The leader of Yemen’s Ansarullah revolutionary movement Sayyed Abdul-Malik Al-Houthi slammed the Saudi aggression’s brutal crimes in the western coastal city of Hudaydah.
Speaking in a meeting with a delegation of AL-Bayda tribal leaders in the capital Sana’a on Monday evening, Sayyed Al-Houthi warned against seditious conspiracies and divisive attempts by enemies in order to establish their control over Yemen.
“Enemies are seeking to dominate Yemeni people through incitement of sedition and division,” he said. The Yemeni leader further underscored that “Meetings and reunions among people from various walks of life are truly indicative of the level of fraternity, cooperation and understanding within the Yemeni nation. The opportunity is ripe to push for promotion of brotherhood, cooperation and social peace in order to restore security and stability in Al-Bayda province.”
“We want to beef up nationwide peace and resolve lingering disputes… We want the government and the nation to work together in order to provide civil services,” the Ansarullah chief pointed out.
Sayyed al-Houthi also pointed to the anniversary of the expulsion of colonial British forces from Yemen, stressing that November 30 marks a bright page in the history of the Arab nation.
Elsewhere in his remarks, the Ansarullah leader also condemned the execution of ten prisoners by Saudi-sponsored Takfiri militants in Hudaydah, describing it as a “heinous crime” and a blatant violation of international humanitarian law.
According to Abdulqader al-Mortadha, head of the Committee for Prisoners’ Affairs in the Yemeni National Salvation Government, Saudi mercenaries executed the victims on November 13 and dismembered their bodies.
Five of the prisoners were residents of Yemen’s Hudaydah province, while the rest were respectively from the provinces of Hajjah and Mahwit.
Albania Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Bahamas Barbados Belgium Belize Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Cabo Verde Canada Chile Colombia Costa Rica Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of Congo Denmark Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Estonia European Union Fiji Finland France Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guyana
Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo Latvia Liberia Lithuania Luxembourg Malawi Malaysia Maldives Malta Marshall Islands Mauritius Mexico Micronesia Moldova Mongolia Montenegro Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Niger Nigeria North Macedonia Norway
Pakistan Palau Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Romania Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa Sao Tome and Principe Senegal Serbia Seychelles Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands South Africa Spain Suriname Sweden Switzerland Taiwan Timor-Leste Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tuvalu Ukraine United Kingdom Uruguay Vanuatu Zambia
Next, the first thing we need to do is to translate the above into plain English. Here is how I would translate all this:
Faithfully supporting a single World Hegemony of the (already dead, but nevermind that, they can pretend it is still alive) AngloZionist Empire and obediently participate in any anti-Russian and anti-Chinese operations to prevent the latter from creating a multi-polar world.
Overthrow those government who refuse to participate in the operations mentioned under #1 and/or get rid of some truly useless and too embarrassing “our SOBs” (Zelenskii anybody?)
Participating in strategic PSYOPs to demonize those countries not invited to the Summit while allowing those invited to use any level of repression/suppression of dissent needed to stay in power.
How relevant is this summit in reality?
By itself, such a summit has zero value, if only because it tries to unite around a single (and vapid) agenda countries with totally different circumstances. It is therefore pretty obvious that all that which come out from this grand show is some insipid declaration “for everything good and against everything bad” (Russian expression).
Results of the regional and municipal elections in Venezuela
This, by the way, also strongly suggest that even though, for example, almost all Latin American countries have been invited to the Summit, this participation is a very good illustration of the comprador nature of the ruling classes in Latin American. If the people were given the right to decide whether they want to subserviently support the “Yankee/gringo” Empire or not, very few, if any, of the invited countries would send delegates.
In other words, this Summit is first and foremost about APPEARANCES, a PR move destined to strong-arm each government on the planet to make a simple choice, the very same choice Baby Bush offered when he said that “you are either with us or with the terrorists”. The updated version of this could be “you are either with us, or with the evil Russians and the evil Chinese”.
[BTW – This is the list of countries which have not been invited (for various reasons): Afghanistan, Algeria, Andorra, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia Herzegovina, Brunei, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cote D’Ivoire, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, China, Comoros, Congo, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, The Holy See, Honduras, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iran, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Monaco, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nicaragua, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Russia, Rwanda, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Vietnam, Yemen, and Zimbabwe.]
The real (people’s) map would look very differently
What would a realistic map look like?
First, almost none of the Latin American countries would be represented.
Second, all of Europe would, but primarily because the EU’s comprador elites are desperate to get from this summit a legitimacy which they are increasingly losing in their own countries due to the truly phenomenal, I would even say, suicidal policies of the EU member states (economy, energy, COVID, crime, immigration, Wokism, etc.).
Next, all of Africa would participate, in a desperate attempt to get as much aid as possible (military, economic, political, etc.) and to show how abjectly subservient to their colonial masters all the African governments still are. This is hardly their fault, true, but that does not change the abject reality of African politics…
Next, the wider Middle-East, India and Pakistan would also participate, but for very different reasons: these governments have all read the writing on the wall, albeit with some differences, and they know that the US is on the way out, but they want that “out” to be played on terms advantageous to them. Nobody wants to be the “next Erdogan” and be overthrown by CENTCOM. I would also add that while CENTCOM ain’t much of a military force anymore, there are numerous multi-billion dollar contracts still linking the USA to these countries and that is reason enough to show up at the Summit, and say all the right things, and then come home and return to business as usual.
Which leaves the entire Asian continent, including Russia, China, Central and Far East Asia. Here the map is simple: countries near Russia and China are not invited, countries near(er) Australia are. Asia currently is the continent with the most agency, by far, and the one with the brightest future due not only to its immense resources (human and natural) but also due to the fact that the two Asian giants (Russia and China) are moving together as one to begin to build the multi-polar world they eventually want to see worldwide on the continent they share. Russia and China also happen to have the most powerful militaries on the planet (especially if counted together, which they increasingly should).
If Malcolm X was still alive today he would probably say that “all the house Negroes have been invited and all the field Negroes have not” (see here) 🙂
The Summit for Democracy as a time machine?
I would argue that the upcoming Summit is like a time machine, not one which allows us to actually travel in time, but one which shows us who will be part of shaping the future of our planet and who will not. The folks invited by the (already dead) AngloZionist Empire are either comprador elites, or regimes with no real agency (and, therefore, no real legitimacy), and a few desperately poor countries which are literally willing to do anything, anything at all, to please their current masters. They have no real future to speak of.
As for the future, it is pretty evident that Asia will be, by far, the most important continent to set the agenda for the foreseeable future. I personally believe that Latin America will be next, all that is needed their is for a few well chosen “dominoes” to fall and the entire continent will be flipped very quickly. True, right now, if we ONLY look at the official map, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador and Bolivia look rather isolated. But let’s look at this differently, the fact that these countries can survive while being surrounded by pro-USA regimes is a very telling sign by itself. Furthermore, there are also two giants in Latin America: Argentina and Brazil, especially the latter. Should Brazil be “flipped”, then that would have a huge impact on the rest of the continent.
Next, the two regions which will “fall” next would be the Middle-East, first, and eventually, Europe, second.
There is very little, if anything, the Empire or the USA can do about the Middle-East: the truth is that the future of the region will be set by Iran (the regional superpower) and Russia. Yes, the Axis of Kindness countries (US+KSA+Israel) can still trigger a major regional war. But they can’t win it. That ship has now sailed.
With the EU, however, things are much more complicated and all the Kabuki theatre we currently see about the “imminent” Russian invasion is all about two things: first, “elegantly” get rid of the Ukraine (to a Russian invasion would be best) and about reasserting the Anglo dominance over the European continent. That plan might still succeed, especially when we consider the very real political power the UK+3B+PU gang has ever EU decision (yes, even the UK still has a lot of influence over the EU ruling classes via its still very real financial power!).
As for Oceania and Africa, they simply don’t matter very much, the former a nicely isolated by distance, the latter has no agency and is totally dependent on some kind of foreign masters.
In the meantime, the brain-dead EU politicians, which should have been placed on suicide watch years ago, are still at it: NATO threatens Russia with “consequences” while the US declares that “all options are on the table“. We can be sure that Putin personally and everybody else in Russia are absolutely *terrified* by such language, and that is why when the “imminent” Russian invasion does not materialize, the leaders of the (long dead) Empire will proclaim themselves “victorious” against the “Putin regime”! Bravo!
And even if the Ukies succeed in forcing Russia to intervene, then NATO will proudly declared that its invincible might is what forced the Russians to stop (doesn’t really matter where exactly). Again, bravo!
All this craziness actually makes perfect sense, as an imaginary war is the only one these losers can “win”.
Radwan Mortada is one of Lebanon’s leading investigative journalists, with almost two decades of experience working with the country’s biggest media outlets.
I met Radwan a decade ago while we were both working at Lebanon’s daily Al Akhbar, he for the Arabic newspaper, me on the English-language website. A veteran security journalist covering military institutions, wars, terrorism, extremism and the layers of intrigue in between, he is one of those rare reporters who can gain access to any information, and call up just about anyone, at any time.
Lebanon has more press freedoms than any country in West Asia, partly because it is politically split in two, with no one party having more power than the others. That rare balance has allowed its media to openly question and criticize all parties and individual political figures, with few of the negative consequences that occur in other states and regions where journalists are roughed up, detained and even killed in ever-rising numbers.
It isn’t often journalists here end up in the slammer for unearthing dirt on the country’s political or business elite, usually because no one person has the power to see it through.
So, when Lebanon’s military court – a body that has absolutely no legal jurisdiction over media activities – sentenced Radwan to imprisonment on 26 November for “the offense of insulting the military establishment,” without providing due notice to the defendant, and in absentia, it created a storm.
