Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

EU Rejects Legitimacy of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro – Foreign Policy Chief Borrell

Sputnik – 30.08.2024

The European Union rejects the legitimacy of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said.

“We cannot accept the legitimacy of Maduro as the elected president. He will remain president de facto, but we deny democratic legitimacy based on results that cannot be verified,” Euronews quoted Borrell as saying after an informal foreign ministerial meeting in Brussels.

Presidential elections in Venezuela were held on July 28. The next day the National Electoral Council declared Nicolas Maduro president-elect for 2025-2031. On July 29, protests started in Venezuela, protesters clashing with the police. Over 2,000 people were detained. Violent unrest in Venezuela lasted one day after the elections, after which the government restored control over the situation on the streets.

US and European lawmakers in charge of foreign affairs matters issued a joint statement claiming opposition leader Edmundo Gonzalez won Venezuela’s presidential election and vowing to hold Maduro accountable if he refuses to relinquish power. Moscow said the Venezuelan opposition must admit defeat in the elections. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned third countries against supporting attempts to destabilize the situation inside Venezuela.

August 30, 2024 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite | , | Leave a comment

The U.S. is Being Accused of Three Coups

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | August 28, 2024

The United States has a long legacy of coups. During the Cold War, Washington participated in no less than sixty-four covert coups. They did not end with the Cold War. Since then, the U.S. has carried out or facilitated several coups, including in Haiti, Venezuela, Brazil, Honduras, Paraguay, Bolivia, Egypt, and Ukraine.

Recently, the United States has been accused of participation in three more coups. The degree of evidence and clarity varies, and, unlike in the above cases, these cases are not yet closed.

Haiti has a horrible history of American interference and coups. The latest chapter reads like a convoluted novel. The United States, who at first seemed to be backing the enormously unpopular and increasingly authoritarian president of Haiti, Jovenal Moïse, has now been accused of involvement in his assassination.

Moïse was assassinated in 2021 in a confusing plot by men armed with high-caliber weapons who claimed to be with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, a claim the U.S. State Department says is “absolutely false.”

But two of the plotters of the assassination now seem to have been revealed as DEA informants and a third as an informant for the FBI.

Floridian Walter Veintemilla, who has been accused of financing the assassination, reportedly received legal advice and an endorsement to capture Moïse from a U.S. intelligence agency informant. If that informant were allowed to testify, his testimony, according to Veintemilla’s defense, would provide evidence “that several investigative and administrative agencies of the United States Government were aware of the actions and intentions of his alleged co-conspirators in Haiti and supported those actions.”

One of Veintemilla’s co-defendants, Arcangel Pretel Ortiz, who is said to have recruited the mercenaries who assassinated Moïse, is an FBI informant. According to The Miami Herald, Ortiz “was so emboldened as an FBI informant that the Miami-area resident met with agents and promoted ‘regime change’ in Haiti ahead of the brazen presidential assassination.”

Christian Sanon, a Haitian-American, is the man the coup group allegedly planned to install as president. He has been accused of being a plotter of Moïse’s assassination. Six weeks before the assassination, Sanon sent a letter to U.S. Assistant Secretary for the State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs Julie Cheng outlining his intention to lead a transition government in Haiti. In the weeks before the assassination, Sanon held a meeting in Fort Lauderdale that Veintemilla attended.

The Haitian coup is not the only one the United States is accused of being involved in. More recently, Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheik Hasina resigned and fled to India after student-led protests became violent and the Bangladeshi military declined to prevent protestors from storming her official residence.

But several news outlets in India are now reporting that Hasina had planned to deliver a speech in which she would have accused the U.S. of “plotting a regime change in Bangladesh.” Hasina claims that Washington orchestrated her removal from power because she refused to give the U.S. two military facilities in Bangladesh. She accused “a white man” of conditioning her power on granting the bases to a “foreign country.” According to Jeffrey Sachs, Hasina had also delayed the signing of military agreements with the United States, including one that would have tied Bangladesh to closer military cooperation.

Relations between Bangladesh and the U.S. have been deteriorating, and Hasina has frequently accused the U.S. of working to remove her from power.

Intriguingly, Sachs points out that Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia and Central Asia Donald Lu had recently gone to Bangladesh for meetings. That is the same U.S. official who met with Pakistani officials just before Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan was removed from office in a non-confidence vote that he insists was a U.S.-supported coup.

Then-Pakistani Ambassador to the U.S. Asad Majeed Khan met with Lu who expressed that the United States is “quite concerned about why Pakistan is taking such an aggressively neutral position” on the war in Ukraine. Lu then says, “I think if the no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister succeeds, all will be forgiven in Washington… Otherwise, I think it will be tough going ahead.” In case the threat was not clear enough, Lu then explained what “tough going ahead” meant: “[H]onestly I think isolation of the Prime Minister will become very strong from Europe and the United States.”

One month later, Khan was removed from office in a non-confidence vote. And all was “forgiven.”

Like Hasina, Khan claims that he was removed in part because of a refusal on basing agreements with the United States. Khan had “distanced” Pakistan’s foreign policy from the U.S., including swearing that he would “absolutely not” allow the CIA or U.S. special forces to use Pakistan as a base ever again: “There is no way we are going to allow any bases, any sort of action from Pakistani territory into Afghanistan. Absolutely not.”

And across the ocean in Venezuela, President Nicolás Maduro has accused the U.S. of aiding a coup attempt after the recent Venezuelan election. At dispute is an election that Maduro claims to have won by a margin of 51.95% to 42.18%, and the opposition claims to have won by a margin of 67% to 30%.

Maduro asked the Venezuelan Supreme Court to review the voting data and validate the results. The court accepted the request and summoned all the candidates to appear before it. All the candidates appeared in the session except opposition leader Edmundo González, who did not show up. The court confirmed that the National Electoral Council delivered all the election evidence requested by the court, including detailed voting records and totals.

On August 22, Venezuela’s Supreme Court backed Maduro’s verdict and said that the voting tallies published online by the opposition to demonstrate its landslide victory were forged. González was the only candidate who refused to participate in the Supreme Court’s audit.

U.S. President Joe Biden initially said he supported new elections in Venezuela before the White House walked the president’s statement back, claiming that Biden was only “speaking to the absurdity of Maduro and his representatives not coming clean about the July 28 elections,” which it was “abundantly clear” Maduro lost. Maduro and the opposition both dismissed the idea of a new election with Maduro reminding the U.S. that “Venezuela is not an intervened country, nor do we have guardians.”

Whether or not the election was fair, and whichever side interfered in the election, the United States was a party to that interference. The U.S. has a long and consistent history of interfering in Venezuelan elections against the party of Hugo Chávez and his successor, Nicolás Maduro. It has been a consistent financer of the Venezuelan opposition and influencer of the Venezuelan media.

But the largest influencer in the current Venezuelan election has been the threat that the stranglehold of American sanctions on the Venezuelan economy will not be relieved until the people of Venezuela yield to the U.S. and vote Maduro out of power. Mark Weisbrot, the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, told me that the sanctions “prevent the country from having democratic elections, because there is overwhelming evidence that the harsh collective punishment of the sanctions will continue until Venezuela gets rid of its current government.” That evaluation was echoed by the governor of the state of Anzoátegui, Luis Marcano, who told historian and political scientist Steve Ellner, “The voter is going to feel a gun pointed at their head. Vote for Maduro and the sanctions remain.”

In addition to Pakistan, these three new charges of regime change are being brought against the United States. Imran Khan’s case against the U.S. seems pretty clear with Donald Lu’s threat on the record. The three new cases—in Haiti, Bangladesh, and Venezuela—may, to varying degrees, be less clear. But they should not be dismissed. And the aged specter of American coups still pervades the world.

August 28, 2024 Posted by | Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Subliminal Message from Beijing to Washington amidst the War Drums

By Lama El Horr – New Eastern Outlook – 12.08.2024 

Anger is a pyromaniac. Under its influence, we tend to provoke a reaction from our adversary, which serves as fuel to fan the flames, thus increasing the legitimacy of the angry inferno. The method is convenient for practicing accusatory inversion and making the one reacting to aggression the instigator of hell.

Today, Washington is angry. The object of this anger is China’s spectacular rise to power, which is increasingly shaking the foundations and legitimacy of US domination of the world. This American anger desperately needs pretexts to both justify and intensify hostilities against Beijing. The United States is therefore seeking to provoke a violent reaction from its main geopolitical rival: China.

So far, this American strategy of one-upmanship has had the opposite effect to that intended. Whether in Beijing’s immediate vicinity, in the Middle East, Africa or Europe, American pressure against China and its partners has reinforced Beijing’s pacifist vocation, to the point of making it a key diplomatic player in the resolution of the world’s most acute crises. Much to the chagrin of Washington’s thirst for fire.

An escalation of tensions meticulously organized by Washington and its allies

Washington’s strategy of escalating tensions aims to target the fulcrums that make the multipolarity advocated by Beijing and Russia a geopolitical reality. Fomenting conflicts involving Beijing’s strategic partners is the path the United States seems to have chosen to curb China’s rise to power and harm its strategic investments.

When Washington allowed Israel to assassinate the Hamas political leader in charge of negotiations, on Iranian soil and in the wake of the Beijing Declaration, the efforts of Chinese diplomacy to unify the Palestinian factions were also targeted. When Israel bombed the Iranian consulate in Damascus in defiance of the Vienna Convention, China, which has a strategic partnership with Iran and Syria, was also targeted. When Washington and its allies bomb Yemen to remove any obstacle to the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian territories, China, which worked for the rapprochement between Riyadh and Teheran, then between Riyadh and Sanaa, is also targeted. When the members of the UN Security Council adopt a resolution on the need for a ceasefire in Gaza, and the United States declares that this resolution is non-binding, China, which urges respect for international law and whose strategic interests are threatened by regional insecurity, is also targeted.

The latest developments concerning the Western Sahara bear striking similarities to those in West Asia. As with the Palestinian question, the Western bloc is flouting international law, which enshrines the Saharawi people’s right to self-determination – except that here, it’s the China-Algeria economic partnership, and the Russia-Algeria security partnership, that seem to be in Washington’s sights. And let’s not forget that Algerian gas is supposed to relieve Europeans of anti-Russian sanctions, and that Algeria continues to speak out on behalf of the Palestinian people.

Likely to inflame tensions on North Africa’s western flank, the Western Sahara is a godsend for Washington at a time when Algeria and its southern neighbors (Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso) have embarked on a process of decolonizing their development and security model – a process that is about to extend to other countries that have also lived under Western tutelage since independence, such as Chad and Nigeria.

Like Israel against Iran, Ukraine against Moscow or Seoul against Pyongyang, France has been assigned the role of executor of the US strategy to contain China, through the demonization of Algeria. Paris is aided in its mission by the Abraham Accords, concluded between Morocco and Israel under the aegis of the Trump administration, which contribute to reinforcing NATO’s presence in North Africa – in a less brutal manner, for the time being, than in the former Yugoslavia.

This strategy of Atlanticist escalation borders on the grotesque when it comes to Venezuela, a BRICS candidate country and one of the world’s leading oil and gas reserves. After decades of outrages suffered by Caracas – attempted coups d’état, media killing of legitimate leaders, suffocation of the economy by apartheid-style sanctions – the United States has still not achieved its goal: to take control of the country’s strategic resources and install its military bases there. As in the case of Iran, the assistance of Beijing and Moscow was crucial in preventing Venezuela’s collapse.

The Western bloc’s decision to resume the affront of not recognizing the elected president has just been severely thwarted by Beijing and Moscow. Invited to the BRICS Summit to be held in Russia in October, Nicolas Maduro announced that he could entrust the exploitation of his country’s strategic resources to members of this structure. Caracas seems to be warning Washington: if you don’t curb your greed, you run the risk of losing everything.

On China’s doorstep, the outbreak of violence that forced the resignation of Sheikh Hasina, Prime Minister of Bangladesh – another BRICS candidate country – raises questions about Washington’s Indo-Pacific strategy. The former head of government’s statements concerning the intentions of “a certain country” to build a military base on the island of Saint Martin in the Bay of Bengal, and also to create a Christian state that would include parts of Bangladesh, Myanmar and even India, offer a reading of events quite distinct from what is being said by the Western media and Muhammad Yunus, the Bangladeshi Nobel Prize winner who has just been entrusted with the head of the interim government.

One power struggle, two world views

Through its leaders, its satellite countries and its megaphone, the mainstream media, the United States strives to portray East-West tensions as a conflict of hierarchy between two models of governance: liberal democracies, synonymous with the West, and autocracies, synonymous with emerging powers. China, on the other hand, offers a different interpretation: the reason for global geopolitical tensions is the questioning of the hierarchy of power in a world where the overwhelming majority of people are challenging American hegemony.

Despite the risk of confrontation it raises, the exacerbation of tensions between Beijing and Washington certainly has one merit: it shows that the two powers have two diametrically opposed conceptions of the world, of their place in it, and of the rules that are supposed to govern relations between states.

Just as it cannot conceive of its own sovereignty without respecting the sovereignty of other states – which implies the primacy of the principle of non-interference and the rejection of any hegemonic power – China also considers that there is an interdependence between its development and that of other nations. This is the founding idea of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, complemented by the vision of a Community of Destiny for Mankind.

This is the bedrock of Chinese political philosophy, in which the notions of development, security and peace are inextricably linked. The BRI and China’s Security, Development and Civilization initiatives are the best illustrations of this concept of civilizational interdependence. In Beijing’s view, we’re all piloting the same ship: it’s up to each and every one of us to be a good pilot, a good teammate and a good visionary, because we’ll have to work collectively to achieve prosperity, and collectively to avoid the pitfalls. The success of such a project depends on keeping the peace on board.

On the contrary, the United States believes that its sovereignty depends on the subordination of other states to its power, and that its continued development depends on obstructing the economic, technological and military independence of other global players. This denial of peoples’ right to self-determination betrays a supremacist conception of power – not inconsistent with imperialist ideology – and logically raises objections throughout the world.

Despite these objections, judging by its militaristic headlong rush, the American administration continues to endorse the statement attributed to Caligula: ‘Let them hate me, so long as they fear me!’ Yet today, with the exception of EU members and a handful of other satellite states, the United States no longer commands the fearful respect it once did in the golden age of its omnipotence – despite the increasingly exorbitant budget allocated to its arms industry.

Behind Beijing’s placid posture, a message to Washington

In this explosive geopolitical context, Washington is seeking to drive Beijing up against the wall, by limiting the Asian giant’s choice to two options. Either China persists in avoiding confrontation – in which case Washington will inevitably gain ground – or China sinks into the spiral of American pyromania – in which case Beijing will turn away from its own geopolitical priorities, in favor of those of its rival. In other words, Washington is offering Beijing the choice between capitulation and surrender.

China doesn’t see it that way, and has its sights set on a third way: pacifism without capitulation. Whether it’s Taiwan, the Korean peninsula, tensions in the South China Sea, conflicts between NATO and Russia, or between the US and Iran, China persists in advocating the peaceful resolution of disputes. In support of this position, Beijing has woven a network of inclusive partnerships, as opposed to exclusive military alliances.

Clearly, this pacifist plea reflects the Chinese authorities’ strategic decision to refrain from knee-jerk reactions to Washington’s military provocations. China’s challenge is to break the United States’ militaristic logic, without indulging its strategy of conflagration.

For the time being, Beijing has decided to meet this challenge with silence. A good illustration of this is the conflict in the Middle East and Gaza. China’s silence has prompted the Western bloc to reveal its cards and discredit itself. ‘Freedom’, ‘Human Rights’, ‘Democracy’ and ‘International Law’ are suffering the same carnage as the Palestinian people.

Beijing’s silence also keeps Washington in the dark about the military capabilities of Beijing’s and Moscow’s partners. The extra-judicial assassinations of Palestinian, Lebanese and Iranian leaders, marked by the seal of international illegality, are the very demonstration of the United States’ frustration at the military calm of its geopolitical adversaries.

Added to this are the uninterrupted requests for membership of the BRICS and the SCO, the hallmarks of the multipolar world. This simple fact means that the tornado of hostilities towards Beijing has not succeeded in diverting the world majority from its aspiration to emancipate itself from the American hegemonic order. Now, if living under the American yoke is intolerable for Iran, Algeria or Venezuela, it’s easy to imagine the degree of irritation the world’s second-largest economy must feel.

But ultimately, as the NATO-Russia conflict has shown, the United States cannot conceive that the deterrent power of its rivals can be applied to itself. It was only by confronting NATO militarily, through Ukraine, that Russia’s deterrent power could be restored. The provocations against Moscow revealed that Washington did not possess all the details of Russia’s military architecture. Today’s outcome of this conflict, revealing the overwhelming superiority of the Russian army, suggests that Moscow, like Beijing and Teheran, had shown unlimited strategic patience before resorting to the military option. Unfortunately, the USA and its NATO allies discovered this at the same time as they discovered Moscow’s firepower.

Today, when Washington seems to be saying: We run the world, and China is part of the world, China seems to be replying, in the manner of Aimé Césaire: Strength is not within us, but above us.

August 12, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

US Sees South America as Testing Ground for Political Spin Techniques – Russia

Sputnik – 05.08.2024

CARACAS -The position of recognizing or not recognizing elections in a sovereign country is a manifestation of colonial policy, and Washington continues to view Latin America as its own backyard and testing ground for political spin techniques, Russian Ambassador to Venezuela Sergey Melik-Bagdasarov told Sputnik.

After the announcement of the official election results in Venezuela, Moscow said the Venezuelan opposition should concede defeat. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned third countries against supporting attempts to destabilize the situation inside Venezuela.

“Even before the election in Venezuela, the US hinted that they would not tolerate the reelection of Nicolas Maduro. The very position of recognizing or not recognizing elections in a particular sovereign country is a clear manifestation of colonial policy. The people of Venezuela have made their choice. It must be respected. But it seems that such an approach is alien to Washington,” Melik-Bagdasarov said.

He explained that United States believes Latin America to be a testing grounds for election interference methods.

“The United States continues to view the Latin America region as its backyard and a testing ground for political technologies [political spin techniques]. According to President Nicolas Maduro, today we are seeing attempts to repeat the ‘Juan Guaido’ project with some changes,” the Russian diplomat added.

Venezuela’s presidential election was held on July 28, and the National Electoral Council declared Nicolas Maduro the winner.

Washington, without waiting for the results of the vote count and subsequent audit, called on the international community to recognize opposition leader Edmundo Gonzalez as the winner of the presidential election in Venezuela. US and EU lawmakers overseeing international relations on Friday threatened Maduro with “responsibility” if he does not voluntarily give up his powers as legitimate head of state.

August 5, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Major Latin American Powers, Hungary Block US-EU Push to Isolate Venezuela’s Maduro

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 04.08.2024

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro was reelected to a third term in office in a showdown with united opposition candidate Edmundo Gonzalez last Sunday, taking 52% of the vote to Gonzalez’ 43%. The US and its allies decried the results, recognized the opposition leader and demanded negotiations for a “peaceful transition of power.”

Efforts by Washington and Brussels to diplomatically isolate President Nicolas Maduro have failed spectacularly after important members of the Organization of American States (OAS) and the European Union rejected efforts to condemn the Venezuelan election results.

In the OAS, major Latin American countries Brazil, Mexico and Colombia abstained from a resolution tabled Wednesday demanding that Caracas release detailed vote tallies and take other steps, including measures to ensure the security of the opposition. The three nations were joined in abstaining from the resolution or being absent from the vote by Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Grenada, Honduras, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Dominica, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago. With 11 OAS members abstaining and five members absent, the resolution failed to attain the required majority to pass.

Permanent Council chairman Ronald Sanders said a consensus could not be reached over a “controversial phrase,” without elaborating.

Across the Atlantic, Hungary blocked a similar proposed joint statement on behalf of the EU’s 27 member countries on purported “numerous flaws and irregularities” in Venezuela’s elections, forcing EU foreign policy czar Josep Borrell to independently issue a statement in the EU’s name.

Hungary’s intransigence is expected to complicate efforts by Brussels to use unanimity among the bloc to justify the leveling of potential new sanctions against Venezuela. Budapest did not explain its motivation for vetoing the EU resolution.

US Secretary of State congratulated Gonzalez for “winning” last Sunday’s vote, with Russia, China, Belarus, Serbia, Iran, Turkiye, Syria, Azerbaijan, North Korea, Vietnam, Madagascar, Namibia, Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua and others recognizing the results and congratulating President Maduro for his victory.

August 4, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , | 1 Comment

US Recognizes Opposition Candidate Edmundo Gonzalez as Winner of Venezuela Election – Blinken

Sputnik – 02.08.2024

WASHINGTON – The United States has determined it will recognize opposition candidate Edmundo Gonzalez the winner of the Venezuelan presidential election, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in a press release.

“Given the overwhelming evidence, it is clear to the United States and, most importantly, to the Venezuelan people that Edmundo González Urrutia won the most votes in Venezuela’s July 28 presidential election,” Blinken said in the release on Thursday.

Blinken called on the Venezuelan parties to begin discussions on a peaceful transition of power in accordance with Venezuelan electoral law.

Moreover, Blinken also said that the United States rejects Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s “unsubstantiated” allegations against opposition leaders, including González and María Corina Machado.

Machado co-founded the Venezuelan Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) Sumate which received significant financial support from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). In 2005, she traveled to the White House to meet then-US President George W Bush, a meeting that was described in classified diplomatic cables as “poking [then Venezuelan President Hugo] Chavez in the eye.”

In 2014, she took a diplomatic position with the government of Panama, which gave her the ability to speak at the Organization of American States (OAS). She used that platform to publicly call for foreign intervention in Venezuela. She has since been banned from running for office.

Earlier this week, Maduro said Gonzalez and Machado must face justice.

On Thursday, RT journalist Fiorella Isabel reported that a draft resolution for the US House of Representatives was being floated around Washington looking for co-signers. That draft calls for more sanctions on Venezuela and would recognize González as the legitimate president of Venezuela.

She added that the draft was authored by Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) and Mario Díaz-Balart (R-FL).

In 2019, the US officially recognized Juan Guaido as the interim President of Venezuela. He was eventually removed as the leader of the opposition from his own party and currently lives in Miami, Florida.

The National Electoral Council declared Maduro president-elect for 2025-2031 after the presidential elections were held in Venezuela on July 28. The Electoral Council said Maduro won 51% of the vote.

Protests broke out the day after the election, leading to clashes between the police and protesters in Caracas. Protesters threw stones and Molotov cocktails at law enforcement officers. According to the Prosecutor General’s Office, 77 law enforcement officers were injured; more than 1,000 people were detained on charges of destruction of state infrastructure, incitement of hatred and terrorism.

The Venezuelan government said a number of countries interfered in the elections and the people’s right to self-determination.

August 1, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , | 1 Comment

Malaysia Defies Western Sanctions on Iran

Malaysia only recognizes sanctions imposed by the United Nations and not by any individual country, Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution says.

By Nguyen Kien Van – New Eastern Outlook – 25.06.2024 

On May 16, a US delegation led by Brian Nelson, the Under Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, visited Kuala Lumpur to discuss sanctions against Iran. The US accuses Iran of using Malaysian companies to finance militants in the Middle East.

What do we know about US accusations against Iran?

The US claims that trade between Malaysia and Iran has skyrocketed since the outbreak of the armed conflict between Israel and Hamas. Western nations allege that Iran financially supports Hamas and Hezbollah, opponents of Israel. The US highlighted the death of over 3,000 Israelis since October 7, 2023, in the ongoing conflict. 30,000 Palestinians killed in the Gaza Strip, however, do not seem to bother the US at all. Instead, the focus remains on Iran and its proxies, including Hamas, allegedly receiving funds through the Malaysian financial system.

The US is concerned that Iran can continue selling oil by transferring it from ship-to-ship in international waters to disguise its origin. Countries that do not adhere to US sanctions, or choose to ignore them, facilitate this process. Brian Nelson identified Malaysia as one such country, allegedly involved in transporting Iranian oil and raising funds for groups the US deems terrorist organizations.

What do Malaysian officials think in this regard?

Following the meeting with the US delegation, Malaysian officials reiterated that they would not comply with sanctions imposed by any country other than those from the UN Security Council. Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail emphasized Malaysia’s commitment to combating terrorism financing. He acknowledged the US concerns about “illegal supplies” of Iranian oil through Malaysia, but reiterated Malaysia’s stance on adhering only to UN-imposed sanctions. The US delegation respectfully accepted Malaysia’s position.

Solidarity Among Muslim Countries

Malaysia, a Muslim-majority country, has consistently supported a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict and condemned Israel’s actions, which have resulted in numerous Palestinian casualties. Malaysia backed Iran’s use of drones and missiles against Israel on April 13, with Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim calling it a legitimate response to Israel’s “barbaric attack” on the Iranian consulate in Damascus.

Back to Kuala Lumpur Airport

By the end of the meeting, the US delegation appeared to recognize their failure to sway Malaysia. Saifuddin Nasution Ismail reaffirmed Malaysia’s commitment to counter-terrorism financing at both ASEAN and global levels, stressing Malaysia’s adherence to the rule of law and expressing hope that the US would acknowledge this.

Once again, US efforts to intimidate Malaysia with sanctions over its economic relations with Iran have faltered, highlighting Washington’s persistent hegemonic ambitions. If other Southeast Asian nations were to similarly defy US pressure, ASEAN could emerge as a robust and independent force in the region.

June 25, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Washington, Pro-Democracy? Depends on the Country

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | February 19, 2024

Pakistan just held an election; Venezuela is about to. Both incumbent governments have banned the leading opposition figure from competing. The United States sanctioned one and was silent on the other. What was the difference? Not international law or responsible leadership, both of which require a consistent application of laws and a consistent response. The important difference was that the United States supported the incumbent coup government in one case and opposed the incumbent coup survivor in the other.

On January 30, the United States reversed the small and rare diplomatic progress it had made with Venezuela by revoking the sanction relief on gold mining and by promising to revoke the sanction relief on Venezuela’s oil and gas sector at the first opportunity. The State Department cited “Actions by Nicolas Maduro and his representatives in Venezuela, including the arrest of members of the democratic opposition and the barring of candidates from competing in this year’s presidential election” as the reason.

Of central concern to the United States was its choice of an opposition leader to run against Nicolás Maduro, Maria Corina Machado, who recently appeared before a roundtable organized by the U.S. House of Representatives’ Foreign Affairs subcommittee. On January 26, Venezuela’s highest court upheld the decision to bar Machado from running for president in the upcoming election.

But Machado was banned for reasons that might be considered reasonable in some democracies. She has a long history of being involved in coups against the democratically elected government of Venezuela. During the failed 2002 coup against Hugo Chavez, Machado was a signatory to the Carmona Decree, which suspended democracy, revoked the constitution, and installed a coup president.

As if participation in a coup is not enough to be barred from running for president, Machado was stripped of her position in the National Assembly in 2014 for acting, according to Miguel Tinker Salas, Professor of Latin American History at Pomona College and one of the world’s leading experts on Venezuelan history and politics, as “a delegate of the Panamanian government” who “sought to testify before the Organization of American States.” She sought to testify against her own country.

That same year, Miguel Tinker Salas says, “hoping to precipitate a crisis,” Machado helped organize La Salida, The Exit, to push President Maduro out of power. She “sought to mobilize forces and take to the streets.”

The next year, in 2015, Venezuelan officials produced evidence in support of their claim of a U.S.-backed coup attempt. According to the officials, the day before the planned coup, Machado joined two other opposition leaders in signing a National Transition Agreement. They say weapons were found in the office of the opposition party.

Machado has endorsed economic sanctions on Venezuela and foreign military intervention to remove the government of Venezuela.

Despite this record, the United States reimposed sanctions for barring Machado. The European Parliament went even further, denying that the Venezuelan court has legal grounds and insisting that Machado “remains eligible to run for the elections.” It says “Unless María Corina Machado is allowed to participate in the elections… elections and election results will not be recognised.” The European Parliament then urged EU member states “to tighten existing sanctions” and to add new sanctions on judges of Venezuela’s Supreme Court.

In Pakistan, the story is very different. Former Prime Minister Imran Khan has been jailed and banned from running in the presidential election. His party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), has been demolished by the Pakistani military, who arrested its senior members.

But the American response to the barring—and even jailing—of, perhaps, the most popular candidate has been very different from their reaction to the barring of Machado in Venezuela. The State Department says that the arrest of Khan “is an internal matter for Pakistan” and that, “The United States is prepared to work with the next Pakistani government, regardless of political party…”

The difference may reflect American position on coups in these countries. Whereas, the United States has supported multiple failed coup attempts to remove the current government in Venezuela and, so, opposes that government; it supported what seems to have been the coup that replaced Khan with the current government.

In April 2022, Khan was removed from office in a non-confidence vote. Khan has claimed that the non-confidence vote was a U.S.-backed coup in democratic disguise. He may not be wrong. A leaked Pakistani cable reveals a meeting between Asad Majeed Khan, then-Pakistani ambassador to the United States, and two State Department officials, one of whom was Donald Lu, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs

Lu begins the meeting by expressing that the United States and Europe “are quite concerned about why Pakistan is taking such an aggressively neutral position” on the war in Ukraine. He pins responsibility for Pakistan’s neutral defiance of the U.S. on Khan, saying, “it seems quite clear that this is the Prime Minister’s policy.” Lu informs the Pakistani ambassador that the trigger for the American concern was “the Prime Minister’s visit to Moscow.” On the day Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine, Khan was in Moscow, meeting with Putin. He defied the United States by refusing to cancel the meeting.

Lu then advises Pakistan’s ambassador, “I think if the no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister succeeds, all will be forgiven in Washington because the Russia visit is being looked at as a decision by the Prime Minister. Otherwise, I think it will be tough going ahead… [H]onestly I think isolation of the Prime Minister will become very strong from Europe and the United States.”

As the polls closed in the Pakistani election, and the media began reporting stunning victories by independent candidates associated with Khan’s PTI party, the Election commission of Pakistan suddenly paused the announcement of results in remaining constituencies. By the time announcements restarted, PTI candidates who had been leading had suddenly lost.

The candidates associated with the PTI were running as independents because they were neither allowed to campaign under the PTI name nor even be identified by the PTI symbol on ballots, challenging voters’ ability to even identify PTI candidates. TV stations were banned from airing Khan’s speeches. Cell phone and internet services were cut, creating logistical confusion for voters. Voter suppression was widespread.

Despite all the obstacles, PTI candidates forced to run as independents won 102 seats. The second place party, the Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz Party of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, came in second with 73 seats. Despite winning the most seats, Khan’s party did not win a majority in the 265 seat National Assembly and will have trouble forming the government.

The U.S. State Department assessed that the election featured “undue restrictions on freedoms of expression… electoral violence… attacks on media workers, and access to the internet and telecommunications services, and… allegations of interference in the electoral process.” Despite that assessment, it declared that it “is prepared to work with the next Pakistani government, regardless of political party.”

Yet again following a foreign policy guided by a rules-based order that only applies the law when it benefits the United States and its allies, instead of a foreign policy guided by international law that applies the same universal standard impartially, the U.S. has confirmed the worst suspicions of a global majority that is losing faith in American leadership. The U.S. sanctions Venezuela for banning a candidate from competing in elections but is willing to work with Pakistan who has done the same. “As consistency starts to be questioned,” S. Jaishankar, India’s Minister of External Affairs has said, “many more nations will start to do their own thinking and planning.”

February 19, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Progressive Hypocrite | , , | Leave a comment

Venezuelan FM Condemns the US Attacks on Yemen

teleSUR – January 13, 2024

The Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yvan Gil, strongly condemned the USA, United Kingdom and other countries’ attacks on Yemen, through a formal statement on his X account.

Gil emphasized that those are an illegal action that violates International Law and that only contributes to generating greater destabilization in the region.

“Venezuela insists that the only way to guarantee peace and stability in the Middle East is through the cessation of the genocide in the Gaza Strip, carried out by Israel,” reads the communique.

As well, Venezuela asks the immediate compliance with all United Nations resolutions for the establishment of a free and sovereign Palestinian State.

The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela join to the countries that urges the international community to exert all necessary pressure measures to reestablish international legality and justice in the area, avoiding an escalation of the conflict caused by Israeli barbarity in Palestine.

Other FMs, like the Russian and the Cuban, also condemned the military attacks by the US & NATO allies in Yemen. They considered that such acts encourage genocide in Gaza and reiterated their call for an immediate cease-fire in the Palestinian enclave.

January 13, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Caracas says UK’s dispatch of warship violated the deal with Guyana over disputed Essequibo

RT | December 28, 2023

Britain’s decision to dispatch a warship to Guyana breaches the “spirit” of the agreement to resolve the Essequibo dispute peacefully and will be met with “defensive action,” Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro said on Thursday.

Earlier this week, the UK announced it would send the offshore patrol vessel HMS Trent, currently deployed in the Caribbean, to visit the “regional ally and Commonwealth partner.”

Maduro called the move “practically a military threat from London” that violates the “spirit of dialogue, diplomacy and peace of the agreements” made with Guyana.

“I have ordered the activation of joint defensive action by the Bolivarian National Armed Forces in response to the UK provocation and threat to the peace and sovereignty of our country,” the Venezuelan president said in a televised speech.

Venezuela “reserves all actions, within the framework of the Constitution and International Law, to defend its maritime and territorial integrity,” the Foreign Ministry in Caracas said in a statement.

Following a national referendum at the beginning of December, Caracas laid claim on “Guayana Esequiba,” a mostly forested region rich in mineral resources that Venezuela has claimed for over a century. Guyana has protested, noting that the area amounts to two-thirds of its internationally recognized territory and asked the “international community” for help.

Brazil and several Caribbean countries offered to mediate the dispute, resulting in Maduro and Guyanese President Irfaan Ali signing the Declaration of Argyle on December 14, at a meeting in St. Vincent. Both sides pledged to refrain from escalation by “words or deeds,” and established a joint commission to discuss the dispute.

Four days later, Britain’s Undersecretary for the Americas David Rutley visited Georgetown and promised Guyana “unequivocal backing,” vowing to “ensure the territorial integrity of Guyana is upheld.”

St. Vincent and the Grenadines Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves, who has taken on the role of the mediator in the dispute, told the island radio on Thursday that he read the Venezuelan statement “very carefully,” describing it as “firm but… not particularly belligerent.”

Gonsalves said he has reached out to both Georgetown and Caracas, and received assurances from both of their “commitment to peace and continued dialogue.”

December 28, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Maduro Orders ‘Defensive’ Military Drills After UK Deploys British Warship Off Guyana Coast

Sputnik – 28.12.2023

CARACAS – Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro ordered on Thursday the armed forces to launch “the activation of a joint defensive action” in response to the deployment of a British warship off the coast of Guyana.

“I have ordered the activation of a joint defensive action of the Bolivarian National Armed Forces” off the coast of Essequibo, he said in a state televised broadcast, but did not provide more information.

Earlier this month, the British media reported, citing a British defense ministry spokesman, that the United Kingdom would deploy a patrol ship off Guyana’s coast as a sign of support for the state in the territorial dispute over Essequibo. The head of Venezuela’s defense ministry, Vladimir Padrino Lopez, called it a provocation.

Venezuelan Foreign Minister Ivan Gil had previously called on his British counterpart David Cameron not to interfere in the affairs of Latin American and Caribbean countries, and to mind his own business.

“From Venezuela, we ask the infamous failure David Cameron, foreign minister of the former imperial power of the United Kingdom, to take his hands off our Latin America and the Caribbean and to take care of his own affairs, which are very complicated,” Gil wrote on social media.

Venezuela’s territorial dispute with Britain and Guyana, a former British colony, has been ongoing since the 19th century. The Bolivarian government stepped up its actions after Guyanese authorities began handing over fossil-rich areas of the disputed shelf to oil companies for development.

Caracas held a referendum on December 3 in which an absolute majority of participants supported the annexation of the territory west of the Essequibo River, and began legislative work to legally back its actions.

Guyana’s President Irfaan Ali has since said that the country views Caracas’ actions as a threat to national security and intends to appeal to the UN Security Council as well as its international partners. During a recent news conference, Ali did not rule out that Guyana may go for a military base for its allies in the region, and on December 7, the US Army’s Southern Command carried out “flight operations” in the country.

The leaders of Venezuela and Guyana, following recent talks on the territorial dispute over Essequibo, pledged not to use force under any circumstances and to resolve it in accordance with the 1966 Geneva Agreement.

December 28, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

UK to Deploy Royal Navy Warship to Ex-Colony Amid Guyana-Venezuela Dispute

By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 24.12.2023

Guyanese President Irfaan Ali and Venezuela’s leader Nicolas Maduro met in mid-December under the aegis of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States and the Caribbean Community to defuse tensions around the disputed region of Essequibo. The two agreed to “continue dialogue to resolve the dispute over the Essequibo territory.”
The UK has decided to re-task Royal Navy warship the HMS Trent and deploy it to Guyana after Christmas, according to British media reports.

Instead of scouring the Caribbean in search of drug smugglers, the warship will take part in joint naval exercises with the former British colony and Commonwealth member. The decision was reportedly prompted by the current flare-up of the territorial dispute between Guyana and Venezuela.

“HMS Trent will visit regional ally and Commonwealth partner Guyana later this month as part of a series of engagements in the region during her Atlantic Patrol Task deployment,” a UK Ministry of Defense spokesperson was cited as saying.

The HMS Trent is a Batch 2 River-class offshore patrol vessel, named after the River Trent. Commanded by Commander Tim D. Langford, it is designed to carry out tasks that include “counter-piracy, anti-smuggling, fishery protection, border patrol, counter terrorism, humanitarian aid, search and rescue, general patrols and defence diplomacy,” as per the Royal Navy website.

The warship will stay in Barbados, the Caribbean region of the Americas, during Christmas, after which it will be heading for Guyana. Its activities will reportedly be carried out at sea, and will not involve docking in Guyana’s capital, Georgetown.

Earlier in December, when Britain’s Foreign Office Minister for the Americas and Caribbean David Rutley visited Guyana, he was quoted as saying that the UK would work internationally “to ensure the territorial integrity of Guyana is upheld.”

The border between Guyana and Venezuela, which runs through the Guyana-Essequibo region, known for its abundant oil reserves, has been a source of territorial dispute for several decades.

Venezuela gained independence from Spain in 1845 and recognized Essequibo – a zone of 160,000 sq. km – as part of its sovereign territory. In 1899, however, the United Kingdom filed and won an arbitration claim to recognize Essequibo as part of its then-Caribbean colony of British Guiana. Independent Guyana referred the dispute to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2018. This came after Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro objected to former Guyanese president David Granger granting oil exploration rights off the Essequibo coast to ExxonMobil, the US-French oil transnational.

Venezuela held a referendum earlier this month in which almost 96% of the population voted in favor of incorporating the Essequibo region, which makes up two-thirds of the territory controlled by Guyana, into the country. Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro put forward a proposal to the parliament, suggesting the establishment of Venezuela’s 24th state, named Guyana-Essequibo. He also produced a new map showing the disputed region of Essequibo as part of Venezuela. Besides referring to Essequibo as a “zone of integral defense,” Venezuela’s president proposed a deadline of three months for oil companies to halt offshore operations in the area. Last Sunday, a referendum was conducted to reaffirm Caracas’s claim to Essequibo. The majority of citizens voted in favor of establishing a state on the disputed territory.

According to Venezuelan media, President Nicolas Maduro has already officially signed decrees to incorporate the western region of neighboring Guyana into Venezuela, ratifying a total of six documents. In addition, Maduro signed a decree facilitating the creation of specialized units within the state oil and gas company PDVSA — PDVSA Essequibo and the Guyana Venezuelan Corporation — CVG Essequibo. To oversee the newly formed state, Major General Alexis Rodriguez Cabello was appointed as the sole head of the 24th state.

Venezuela and Guyana have since agreed not to threaten or use force in any circumstances to settle the dispute, as per a joint statement, published by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. The sides also agreed to meet in Brazil within the next three months to “consider any matter with implications for the territory in dispute” and immediately establish a joint commission on the level of foreign minister and experts to address the dispute.

December 24, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »