaiting maintenance, known as idle. The number is significantly higher than the navy’s target of having a maximum of 20% of all fast attack subs undergoing maintenance at any one time and zero submarines sitting idle and waiting to begin repairs.
The maintenance backlog has “substantially reduced” the number of the SSNs operational at any given moment, reducing the “force’s capacity for meeting day-to-day mission demands and potentially putting increased operational pressure” on fast attack submarines that are in service, CRS naval analyst Ronald O’Rourke said in the report.
The Naval Sea Systems Command responded by blaming “planning, material availability, and shipyard execution.” The service has launched several initiatives to address these “primary maintenance delay” factors, the command added.
Which Subs Need Maintenance?
The inactive SSNs are not the nuclear ballistic missile Ohio-class submarines, “but fast attack boats, including the Seawolf-class, that can fire torpedoes and Tomahawk cruise missile at vessels and land targets, and perform stealth missions such as surveillance,” Bloomberg earlier reported.
As for SSNs, it is the US Navy’s hull classification symbol for a nuclear-powered general-purpose attack submarine.
‘Severe Blow to US Admirals’ Pride’
Taking almost 40 percent of US fast attack submarines out of service is “quite a big blow to the pride of American admirals and sailors,” Vasily Dandykin, a Russian veteran military analyst and retired Russian Navy captain 1st rank, told Sputnik.
The reasons why the 18 SSNs have been temporarily decommissioned should be discussed in light of the US’ self-declared victory in the Cold War, Dandykin insisted.
“After announcing this win, Americans turned a blind eye to maintenance-related issues,” the analyst said, adding that “the delayed repairs shorten the lifespan of a submarine.”
When asked about the condition of the SSNs in service, the analyst pointed to a spate of problems with the maintenance and qualifications of crews, which he said resulted earlier in various navigational incidents.
Connecticut Sub Crash
One of the major incidents happened to the USS Connecticut in the South China Sea in October 2021.
A subsequent navy investigation into the crash of the Seawolf-class submarine into an underwater ridge in the sea found that the incident was “preventable” and that it followed navigation planning and risk management mistakes, as well as other errors.
The failures “fell far below US Navy standards,” and the incident left the fast attack submarine unable to operate “for an extended period of time” because of the damage, the probe pointed out. The Connecticut reportedly won’t be back in service until early 2026 at the soonest.
Another incident dates back to January 9, 2005, when one crewman died after the US nuclear submarine San Francisco ran aground off Guam in the Pacific Ocean. Twenty-three crewmen were injured in the incident.
In February 2001, the USS Greeneville’s rudder tore through the Japanese fishing boat Ehime Maru’s lower deck during a fast surface maneuver, sinking the vessel within minutes. Nine people aboard died, including students and instructors in commercial fishing.
Repercussions
Operational pressure on the SSNs that are still in service is almost sure to increase, which means that their life span may be reduced and the construction of more such submarines will be needed, Dandykin meanwhile went on to say. This will, in turn, lead to spending hefty sums from the US’ defense budget, he added.
He was echoed by Earl Rasmussen, a retired lieutenant colonel with over 20 years in the US Army, who told Sputnik that the fact that 18 SSNs are now out of service means that the US Navy will have to limit its operations in the Red Sea, the Mediterranean, and the South China Sea.
“Almost 40% of the SSNs being decommissioned will impact our capability to deploy our reach and to deploy the defensive capability,” Rasmussen pointed out. The US Navy is “below its optimal or even projected readiness capability,” the US expert concluded.