The Lebanese Press Editors Syndicate (LPES) immediately expressed its “astonishment” at the decision, and announced that it had assigned its legal advisor to review the case against Mortada with the possibility of filing an appeal.
According to the statement by the LPES, this ruling is a “violation of Article 28 of Legislative Decree No. 77/ 104, as amended by Law No. 330 of 18/1994, which abolished pre-trial detention for publication crimes and the penalty of imprisonment for journalists from most of its rulings.”
Other LPES officials say they will not allow authorities to set a precedent for the imprisonment of journalists who conduct investigative work.
And just today, Reporters sans frontières (Reporters Without Borders or RSF) tweeted:
#Lebanon: @RSF condemns the conviction in abstentia of @radwanmortada by the military court to more than one year in prison for “defaming the army”: an illegal pressure to silence a critical journalist, now forced to move from his home to protect himself and avoid any sentence. pic.twitter.com/fnqPSvc0tP
“RSF condemns the conviction in abstentia of Radwan Mortada by the military court to more than one year in prison for “defaming the army”: an illegal pressure to silence a critical journalist, now forced to move from his home to protect himself and avoid any sentence.
Lebanese media outlets across the political spectrum have covered this story in Radwan’s favor, and the country’s Minister of Information George Kordahi weighed in by saying the ‘Publications Court’ is the only Lebanese body authorized to rule on media affairs, based on the constitution and the laws regulating freedom of opinion and expression.
So why did Lebanon’s military court take action against a leading Lebanese media figure, well outside of its legal jurisdiction? Why now, in the midst of the country’s excruciating economic collapse and with terror and strife within its borders? Was there nothing more important for Lebanon’s military court to address – than this? And who instigated these proceedings?
The Cradle went directly to the source to answer some of these questions. This is what Radwan Mortada had to say:
The Cradle: Lebanon’s military court has sentenced you to one year and one month in prison. Before getting into the details, could you please tell me why a military court is involved in sentencing a journalist? Is this even legal?
Mortada: Military courts have no authority to try journalists for verbal offenses. They cannot prosecute me, and it would be illegal to do so. But the army commander, General Joseph Aoun, uses the military court as a weapon to fights those mentioning him to suppress freedom of opinion and expression. My words about the army command’s responsibility in the Beirut port explosion greatly angered Joseph Aoun, so he decided to make his own law.
First, he decided to ban me from entering the military court without legal justification. When I confronted him by saying that he did not inherit the court from his father to control it as he wishes and break the law, he sent a military force to raid my house and besieged the TV channel where I work to arrest me by force.
The Cradle: We have heard that you were not at the hearing or the sentencing. How is it possible that you were not even allowed to defend yourself? Why was this sentence delivered in absentia?
Mortada: My trial was a sham and a show. The president of the military court, Brigadier General Munir Shehadeh, violated due process because I was not notified of the trial date. This is against the law and exposes the implicit intent to prosecute me in this martial method. Also, the president of the court is an officer under the command of the army commander who filed the complaint against me. How could he be a judge between me and my opponent? The judge is a lower rank than the commander and has to respond to his orders by saying: ‘Yes, my commander.’
There is also a legal precedent issued by the military court itself. Hanin Ghaddar had previously been sentenced in absentia to six months in prison. But the president of the court at the time, Brigadier General Hussein Abdullah, ruled that the military court had no jurisdiction to try journalists after the United States withdrew his entry visa to America.
The Cradle: What are the military court’s charges against you?
Mortada: Offending the Lebanese Army, disparaging the military institution, and harming national security and the prestige of the state.
The Cradle: You believe the ultimate responsibility of the ammonium nitrate stores in Beirut’s Port lies with Lebanon’s military establishment. In essence, the Beirut blast happened under Joseph Aoun’s watch. Why hasn’t he been held accountable by the lead investigative judge, Tarek Bitar?
Mortada: Here is the root of the problem. I was the first to announce the responsibility and negligence of the army that led to the explosion of the Port of Beirut on 4 August 2020. I said that if the army had done its duty as it should have, the explosion would not have happened. This is a fact because the law holds the army exclusively responsible for dealing with ammonium nitrates.
But the judicial investigator, Tarek Bitar, is weak before the army and the current leadership represented by Joseph Aoun, so he did not dare to summon him. The responsibility of the army exists even if there are no traceable documents or if paperwork has been destroyed. If the army says it was not aware of the presence of a time bomb weighing 2,755 tons perched in the heart of Beirut for seven years, that is an even greater catastrophe since its most basic mission is to maintain security in the country.
The Cradle: I’ve known you and worked with you for a decade. We’ve even written articles together. I know your integrity and how you work, and I personally consider you among Lebanon’s most productive and professional journalists. So when you raise questions, I know you’re onto something. Do you trust this investigation of the Beirut Port explosion? Why or why not?
Mortada: In fact, I am personally acquainted with judicial investigator Tariq Bitar, but I am suspicious of the course of the investigation because I sense discrimination in the way this case is managed. The support Bitar has from America and some of the right-wing Lebanese parties only increases my apprehension and concern. You personally know that I have seen the documents that detail the investigation into the explosion in the port of Beirut. So I know there are officials whom the judicial investigator did not approach. The biggest evidence is his decision to exclude the current army leadership from the investigation, even though Joseph Aoun has been at the head of the army since 2017 and he bears the responsibility for this neglect.
I wish Judge Bitar had dealt with this case in another way, given the sensitivity of matters in our country. He should have summoned everyone, then decided who was responsible and charged him, but the direction of the investigation created a kind of suspicion. Therefore, I declared that I did not trust the existing investigation. But in order not to prejudge its results, I am patiently awaiting the issuance of the indictment decision by Judge Bitar to announce my final position on the investigation.
The Cradle: You wrote a very courageous piece for The Cradle that identified seven Lebanese judges that must be held accountable for unloading, storing, then ignoring the ammonium nitrate stores in Beirut’s Port. Why are these judges not being held accountable either?
Mortada: This judiciary branch bears this responsibility because it serves as a protective umbrella for the judges. Judge Bitar filed complaints against a number of judges. Although the complaints came late, the delay of the Cassation prosecution in ruling against them makes it bear a great responsibility.
The Cradle: You also covered the mass shootings and killings in Tayouneh on 14 October, and were the first to point out that the Army’s statements before and after Aoun’s meeting with the US Ambassador Dorothy Shea were different. Explain that to us.
Mortada: I wrote that the negligence of the Lebanese Army caused the Tayouneh massacre, which claimed the lives of seven innocent citizens, some of whom were shot by the army. It almost erupted into a civil war, given that this took place on a contact line between areas where a Shia majority and a Christian majority live. I spoke about the army’s responsibility and its neglect in separating the demonstrators, its wrong way of dealing with the demonstration, and the shooting that erupted after the demonstration.
I also published secret investigations conducted by the army, which showed that there was an ambush prepared the night before the demonstration, which was heading to the Palace of Justice to protest the performance of the judicial investigator Bitar in the explosion of the port of Beirut. The publication of these investigations angered the army, as they were leaked from the military court.
The Cradle: Who does Joseph Aoun think he is to do this, and why is he so focused on you, one of Lebanon’s leading journalists and a veteran security correspondent with the country’s top media outlets who has broken countless stories over the years?
Mortada: I was among the very few journalists to dare to call it by its name. I was the first to talk about the army’s main responsibility for the Beirut port explosion. Many others are afraid to face them or they are on their payroll. But I’m not one of them. Nobody can buy me and nobody can intimidate me. I carried my blood in my hands and went to the front lines and covered the lives of the most radical jihadist fighters. I was arrested in Syria. I was not afraid and I will not fear anyone. In my search for the truth, there are no red lines. I only want the truth. I know that this issue frightens many. Joseph Aoun is one of them.
The Cradle: Do you think Joseph Aoun has picked the wrong battle? Lebanon’s media associations have all, without exception, come in on your side.
Mortada: Definitely. Joseph Aoun has made a big mistake by deciding to go ahead with this fight. The battle with the press to suppress freedom of opinion and expression is a losing battle. The time of the police state is long gone. We are today in the twenty-first century. If he does not know it, he must change his advisors who are leading him to the abyss.
The Cradle: We all know that Joseph Aoun has aspirations to become president of the republic. He has increasingly associated himself and the LAF with the Americans, when Lebanon is clearly divided into two different political camps. Why would someone who is changing the highly-respected neutrality of the Lebanese army be fit for this position?
Mortada: I don’t think that General Joseph Aoun’s mentality qualifies him to be president of Lebanon. An officer leading an army cannot ask a military force to raid a media outlet to arrest a journalist, while he himself is thinking of becoming the president of Lebanon. Lebanon deserves better in light of the suffering of its people. Short-sightedness, narrow-mindedness, and personalization are not characteristics of a successful leader.
You know that the World Bank announced that Lebanon is going through one of the three worst economic crises in 150 years. You know the extent of the economic collapse, hunger, and unemployment that the Lebanese suffer from. I myself feel ashamed because my case came out in public at this time with all the tragedies we are experiencing. Imagine that the army chief and the president of the military court have nothing more important on their plate than going after a journalist they want to discipline, while forgetting about all the crises our country is going through.
The Cradle: What are you going to do now to fight these charges and stay out of prison?
Mortada: I will fight to the end. There is a team of lawyers that is objecting to the military court’s ruling. I will not accept any settlement and will follow up on every detail and highlight every violation. Dozens of foreign and Lebanese journalists and human rights defenders have contacted me and denounced the unjust ruling issued against me for simply expressing my opinion.
The Cradle: Radwan, I’ve learned a lot from you over the years and continue to do so. Thank you for your frankness and your courage in reporting the things we all want to know. What will you do when your name is cleared? Will you change your voice?
Mortada: Thank you, Sharmine. I assure you, this case will make me raise my voice higher and higher. I will open my eyes more to their violations and the approach they represent. I am a well-known journalist in Lebanon, and yet they attacked me. What do you think they will do to the rest of the citizens and the extent of the injustice they inflict on those who have no voice?
This ruling alerted me that I was inattentive in some areas related to the leadership of the army and the presidency of the military court. Today, I will work hard to count their every breath to shed light on any offense they commit.
Flags wave ahead of a NATO Defence Ministers meeting at the Alliance headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, October 21, 2021. REUTERS/Pascal Rossignol – RC28EQ9178EG
The charade has come to a point that – diplomatically – is quite unprecedented: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov lost his Taoist patience.
Independent geopolitical analyst, writer and journalist
By Pepe Escobar,
American hysteria over the “imminent” Russian invasion of Ukraine has exploded every geopolitical Stupid-o-Meter in sight – and that’s quite an accomplishment.
What a mess. Sections of the U.S. Deep State are in open revolt against the combo that remote controls Crash Test Dummy, who impersonates POTUS. The neocon-neoliberal axis is itching for a war – but has no idea how to sell it to an immensely fractured public opinion.
UKUS, which de facto controls the Five Eyes spy scam, excels only in propaganda. So in the end it’s up to the CIA/MI6 intel axis and their vast network of media chihuahuas to accelerate Fear and Loathing ad infinitum.
Russophobic U.S. Think Tankland would very much cherish a Russian “invasion”, out of the blue, and could not give a damn about the inevitable trouncing of Ukraine. The problem is the White House – and the Pentagon – must “intervene”, forcefully; otherwise that will represent a catastrophic loss of “credibility” for the Empire.
So what do these people want? They want to provoke Moscow by all means available to exercise “Russian aggression”, resulting in a lightning fast war that will be a highway to hell for Ukraine, but with zero casualties for NATO and the Pentagon.
Then the Empire of Chaos will blame Russia; unleash a tsunami of fresh sanctions, especially financial; and try to shut off all economic links between Russia and NATOstan.
Reality dictates that none of the above is going to happen.
All exponents of Russian leadership, starting with President Putin, have already made it clear, over and over again, what happens if the Ukro-dementials start a blitzkrieg over Donbass: Ukraine will be mercilessly smashed – and that applies not only to the ethno-fascist gang in Kiev. Ukraine will cease to exist as a state.
Defense Minister Shoigu, for his part, has staged all manner of not exactly soft persuasion, featuring Tu-22M3 bombers or Tu-160 White Swan bombers.
The inestimable Andrei Martyanov has conclusively explained, over and over again, that “NATO doesn’t have forces not only to ‘counter-act’ anything Russia does but even if it wanted to it still has no means to fight a war with Russia.”
Martyanov notes, “there is nothing in the U.S. arsenal now and in the foreseeable future which can intercept Mach=9-10+, let alone M=20-27, targets. That’s the issue. Same analytical method applies to a situation in 404. The only thing U.S. (NATO) can hope for is to somehow provoke Russia into the invasion of this shithole of a country and then get all SIGINT it can once Russia’s C4ISR gets into full combat mode.”
Translation: anything the Empire of Chaos and its NATO subsidiary try in Donbass, directly or indirectly, the humiliation will make the Afghanistan “withdrawal” look like a House of Gucci dinner party.
No one should expect clueless NATO puppets – starting with secretary-general Stoltenberg – to understand the military stakes. After all, these are the same puppets who have been building up a situation which might ultimately leave Moscow with a single, stark choice: be ready to fight a full scale hot war in Europe – which could become nuclear in a flash. And ready they are.
It’s all about Minsk
In a parallel reality, “meddling in 404” – a delightful Martyanov reference to a hellhole that is little more than a computer error – is a totally different story. That perfectly fits American juvenilia ethos.
At least some of the adults in selected rooms are talking. The CIA’s Burns went to Moscow to try to extract some assurance that in the event NATO Special Forces were caught in the cauldrons – Debaltsevo 2015-style – that the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, with Russian help, will concoct, they would be allowed to escape.
His interlocutor, Patrushev, told Burns – diplomatically – to get lost.
Chief of the General Staff, Gen Valery Gerasimov, had a phone call with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen Mark Milley, ostensibly to ensure, in Pentagonese, “risk-reduction and operational de-confliction”. No substantial details were leaked.
It remains to be seen how this “de-confliction” will happen in practice when Defense Minister Shoigu revealed U.S. nuclear-capable bombers have been practicing, in their sorties across Eastern Europe, “their ability to use nuclear weapons against Russia”. Shoigu discussed that in detail with Chinese Defense Minister Wei Fenghe: after all the Americans will certainly pull the same stunt against China.
The root cause of all this drama is stark: Kiev simply refuses to respect the February 2015 Minsk Agreement.
In a nutshell, the deal stipulated that Kiev should grant autonomy to Donbass via a constitutional amendment, referred to as “special status”; issue a general amnesty; and start a dialogue with the people’s republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.
Over the years, Kiev fulfilled exactly zero commitments – while the proverbial NATOstan media machine incessantly pounded global opinion with fake news, spinning that Russia was violating Minsk. Russia is not even mentioned in the agreement.
Moscow in fact always respected the Minsk Agreement – which translates as regarding Donbass as an integral, autonomous part of Ukraine. Moscow has zero interest in promoting regime change in Kiev.
This charade has come to a point that – diplomatically – is quite unprecedented: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov lost his Taoist patience.
Lavrov was forced, under the circumstances, to publish 28 pages of correspondence between Moscow on one hand, and Berlin and Paris on the other, evolving around the preparation of a high-level meeting on Ukraine.
Moscow was in fact calling for one of the central points of the agreement to be implemented: a direct dialogue between Kiev and Donbass. Berlin and Paris said this was unacceptable. So yes: both, for all practical purposes, destroyed the Minsk Agreement. Public opinion across NATOstan has no idea whatsoever this actually happened.
Lavrov did not mince his words: “I am sure that you understand the necessity of this unconventional step, because it is a matter of conveying to the world community the truth about who is fulfilling, and how, the obligations under international law that have been agreed at the highest level.”
So it’s no wonder that the leadership in Moscow concluded it’s an absolute waste of time to talk to Berlin and Paris about Ukraine: they lied, cheated – and then blamed Russia. This “decision” at the EU level faithfully mirrors NATO’s campaign of stoking the flames of imminent “Russian aggression” against Ukraine.
Armchair warriors, unite!
Across NATOstan, the trademark stupidity of U.S. Think Tankland rules unabated, congregating countless acolytes spewing out the talking points of choice: “relentless Russian subversion”, “thug” Putin “intimidation” of Ukraine, Russians as “predators”, and everything now coupled with “power-hungry China’s war on Western values.”
Some Brit hack, in a twisted way, actually managed to sum up the overall impotence – and insignificance – by painting Europe as a victim, “a beleaguered democratic island in an anarchic world, which a rising tide of authoritarianism, impunity and international rule-breaking threatens to inundate”.
The answer by NATOstan Defense Ministers is to come up with a Strategic Compass – essentially an anti-Russia-China scam – complete with “rapid deployment forces”. Led by who, General Macron?
As it stands, poor NATOstan is uncontrollably sobbing, accusing those Russian hooligans – scary monsters, to quote David Bowie – of staging an anti-satellite missile test and thus “scorning European safety concerns”.
Something must have got lost in translation. So here’s what happened: Russia conclusively demonstrated it’s capable of obliterating each and every one of NATO’s satellites and blind “all their missiles, planes and ships, not to mention ground forces” in case they decide to materialize their warmongering ideas.
Obviously those deaf, dumb and blind NATOstan armchair warrior clowns – fresh from their Afghan “performance” – won’t get the message. But NATOstan anyway was never accused of being partial to reality.
Good morning. This drawing in the hands of a girl is the dream of all Ukrainians. A new generation is growing up, which was not “brainwashed” by the Soviet mindset. This is our future, which we are fighting for!
By the way, to those who might be tempted to dismiss this has “just a drawing” on “just a Telegram channel”, I want to remind you all of what, for example, the official symbol of the Ukie military intelligence stupidity service looks like:
Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi assured his French counterpart, Emmanuel Macron, that Tehran seeks a definitive result through the ongoing talks in the Austrian capital, emphasizing that Vienna negotiations must end in removal of sanctions imposed on Iran.
Raisi made the remarks in a Monday phone call initiated by Macron, which lasted for one and a half hours, during which the two sides discussed the current state of Vienna talks on removal of anti-Iran sanctions and other issues of mutual interest.
“Sanctions have failed to stymie Iran’s progress and today, the entire world knows who violated the JCPOA, and they must return to their commitments,” Iran’s president said, using an acronym for Iran’s nuclear deal with world powers, officially called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action [JCPOA].
He further stated: “The current conditions are the result of Americans and Europeans not fulfilling their commitments as per the JCPOA.”
Raisi added that those parties who violated the JCPOA must gain the opposite side’s trust so that negotiations could proceed in a real manner and bear fruit.
“If Americans remove sanctions and Europeans fulfill their commitments, you should have no concern about Iran fulfilling its commitments, because we have shown time and again and in practice that we abide by our obligations,” Iran’s president said.
In parallel, Raisi reiterated that “Iran seeks [a definitive] result in [Vienna] talks and negotiations must end in removal of sanctions.”
Iran’s president then told Macron that if they believe in the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] as an international authority, they should note that “the agency has frequently announced that the Islamic Republic of Iran is committed to its nuclear obligations.”
He added that during his recent visit to Iran, Director General of the IAEA Rafael Grossi said nothing about Iran not being in compliance with its obligations, adding, “We are now ready to continue full cooperation with the Agency.”
“Iran has always lived up to its nuclear commitments and the International Atomic Energy Agency has confirmed Iran’s commitment [to its obligations] on many occasions,” Raisi said, adding that dispatching a comprehensive team to Vienna talks indicates Iran’s serious determination in those negotiations.
He also urged Macron to work with other participants in Vienna talks to secure removal of sanctions imposed on Iran.
Macron, for his part, condemned unilateral withdrawal of the United States from the JCPOA, saying that Paris considers the nuclear deal a common responsibility for its members.
Macron added that he has talked to US President Joe Biden and that Paris is bent on going on with the negotiations until a final result is reached.
The French president’s phone call came after the end of the first meeting of the seventh round of Vienna talks earlier the same day during which, according to Iran’s top negotiator, Ali Baqeri-Kani, all participants in the first meeting of the seventh round of talks have agreed that removing sanctions must be the main focus of negotiations.
Iran’s negotiator said all parties agreed that focus of the talks should be removal of sanctions imposed on Iran after the US’ unilateral withdrawal from the landmark 2015 nuclear deal.
The head of the Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc MP Mohamad Raad said, “We smell a coup against the Taif Agreement. This coup aims at reassuring the ‘Israeli’ enemy that the Lebanese people can’t face its aggression, so that it dictates its normalization and authoritarian policies and control even deciding the fate of our gas wealth in our territorial waters, as gas exploration is confined to certain companies of certain countries. Despite all this, we still talk about independence and sovereignty, but we are incapable of building one power facility that supplies Lebanon with power 24/7”.
Raad made the statement during the memorial ceremony held by Hezbollah on the 40th day on the passing of Martyr Muhammad Jamal Tamer.
He added, “Our national currency collapsed because it depends on foreign currency. Tomorrow, our policy will collapse because it also depends on foreign policies. If the Lebanese people want this, it’s up to them, but we are sacrificing our blood and souls to protect those who don’t know where there interest is in this period. Is it required that we commit suicide so that others are satisfied? We are keen to preserve the common living in this country; we want it to rule sovereignly and independently, and that its interests are in accordance with the aspirations, will, and national decision”.
“If anyone thinks that the equation has gone wrong and that the power balance became in the interest of the ‘Israeli’ axis and normalization and wants to turn against the Taif, we tell our people to pay attention to this miscalculation because Lebanon has gotten out of the ‘Israeli’ era and will not return to it; as all the methods of force that were used to twist the arm of the Resistance failed, and the sponsors of strife realized that the Resistance benefits from the national consensus on its role in Lebanon. So, let us not allow a faction of the Lebanese to undermine this consensus… The weapon of the Resistance has become on everyone’s lips, and media outlets have been bought in order to promote this issue,” Raad added.
Regarding the Tayouneh crime, Raad said, “What happened is not just a clash between the people of two areas, it’s rather a designed and planned aggression in order to cause a strife and to push people to fight among themselves and mess up the whole situation, so that the killer gives his credentials to the people who hired and pay him regionally or internationally”.
Raad concluded saying, “From now on and without wasting time and opportunities, let’s figure things out. Don’t let anybody drag you to a new civil war in order to impose on you a settlement with new balances of power, as long as people are open to each other and ready for dialogue, and as long as they appreciate their common interests and have no enemies but one enemy, which is still occupying our land”.
Yemen’s foreign minister says Saudi Arabia’s intensified attacks on the war-wracked country show the inability of the Saudi Arabia in the face of the Sana’a government, whose forces have continued to liberate areas under the control of Saudi-backed mercenaries.
“The bombardment [of Yemen] and the repetition of what has happened since the beginning of the aggression is a manifestation of [Saudi Arabia’s] helplessness,” Hesham Sharaf told Lebanon’s al-Mayadeen television network on Sunday.
“The current escalation on several fronts comes as the Saudi coalition reached the conviction that it has failed to put pressure on Sanaa,” he added.
The Yemeni minister then emphasized that the Yemeni forces are ready to respond to any escalation.
At the same time, Sharaf expressed his country’s readiness for dialogue and reaching “a just peace,” but stressed that the Saudi-led coalition must first stop its attacks on Yemen and open the Sana’a Airport and Yemen’s ports as a gesture of goodwill.
“We extend our hand for peace, but for a just peace,” he remarked. “Open the Sana’a Airport and [Yemen’s] ports and those would be gestures of peace, but moving towards peace [talks] while bombing us and showing us [your] muscle would not help.”
The Yemeni minister explained that the Sana’a International Airport is a civilian airport and “has nothing to do” with the nearby al-Dailmi airbase.
“Bombing the Sanaa Airport means that they don’t want to normalize the situation in Yemen or move towards peace.”
Sharaf also stressed, “We do not accept guardianship, neither from Saudi Arabia, nor from the UAE, nor any other country, and therefore, we will continue our efforts despite all obstacles,” in an apparent reference to the Yemeni counter-attacks.
The Yemeni foreign minister’s remarks come as Saudi fighter jets have continued to target the Yemeni capital, Sana’a, to make up for their defeats in other areas.
According to Yemen’s al-Masirah television network, Saudi warplanes conducted three airstrikes on the Sana’a International Airport on Sunday evening.
Two Saudi airstrikes also hit the neighborhood of Dhahaban in Sanaa at dawn on Saturday.
A Yemeni security official said on Monday that at least one citizen was killed and eleven others wounded, including African migrants, when the Saudi-led coalition bombarded several border districts in Saada province, northern Yemen.
The official explained that the Saudi army attacked the highway in the border directorate of Shada with artillery shells, killing one citizen and wounding two others.
Three Yemeni citizens and five African migrants were also injured by Saudi army fire in the al-Raqaw area in the border directorate of Monabbih, Yemen Press Agency reported.
Saada’s border districts are subjected to the Saudi-led coalition’s daily air raids, which cause casualties and large damage to citizens’ homes and property.
Saudi Arabia, backed by the US and regional allies, including the UAE, launched the war on Yemen in March 2015, with the aims of bringing the government of Yemen’s former president Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi back to power and crushing the popular Ansarullah movement.
The war has left hundreds of thousands of Yemenis dead and displaced millions more. It has also destroyed Yemen’s infrastructure and spread famine and infectious diseases there.
Despite heavily-armed Saudi Arabia’s continuous bombardment of the impoverished country, Yemeni armed forces and the Popular Committees have grown steadily in strength against the Saudi-led invaders and left Riyadh and its allies bogged down in the country.
by Rostislav Ischenko for Ukraina.ru source: Note: this machine translated text
Joseph Biden, the 46th president of the United States, has asked Russian President Vladimir Putin for a meeting for the second time in six months. This would not be surprising: in the end, international tensions have reached a limit, and not only the most alarmist of experts, but also the most cautious of politicians have already started talking about the high probability of war
In such circumstances, responsible leaders of great powers are simply obliged to meet and seek compromises.
But this is the same Biden, whose team cried all the tears over Russian interference in the American elections and twice tried to organize the impeachment of the 45th US President Donald Trump, accusing the latter of surrendering American interests to Russia and working for Putin. Meanwhile, Putin and Trump had only one full-format meeting (in Helsinki, July 16, 2018, a year and a half before the expiration of Trump’s powers), and the rest — about five short conversations “on the sidelines” of various summits.
Relations between Russia and the United States had sunk to the freezing point even before Trump. At the same time, the 45th American president, although he negotiated more harshly, was still much more constructive than the 46th. Trump was inclined to seek a compromise, despite all the contradictions, because only a mutually acceptable compromise can ensure a long and lasting peace.
Biden, in a typical American manner, is trying to deceive a partner in the negotiation process, seeking only a truce – a postponement of confrontation for some time, during which the United States will try to solve its problems in order to take up the old with renewed vigor later.
That is why Biden’s team is begging for meetings with Putin, as if their ancient boss is afraid to die without telling Vladimir Vladimirovich something important. Pay attention to the diplomatic activity of the American president who does not always adequately perceive reality during the first year of his term:
* spring – activation of the US-European Union, an attempt to force the EU to go to a sharp deterioration in relations with Russia and abandon the SP-2; * summer – a sudden request for a meeting with Putin, insistence on its early organization, declared readiness to resolve the entire spectrum of controversial issues. In fact, absolutely empty and unacceptable hints for Russia about the readiness of the United States not to interfere if the Kremlin decides to restore its exclusive sphere of influence in the post-Soviet space by force, so that, as a reciprocal courtesy, Russia refuses an informal (but very problematic for the United States) alliance with China. The rest of the summer is devoted to spreading disinformation that Moscow is ready to negotiate with the United States at the expense of Beijing; * autumn — the formation of an anti-Chinese alliance of US vassals in the Asia-Pacific region and part of the European powers, followed by a sharp and persistent desire to organize a personal meeting between Xi Jinping and Biden (the meeting took place, was in vain, after which the United States began spreading disinformation that Beijing is ready to negotiate with Washington at the expense of Moscow); * winter — against the background of the sharp aggravation of the situation on the borders of Russia and Belarus that began in the autumn and an undisguised attempt to draw Russia into a war with the participation of Eastern European members of NATO and the EU, a new insistence on a personal meeting with Putin.
In my opinion, there is no need to have an outstanding intellect to see the “swing” on which the United States is trying to “rock” Russia and China in order to break their partnership (absolutely nullifying all attempts by the United States to regain the status of a global hegemon) and suppress Moscow and Beijing one by one and one by one. The United States offers everyone something unnecessary, but seriously binding their hands and requiring large resource costs, they try to link everyone with a regional war with their allies (who, however, are not in a hurry to drag chestnuts out of the fire for Washington), they inspire everyone that the partner has almost agreed to the American proposal and we must hurry to negotiate ourselves so as not to be made fools of.
The method is simple, has been used since ancient times and quite often led to success. The United States understands that neither Russia nor China want to win right now and annex the post-Soviet territories in Europe and Taiwan (respectively).
Moscow and Beijing would prefer to solve these problems peacefully and later. At this stage, the too clearly expressed intention to return the fallen imperial territories may not only limit the possibilities of cooperation between Russia and China to resist the military-political and financial-economic pressure of the United States, but also undermine the entire system of Eurasian unions built by them.
Therefore, the United States, in order to persuade Russia and China to make concessions in the negotiations, frighten both of them with an unnecessary regional war, while at the same time offering to negotiate and solve this problem. If someone gives up and starts at least discussing options, Washington will immediately provide a proof leak of information in order to persuade the second partner to make a concession, and then bargain with both from a favorable position to bring down the price.
Realizing all this, the Russian leadership is in no hurry to talk with Biden. Peskov, on behalf of the Kremlin, said that the exact date has not yet been determined. However, the Kremlin has agreed in principle to organize a videoconference before the end of the year. Why did they do that?
Every month (not to mention a year) without war, Russia and China strengthen and weaken the United States. If we hold out for two or three years, the war will become meaningless for the United States, because, by their own admission, after 2024 they do not see the possibility of defeating China militarily. Consequently, in two years, the opportunities for American blackmail will decrease sharply, and America’s allies, who are already unwilling to risk themselves because of the Washington games, will become even more thoughtful, it will be even more difficult to persuade them to demonstrative aggressive actions against Moscow and Beijing. A certain US deadline is approaching, we need to act already. Under these conditions, Washington, having lost hope of achieving its goal by peace, can really bet on provocation of war.
Any negotiations are a way to delay time. While they are preparing and while they are going, it is unprofitable for the United States to be unconstructive, which means they will try to keep their allies on a short leash. But vassal states are not trained dogs that can be set on an object or calmed down in one second, rocking the situation takes time (albeit a little). The solution suggests itself: as long as possible to delay the time in determining the date of negotiations, postponing them for later. As soon as it becomes impossible to pull further – to hold negotiations and try, without giving a single opportunity to interpret their outcome as a willingness to take seriously American proposals for the surrender of an ally, to involve the United States in the preparation of the next meeting by creating permanent expert groups in the areas.
Any diplomatic department is a complex bureaucratic machine that is extremely difficult to force to move simultaneously in two directions. If you give the task to begin diplomatic preparations for war, this apparatus will move in one direction, if you set the task of finding a compromise, then in another. At the same time, it will have a serious informational impact on both the international and domestic agenda. That is, even meaningless, but regular meetings of experts reduce (though not completely remove) the risk of fatal confrontation.
Russia’s actions indicate that the Kremlin clearly sees the threat and has chosen the right tactics. The agreement on the creation of expert groups was reached during the first meeting with Biden, with the organization of which they stretched out as much as they could. However, America countered this agreement by saying that the expert groups did not work. So, now Russian diplomats will point this out and demand more constructive.
The current meeting is also being delayed as much as they can, having already postponed it until the end of December. If it works out, then under the pretext of New Year’s holidays they will postpone it until the middle-end of January (however, this is unlikely, the United States is in a hurry). The current meeting will be held online: the coronavirus. Although he does not interfere with Putin and Biden’s meetings with other politicians, but in this case only online. And not because I don’t want to waste time on flights, knowing in advance that the negotiations will be in vain. The online mode does not allow the organization of fake leaks about the content of negotiations. This is not a face-to-face conversation (in the presence of only unknown and controlled translators, in an office protected from wiretapping) – everything is recorded, and by both sides.
Thus, Russia is trying to win one and a half to two months out of the 48 required. Will it be possible to win the world completely?
This question has no definite answer. On the one hand, time is running out, and with the approach of 2024, the United States has nothing to lose, and in the vassal countries designated by them for slaughter, there are their own war parties that (for personal gain) are ready to start even a losing war that destroys their states. On the other hand, the current authorities, who are now in charge of American consumables, are doing everything possible to get rid of the honorable mission of pointlessly dying for the interests of the United States. How strong will they have enough strength to continue maneuvering on the verge of a foul? How ready are Americans to increase pressure on the dependent elites of limitrophs? Where is the weak link ready to break: in Europe or in Asia and who is it (Ukraine, Taiwan, someone else)? We can only assume with more or less certainty.
Often the expected danger comes at all from where it is not expected or when they stopped waiting and relaxed.
ليست العودة إلى مفاوضات فيينا جولة استكشافية، ولا محاولة مفتوحة على احتمالات، فالشهور التي مضت منذ توقف التفاوض كانت هي شهور المفاوضات الفعلية، وساحة الاستكشاف الحقيقية، وميدان اختبار الاحتمالات المتعددة، وقبل سنوات عندما قررت واشنطن استئناف المفاوضات في مثل هذه الأيام من عام 2013 ، بعدما توقفت عام 2012، قلنا إن العودة للمفاوضات هي قرار بالتوصل لاتفاق، لأن ما سبق العودة كان اختبارات كافية للبدائل، وأن الحرب على سورية وتحريك الأساطيل نحوها في آب 2013، كانت سقف هذه الاختبارات، وفي كل مرة كان هناك من يعتقد بأن فرص التوصل للاتفاق تتراجع كنا نقول إن بديل الاتفاق هو الاتفاق، واليوم نعيد أن البدائل التي يتحدث عنها الإسرائيليون هي تلك التي حازوا تفويضاً أميركياً باختبارها ولكن سقفها عمليات التخريب التي لحقت بالمنشآت النووية، والاغتيالات التي استهدفت علماء الملف النووي، وراقب الأميركيون نتائجها فوجدوا ان المشروع النووي الإيراني لا يزال يتقدم، علماً أن الإسرائيلي قبض نقداً وسلفاً ثمن ما قام به، سواء بعمليات التطبيع مع الخليج، أو بأموال عربية مولت هذه العمليات، أما الحرب فقد اختبرها الأميركيون في عهد الرئيس السابق دونالد ترامب، سواء يوم أسقطت إيران طائرتهم التجسسية العملاقة فوق الخليج، أو يوم دكت بصواريخها قاعدة عين الأسد، رداً على اغتيال الجنرال قاسم سليماني.
–
الاختبارات التي يفترض أن تقرر مصير المفاوضات قد جرت، والبدائل التي يمكن أن يلجأون إليها قد تم اللجوء إليها، ولذلك نكرر وبثقة أن بديل الاتفاق هو الاتفاق، وأن شروط إيران للعودة إلى الاتفاق قد تم فرضها في ساحات الاشتباك التي جعلت مسار فيينا بتوقيت طهران خياراً وحيداً أمام الأميركيين، على رغم كثرة كلامهم عن أن الوقت ينفد من أمام خيار التفاوض، وهم يكررون ذلك طوال ستة شهور، ثم يعودون عندما قررت إيران أن العودة صارت مناسبة، فذلك لأن التفاوض يأتي على خلفية بدائل تم اختبارها، أولها كان في لبنان بمحاولة الإنقلاب على حزب الله من بوابة الأزمة الاقتصادية وتفجير الشارع بوجهه، وقد انتهت بنتيجة صفرية، والثانية بمحاولة دعم الحرب على اليمن ودفعها باتجاه الحسم، عبر تشديد الحصار وحملات التجويع، والقصف التدميري الوحشي، ففاجأتهم مأرب بحضورها وتحول الحرب إلى حسم معاكس يقترب، والثالثة بمحاولة تغيير قواعد الاشتباك في فلسطين، ودفع غزة إلى التنازل طلباً للقمة الخبز، فكان سيف القدس، والتدهور في ميزان الردع الإسرائيلي لحساب ميزان ردع معاكس.
–
بعد الانسحاب من أفغانستان يدرك الأميركيون أنهم خارج سياقات حروب جديدة، وبعد الاتفاق الصيني- الإيراني يدرك الأميركيون أن إيران لم تعد بحاجة حيوية للعودة إلى الاتفاق، بل إن إيران التي قطعت أشواطاً في تطوير برنامجها النووي مستظلة بالانسحاب الأميركي من الاتفاق، فرضت معادلة قوامها أن أميركا خسرت الاتفاق الذي كان يقيد البرنامج النووي الإيراني، ولم تكسب بالمقابل شيئاً في الميادين التي قالت إنها تعترض على عدم تضمينها للاتفاق، وهي البرنامج الصاروخي الإيراني، الذي باتت فروعه منتشرة على ضفاف البحر المتوسط والبحر الأحمر وفوق مياه الخليج، وصولاً لباب المندب، أما الوضع الإقليمي فقد بات حضور قوى المقاومة فيه صاحب اليد العليا في كل ساحات الاشتباك، وكما يقول الروس للأميركيين، لم تعودوا في وضع يهدد إيران بكلفة عدم العودة، بل عليكم أن تقدموا لها حوافز للعودة، ويكفي دليلاً أن إيران ليست راغبة بامتلاك سلاح نووي عودتها للمفاوضات بنية العودة للاتفاق، على رغم بلوغها العتبة النووية.
–
معادلة فيينا هي العودة للاتفاق أو العودة للاتفاق، وإلا لما تمت العودة إلى فيينا.
Terminology and definitions have always been part of wars used by the West in general, and Washington and London in particular against resistance movements and freedom fighters.
Western governments orchestrate systematic misleading campaigns and spend billions of dollars to tarnish the resistance image and portray them as ‘terrorists, smugglers and drug traffickers.’
They depict them as groups that carry ‘illegal and criminal activities to introduce them to the public as groups of organized crime committers.’
This kind of baseless and unfounded accusations by the Western governments aims at justifying the use of violence reaching to killing the resistance operatives and activists whether political or military.
The whole issue emanates from the open and unabated support those governments pledge to ‘Israel.’
Both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine fall under this category and they truly represent their people’s struggle against the ‘Israeli’ occupation.
Hezbollah has become a beacon of light and hope to tens of millions across the world after its success in resisting the occupation and inflicting successive defeats against it, thus bringing continuous victories and glory to the whole Umma.
Many Western governments have designated the party as a ‘terrorist entity’ following endless, heavy, and persistent ‘Israeli’ efforts and lobbying to this effect.
Hamas received equal treatment and faced the same tough measures for its continuous fight to protect the Palestinian people.
After many unsuccessful wars by the ‘Israelis’ to eradicate them, and after they emerged triumphant from their battles and become icons of hope to the people, the ‘Israelis’ started a restless campaign not only to tarnish their image, but to force laws and regulations all over the world to criminalize them so they can clamp their support and criminalize any support or any assistance they could receive and even to make any contact with them and their representatives as illegal.
Those measures reflect how hopeless ‘Israel’ has become because of the resistance in Palestine and Lebanon.
But no matter how hard they might try, it is evident that their sinister, unjust, and aggressive decisions will not bring them any positive result.
The Western governments who aided ‘Israel’ in its effort should be questioned held responsible by their people for their support to the number one terrorist and apartheid entity in the world nowadays.
The so called international community, especially the United Nations and human rights organizations bear equal responsibility in saying the truth and revealing the true face of ‘Israel.’
‘Israel’ should be ready to know that those resistance movements are not separated or fragmented, contrary, they are now in a real axis that stretches from Gaza to Sanaa.
Tens of millions of supporters believe in their choice and support their resistance.
Hundreds of thousands of trained military personnel are ready to join any war against ‘Israel’ as pronounced by the leaders of this axis.
They are also supported by governments and states that strongly believe in the cause.
The resistance movements in Palestine and Lebanon have proved their effectiveness in protecting their people and liberating lands.
However, although the ‘Israeli’ efforts and western support against Hezbollah and Hamas could help the Zionist entity gain some publicity, this can never change one letter in the dictionary of battle against occupation.
Our people and our Umma are more decisive than any time in the past to liberate their sacred lands and protect them. This has already been written, the ‘Israelis’ have only to wait and see how many defeats they will receive and how many victories the resistance will gain, and it is only a matter of time!
The White House says that their goal is a return to mutual compliance with the JCPOA, and that they have not reconsidered their decision to release strategic oil reserves.
White House Spokesperson Jen Psaki
White House Spokesperson Jen Psaki said on Monday that the United States’ goal of full return to compliance with the Iran nuclear agreement has not changed.
“Our objective has not changed,” Psaki said. “It remains a mutual return to full compliance with the JCPOA.”
The Vienna Talks were restarted today after a 5-month hiatus. Russia’s Permanent Representative to International Organizations in Vienna, Mikhail Ulyanov, said today that the seventh round of negotiations on the renewal of the nuclear deal has begun successfully.
Psaki also commented on the Biden administration’s decision to release oil from the US Strategic Petroleum Reserves, saying the administration has not reconsidered its position on the release.
Psaki: No plans to restrict Biden’s travel for Omicron
Psaki was asked during the press briefing whether there are plans to restrict President Joe Biden’s travel on account of the new Omicron variant, to which Psaki said that there are “none planned at this point.”
She also clarified that Biden will put forward a detailed strategy on how to fight covid this winter next Thursday, adding that there are no recommendations on changing US citizens’ travel plans during the upcoming holiday season.
Psaki said that they had pressed on pharmaceutical companies in the past to be a productive player in the fight against the pandemic, but “we can’t compel or force anyone to share their intellectual property data… that’s not something written into these contracts which obviously were done prior to the president taking office.” However, Biden’s “supports the IP waiver,” she declared.
On the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people, factions call on the Palestinian Authority to stop all relations with “Israel,” and stress that resistance is the only way to end the occupation.
The Committees called on the PA to stop all relations, agreements, and negotiations with the Israeli occupation.
On the occasion of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people, the Popular Resistance Committees in Palestine considered that the decision to partition the land represents Western and international complicity “that will not legitimize the usurpation of Palestine by the criminal Zionist enemy entity.”
The 29th of November marks the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People that the UN celebrates every year.
It also coincides with the day the UN General Assembly adopted Partition Resolution No. (181) which called for the partition of Palestinian lands to accommodate the occupation’s expansionist goals, forcefully separating the land into “Arab and Jewish states”.
The Committees considered that the partition plan “laid the foundations for the largest mass expulsion and displacement of the Palestinian people in history.”
In a statement, the Committees affirmed that the only feasible way to uproot “Israel” is through resistance in all its forms.
It called on the Palestinian Authority to stop all relations, agreements, and negotiations with the Israeli occupation, as well as withdraw its recognition of it.
In the same context, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine considered that ending the occupation could only come through the escalation of the struggle against “Israel,” and called for unifying the Arab stance against normalization.
For its part, the Palestinian Freedom Movement urged the Palestinian authority to harmonize with and acknowledge the magnitude of international solidarity that supports Palestinians and rejects the occupation.
Moreover, the Global Campaign to Return to Palestine celebrated the occasion through a series of projects and activities in support of the Palestinian people and their steadfastness in their land.
The International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people is considered an opportunity to draw attention to the Palestinian cause that remains unresolved and the fact that Palestinians have not obtained their inalienable rights, despite numerous international resolutions.
بخلاف ما يظنه الكثيرون الذين لا تبهرهم إلا الدول التي تملك أموالا طائلة، يحتل الأردن موقعاً مؤثراً في خريطة الجغرافيا السياسية والاقتصادية والأمنية للمنطقة، فقد قام مشروع الحرب على سورية على ركيزتين في الجغرافيا هما تركيا والأردن، وعندما خرج الأردن من الحرب اختل التوازن وبدأ أفول الحرب، أما مشروع التطبيع فيعتمد على الأردن كبيضة قبان، فالأردن هو المعبر الجغرافي للتطبيع الاقتصادي بين الخليج وكيان الاحتلال، حيث لا معنى للتطبيع الا باكتمال خطة نقل النفط الخليجي عبر الأردن .إلى ساحل المتوسط في فلسطين المحتلة، وتأمين خطوط نقل السلع التجارية .إلى الخليج من مرافئ فلسطين المحتلة على المتوسط، ولا يستقيم التطبيع إلا بتفكيك المشرق أو بلاد الشام، ولذلك كان الأردن ركيزة ما سمي بمشروع الشام الجديد الذي يضم العراق ومصر ويتوسطه الأردن، لتأمين بيع الغاز والكهرباء من مصر إلى العراق، فتنتعش مصر ويفصل العراق عن إيران.
–
قدرة الأردن على تحمل تبعات التطبيع شعبياً وسياسياً هي ما يخضع لمقياس الضغط بصورة مستدامة لمعرفة درجة الأمان في السير بالخطوات المكلفة للاستثمار في خطط التطبيع الطويلة المدى، كأنابيب نقل النفط وخطوط تجارة الترانزيت، لذلك كانت الخطة الأولى هي تأمين عائدات للمواطن الأردني من مشروع التطبيع لضمان اشتراكه بالاستفادة، وفقاً لما يسمى برشوة الشعوب لإشراكها بالخيانة أو الاستعمار، وهذه هي وظيفة المشروع الممول تحت عنوان التطبيع لبناء مزارع توليد الطاقة الجديدة النظيفة من الشمس، في الصحراء الأردنية وبيعها لكيان الاحتلال، مقابل شراء كميات من المياه المحلاة التي تنفذها مشاريع يمولها ذات البرنامج ضمن إطار التشجيع على التطبيع، ولم يكن أحد من القيمين على المشروع ليضع في حسابه أن يتعرض البرنامج لحملة احتجاج شعبية تعادل الانتفاضة تجعله موضع إعادة نظر، في ضوء خروج الآلاف من الأردنيين في تظاهرات رفض التطبيع، ما تؤشر عليه نحو المستقبل.
–
عندما يخرج الأردنيون رفضاً لمشاريع التطبيع المصممة لكسب ودهم ورضاهم، بالتالي صمتهم على ما سيليها، وما يطلب إليهم حراسته وتوفير أمنه من مشاريع عملاقة لاحقة، فهذا يعني نسف فرص قيام هذه المشاريع، التي لا يمكن حمايتها إلا بالاستقرار، فمسار مئات الكيلومترات لأنابيب النفط وقوافل التجارة وباصات السياح، لا يمكن حمايته بنشر مئات آلاف الجنود على المسار، بل بخلق بيئة متصالحة مع المشاريع توفير الاستقرار السياسي والأمني، وهذا ما فشل بالأمس فشلاً ذريعاً، وما ليس بالإمكان تجاهل فشله وتجاوزه والسير بالمشاريع التي يصبح التطبيع من دونها أقل قيمة ومردود، وتموت تطلعات أصحابه للشراكات الاستراتيجية المربحة، وهذا يعني بالتوازي صرف النظر عن مشاريع ضمان أمن التطبيع عبر صيغة الشام الجديد، التي تضم الأردن والعراق ومصر.
–
النهوض الشعبي الأردني بوجه التطبيع ليس غريباً على الأردن، بقياس المواجهات التي خاضها الأردنيون مراراً بوجه حلقات متعددة منذ اتفاق وادي عربة، وكانت الدعوة لإقفال سفارة كيان الاحتلال أحد تجلياتها، ورفض اتفاق الغاز بين كيان الاحتلال والأردن احد محطاتها، لكن منذ معركة سيف القدس ينمو في الأردن مناخ مشابه للمناخ الفلسطيني، حيث تتصاعد الآمال بخط المقاومة وقدرته على تحقيق المزيد من الإنجازات، وبسبب التداخل التاريخي بين الفلسطينيين والأردنيين نسبة الفلسطينيين المقيمين في الأردن وحاملي الجنسية الأردنية بينهم يصعب الفصل بين الخيارات الأردنية الشعبية ونهوض القضية الفلسطينية، ويبدو أن مسار التطبيع الذي بني على فرضية ضمان التموضع في الأردن كبيضة قبان ضامنة للنجاح سيجد مقبرته في الأردن.
هذه الأعداد الكبيرة في وسط البلد بالإضافة إلى مثيلاتها في مختلف المحافظات تتحدث بوضوح عن انفصال صانع القرار عن الإرادة الشعبية.وتقول أيضاًأن التخويف بالاعتقالات لم يجد مع الشعب الأردني ولن يجدي.فرفض التطبيع والعداء للكيان الصهيوني هو أصيل فينا والمطبعون هم الطارئون #التطبيع_خيانةpic.twitter.com/K0zVWcOxXJ
Lebanese Information Minister George Kordahi stressed that the Publications Court is the only one authorized to deal with media affairs.
In a statement, the Lebanese minister commented on the ruling issued by the military court against Al-Akhbar’s journalist Radwan Mortada.
“The Publications Court is the only one authorized to deal with media affairs, including what is related to the work of journalists under the constitution and the laws regulating freedom of opinion and expression,” read the statement, carried by National News Agency (NNA).
He expressed his hope that this issue would be settled under the Publications Law, while ensuring freedom of expression and the rights of institutions in accordance with regulations and laws.
Chief of Palestinian resistance Hamas political bureau Ismail Haniya stressed that ‘Israeli’ prisoners in the besieged Gaza Strip will not see the light of day until Palestinian inmates held in ‘Israeli’ jails are released.
Haniya made the remarks in an interview with the international Arab Forum for Solidarity with Detainees in Zionist prisons on Saturday, the movement’s official website reported on Sunday.
He stressed that the issue of the Palestinian prisoners in ‘Israeli’ occupation jails would remain a top priority for Hamas and the movement supports these inmates by strengthening their steadfastness and working hard until they are released.
Haniya also noted that Hamas has managed to free more than a thousand Palestinian detainees from Zionist jails in the Wafaa al-Aharar [“True Promise of Free Men”] prisoner swap deal with the occupying regime in 2011.
Haniya emphasized that Tel Aviv does not make compromises willingly, confirming that “this enemy gives nothing without being forced to do so.”
More than 7,000 Palestinians are reportedly held in ‘Israeli’ jails. Hundreds have been incarcerated under the practice of administrative detention, which allows holding Palestinian inmates without trial or charge. Some Palestinian prisoners have been held in administrative detention for up to eleven years.
Elsewhere in his remarks, Haniya paid homage to Operation al-Quds Sword, which marked the latest military faceoff between the Zionist regime and the Gaza-based resistance groups, including Hamas.
He confirmed that this confrontation with the ‘Israeli’ occupation forces was a milestone in the history of Palestine, as it has “put the region on the path towards ending the ‘Israeli’ occupation of Palestine.”
Can the Beirut blast’s lead investigator, Judge Tarek Bitar, take on his negligent colleagues? Events so far suggest he won’t.Photo Credit: The Cradle
Lead investigative Judge Tarek Bitar refuses to prosecute his judiciary colleagues who signed to unload, store, then ignore the ammonium nitrates that devastated Beirut last August.
The Lebanese are split on the performance of Judge Tarek al-Bitar, the lead judicial investigator in the massive 4 August Port of Beirut explosion last year.
One side blindly trusts the man, believing Bitar will spearhead the fight against Lebanon’s existing corrupt political class and discover the identities of those responsible for the deadly port blast.
The other side views him as a foreign tool used to create sedition in Lebanon by targeting political figures critical of the US. The Lebanese resistance, Hezbollah, was the first to draw suspicion to Bitar’s performance, whose arbitrary and biased allegations seemed to target only one side of the political divide.
Hezbollah’s charges have gradually escalated over the months. When Bitar first took on the blast investigation – the second judge to do so – Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah urged him to publish the blast site’s technical report so it would quash unsubstantiated rumors about the group’s role in the explosion, or allegations that it stored ‘weapons’ at the Port of Beirut.
Bitar did not respond to Nasrallah’s request for transparency, however, and allowed political and media disinformation to go unchecked during a national crisis.
In one example of this, an alleged ‘witness’ named Imad Kashli appeared in a Lebanese media outlet claiming that he transported ammonium nitrate for Hezbollah from the Port of Beirut to a village in the south, in what was later discovered to be false testimony. Bitar failed to take any action against Kashli under the pretext that he was ‘sick,’ and media outlets never bothered to refute or retract the fabricated story.
Furthermore, Bitar’s political targets say the judge’s own allegations are not comprehensive, but deliberately selective. His interrogation roster focuses overwhelmingly on personalities belonging to one political affiliation, while unjustifiably excluding officials in the very same posts with opposite political views. Bitar has interrogated former Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) Commander Jean Kawahji, for instance, while skipping over current LAF Commander Joseph Aoun, a Washington-favored army man.
Aoun cannot be bypassed or absolved of responsibility. The explosion happened on his watch, during his tenure. Bitar’s detractors rightly point out that the ultimate responsibility for the Beirut blast must focus on the Lebanese judiciary and the military. The former signed the papers that allowed in and continued to store tons of illegally-stored ammonium nitrate in Beirut, and the latter has the final word on any explosives inside Lebanon’s legal boundaries.
The fact that Bitar has ruled out questioning the current army leadership, most of the judges, the Ministers of Justice and Defense, and the Justice Ministry’s cases commission from has raised eyebrows, obviously. Nasrallah did not mince his words when he stated, in a recent speech, that the greatest responsibility for the 2020 calamity rests with the judges who gave permission to unload vast amounts of ammonium nitrate explosives from a foreign ship seized by Lebanese authorities, and then gave permission to store these substances in dangerous conditions inside the Port of Beirut.
Bitar’s choices lead to armed confrontations
Leaked reports in the media and from within the corridors of Lebanon’s Judiciary, instead deflected blame onto cabinet ministers and members of parliament (MPs), revealing that they would be arrested even before Bitar issued the summons. Furthermore, he has been quoted as saying that he wanted to fight, not avenge, the political class, which he did not deny in a press interview – thus, confirming the words attributed to him.
His behavior and the investigation’s bias has only reinforced suspicions against Bitar, who was expected, at the very least, to handle these processes and suspects impartially, and to display good faith by muzzling rumors and disinformation.
The judge’s questionable performance finally prompted supporters of Hezbollah, Marada, the Amal Movement, and members of professional organizations (lawyers, etc) to hold a protest in front of the Beirut Palace of Justice.
On 14 October, a peaceful demonstration by these groups was ambushed in Beirut’s Tayouneh neighborhood by far-right Lebanese Forces (LF) party gunmen. Rooftop sniper fire quickly escalated into an armed clash that killed seven Hezbollah and Amal supporters and injured dozens of others.
The attack could have easily spiraled into a civil war had it not been for Nasrallah’s public calls for restraint, which gave space for an investigation by army intelligence, under the supervision of the judiciary, that this week summoned LF leader Samir Geagea for interrogation. That case continues.
Judiciary and military responsibility for the explosives
Why has Bitar overlooked the judicial and military responsibilities for the ammonium nitrates and its storage at the port for seven years? Why does he persist in focusing his investigation on cabinet ministers and parliamentarians mainly, despite the fact that the explosion was primarily a security and judicial failure?
If the army had carried out its function, entrusted exclusively to Lebanon’s military under the country’s Weapons and Ammunition Law, by supervising the nitrate storage, destruction, or re-export, the devastating explosion would have been averted.
Similarly, if judges had done their job, a legally binding – not a political one – decision would have ensured the destruction or immediate exportation of the explosive materials from Warehouse 12 in the Port of Beirut.
Despite the negligence of his judicial colleagues, Judge Bitar has been noticeably timid about addressing their liabilities in the lead-up to the explosion. The politicization of his investigation has all but buried the legal distribution of responsibility – the truth, so to speak – for the blast.
The judges who escaped Bitar’s ‘judgement’
Judge Jad Maalouf
To this day, the ‘guardians of justice’ continue to remain unaccountable. But the names of seven judges and a state attorney suspected of negligence have been identified as those most liable for the judiciary’s failings: Judges Jad Maalouf and Carla Shawah from the Beirut Urgent Matters Court, Ministry of Justice Judges Marwan Karkabi and Helena Iskandar, head of the Beirut Executive Department Mirna Kallab, government commissioner at the Military Court Judge Peter Germanos, Appeals Court Attorney General Ghassan Khoury, and state attorney Omar Tarabah.
Lebanon’s Internal Security Forces (ISF) had identified these judges in a report presented to Judge Bitar at the start of his investigation.
The judiciary’s responsibility in the blast has also been lost amid blanket local media focus on Lebanon’s political class since 17 October 2019, when a street ‘revolution’ arose in response to the country’s economic collapse. The prevailing trend in the country has been to lay all blame on the politicians and bankers who let this happen.
So there would be little fallout for Bitar if he took the easy path, focused on the easy ‘villains,’ and didn’t rock the boat with his judicial colleagues or Lebanon’s ‘neutral’ military establishment.
Bitar checked some boxes, but basically played softball with the judiciary. As an example, he formally requested that the Cassation Court’s public prosecutor separately verify the negligence of Beirut Judges Maalouf and Shawah in order to charge them with the crime of probable intent, like the rest of the defendants in the case.
Although more than a year has passed since the blast investigation began, any action against the judges, or even checking their files or hearing their statements, has been delayed for months, although the role of one of them – Jad Maalouf – is critical.
Maalouf signed off on the decision to unload the ship’s ammonium nitrate cargo and appoint a judicial guard as the head of the port, Mohammad al-Mawla. After Mawla claimed that he did not hold the keys to the warehouse, Maalouf was supposed to appoint another judicial guard and establish a time period for guard duty, which did not happen. Bitar listened to the statements of Maalouf and Shawah as witnesses only, unlike others who he intends to prosecute. Why?
The file of the ammonium nitrate shipment had swung back and forth for years between the General Customs Directorate and Beirut Urgent Matters Judge Maalouf. Several letters were sent to the Director General of Customs Badri Daher to re-export the goods, but Judge Maalouf kept writing down the request and sending it to the Justice Ministry’s cases commission, which responded only once by approving the re-export.
Maalouf was assigned to transfer the ownership of the goods within a week, even though Article 13 of the UN’s Hamburg Convention permits the destruction of goods – and if they are hazardous, without transferring their ownership – without paying compensation to the owner. The Hamburg Convention, signed in 1978 and enforced in November 1992, is the UN’s ‘Hamburg Rules’ on cargo sea shipments that unified a legal system regulating the rights and obligations of shippers, carriers, and consignees under the contract of transport of goods by sea.
According to legal experts, Judge Maalouf should have ruled to destroy these highly dangerous materials based on both Article 13 of the Hamburg Convention as well as the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 579 of the Lebanese Code of Civil Procedure; that is, without a request from anyone and regardless of the rights of their owners, who are not entitled to compensation for the destruction of hazardous goods.
Instead, four years were spent on issuing notifications, or requesting discussions on jurisdiction and the legality of selling or destroying the goods. If Judge Maalouf had taken the decision to destroy the ammonium nitrates immediately, Lebanon would have certainly avoided its destructive consequence last August.
The same reasoning applies to suspected Judge Shawah, who was referred to the prosecution with Maalouf, but judicial sources tell The Cradle that she has not received any document or review from anyone since she took over the ammonium nitrates case from Maalouf.
Judge Bitar has also asked the Appeals Court public prosecutor to verify the suspected negligence of Public Prosecutor Judge Khoury for authorizing the closing of the nitrates file. But Bitar did not do that for months, and until the day before, he believed that the Court of Cassation might recuse him based on the lawsuits submitted by the defendants and ministers accusing him of bias.
It appears that Bitar initially suspected Khoury of involvement in criminal activities that contributed to the death and injury of people and causing damage to public property as a result of the judge’s decision to shelve the State Security’s investigation report. Then, inexplicably, Judge Imad Qabalan, the Court of Cassation’s public prosecutor, decided those suspicions were unjustified and threw out Bitar’s inquiries by saying he considered “the report of the judicial investigator [Bitar] dated 24 September 2021 to be empty of any suspicions and does not prove fault in the job duties of Judge Khoury.”
The fourth and fifth judges, Helena Iskandar and Marwan Karkabi, who headed the Justice Ministry’s cases commission, are suspected of years of procrastinating before responding to the correspondence of the Director General of Customs and the Urgent Matters Judge. Although they received several letters, they responded only once by proposing to re-export the nitrates without following up on the case, which is one reason the ammonium nitrates remained in the heart of Beirut.
The sixth judge, Peter Germanos, was contacted by State Security investigators – when he was the government representative at the military court regarding the ammonium nitrate stores – to notify him about the high risk of these materials. But Germanos told them this case was not in the jurisdiction of the military prosecution because the Urgent Matters Judge had ruled to remove that material from Warehouse 12.
Although the issue is related to the Lebanese state’s national security and clearly falls within the jurisdiction of the Army Intelligence, Germanos decided that it is not within the powers of the Military Public Prosecution. Why?
Judge Germanos has denied on Twitter that he received any reports or minutes on the ammonium nitrates from the State Security or any other agency. Here, Bitar’s investigation needs to discover which side is telling the truth, bearing in mind that most communications between the judicial police and public prosecutor were conducted orally, over the phone, until written investigation minutes are stamped and referred to the Public Prosecution.
The seventh judge – Mirna Kallab, head of the Executive Department in Beirut – following correspondence from the Justice Ministry’s cases commission on the sale of the nitrates, was tasked specifically with appointing an inspections expert. A dispute emerged from the start between the Ministry of Works and the cases commission over who should pay the expert’s fees, which did not exceed 700,000 (approximately $467) Lebanese pounds.
Here, state attorney Omar Tarabah’s name appears for procrastinating for more than a year over correspondence related to paying the expert’s fees to inspect the Rhusos, the ship which transported the ammonium nitrate to the Port of Beirut.
In a nutshell, it is believed that the reason for Bitar’s leniency in holding negligent judges accountable for the Beirut blast is due to the prevailing conviction among judges of the need to protect and provide their colleagues with immunity, lest they next become scapegoats for the political class who would also wish to protect their colleagues with immunity.
Bitar should have refused to cater to the judiciary and military establishments, and made a beeline for whomever he suspected of negligence, regardless of their affiliations. Having failed to do so, this investigation is now a bust. Unless Bitar changes course and takes on these two protected institutions, only scapegoats will be charged for Lebanon’s deadliest explosion in history.
Iran’s top negotiator in the forthcoming talks in the Austrian capital on the removal of illegal sanctions imposed on the country Ali Baqeri-Kani said Tehran’s main goal is to secure a full and verifiable removal of all sanctions through the Vienna negotiations.
Baqeri-Kani’s remarks were made in an article published by the Financial Times on Sunday in which he slammed Western countries, especially the United States, for using talks as a tool to restrict Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.
“Western countries, in particular the US, work tirelessly to portray ‘negotiations’ as merely a process to restrict Iran’s legitimate and peaceful nuclear program, which is enshrined in international treaties and watched by oversight organizations,” he said.
The Iranian negotiator then emphasized that the Islamic Republic, however, seeks to achieve two goals through engaging in Vienna talks.
“In this vein, we have two goals: the first is to gain a full, guaranteed and verifiable removal of the sanctions that have been imposed on the Iranian people. Without this, the process will continue indefinitely,” Baqeri-Kani said.
He then noted that Iran’s second goal is “to facilitate the legal rights of the Iranian nation to benefit from peaceful nuclear knowledge, especially the all-important enrichment technology for industrial purposes, according to the terms of the international Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT].”
Baqeri-Kani left Tehran for Vienna on Saturday to attend the seventh round of talks that are intended to bring the US back to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action [JCPOA], commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal.
A return to the JCPOA would mean Washington needs to remove its unlawful sanctions on Tehran, three years after the US left the 2015 accord and unleashed a “maximum pressure” campaign on the Islamic Republic.
The US withdrawal came while the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] had issued 15 consecutive reports certifying Iran’s full compliance with its nuclear obligations under the JCPOA.
The Islamic Republic’s unwavering position on the verifiable removal of US sanctions, observers say, stems from the fact that the US started to impose new rounds of sanctions on Iran merely a day after the JCPOA’s implementation date.
It also took the US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control [OFAC] seven months to grant Airbus and Boeing partial permission to sell planes to Iran. Even then, Iran received only three out of 117 Airbus passenger aircraft it ordered and none from Boeing.
The significant noncompliance of the other parties, in particular the US, prompted Iran to invoke the “dispute resolution mechanism” several times both before and after the US withdrawal from the nuclear pact.
Former White House senior adviser Jared Kushner is seeking investors from the Gulf States for a new firm, according to a report in the New York Times.
The son-in-law of former US president Donald Trump established the Miami-based investment firm Affinity Partners after Trump lost his reelection bid to current president Joe Biden in November of last year.
Kushner has so far struggled to get financial backing from sovereign wealth funds, according to the Friday report, with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates declining. However, Kushner did have success in courting Saudi Arabia and the kingdom’s $450 billion Public Investment Fund, sources told the newspaper, and with negotiations over what could be a sizeable amount of money.
Over the summer it was reported that Kushner will also open an office in the apartheid “Israeli” entity that will promote trade ties between “Israel”, India, the Gulf States and North Africa.
Kushner was one of the architects of the so-called ‘Abraham Accords’ that normalized relations between ‘Israel’ and the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan.
“When former White House officials start cashing in their time served with our government by cozying up to monarchs, it turns the stomach a bit. Is it illegal? No,” Nick Penniman, the head of Issue One, a good-government organization in Washington, told the Times. “Is it swampy and seemingly hypocritical? Yes.”
TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iran is not going to hold any bilateral negotiations with the US in the forthcoming round of talks in Austria on the revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Saeed Khatibzadeh said.
In comments at a press conference in Tehran on Monday, Khatibzadeh dismissed any plan for direct talks between the Iranian and American delegations in Vienna.
He also reminded the US that only with a genuine intention to lift the sanctions can it rejoin the nuclear deal, otherwise it will have to stay away from the JCPOA negotiating table.
“The Americans have wasted our time in six rounds of negotiations to keep the failed legacy of Trump,” the spokesperson added, recommending that the US seize the opportunity as the Iranian administration is entering the talks with goodwill and true resolve to see results.
“Such a window of opportunity will not remain open forever,” he added.
The US is advised to attend the Vienna talks with the purpose of removing the sanctions that have been imposed on Iran since 2015, specifically the sanctions with labels totally unacceptable to Iran, he noted.
The JCPOA was signed in 2015 between Iran and the Group 5+1 and endorsed by the UN Security Council Resolution 2231.
However, then-US president Donald Trump unilaterally pulled Washington out of the nuclear deal in May 2018 and reinstated the anti-Iranian sanctions that had been lifted by the deal.
As the remaining European parties have failed to fulfill their commitments to the accord and compensate for Washington’s absence, Iran moved in May 2019 to scale back its JCPOA commitments.
Iran and the remaining parties to the JCPOA have held six rounds of talks in Vienna, which began after the US administration of Joe Biden voiced a willingness to rejoin the nuclear agreement, to examine the prospect of the bans’ fresh removal.
Vienna is now hosting the first round of JCPOA negotiations after the new Iranian administration took office in August.
UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM 