Wagner’s Prigozhin tells Al Mayadeen Ukraine counteroffensive underway

June 08, 2023

Wagner PMC took the lion’s share in the year-long battle leading to the full control of Russia over the city of Bakhmut in the Donetsk region

By Al Mayadeen English 

Wagner PMC founder and chief Yevgeny Prigozhin tells Al Mayadeen English that Ukraine’s counteroffensive is beginning as the latter pushes toward Russia in a series of attacks on Russian targets.

The events taking place in Ukraine forebode a Ukrainian counteroffensive as Kiev ups its efforts, as was expected, Russian Wagner Private Military Group Yegevny Prigozhin said answering Al Mayadeen English’s questions on Thursday hours after Ukrainian attacks took place in Zaparozhye.

“I think that the events that are currently taking place at the front are the beginning of a Ukrainian counteroffensive, which is currently ramping up its efforts as expected,” Prigozhin told Al Mayadeen English in an audio recording.

In response to a question about Russia’s expected performance regarding the long-awaited counteroffensive set to be carried out by Ukraine in the spring, Prigozhin said “We will see in the near future… how Russia will deal with it. I hope it does well, I’m counting on it.”

The Ukrainian attacks conducted on Zaparozhye were preceded by artillery strikes.

Moreover, the attacks, according to drone footage taken Wednesday during the Ukrainian offensive on the front, saw the usage of at least two German-made Leopard 2 tanks, as well as several armored personnel carriers, including US-made M113s.

The images represent the first visual confirmation that Ukrainian forces are employing Leopard 2 tanks in active combat.

It is worth noting that Wagner PMC took the lion’s share in the year-long battle leading to the full control of Russia over the city of Bakhmut in the Donetsk region, taking thousands of casualties in the process, Prighozin said earlier.

Wagner’s shows African people how to fight against aggression 

Responding to a question posed by Al Mayadeen English about Wagner’s efforts in Africa, the company’s founder underlined that Wagner plays a major role in Africa, saying it shows the African people that they can fight against the aggression of foreign powers.

“PMC Wagner shows the African peoples that they can fight against external aggression, as well as against the actions of terrorists and gangs in Africa,” Progizhin told Al Mayadeen English. “Wagner proves that African peoples can be protected.”

He went on to criticize the United Nations’ effort in Africa, saying the UN and other states were not engaged in the continent in this manner. “They only think about how to suck natural resources from the African subsoil.”

Wagner is present in Libya, the Central African Republic, and Mali, among other African states whose governments asked for the help of the Russian PMC.

France has been deeply entrenched in Mali militarily since 2013 under the pretext of countering terrorist activities in the Sahel region after the 2011 intervention in Libya by NATO forces. The country achieved full independence after French troops withdrew from its country on August 15, 2022, following pressure from the Malian government.

Malian Foreign Minister Abdoulaye Diop told Al Mayadeen that France and all its partners needed to realize that Africans were perfectly capable of running their countries and choosing their partners based on their national interests.

Africa is open to establishing partners with anyone in the whole world, and the United States is an important partner, but it must take into consideration the interests and sovereignty of African states, the top Malian diplomat said.

Meanwhile, Diop underlined that Russia was a strategic partner of Mali’s, as Moscow supplied Bamako with everything it asked for within the framework of its confrontation against extremist groups such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

Wagner distinct from Western PMCs

Asked about the difference between Wagner and other, Western PMCs, Prigozhin underlined that Western PMCs are private military companies, while the name just stuck with Wagner, but it is different from Western PMCs.

“PMC Wagner is a full-fledged army with aircraft, helicopters, air defense, and so on,” he underlined.

“If it is necessary to stop a conflict or someone’s aggression somewhere, Wagner PMC can easily deal with the issue in territories comparable to the territory of the Congo, Sudan, and other large African countries.”

Wagner is known for its efforts in Ukraine alongside the Russian armed forces and in other states throughout Africa alongside the government forces.

As part of the war in Ukraine, several US PMCs were seen to be on the ground in the country. Following the beginning of the war in Ukraine, former American marines established a private military company in the US, Mozart Group, which aims to train Ukrainian soldiers and participate in the ongoing fight against Russian forces.

Mozart deployed on the frontlines in Ukraine three teams of US veterans, each team accumulating nearly $100,000 of expenses monthly according to the group’s leader ex-US Marine officer Andy Milburn, The Intercept reported.

Reports say the head of Mozart Milburn managed the group “in a manner which has caused senior Ukrainian military officers to remark ‘can’t he go home and stop saving our country.’”

Moreover, Blackwater‘s founder, a private mercenary who has massacred scores of Iraqis and is despised in Iraq more than the US soldiers themselves, established earlier another private military company called Reflex Responses – or R2 – after he sold Blackwater to investors as an escape from controversy.

The Wagner PMC, also known as the Wagner Group, is a Russian paramilitary organization or a private military company founded by Yevgeny Prigozhin that operates closely with the Russian Armed Forces that first emerged in 2014 when it helped Russia with the reunification effort with Crimea.

Wagner also operated and still operates in the Donbass People’s Republics, namely Donetsk and Lugansk, as part of Russia’s effort in the region.

Russia & NATO

As the Draconian Western-led sanctions on Russia exacerbate the economic crisis worldwide, and as Russian troops gain more ground despite the influx of military aid into Ukraine, exposing US direct involvement in bio-labs spread across Eastern Europe and the insurgence of neo-Nazi groups… How will things unfold?

Related Stories

UN warns of collapse as Sudan fighting enters third week

29 Apr 2023

Source: Agencies

By Al Mayadeen English 

The United Nations belies that the situation in Sudan will see the country collapsing as violence enters its third week between the country’s warring factions.

Smoke rises in Khartoum, Sudan, Saturday, April 29, 2023 (AP)

Warplanes on bombing flights received intense anti-aircraft fire above Khartoum on Saturday, as the conflict between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) reached its third week, breaching a recently restored truce.

Since April 15, battles have erupted between army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan’s forces and his number two, RSF commander Mohamed Hamdan Daglo (Hemedti).

While the number of dead civilians keeps rising and chaos and lawlessness engulf Khartoum, a city of five million people where many have been confined to their homes without food, water, or electricity, they have repeatedly agreed to ceasefires that have failed to yield many results. 

To escape the fighting, tens of thousands of people have been displaced from their homes in Sudan or have made difficult journeys to neighboring Chad, Egypt, South Sudan, and Ethiopia.

“There is no right to go on fighting for power when the country is falling apart,” UN chief Antonio Guterres the Al Arabiya television.

Al-Burhan and Dagalo have agreed to multiple fragile truces since the start of the fighting, with each side blaming the other for violating them.

The United States, Saudi Arabia, the African Union, and the United Nations mediated the agreement to the most recent three-day truce, which will end at midnight on Sunday.

Guterres voiced his support for the African-led mediation efforts. “My appeal is for everything to be done to support an African-led initiative for peace in Sudan,” he told Al Arabiya.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon said it had “deployed US intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets to support air and land evacuation routes which Americans are using.”

Britain said it was ending its evacuation flights, after airlifting more than 1,500 people this week.

The World Food Programme has warned that the clashes could plunge millions more into hunger in a country where 15 million people –one-third of the population – already need aid to stave off famine.

The unstable security situation in Sudan is slowly taking its toll on the economy: especially in regard to food products, according to a report by The Guardian

Locals have forsaken their day-to-day jobs out of fear of getting caught in the cross-fire. The Guardian correspondent reports that Omdurman’s open-air market, which used to be an economic hub for the exchange of goods, has had half of its stalls closed. 

Ever since the violence broke out, causing fuel stations to close down, fuel prices have spiked impacting by extension the prices of all other commodities. 

Sudan’s armed forces agreed to extend the ceasefire, which was proposed for an additional 72 hours, to take effect from the expiry date of the current truce.

On the last day of the fourth ceasefire, clashes erupted at several points in Khartoum and plumes of smoke rose in the vicinity of the presidential palace in Khartoum, coinciding with the overflight of warplanes. 

As battles intensified on the ground, the two rival generals took aim at each other in the media, with Al-Burhan identifying the RSF as a militia that aims “to destroy Sudan” in an interview for US-based TV channel Al-hurra.

He also added “mercenaries” were pouring over the border from Chad, Central African Republic, and Niger to fuel the chaos.

In response, Dagalo slammed the army chief in an interview for the BBC, saying he was “not trustworthy” and a “traitor”.

According to the UN, around 75,000 people have been internally displaced as a result of the fighting in Khartoum, the states of Blue Nile and North Kordofan, as well as the western area of Darfur.

Related Stories

Xi’s ‘Chilling’ Remarks: A Multipolar World Offers Challenges and Opportunities to the Middle East and Africa

March 28, 2023

Chinese President Xi Jinping with Russian President Vladimir Putin. (Photo: Presidential Executive Office of Russia, via Wikimedia Commons)
– Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is “Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak out”. Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

By Ramzy Baroud

The final exchange, caught on camera between visiting Chinese President Xi Jinping and his Russian host and counterpart, Vladimir Putin, sums up the current geopolitical conflict, still in its nascent stages, between the United States and its Western allies on the one hand, and Russia, China and their allies, on the other.

Xi was leaving the Kremlin following a three-day visit that can only be described as historic. “Change is coming that hasn’t happened in 100 years and we are driving this change together,” Xi said while clasping Putin’s hand.

“I agree,” Putin replied while holding Xi’s arm. ‘Please take care, dear friend,” he added.

In no time, social media exploded by sharing that scene repeatedly. Corporate western media analysts went into overdrive, trying to understand what these few words meant.

“Is that part of the change that is coming, that they will drive together?” Ian Williamson raised the question in the Spectator. Though he did not offer a straight answer, he alluded to one: “It is a chilling prospect, for which the west needs to be prepared.”

Xi’s statement was, of course, uttered by design. It means that the Chinese-Russian strong ties, and possible future unity, are not an outcome of immediate geopolitical interests resulting from the Ukraine war, or a response to US provocations in Taiwan. Even before the Ukraine war commenced in February 2022, much evidence pointed to the fact that Russia and China’s goal was hardly temporary or impulsive. Indeed, it runs deep.

The very language of multipolarity has defined both countries’ discourse for years, a discourse that was mostly inspired by the two countries’ displeasure with US militarism from the Middle East to Southeast Asia; their frustration with Washington’s bullying tactics whenever a disagreement arises, be it in trade or border demarcations; the punitive language; the constant threats; the military expansion of NATO and much more.

One month before the war, I argued with my co-writer, Romana Rubeo, that both Russia and China might be at the cusp of some kind of unity. That conclusion was drawn based on a simple discourse analysis of the official language emanating from both capitals and the actual deepening of relations.

At the time, we wrote,

“Some kind of an alliance is already forming between China and Russia. The fact that the Chinese people are taking note of this and are supporting their government’s drive towards greater integration – political, economic and geostrategic – between Beijing and Moscow, indicates that the informal and potentially formal alliance is a long-term strategy for both nations”.

Even then, like other analysts, we did not expect that such a possibility could be realized so quickly. The Ukraine war, in itself, was not indicative that Moscow and Beijing will grow closer. Instead, it was Washington’s response, threatening and humiliating China, that did most of the work. The visit by then-US House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, to Taiwan in August 2022 was a diplomatic disaster. It left Beijing with no alternative but to escalate and strengthen its ties with Russia, with the hope that the latter would fortify its naval presence in the Sea of Japan. In fact, this was the case.

But the “100 years” reference by Xi tells of a much bigger geopolitical story than any of us had expected. As Washington continues to pursue aggressive policies – with US President Joe Biden prioritizing Russia and his Republican foes prioritizing China as the main enemy of the US – the two Asian giants are now forced to merge into one unified political unit, with a common political discourse.

“We signed a statement on deepening the strategic partnership and bilateral ties which are entering a new era,” Xi said in his final statement.

This ‘no-limits friendship’ is more possible now than ever before, as neither country is constrained by ideological confines or competition. Moreover, they are both keen on ending the US global hegemony, not only in the Asia and Pacific region, but in Africa, the Middle East and, eventually, worldwide as well.

On the first day of Xi’s visit to Moscow, Russia’s President Putin issued a decree in which he has written off debts of African countries worth more than $20 billion. Moreover, he promised that Russia is “ready to supply the whole volume sent during the past time to African countries particularly requiring it, from Russia free of charge ..,” should Moscow decide “not to extend the (grain) deal in sixty days”.

For both countries, Africa is a major ally in the upcoming global conflict. The Middle East, too, is vital. The latest agreement, which normalized ties between Iran and Saudi Arabia is earth-shattering, not only because it ends seven years of animosity and conflict, but because the arbitrator was no other than China itself. Beijing is now a peace broker in the very Middle East which was dominated by failed US diplomacy for decades.

What this means for the Palestinians remains to be seen, as too many variables are still at work. But for these global shifts to serve Palestinian interests in any way, the current leadership, or a new leadership, would have to slowly break away from its reliance on western handouts and validation, and, with the support of Arab and African allies, adopt a different political strategy.

The US government, however, continues to read the situation entirely within the Russia-Ukraine war context. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken responded to Xi’s trip to Moscow by saying that “the world should not be fooled by any tactical move by Russia, supported by China or any other country, to freeze the war (in Ukraine) on its own terms.” It is rather strange, but also telling that the outright rejection of the potential call for a ceasefire was made by Washington, not Kyiv.

Xi’s visit, however, is truly historic from a geopolitical sense. It is comparable in scope and possible consequences to former US President Richard Nixon’s visit to Beijing, which contributed to the deterioration of ties between the Soviet Union and China under Chairman Mao Zedong.

The improved relationship between China and the US back then helped Washington further extend its global dominance, while putting the USSR on the defensive. The rest is history, one that was rife with geostrategic rivalry and divisions in Asia, thus, ultimately, the rise of the US as the uncontested power in that region.

Nixon’s visit to Beijing was described by then-Ambassador Nicholas Platt as “the week that changed the world”. Judging that statement from an American-centric view of the world, Platt was, in fact, correct in his assessment. The world, however, seems to be changing back. Though it took 51 years for that reversal to take place, the consequences are likely to be earth-shattering, to say the least.

Regions that have long been dominated by the US and its western allies, like the Middle East and Africa, are processing all of these changes and potential opportunities. If this geopolitical shift continues, the world will, once again, find itself divided into camps. While it is too early to determine, with any degree of certainty, the winners and losers of this new configuration, it is most certain that a US-western-dominated world is no longer possible.

ISRAEL’S HUMILIATING EXPULSION FROM AU SUMMIT EXPOSES ITS FAILED DIPLOMACY IN AFRICA

MARCH 22ND, 2023

Source

By Ramzy Baroud

The scene of Israeli Ambassador Sharon Bar-Li, along with other Israeli delegates, being escorted out of the opening ceremony of the African Union Summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, on February 18, was historical—in a few seconds, the very moment that was meant to crown twenty years of Israeli diplomacy on the African continent turned to represent Israel’s failure in Africa.

Unable to fathom the breakdown of its diplomatic and political efforts, Tel Aviv responded to Bar-Li’s removal by waging a war of words against African countries, accusing them of spearheading a campaign to block Israel’s observer status.

Referring to a “small number of extremist states like South Africa and Algeria,” a spokesperson for the Israeli foreign ministry alluded to a plot, supposedly hatched by Iran and carried out by African governments that are “driven by hate” for Israel.

The undiplomatic nature of the Israeli foreign ministry language is a major shift compared to the upbeat, diplomatic rhetoric used by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he visited Africa to speak at the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) in Liberia in 2017.

“Israel is coming back to Africa, and Africa is coming back to Israel,” Netanyahu had said, adding, with a theatrical language and much emphasis on each syllable, “I believe in Africa.”

Netanyahu’s reference to “coming back to Africa” was intended to underscore two points: One, the diplomatic and political return to Africa and, two, an imagined return to the continent as a representation of a shared historical experience.

On the latter, Netanyahu had referenced some drummed-up, shared anti-colonial struggle between Israel and African countries. “Africa and Israel share a natural affinity,” Netanyahu claimed in his speech at the ECOWAS. “We have, in many ways, similar histories. Your nations toiled under foreign rule. You experienced horrific wars and slaughters. This is very much our history.”

On the other hand, the diplomatic’ return’ is more real than imagined. But the diplomatic ties between Israel and many African countries, starting with Ghana in 1956, took place under unique historical circumstances, in which many African countries were still colonized, semi-independent or largely reliant on their former colonizers. For example, Ghana-Israel relations started when Ghana was still called Gold Coast. In fact, the diplomatic accords with Tel Aviv at the time only took place when the Gold Coast received official approval from Britain since the country was still a British colony.

A FAILED CAMPAIGN OF ‘NORMALIZATION’

Before 1973, Israel had full diplomatic ties with 33 African countries. Much of this changed, however, in October of the same year. When Arab countries fought a war against Israel’s colonial expansion, many African countries broke ties with Israel in favor of maintaining their truly historic, economic and spiritual ties with their Arab brethren. It was no wonder that it was the Organization of African Unity – the precursor to the African Union – that first identified Israel’s founding ideology, Zionism, as a form of racism in their 12th ordinary session held in Kampala in 1975.

The so-called ‘peace process’ and the signing of the Oslo Accords between Palestinian leaders and Israel expectedly weakened the stalwart African position towards Palestine, not out of enmity to the Palestinians but due to western pressure and the misconception that peace and justice had finally arrived in Occupied Palestine. It was against this very backdrop that Netanyahu visited Africa and began his campaign of normalization with many African countries.

Israel’s motives in Africa are clear: economic profits and political dividends, particularly pro-Israeli votes at the UN. Years after Israel’s ‘return to Africa,’ neither Africa benefited from the lofty promises made by Tel Aviv to revitalize local economies and to fight desertification, nor did Africa, as a bloc, significantly change its votes in favor of Palestinians’ rights at the UN.

CONFUSION, IF NOT DESPERATION, IN ISRAELI DIPLOMACY

Still, for Netanyahu, the benefits outweigh the disappointments, especially as Tel Aviv fully understands that Africa, more than ever since the Berlin Conference in 1884, has, once more, become a major contested geopolitical space. That’s where the breakdown of Israel’s calculations happened, thus the humiliating episode in Addis Ababa.

Following the removal of the Israeli delegates, Tel Aviv continued to make a case based on technical grounds: that the Israeli ambassador had the proper accreditations, that Israel was officially an observer member of the AU, and so on.

Israel’s observer status has caused a rift among AU members. The approval was granted unilaterally by the Chair of the AU Commission, Moussa Faki Mahamat, in July 2021. As the news spread about Mahamat’s personal decision, many countries protested, and the status was frozen, pending a decision based on a proper democratic process.

Just two days after the Israeli delegation was removed from the Summit, the AU – in fact, Mahamat himself – announced to reporters on February 20 that the Israeli membership “status is suspended until such time as this committee can deliberate,” asserting that “we did not invite Israeli officials to our summit.”

The Israeli response to all of this reflected a general sense of confusion, if not desperation, in Israeli diplomacy.

African countries, however, followed the incident with a clear policy position, delineating that the decision to suspend Israeli membership was not a technical or procedural one. It was, in the words of Clayson Monyela, head of the public diplomacy in South Africa’s Department of International Relations, “an issue of principle.”

Three weeks after the AU decision, the South African parliament voted in favor of a motion that downgrades the country’s embassy in Tel Aviv to a mere liaison office. That decision, too, was a matter of principle, namely as a “first step” that aims to pressure Israel “to comply with human rights, recognize the rights of the Palestinian people (and) their right to exist.”

As geopolitical spaces open for countries in the Global South, due to changing global power dynamics, more countries are daring to challenge the hegemony of former colonial powers. Considering their history of valiant anti-colonial struggles, it is no surprise that African countries are leading this momentum toward national and regional independence.

Ultimately, it took only six years for Africa to prove Netanyahu wrong that Israel “did not return to Africa.” However, it is true that Africa is returning to its anti-colonial roots.

Macron’s Problem Is That He’s Losing Africa but Still Wants to Be a Player

March 9, 2023

Martin Jay is an award-winning British journalist based in Morocco where he is a correspondent for The Daily Mail (UK) who previously reported on the Arab Spring there for CNN, as well as Euronews. From 2012 to 2019 he was based in Beirut where he worked for a number of international media titles including BBC, Al Jazeera, RT, DW, as well as reporting on a freelance basis for the UK’s Daily Mail, The Sunday Times plus TRT World. His career has led him to work in almost 50 countries in Africa, The Middle East and Europe for a host of major media titles. He has lived and worked in Morocco, Belgium, Kenya and Lebanon.

Martin Jay

Viewing Africa with double standards is part of why Africans are breaking their ties with Europe, Martin Jay writes.

The paternalism isn’t uniquely France’s. It’s a malaise of western elites and viewing Africa with double standards is part of why Africans are breaking their ties with Europe.

The row in front of the cameras was thrilling as it was unprecedented. The president of Congo made the point in front of the journalists that France’s foreign minister’s comments about the president’s election being some kind of compromise of democracy was unacceptable as France itself is guilty of election irregularities. But they are not reported with the same zealous paternalism and are not even presented the same way as they are in reality, but distorted by media. Macron responded that the foreign minister’s comments were distorted and that the French media doesn’t represent France, a point which Felix Tshisekedi did not accept at all, which raised a round of applause from the journalists present in Kinshasa.

It was Macron’s last day of his Africa tour and one which he will remember as being a PR disaster. The point of the tour was to shore up support from old allies on the continent but, in this context, it could hardly be a success when you look at the YouTube footage of the DRC press conference.

In so many ways, the speech of Tshisekedi was so pertinent though. It felt like he was trying to avert another catastrophe to prevent his own country going down the same road as Mali, Burkina Faso and probably Chad soon. France is losing its former colonies in Africa faster than Macron can say “FrancAfrique” and Tshisekedi is clearly conscious of this historic time for France.

“Look at us differently by respecting us, by considering us as true partners and not always with a paternalistic look with the idea of always knowing what is necessary for us” Tshisekedi said, wagging his finger at Macron.

“Francafrique no longer exists. We must establish a policy of equals.”

He urged for an equitable relationship between the two nations and pushed France to impose sanctions on Rwanda for the ongoing violent conflict in the country’s Goma area.

But what happened next was both shocking and ominous in how Macron reacted to the problem of militias in Rwanda controlling parts of the Congo’s border region and sums up so perfectly what is wrong with France’s delusional views about itself and even its contemporary history in Africa.

Macron denies all responsibility and waves the finger.

“Since 1994, and it is not France’s fault, I’m sorry to say it in such blunt terms, you have not been able to restore the sovereignty, neither military, nor security, nor administrative, of your country. This is also a reality. We must not look for culprits outside this affair,” said the French President.

The DRC government has accused Rwanda of backing the militia group M23, which re-emerged from dormancy in late 2021, subsequently occupying swathes of territory in North Kivu.

If only Macron’s statement was even half true, perhaps it could garner a shred of ephemeral credibility at the press conference. In fact, it was a bare-faced lie and Macron knew perfectly what he was saying and how he was papering over a genocide in Rwanda which is entirely the fault of France and the government of Mitternand who ordained his son to run an information terror campaign called “Network Zero” which installed so much fear in uneducated Hutus that they took the responsibility of butchering the Tutsis themselves. France set it up, ran it and then washed its hands of it when the then president of Rwanda, an Elysee puppet and a Hutu moderate, was murdered when his plane was shot down in April 1994 on its way back from a peace conference which agreed to re-integrate Tutsis back into Rwanda, an event which sparked the Rwandan genocide itself.

For Macron, he and France had nothing to do with the problems or Rwanda and its militias is like saying that Adolf Hitler was only a bystander in the second world war. Perhaps it is this kind of bare-faced lying which African elites are so tired of when they deal with French leaders?

It is preposterous for Macron to attempt to play such a role at a press conference. This extraordinary French shoulder shrug of abandonment of responsibility, combined with the outdated moral tutelage which most French leaders revel in when dealing with African leaders is appalling on so many levels.

The Rwanda question and who bears responsibility is an important one though as the DRC president firmly points the finger at Macron. Despite Macron himself even admitting that the days of Francafrique being over, few people in Africa itself believe this is a genuine statement and are convinced that France still has strategic interests in the Rwandan regime, despite it being English-speaking and created from a geopolitical shift of a CIA-backed coup in 1994 where the Elysee lost a satellite. Rwanda 1994 was actually the beginning of the end for France’s big role in the continent and yet Macron is still trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the Congolese when he pulls such a shameful stunt as the one at the press conference.

Macron claims era of French interference in Africa is ‘well over’

Source: Agencies

Feb 03, 2023

French President Emmanuel Macron gives a speech in Libreville, Gabon, March 2, 2023 (AFP)

By Al Mayadeen English 

The French President says his country has no desire to return to past policies of interfering in Africa.

French President Emmanuel Macron on Thursday said the era of French interference in Africa was “well over” as he began a four-nation tour of the continent to renew strained ties.

Anti-French sentiment runs high in some former African colonies as the continent becomes a renewed diplomatic battleground, with alleged Russian and Chinese influence growing in the region.

Macron claimed that France maintained no desire to return to past policies of interfering in Africa ahead of an environment summit in Gabon, the first leg of his trip.

“The age of Francafrique is well over,” Macron said in remarks to the French community in the capital Libreville, referring to France’s post-colonization strategy of supporting authoritarian leaders to defend its interests.

“Sometimes I get the feeling that mindsets haven’t moved along as much as we have, when I read, hear and see people ascribing intentions to France that it doesn’t have,” he added.

Read more: Macron after Europe division to save his country: Foreign Policy

Military reorganization

Macron on Monday said there would be a “noticeable reduction” in France’s troop presence in Africa “in the coming months” and a greater focus on training and equipping allied countries’ forces.

France has in the past year withdrawn troops from former colonies Mali, Burkina Faso, and the Central African Republic. The pullout from Mali and Burkina Faso came following months of protests and demands by locals.

In his remarks on Thursday, Macron insisted that the planned reorganization was “neither a withdrawal nor disengagement,” defining it as adapting to the needs of partners.

According to official figures, more than 3,000 French soldiers are deployed in Senegal, Ivory Coast, Gabon, and Djibouti. The proposed revamp concerns the first three bases but not Djibouti. Another 3,000 troops are in the Sahel region of West Africa, including in Niger and Chad.

Preserving rainforests

Macron landed in Libreville on Wednesday and will later head to Angola, Congo-Brazzaville, and the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo.

His comments came before several heads of state were due to attend the One Forest Summit in Libreville, which will focus on preserving rainforests that play a vital role in the global climate system.

The forests of the vast Congo River basin represent the planet’s second-largest carbon sink after the Amazon. They are also home to huge biodiversity including forest elephants and gorillas and bear traces of the settlement of early humanity. But they face threats such as poaching, deforestation for the oil, palm and rubber industries, and illegal logging and mineral exploitation.

The gathering kicked off on Wednesday with exchanges between ministers, civil society representatives, and experts.

Read more: Burkina’s youth resurrect Thomas Sankara’s anti-colonial project

Related Stories

In Munich: West sounds alarm over Global South stances

The recent conference on international security policy focused extensively on the significance of the Global South to the west’s security. As power competition with China and Russia intensifies, the west is compelled to reassess its approach to relations with these countries.

February 23 2023

Photo Credit: The Cradle
Mohamed Sweidan is a strategic studies researcher, a writer for different media platforms, and the author of several studies in the field of international relations. Mohamed’s main focus is on Russian affairs, Turkish politics, and the relationship between energy security and geopolitics.

By Mohamad Hasan Sweidan

“I am struck by how much we are losing the trust of the Global South.”

French President Emmanuel Macron during the Munich Security Conference 2023

The 59th Munich Security Conference (MSC) held from 17 to 19 February, was attended by over 150 senior officials, including more than 40 heads of state and international organizations. The conference focused on three main topics: the war in Ukraine, the need to confront China and Russia, and the importance of the Global South in the struggle between the great powers.

As in the previous year, Russia was not present at the Munich conference. However, this year marked the first time in twenty years that Moscow was not even invited to participate. With both Russia and Iran absent, the conference became a platform for attacking opponents of western policies.

The Great Game for the Global South

The conference took place against a backdrop of international turmoil and competition among great powers for influence in the emerging multipolar order. Several western countries expressed their dissatisfaction with the positions of Global South countries in relation to the conflicts involving China and Russia.

During her speech, US Vice President Kamala Harris stated that:

“We have invited a record number of representatives from the so-called “Global South,” because while we have this unity between us, when you talk to representatives of the Global South – and we had them on the podium this morning – you see that many countries sit on the fence.”

Accordingly, Christoph Heusgen, chairman of the MSC, announced at the opening ceremony that this year’s conference would “put a spotlight on the Global South” and “listen to their concerns.”

France’s Macron pointed out that efforts in reshaping the global order should be more inclusive: “The west has been losing the Global South and hasn’t done enough to respond to the charge of double standards, including by not helping poor countries fast enough with Covid vaccines,” he said. “One way to address the concerns of the Global South is to bring about reforms in the United Nations.”

A wake-up call for the west

While the discussions and outcomes of the conference suggest that western powers have come to recognize the significance of nations in the Global South, this appears to be mainly because of the necessity in rallying their support in major conflicts against Russia and China.

The conflict in Ukraine fully demonstrated that the refusal of many Latin American, African, and Asian countries to support western sanctions was a significant factor in the failure of the west’s attempts to isolate Russia.

The MSC’s final report states: “The wake-up call provided by Russia’s war and the diffidence of many countries in the ‘Global South’ has roused liberal democracies from their complacency, reminding them that the international order, just like democracy itself, is in constant need of renewal.”

The report added that “countries in the Global South can become crucial ‘swing states.’ They can tip the balance between systemic competitors and therefore determine the fate of the international rules-based order.” It also recognized that:

“Influential states such as India, Turkey, or Saudi Arabia are quite actively hedging their bets in the current geopolitical standoff – both when it comes to Ukraine but also on many other policy issues. Rather than being guided by deep feelings about the international order, their responses to the war in Ukraine and their stances in the broader international contest over the international order seem to be guided by much more pragmatic reasoning.”

The report also found that:

“Many countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America have steadily lost faith in the legitimacy and fairness of an international system which has neither granted them an appropriate voice in global affairs, nor sufficiently addressed their core concerns. To many states, these failures are deeply tied to the west. They find that the western-led order has been characterized by post-colonial domination, double standards, and neglect for developing countries’ concerns.”

Legacy of colonialism

It is clear from the statements made at the Munich Security Conference that the west recognizes the need to change its approach to development cooperation with the countries of the Global South, in order to counter the increasing influence of Beijing and Moscow.

However, this will require a fundamental shift in attitudes and policies towards these countries, which have historically been viewed as objects of aid and development rather than equal partners in a mutually beneficial relationship. This too is pointed out in the MSC report:

“The United States and Europe will have to rethink their approaches to development cooperation with countries in the Global South. They need to make their development models more attractive, as China offers an alternative model based on a narrative of solidarity and mutual benefits. To compete with China, the approach must focus on the novelty on short-term emergency relief as well as long-term financing enables sustainable and resilient systems in partner countries.”

The colonialist legacy of the west continues to cast a long shadow over its relations with the Global South, and it will take sustained effort and genuine commitment to overcome this legacy and build a more equitable and productive relationship.

This will require a shift away from the donor-recipient model towards one based on partnership and mutual benefit, and a recognition that the interests and aspirations of the countries of the Global South must be taken seriously and respected.

Looting wealth, interfering in the policies of states, and waging wars are hallmarks of western policies in the developing world. Those states who do not adhere to western diktats are regularly subjected to ominous sanctions or extreme economic pressures.

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the support for authoritarian regimes and coups, the economic vise on countries like Lebanon and Venezuela, and the unequal distribution of vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic are just a few examples of the ways in which western powers have acted against the interests and well-being of Global South countries.

In 2019, when former US President Donald Trump triumphantly claimed ownership of Syrian oil, it marked a clear example of the problematic and exploitative attitudes that continue to plague western policies toward the Global South. The fact that western leaders did not anticipate the rise of the developing countries to become decisive “swing states” – as noted in the final report of the Munich conference – is a reflection of the west’s ongoing ignorance and neglect of the interests and aspirations of these vital states.

West Asia at the MSC

The MSC also highlighted the increasing importance of West Asia in global energy politics and the west’s alarm about China’s growing influence in this region. The International Energy Agency’s (IEA) projection that West Asian countries will meet a large share of China and India’s growing oil needs has raised the region’s strategic value for these influential emerging powers.

Washington’s frustration with Saudi Arabia’s standing in the Ukrainian conflict was also evident at the conference, as the west seeks to prevent a repeat of such behavior in the more important conflict with China. Per the conference report:

“Amid the decline of the American presence in the Middle East [West Asia], liberal democracies are increasingly concerned about China’s growing influence. Deeper relations between China and the Middle East [West Asia] may evolve to include a stronger Chinese military and security footprint, which could undermine the west’s security partnerships with countries in the region.”

In essence, the Munich meeting provided a platform for declining western powers to express their concerns about the growing influence of China in West Asia, as well as their frustration with Saudi Arabia’s perceived lack of loyalty. It highlighted the need for the west to adapt its strategies in dealing with the developing world and to foster new forms of international solidarity and cooperation.

However, it is important to acknowledge that the term “Global South” itself reflects a colonial mindset that continues to shape the west’s perception of developing nations, and that such imperial policies will continue as long as such attitudes persist.

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.

African Union Suspends ‘Israeli’ Regime’s Observer Status

Feb 20, 2023

By Staff, Agencies

The African Union [AU] said the ‘Israeli’ regime’s observer status at the 55-nation bloc has been suspended and the regime was not invited to the union’s recent summit from which its delegation was kicked out.

Chairperson of the African Union Commission, Moussa Faki Mahamat, made the remarks on Sunday, a day after a Zionist delegation was forced out of the opening ceremony of the AU summit in the Ethiopian capital city of Addis Ababa.

Faki had granted the Zionist occupation regime the status in 2021, sparking an outcry across the pan-African bloc and vehement protests from key members, in Algeria and South Africa.

As a result, last year’s AU summit suspended a debate on whether to withdraw the accreditation of the Zionist regime and established a committee of heads of state to address the issue.

“That means that the [observer] status [of ‘Israel’] is suspended until such time as this committee can deliberate…and so we did not invite ‘Israeli’ officials to our summit,” Faki said, adding that an investigation was being conducted.

The Zionist regime has shown a fiery reaction to the Saturday incident that has gone viral across social media showing security guards approaching the ‘Israeli’ delegates and escorting them out after several minutes of argument.

The regime accused what it called a “small number of extremist states like Algeria and South Africa” of being behind the move.

South Africa, however, has roundly rejected the claim, saying Tel Aviv’s application for observer status at the AU has not been decided upon by the bloc.

“Until the AU takes a decision on whether to grant ‘Israel’ observer status,” it cannot have the regime “sitting and observing,” Clayson Monyela, head of public diplomacy in South Africa’s Department of International Relations and Cooperation, told Reuters.

“So, it’s not about South Africa or Algeria, it’s an issue of principle,” he added.

Related Videos

An Israeli delegation was expelled from the African Union summit in Addis Ababa
Algeria expels the entity’s representatives from the African Union

Related Articles

Israeli Delegation Expelled from African Union Conference Hall in Addis Ababa: Video

 February 18, 2023

Members of the Israeli delegation were expelled from the African Union Conference Hall in the Ethiopian capital of Addis Ababa.

Well-informed sources indicated that the Zionist delegation used fake cards to enter the hall stealthily, adding that security personnel, accordingly, expelled them.

The incident occurred during the opening ceremony when the security personnel of the conference approached the members of the Israeli delegation and asked them to leave the hall.

It is worth noting that the African Union’s commission had cancelled the invitation sent to the Israeli enemy to attend as an observer upon pressures exerted by Algeria and South Africa.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

The Other Russia-West War: Why Some African Countries are Abandoning Paris, Joining Moscow

February 14, 2023

An anti-France protest in Burkina Faso. (Photo: video grab)
– Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is “Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak out”. Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

By Ramzy Baroud

The moment that Lieutenant-Colonel Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba was ousted by his own former military colleague, Captain Ibrahim Traore, pro-coup crowds filled the streets. Some burned French flags, others carried Russian flags. This scene alone represents the current tussle underway throughout the African continent.

A few years ago, the discussion regarding the geopolitical shifts in Africa was not exactly concerned with France and Russia per se. It focused mostly on China’s growing economic role and political partnerships on the African continent. For example, Beijing’s decision to establish its first overseas military base in Djibouti in 2017 signaled China’s major geopolitical move, by translating its economic influence in the region to political influence, backed by military presence.

China remains committed to its Africa strategy. Beijing has been Africa’s largest trading partner for 12 years, consecutively, with total bilateral trade between China and Africa, in 2021, reaching $254.3 billion, according to recent data released by the General Administration of Customs of China.

The United States, along with its western allies, have been aware of, and warning against China’s growing clout in Africa. The establishment of US AFRICOM in 2007 was rightly understood to be a countering measure to China’s influence. Since then, and arguably before, talks of a new ‘Scramble for Africa’ abounded, with new players, including China, Russia, even Turkiye, entering the fray.

The Russia-Ukraine war, however, has altered geopolitical dynamics in Africa, as it highlighted the Russian-French rivalry on the continent, as opposed to the Chinese-American competition there.

Though Russia has been present in African politics for years, the war – thus the need for stable allies at the United Nations and elsewhere – accelerated Moscow’s charm offensive. In July, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visited Egypt, Ethiopia, Uganda, and the Republic of Congo, fortifying Russia’s diplomatic relations with African leaders.

“We know that the African colleagues do not approve of the undisguised attempts of the US and their European satellites .. to impose a unipolar world order to the international community,” Lavrov said. His words were met with agreement.

Russian efforts have been paying dividends, as early as the first votes to condemn Moscow at the United Nations General Assembly, in March and April. Many African nations remained either neutral or voted against measures targeting Russia at the UN.

South Africa’s position, in particular, was problematic from Washington’s perspective, not only because of the size of the country’s economy, but also because of Pretoria’s political influence and moral authority throughout Africa. Moreover, South Africa is the only African member of the G20.

In his visit to the US in September, South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa defended his country’s neutrality and raised objections to a draft US bill – the Countering Malign Russian Activities in Africa Act – that is set to monitor and punish African governments who do not conform to the American line in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

The West fails to understand, however, that Africa’s slow, but determined shift toward Moscow is not haphazard or accidental.

The history of the continent’s past and current struggle against western colonialism and neocolonialism is well-known. While the West continues to define its relationship with Africa based on exploitation, Russia is constantly reminding African countries of the Soviet’s legacy on the continent. This is not only apparent in official political discourses by Russian leaders and diplomats, but also in Russian media coverage, which is prioritizing Africa and reminding African nations of their historic solidarity with Moscow.

Burning French flags and raising Russian ones, however, cannot simply be blamed on Russian supposed economic bribes, clever diplomacy or growing military influence. The readiness of African nations – Mali, Central African Republic and, now, possibly, Burkina Faso – has much more to do with mistrust and resentment of France’s self-serving legacy in Africa, West Africa in particular.

France has military bases in many parts of Africa and remains an active participant in various military conflicts, which has earned it the reputation of being the continent’s main destabilizing force. Equally important is Paris’s stronghold over the economies of 14 African countries, which are forced to use French currency, the CFA franc and, according to Frederic Ange Toure, writing in Le Journal de l’Afrique, to “centralize 50% of their reserves in the French public treasury”.

Though many African countries remain neutral in the case of the Russia-Ukraine war, a massive geopolitical shift is underway, especially in militarily fragile, impoverished and politically unstable countries that are eager to seek alternatives to French and other western powers. For a country like Mali, shifting allegiances from Paris to Moscow was not exactly a great gamble. Bamako had very little to lose, but much to gain. The same logic applies to other African countries that are fighting extreme poverty, political instability and the threat of militancy, all of which are intrinsically linked.

Though China remains a powerful newcomer to Africa – a reality that continues to frustrate US policymakers – the more urgent battle, for now, is between Russia and France – the latter experiencing a palpable retreat.

In a speech last July, French President Emmanuel Macron declared that he wanted a “rethink of all our (military) postures on the African continent.” France’s military and foreign policy shift in Africa, however, was not compelled by strategy or vision, but by changing realities over which France has little control.

DHL employees detained for attacking Russian diplomat in CAR

2 Feb, 2023

Source: Al Mayadeen Net

By Al Mayadeen English 

Four DHL employees were seized as part of the investigation into the Russian diplomat’s assassination attempt.

Dimitry Syty (center) at the National Assembly in Bangui, Central African Republic. (AFP)

    Four DHL employees were seized as part of the investigation into the attempted assassination of Dmitry Syty, the head of the Russian House in the Central African Republic (CAR), a high-ranking source in the CAR police informed Sputnik on Wednesday.

    “As a result of the investigation, four suspects were placed [in custody] under a detention warrant: three men and one woman. A trial is expected to be organized by the Bangui Prosecutor’s Office,” the source said.

    The official clarified that the four DHL employees plead not guilty.

    In December last year, Central African Republic police considered the assassination attempt on the head of the Russian House in the CAR to be a terrorist attack, the country’s police chief Bienvenu Zokoue said.

    Syty received a parcel bomb that exploded on a table in his cabinet, Bangui’s police told Sputnik. “It seems that he started going through mail at the table, opened a parcel, began pulling what was in it, and the explosion occurred,” the police said.
     
    The police gave Sputnik photos from the blast site that showed there was a note at the crime scene with threats in French.

    Read next: 

    Related Stories

    Morocco to Become a Huge U.S. Military Base to Counter Russia in Africa. What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

    January 24, 2023

    Source

    Martin Jay is an award-winning British journalist based in Morocco where he is a correspondent for The Daily Mail (UK) who previously reported on the Arab Spring there for CNN, as well as Euronews. From 2012 to 2019 he was based in Beirut where he worked for a number of international media titles including BBC, Al Jazeera, RT, DW, as well as reporting on a freelance basis for the UK’s Daily Mail, The Sunday Times plus TRT World. His career has led him to work in almost 50 countries in Africa, The Middle East and Europe for a host of major media titles. He has lived and worked in Morocco, Belgium, Kenya and Lebanon.

    By Martin Jay

    There may be questions about whether Russia is winning the war in Ukraine, but there is no doubt it is winning the global war against the West. And it’s starting in Africa

    There may be questions about whether Russia is winning the war in Ukraine, but there is no doubt it is winning the global war against the West. And it’s starting in Africa

    Pundits have for months claimed that Ukraine has made great advances on the battlefield and taken back considerable swathes of territory that Russia held. While this claim is losing its validity in recent weeks there, most western analysts indulge themselves with their own blinded dogma and refuse to look at the bigger Ukraine war: commonly known as the ‘global south’ but in reality is actually just the ‘rest of the world’ beyond the boundaries of so-called western countries.

    While most countries in Africa and Asia didn’t support Putin’s invasion, they were more vexed by the West’s ‘you’re either with us or against us’ narrative which quickly followed with a threat from the U.S.’s own UN ambassador who made it clear to Africa that countries which didn’t follow U.S. sanctions against Russia would be punished.

    That hasn’t worked out too well though for America, despite the U.S. cleaning up on LPG contracts in Europe whose governments are happy to pay four times the price of Russian gas, as Washington still has a few problems with this new world war.

    Africa is starting to bother Biden. In recent months it has become clear that the threat of sanctions has backfired and many nations are ready to go ‘non-aligned’ and take their chances or even to cross over to Russia for security reasons.

    Mali, a former French colony which until just a few months ago had French troops fighting Islamic terror groups there, is now a fully-fledged Russian ally. Burkina Faso looks like it will follow. If it does, then a domino effect is sure to take place with Francophone countries who are tired of the paternalistic relationship they have with Paris and the nauseating tutelage that is spoon-fed to them from the Elysee. This is not only starting to worry Paris, but the EU is also beginning to see the dangers of losing these countries to Russia and China.

    It’s also worrying Biden, who, unlike the EU or the Elysee, at least has the means and the initiative to act rather than just whimper like a puppy just kicked by its new owner.

    Biden’s plan, like so many American presidents, is hardly an original one: send more troops and show a presence on the continent.

    But it’s his choice of which country to send them to is both interesting and dangerous: Morocco.

    Joe Biden instructed Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin to prepare an emergency plan to establish an American military-industrial base in Morocco, the New York Daily News has reported. Apparently the ruse was proposed during a high-level meeting at the end of December when Biden and Austin discussed America’s new global military strategy.

    Biden has told Austin to push the Pentagon to facilitate the logistical and legal aspects of U.S. defence industry investments in Morocco. Details are sketchy, but it seems that Morocco is going to host U.S. defence companies, as well as possibly even be a recipient of U.S. military aid like Israel.

    This would not only be a game-changer for Morocco to flex its muscles in the continent, but also put the country on a more even keel with Algeria’s whose defence budget dwarfs that or Morocco’s.

    According to media sources in the U.S., before his meeting with Austin, Biden received a detailed report from CIA Director William Burns, who just recently visited Libya on the expansion of Russia’s influence in Africa, including Zimbabwe, Sudan, the Central African Republic, Algeria and the Sahel and Sahara countries. It might well be that Biden feels that whilst it is inconceivable to fight with Putin in Ukraine, U.S. troops and their proxies could take the fight to them in Africa.

    For Morocco though there is certainly a dark side. Are we to assume that with this new plan for more troops on the ground and more kit, that this will defuse the threat from Algeria which Russia has a formidable friendship with? Or, more likely, will this only raise the stakes higher and create a war-like scenario, entirely manufactured by the Biden administration, which ultimately the Moroccans will be left to tackle on their own? Remarkably, the format of ‘hit-n-run’ which Biden started in Ukraine in 2014, which led to the war there, along with a similar strategy in Taiwan, is being cultivated in Morocco to antagonise and threaten Algeria both along its long border but more probably in Western Sahara in the South. We can only presume that reports a few weeks ago in state-friendly media of nuclear power plant deals being agreed between Morocco and Russia is also part of Biden’s move in Morocco. He may well see it as a double-whammy but like almost everything the American president touches on the geomilitary circuit, he f***s up, in Obama’s own words. Rabat may well have used the deal with Russia as a card to play, gambling on taking the whole pot if the U.S. boosts their military budget beyond the miniscule 1.5bn dollars presently. But like Rabat’s recent bungling of the bribery scandal in Brussels, which is more about the elite’s dismal media skills, it is likely that the U.S. game is going to make them the loser as they are the chosen crash test dummies that Biden wants in his latest geopolitical experiment. Pray for the Moroccans. They are good people who will pay a high price for being both gullible and insecure.

    Exclusive: Resistance culture undergoing war – Jamileh Alamolhoda

    23 Jan 22:03

    Source: Al Mayadeen

    By Al Mayadeen English 

    Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s wife, Jamileh Alamolhoda, tells Al Mayadeen that Iran is standing in the face of western patriarchal hegemony through cultural resistance.

    Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s wife, Jamileh Alamolhoda

    Iran is one of the few countries that want to stand in the face of the West’s patriarchal standards, and this is why the West is suppressing Iran, Dr. Jamileh Alamolhoda, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s wife, told Al Mayadeen during an interview that aired Monday.

    Alamolhoda explained to Al Mayadeen that there was a widespread media campaign aimed at undermining the culture of Iranian resistance, especially resistance stemming from Iranian women.

    She went on to explain that media patriarchy was “taking over the world, and truth be told, they founded a new definition of the woman and introduced a new feminist culture based on their own standards, demanding that all other cultures yield. In the event that someone stands up to them, they suppress them.”

    Alamolhoda underlined that if Iranian, Arab, Chinese, or Japanese women reject the Western standards regarding media patriarchy, they would be condemned because of the prevalent form of media repression, which props up only two options: fall in line or perish.

    “This attack on women targets all cultures, but the culture of resistance against the culture of hegemony, or in better words, the cultural hegemony that America wants to impose on other cultures is manifested today in the countries of the axis of resistance and is engaging in cultural resistance,” she said.

    “They usually look at the issue of resistance from the military aspect only, but the basis of that military resistance is cultural resistance acquired from women within the family and in their upbringing methods,” she stressed.

    Furthermore, according to Alamolhoda, the culture of resistance may be acquired from schools and universities, allowing the main supporters of cultural resistance to be the mothers or wives of those martyred in occupied Palestine, Lebanon, and Iraq, among other countries.

    She also explained that both cultures were prevalent in Iran, “and the question remains, what is the woman’s true choice? But when some resort to riots and violence with the aim of destabilizing security and order, the government cannot but intervene.”

    The doctor touched on the rallying of the media against Iran, saying there were around two hundred TV channels that were inciting the masses against the culture of Iranian resistance, especially when it comes to Iranian women. “We have a few friends in the world who share the same thinking, such as Al Mayadeen and Al Manar channels.”

    Finally, she directed a message to the women of Iran, the Arab world, and the resistance, which she said also included the women of Africa and Latin America – “everyone seeking salvation from the hegemony of American culture.” She said: “we advise them to review the principles set by Imam Khomeini and those of the leader of the Revolution, reciting the Quran again, and going through the Hadiths to remind themselves of the views and opinions of the Noble Prophet (PBUH).”

    This comes against the backdrops of the riots that took place in Iran over alleged violations of human rights and amid accusations of misogyny directed at Iran. 

    Iran’s Intelligence Ministry and the Intelligence Organization of the IRGC issued a statement in late October taking a jab at the role of foreign spy agencies, especially the CIA, in puppeteering the riots in Iran that took place in September.

    “Numerous examples and undeniable references of the all-out role of the American terrorist regime in designing, implementing, and maintaining” the riots were exposed as part of “continuous and precise” intelligence monitoring in the past year, supported by documents, the statement read.

    The statement pointed fingers at the CIA as it “played the main role” while being buddy-buddy with the espionage services of the UK, “Israel” and Saudi Arabia.

    “The main perpetrators were the CIA, the British and Saudi intelligence services, the Israeli Mossad, and the intelligence services of other countries,” it read. “the planning and the execution of the majority of the riots were carried out by the Mossad in collaboration with terrorist organizations.”

    Related Stories

    Exclusive: Resistance culture undergoing war – Jamileh Alamolhoda

    January 23, 2023

    Source: Al Mayadeen

    Private Dialogue | Dr. Jamila Alamolhoda – Wife of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi

    By Al Mayadeen English 

    Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s wife, Jamileh Alamolhoda, tells Al Mayadeen that Iran is standing in the face of western patriarchal hegemony through cultural resistance.

    Iran is one of the few countries that want to stand in the face of the West’s patriarchal standards, and this is why the West is suppressing Iran, Dr. Jamileh Alamolhoda, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s wife, told Al Mayadeen during an interview that aired Monday.

    Alamolhoda explained to Al Mayadeen that there was a widespread media campaign aimed at undermining the culture of Iranian resistance, especially resistance stemming from Iranian women.

    She went on to explain that media patriarchy was “taking over the world, and truth be told, they founded a new definition of the woman and introduced a new feminist culture based on their own standards, demanding that all other cultures yield. In the event that someone stands up to them, they suppress them.”

    Alamolhoda underlined that if Iranian, Arab, Chinese, or Japanese women reject the Western standards regarding media patriarchy, they would be condemned because of the prevalent form of media repression, which props up only two options: fall in line or perish.

    “This attack on women targets all cultures, but the culture of resistance against the culture of hegemony, or in better words, the cultural hegemony that America wants to impose on other cultures is manifested today in the countries of the axis of resistance and is engaging in cultural resistance,” she said.

    “They usually look at the issue of resistance from the military aspect only, but the basis of that military resistance is cultural resistance acquired from women within the family and in their upbringing methods,” she stressed.

    Furthermore, according to Alamolhoda, the culture of resistance may be acquired from schools and universities, allowing the main supporters of cultural resistance to be the mothers or wives of those martyred in occupied Palestine, Lebanon, and Iraq, among other countries.

    She also explained that both cultures were prevalent in Iran, “and the question remains, what is the woman’s true choice? But when some resort to riots and violence with the aim of destabilizing security and order, the government cannot but intervene.”

    The doctor touched on the rallying of the media against Iran, saying there were around two hundred TV channels that were inciting the masses against the culture of Iranian resistance, especially when it comes to Iranian women. “We have a few friends in the world who share the same thinking, such as Al Mayadeen and Al Manar channels.”

    Finally, she directed a message to the women of Iran, the Arab world, and the resistance, which she said also included the women of Africa and Latin America – “everyone seeking salvation from the hegemony of American culture.” She said: “we advise them to review the principles set by Imam Khomeini and those of the leader of the Revolution, reciting the Quran again, and going through the Hadiths to remind themselves of the views and opinions of the Noble Prophet (PBUH).”

    This comes against the backdrops of the riots that took place in Iran over alleged violations of human rights and amid accusations of misogyny directed at Iran. 

    Iran’s Intelligence Ministry and the Intelligence Organization of the IRGC issued a statement in late October taking a jab at the role of foreign spy agencies, especially the CIA, in puppeteering the riots in Iran that took place in September.

    “Numerous examples and undeniable references of the all-out role of the American terrorist regime in designing, implementing, and maintaining” the riots were exposed as part of “continuous and precise” intelligence monitoring in the past year, supported by documents, the statement read.

    The statement pointed fingers at the CIA as it “played the main role” while being buddy-buddy with the espionage services of the UK, “Israel” and Saudi Arabia.

    “The main perpetrators were the CIA, the British and Saudi intelligence services, the Israeli Mossad, and the intelligence services of other countries,” it read. “the planning and the execution of the majority of the riots were carried out by the Mossad in collaboration with terrorist organizations.”

    Related Stories

    Do the Europeans deserve what is coming to them next?

    December 15, 2022

    Dear friends

    I was born in Switzerland, arguably the heart of Europe, and as a European by birth, if not by culture, I feel that I should address the issue of the regular European’s responsibility for what is going on in both the Ukraine and Serbia.

    I don’t believe in collective guilt, so the short answer is “no”.

    But I do believe in consequences and I do believe in God’s justice (and love, of course!).  In other words, I don’t think you can commit evil deeds and get away with it: sooner or later you will have to pay, especially if you fail to repent for your evil actions.

    Furthermore, I do realize that the EU is a US colony/protectorate, but so was much of the world.

    Why can there be real resistance to the Empire in Latin America or Africa and none in the EU?  Should Cuba begin sending soldiers, doctors and engineers to the EU (just kidding!)?

    [As a kid I remember all the various protest and resistance movements we had in Europe, they ranged from the (mostly) peaceful anti-nuclear ecologists, to striking unions, to the RAF in Germany, to the IRA in Ulster, ETA in Spain and even the various Kurdish, Armenian, Palestinian and other ethnic groups engaging various degrees of violent resistance against the state.  Even in tiny Switzerland we had the Jura autonomists with some creative resistance methods!  That is not to say that I approve of all of these, only that I remember a time when there was real resistance in Europe.  Are modern Europeans capable of meaningfully resisting *anything* nowadays?  I very much doubt it]

    I think that we can safely say that the EU is the most docile, cowardly and loyal colony to the Empire.  Why?  Probably because all the other colonies *knew* that their colonial status will never change under the AngloZionist rule, whereas the Europeans hoped to somehow “elevate” themselves by being Uncle Shmuel’s “poodles”.  And, after all, imperialism was born in Europe (the Crusades) and not in the New World.

    You would think that by now, even the dumbest EU politician would realize that anti-Russians sanctions almost exclusively hurt Europe.  Yet, what do we see?  They are STILL at it and they are STILL doubling down, check out this headline: “EU set to freeze assets of RT’s parent company – media“.  Please read it, you will see that this is a direct and absolutely unapologetic crackdown on free speech.  And while doubleplusgoodthinking and politically correct Europeans love to (mis-)quote Voltaire and proudly proclaim that they too “I don’t agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it” in reality they absolutely don’t give a damn.

    This is nothing new.

    When the AngloZionist launched a TOTALLY ILLEGAL war of aggression against the Serbian nation and a country, Yugoslavia, which was a founding member of the Non Aligned movement the proud Europeans did this (see image).

    At best!

    Many actively participated in the martyrdom of the Serbian nation.  Again.  The same way the Europeans betrayed Serbians during WWII.  And now, they are STILL at it (see EU threats about Kosovo).

    And, make no mistake, all these years KLA terrorism in Kosovo has been fully supported and even aided by KFOR and EULEX (that latter entity modestly called “European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo“(emphasis added).

    And, now again, all we hear from the Old Continent is a deafening silence.  Either that, or threats.

    Long forgotten is Yehuda Bauer’s wise admonition:

    Thou shalt not be a victim.
    Thou shalt not be a perpetrator.
    And above all,
    Thou shalt not be a bystander.

    By making the EU the accomplice of the US aggression on Serbia, the US has basically secured the European’s loyalty forever, since now they are not only bound by cultural or colonial ties, they are also accomplices in the rape of Serbia, the Maghreb and Mashreq, Afghanistan and all the other countries which suffer(ed) under the Hegemony’s yoke.

    The AngloZionist attack on Yugoslavia was the Kristallnacht of international law, it was the event from which all of the horrors we see today sprang.  And yet, far from understanding (and nevermind admitting!) the crime of aggression (the worst crime in international law, above even genocide or crimes against humanity!) and showing some remorse, the European leaders stayed the course while the “regular” people of Europe simply ignored it all like the good little poodles they became.

    And please don’t give me the argument that “we faced too pwoerful an enemy” or “we could do nothing”.  At the very least, every single European could follow Solzhenitsyn’s appeal and “live not by the lie“.  But they could not even do that.  1000 years of anti-Christian propaganda and heresy has resulted in a society which does not even believe in the very notion of “truth”.  No wonder they can’t stop lying anymore…

    I think that it is a truism that if you have no self-respect you will also get no respect from others.  I also think that it is fair to say that the EU has become the most despised society on the planet.  And it is not just Putin who calls the EU a “doormat for the US” – the same opinion is held in much of Zone B.

    Here is, I think, the correct answer to the question I asked above: do the Europeans deserve what is coming to them next?  Considering that what is coming to them next is entirely self-inflicted, I think that irrefutable answer is a resounding “YES!”.

    If not, then who is to blame?  Russia?  The USA?  Putin?  “The Jews”?  Immigration?  Muslims?

    Speaking of the USA – at least the US Americans voted for Trump (twice).  The fact that this made (almost) no difference is irrelevant, at least the people of the USA tried to resist!  In fact, even under the current crackdown against dissent, I still think that there is a much higher proportion of US Americans capable and willing to resist than Europeans.

    And so today I want to do something I never did before.  I will re-post once more something I have already posted once: the interview of Col. Douglas Macgregor by Dr Michael Vlahos.  I judge this conversation to be so important that it deserves a second posting.  Before I leave you with these two men, I want to just add the following:

    These two man are from the generation which I had as professors during my years in US colleges (1986-1991) and for whom I still have the utmost respect.  That does not mean that I necessarily agree with everything they did, said or wrote, not at all.  But such men I can respect not only for their formidable intellect, but also for being men of honor and truth, and real (as opposed to flagwaving) patriots of their country.

    This is the generation of men like David Glantz or Lester W. Grau – US officers who truly studied, carefully, Soviet military doctrine (authors like Reznichenko, Gareev or Ogarkov) and who, through their studies, did not come to hate Russia or Russians at all, but saw them as fellow professionals and patriots.   Having had the privilege to spent some time with the folks who taught at the Frunze Military Academy (I even ended up co-authoring a small book with one of them) I can attest that the Russian top strategists had a great deal of respect for their US colleagues too.

    The contrast with the Neocon freaks “from the basement” could not be bigger.

    I sincerely think that in the following conversation every topic and every sentence is important because it shows what that generation of competent and honorable US Americans think of the (many) abomination(s) which we are witnessing today.  I can sincerely say that I wish them, and their cause, full success.

    As far as I am concerned, we have the same enemy.

    May their example of resistance (because that is *exactly* what this is) inspire more (there are already a few) Europeans to follow their example.

    Andrei

    Finally, and in the spirit of my post today, I leave you with one superb music video from France: “Indignez-vous” by HK et les Saltimbanks (see translated lyrics below).

    Who knows, maybe this video will wake-up a few more Europeans?

    Machine translated lyrics:

    I got up one morning, dark day of existence
    I raised my voice and my fist, when the rule was silence
    I’ve seen some get on trains, leave in a huge fog

    I could be neither accomplice nor witness, I entered into resistance
    A voice paved with hope, populated by women and men from everywhere
    A choice as a matter of course, between gallows and neck rope
    I came back from so far away, I give thanks to my star
    Death forgot me on the way, to Dora and Buchenwald
    93 years old I can believe, that my end is not very far away
    93 years old here is my memory, take the greatest care of it
    Indignation stubbornly, in a world on guard of you
    Be one of those who walk against the wind my friends, be indignant
    Be indignant!
    Be indignant!
    This is an old gentleman talking to you
    Brandishing his star, do you hear?
    So do you think that today we are missing the reasons for the uprising
    When our own lives are on credit, under the dictatorship of the banks
    Money commands the shareholders, they themselves command the president
    Who orders ordinary people to execute well kindly
    All this unsold food, so throw it in the trash
    And on top of the pile of junk, pour me 10 liters of bleach
    This is the world that is ours, absurd, cruel and merciless
    Until that damned poverty line comes through our door
    Human rights set aside, sold in individual portions
    When the food crisis lingers in front of the eternal
    But miracles when billions are found in the second
    To save the king dollars and all the bankers of this world
    Be indignant!
    Be indignant!
    This is an old gentleman talking to you
    Brandishing his star, do you hear?
    Be indignant!
    Be indignant!
    This is an old gentleman talking to you
    Brandishing his star, do you hear?
    Our chains are certainly less visible, than in the dark days of slavery
    But our minds are being targeted, what have they done with our heritage
    Excessive competition, generalized amnesia
    Mass consumption products for an anesthetized youth
    It’s high time, my friends, to finally turn on the stars again
    Who have guided his whole life, this old gentleman who speaks to you
    Yes I was that Armenian, I am still that German Jew
    I am the Palestinian people, justice is my only side
    Be citizens without borders, of those peoples who rise up
    Contaminate the whole earth, with your revolts and your dreams
    Be indignant it is your right, and in memory of all those
    Who are still dying not to have it, this right is in fact a duty
    Be indignant!
    Be indignant!
    It’s an old man who’s talking to you
    Brandishing his star, do you hear?
    Be indignant!
    Be indignant!
    This is an old gentleman talking to you
    Brandishing the starry sky, do you stand up?
    Be indignant!
    Be indignant!
    This is an old gentleman talking to you
    Brandishing his star, do you hear?
    Be indignant!
    Be indignant!
    He is an old gentleman, a great gentleman
    Who’s talking to you, who’s talking to you

    Vladimir Putin Address to SCO and CIS Defense Ministers Dec 9, 2022 – English Subtitles

    December 09, 2022

    Putin talks Ukraine, Merkel and nuclear war

    9 Dec, 2022 22:14

    Russian President Vladimir Putin answers questions from reporters after the Eurasian Economic Union’s (EAEU) summit in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. ©  Sputnik / Pavel Bednyakov

    Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke with reporters after the Eurasian Economic Union summit in the Kyrgyz capital of Bishkek on Friday. Among the topics he addressed were the latest revelations from former German chancellor Angela Merkel, the military operation in Ukraine, the threat of nuclear war, the high-profile prisoner swap with the US, and Russian relations with the EU and Africa.

    Merkel’s comments vindicate Ukraine operation

    Putin found German chancellor Angela Merkel’s confession – that the purpose of the Minsk agreements was to “buy time” for Ukraine – surprising and disappointing, but said it only means the decision to launch the special military operation was correct. “Their point was only to load up Ukraine with weapons and prepare it for hostilities. We see that. Honestly, we may have realized that too late, and maybe should have started all this sooner,” Putin said.
    While he knew that Ukraine did not intend to implement the deal, “I thought other participants in that process were honest. Turns out they too were deceiving us,” said the Russian president.

    How to negotiate with “trust at zero”

    The deception about Minsk now raises a “question of trust,” said Putin, noting that it is currently “almost at zero.” The real question now is whether negotiations about anything with anyone are even possible, and what would guarantee any eventual deal, he added. “In the end, there will have to be talks. We are ready for them, I have said that many times. But it does make us think, who we’re dealing with.”

    What he meant by Ukraine “taking a long time”

    Asked about his earlier statement that the military operation might be a “long process,” Putin explained that he was actually referring to the resolution of the conflict in Ukraine. “The special military operation is proceeding apace, everything is stable, there are no questions or problems with it today,” he said. Resolving the whole situation will “probably not be easy and will take some time, but one way or another, all participants in this process will have to agree with the realities that are taking shape on the ground.”

    On launching a nuclear first strike

    The US has long had a doctrine of a “disarming” attack against command and control systems, for which they developed cruise missiles the Soviet Union lacked, Putin said. Now Russia has hypersonic missiles that are “more modern and even more effective,” so “perhaps we should think about adopting the developments and ideas of our American partners when it comes to ensuring security.”
    While the US doctrine envisions a pre-emptive nuclear strike, Russia’s doctrine is about retaliation, Putin explained. If the Russian early warning system detects a missile attack, “hundreds of our missiles will fly and it will be impossible to stop them.” While some attacking missiles will strike Russia, “nothing will remain of the enemy,” and that is how nuclear deterrence works, he explained.

    More swaps like Bout-Griner are possible

    Russia does not consider the success of talks to trade Brittney Griner for Viktor Bout as an opening to discuss other subjects with the US. While the negotiations “created a certain atmosphere,”no other issues were brought up within their framework, Putin said. 
    He added that contacts between Russian and US security services “continue, and in fact never stopped,” but that this specific trade was initiated by US President Joe Biden.
    “Are other exchanges possible? Yes, everything is possible. This is the result of negotiations and the search for compromise. In this case, a compromise was found,” the Russian president said.

    On the need for another mobilization

    There are “no considerations” of another call-up, Putin said when asked if more Russians will need to take up arms in 2023. Of the 300,000 that were called up, some 150,000 have been deployed, but only 77,000 in the fighting units, while others are engaged in other duties at the moment. The remaining 150,000 troops are not yet deployed, but undergoing additional training, he explained. 
    “Half of those called up are a battle reserve, so why would anyone talk of an additional call-up?” Putin concluded. 

    Answering Borrell’s Africa comment

    Responding to the claim by EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell that many Africans perhaps don’t know where Donbass is or who Putin may be, the Russian president said that the continent knows all too well who helped their liberation from European colonialism.
    EU politicians should “stop talking about their love for the African peoples and start helping these countries,” Putin said. “If the people you spoke about knew where Africa was and what condition the peoples of Africa were in, they would not interfere with the supply of Russian food and fertilizers to the African continent, on which the harvest in African countries ultimately depends and the salvation of hundreds of thousands of people in Africa from starvation.”

    On Trussification: From Decolonisation to Desperation to Hopelessness to Farce

    October 16, 2022

    By Batiushka

    Source

    Decolonisation: The Western Withdrawal from Asia, Africa and Europe

    The Western European Empires have gone. The bankrupt Spanish Empire went first, in the century before last, the Germans lost their colonies in 1919 (at the same time as the Austro-Hungarians lost their European colonies), then the Italians lost their fantasies in Africa during the Second World War, the Germans got kicked out of their colonies in Eastern Europe in 1945, but the Portuguese much later, only getting kicked out of Africa in the 1970s. By that time the Dutch, the British, the Belgians and the French had also been kicked out of their colonies. Only the NATO Danes still hold on to Greenland, which is a lot of ice and snow and all of 56,000 people, though both Eisenhower and Trump wanted to buy it. However, since the US has its base at Thule, it effectively controls the country anyhow.

    Since 1947 the UK has been kicked out of almost everywhere, infamously from the Indian Subcontinent in 1947, from Palestine in 1948 and humiliatingly, by their Americans ‘allies’, from Suez in 1956. All that remains is, for the moment, a small group of tiny enclaves and islands like Bermuda, the Caymans, Gibraltar, St Helena, the Falklands etc, about 18,000 square kilometres and fewer than 300,000 people in all, plus a lot of ice in the ‘British Antarctic Territory’.

    As for France, after its humiliation in South-East Asia in 1954, it has gradually been kicked out of Africa (1946-2022) (Suez in 1956, Algeria in 1962 etc) and soon, even after its decades of assassinating independentist African politicians and military interventions, it will have nothing left there, though it still has a few islands in various oceans here and there.

    As for the short-lived US Empire, over the last fifty years it has largely been kicked out of several Asian countries (Vietnam (1975), Iran (1979), Iraq (2011-2021) Afghanistan (2021), now out of Russia (2022), and soon out of China, India and Saudi Arabia. True, it still hangs on in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Israel, but not for much longer. Eurasia is to be US-free.

    As regards the Western withdrawal from Europe, the UK left Europe in 2020. It still hangs on to Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and above all to England, but it will not last. Now it is the turn of the US to be kicked out of Europe. It is happening in the Ukraine at this very moment, but this rejection will later spread to Western Europe. Then it will be the turn of the EU to be kicked out of Europe and ultimately the US will be kicked out of the Americas, especially out of the US.

    Do not be surprised by the words ‘the Western withdrawal from Europe’ or ‘the UK being kicked out of the UK, the EU out of the EU and the US out of the US’. This is not gibberish. I am talking about the removal of the three parasitic Establishment elites in all those three manmade unions. Once those elites have gone, those purely manmade unions will fall and the newly sovereign peoples of England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, the peoples of Continental Western Europe and all those in Northern America can be liberated from their zombification and so will be able to retrieve their roots, their identity, their sovereignty and their selves again.

    Desperation

    When the USA gets desperate, it always turns to terrorism, much as gunboat Britain did and still, very weakly, attempts to do. Without mentioning the CIA-created quagmires in Latin America or in Asia or mentioning the details of the Gulf of Tonkin (1), we recall its quagmires just in Europe: the installation of the Greek junta in 1967, the CIA overthrow of De Gaulle in France in 1968, the assassination of Aldo Moro in Italy in 1978, the assassination of Olof Palme in 1986, and much more recently MH17, its terrorist attacks on the Nordstream pipelines and the Crimea Bridge, and now its attempt to force Russia to use nuclear weapons, so that the Zionist neocons in Washington can at last find an excuse to use their nuclear toys.

    Those who want modern Russia to behave like Stalin’s Soviet Union and blast their brother-people of the Ukraine off the map, as the USSR did in Berlin in 1945 (though in truth most of the damage had already been done by Anglo-American terrorist bombing) need a gentle reminder. Despite US fantasies and intimidation, I have news – the Soviet Union is dead and President Putin definitely does not want it back. He, after all, lived through its end when he was in East Germany and remembers just how awful it was. Russia’s aim has never been either the occupation of the Ukraine (unlike the Soviet aim in Eastern Europe in 1945, which was to create a buffer zone for self-protection from the aggressive West), or the destruction of the Ukraine, or the massacre of its Ukrainian brothers. Let us remind ourselves yet again of Russia’s three aims in this conflict against the US puppet regime in Kiev, that is, of the aims of the Russian campaign for the liberation of Russia’s brothers and sisters in the Ukraine from the Fascist junta. These three aims were, and are, and will be:

    1. The Liberation of the Donbass

    This has been 75% achieved, indeed, since the liberation has turned out to be not just that of Lugansk (99% achieved) and Donetsk (75% achieved), but also of 99% of Kherson and 75% of Zaporozhie, we could say that it has been 85% achieved. Why has the liberation turned into Donbass x 2, of four provinces instead of two? Simply because the Kiev junta continually threatened the Crimea and the Donbass and they had to be protected. And if Kiev continues to shell Donbass x 2 and occupy its empty fields, the Russian campaign will have to be the liberation of Donbass x 3 or even Donbass x 4.

    2. The Demilitarisation of the Ukraine

    This is well on its way, at least 50% completed already. In fact, it was completed as regards the NATO-fortified Kiev military by 25 March. However, since, as Russia expected, NATO decided to resupply Kiev with their own military stocks, now already much depleted, demilitarisation is still under way. But it is only a question of time.

    3. Denazification

    There is some confusion here. What does this term mean? Does it mean Russia sending out teachers to instruct Ukrainians in the difference between Nazi racism and the normal human acceptance of people from other countries and their cultures? No, it does not. Denazification in today’s Western context is different from that. It is the process by which the infantile Westernised child learns to stop putting its fingers into the flame. In other words, the West has to teach itself and learn from bitter experience. This is how Denazification (and from there regime-change) will be implemented throughout today’s Western world.

    For example, over the last three months the yen, the euro and the pound sterling have all been reaching historic lows against the US dollar. This is because US interest rates are higher than elsewhere and so its financial markets are attracting international investment capital. After all, why invest in European countries, which are energy-dependent but forced to boycott their main source of energy? You do not want to invest in self-bankrupting countries, which are set on a suicidal course. The USA is not as yet perceived to be self-bankrupting (though its turn will come). What is the denazifying result of all this? Let us look at the ‘case’ – and it is a ‘case’, in the medical and pathological sense – of the UK.

    Hopelessness

    Having ditched its drunken loser Johnson, over the summer the UK Establishment wasted two months in the middle of a huge political and economic crisis allowing 80,000 mainly elderly and wealthy people to select an incompetent Prime Minister for 68.7 million people – such is UK democracy, which apparently the rest of the world, especially ‘autocrats’ in Russia and China, urgently need to learn from. Thus, as soon as Truss, the worst possible candidate for Prime Minister, had been carefully selected over the two summer months, many commentators, including myself, doubted that she could last until Christmas. It now seems that that pessimism may have been very optimistic. Some latest estimates reckon that at best she may not last until 1 November.

    Truss’ decision to increase government spending – not least to double the UK ‘Defence’ (who is attacking the UK anyway?) budget to £50 billion by 2030 – to send over £3 billion of military supplies to Kiev so far this year, to subsidise 100,000 Ukrainian ‘refugees’, and at the same time to make tax cuts for the rich (what else would you expect the Conservative Party to do?) has not been accepted by Biden, the IMF and, above all, by the markets.

    Therefore, on 14 October Truss ditched her own Minister of Finance of 38 days for his decision to carry out her own illiterate economic policy – illiterate, as precisely and prophetically described last July by Truss’ rival as Conservative Prime Minister, the former Finance Minister, Sunak. So, on 14 October, Truss appointed a new British Finance Minister, the fourth in four months, a man notorious for contributing to the destruction the UK’s abysmal Health ‘Service’ (2). He will now do exactly the opposite of everything she had promised just three weeks before and on which impossible promises the intellectually challenged elected her.

    Naturally, the hopeless Truss blames all her problems on ‘global factors’ and especially on ‘Putin’s appalling invasion of the Ukraine’. No mention of voluntary and suicidal Western sanctions at all. After all, would she want to admit to her own colossal stupidity? Here we see how Denazification and, as a result regime change, are already happening in the UK, all by themselves, just as they will in the EU and in the USA. All Russia has to do is to sit back and watch Western leaders destroying themselves and dragging down their countries with them, until their peoples rise up in revolt, as is beginning to happen all over Western Europe, and as will happen in the US (we had a presage of this at the Capitol last year) and in its other colonies. This is Denazification, though perhaps more precisely it should be called ‘Auto-Denazification’. Or perhaps it could just be called ‘Hopelessness’? Or maybe just ‘Trussification’?

    16 October 2022

    Note:

    1. A quick read of William Blum’s Killing Hope, US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II or Stephen Kinzler’s Overthrow, America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq should be enlightening here.

    2. A young friend in the UK phoned me on 14 October. He told me how after weeks and weeks of chronic pain, he was eventually diagnosed by a UK hospital doctor as having cancer. He was then told that he had six months to live, but that surgeons would not have enough time to operate, as ‘the waiting list is too long’, and was then given ‘pain-killers’ that did not work as consolation for his death-sentence. The next day, through a friend, he booked a flight to Romania. There, arriving from the airport, he was seen in a clinic at once and given an MRI scan. He was immediately informed that he had a hernia. The surgeon apologised to him that he could not operate on him the next day, but that he would have to wait until the day after. Just another example of the UK’s ‘world class’ health system….Trussification indeed.

    The Western Empire Attacks Russia: The World Strikes Back

    October 14, 2022

    Source

    by Jo Red

    In war, as in life more generally, the concept of tempo is essential.

    In his masterpiece Philosophy and Real Politics, British “Leninist” philosopher Raymond Geuss emphasizes “priorities, preferences, timing” (p. 30) as defining differences between “real politics” and the abstract, universalistic philosophy that flattens everything in the unfathomable ignorance of timeless present and depthless surface.

    Be reminded of that while you celebrate Putin’s birthday by cheering at the destruction of the Crimean bridge – and the loss of 3 innocent lives. Please be reminded of that. Either one or the other must hold: you plan and execute war – just like anything else – with a view to its intrinsic logic – dictating its own and specific tempo – or else, you go on the offensive and strike with an ear for audience and a view for choreographic photo ops. No, world history and Putin’s, or any other individual’s, private life events being synchronized is not a possibility. That’s called “delusion of reference” and might be a sign of serious mental illness.

    The point I’m trying to get across is that, contrary to Ukraine, Russia will not rush to respond to Ukraine’s symbolic provocations in the timing of any mediatic agenda. Big Serge has explained very convincingly that they are probably following the schedule dictated by military and political necessity, rather than the “events” that attract the attention of Western so-called “politicians”. By the way, has Zelensky been reminded of Putin’s b-day by Facebook?

    Be it as it may, it would be a mistake to think that, because of the advances of the Ukrainians on the ground, Russia’s offensive is not “proceeding”. While the UA’s junta continues to push Ukraine’s youth forward to be uselessly massacred in occupying some almost empty 2000 sq km under Russian target shooting, global developments unfold in the embarrassed “distraction” of Western media.

    Putin in his recent speech, Pope Francis since years ago, and well, just anybody else at this point has been able to tell you that this is a global war. The Nord Stream sabotage at the hands of the Anglo-Americans is only additional, unnecessary evidence that the confrontation with Russia reaches from Caucasus to the Danish Sea and beyond.

    Only a few days ago, an anti-French and pro-Russian uprising expelled the latest iteration of Parish’s endeared viceroys in the country. I won’t deny that seeing so many, newly liberated Africans waving the Russian flag moved me. It is just another step in the global anti-colonial, liberation struggle outlined by Putin in his programmatic speech.

    If you like counting square km, well Burkina Faso stretches over 274 200. The 74th country in the world by surface, with a population of 20 million: we could say, average size. I know, I know, anything happening South to the Mediterranean and involving Black people is irrelevant until they are slave-traded and “integrated” into the Metropolis: only then, and only if they vote right (i.e. left) Black Lives Matter. But whatever the Western empire’s propaganda is saying – or conceiling – the truth is that the colonies are absolutely vital for its hegemony. Africa is the youngest continent, and possibly the richest in resources: it is no coincidence if the French, British, and nowadays the American continue to feast on it. France will simply be unable to retain its standard of living without its neo-colonies. And that moment is coming. The Central African Republic, Mali, and now Burkina, have recently broken free. And it is everything but unlikely that other states in the area will follow. Nearby, Niger and Chad still suffer under the French yoke, but not passively. The Chadian dictator Idriss Déby died at the hands of the rebel in 2021, and his young son is now leading the country. The local junta has just postponed free elections by another two years, yet obviously, as these are NATO’s friends, you won’t read or hear about violations of democracy.

    On to another plexus in world power, the Middle East is undergoing a seismic-range transformation as the divides that defined the region cannot be taken for granted anymore. It is already some time since Turkey has timidly restarted some dialogue with Syria. Iran only drew nearer to Russia and China by entering the SCO. Besides being key in assembling a union of Caspian states, ripe with strategic and economic relevance, including tourism, Teheran is pushed in the arms of the continental powers by the suicidal policies of the West. Divide et impera, divide and rule, has been the leitmotiv of any empire since at least the times of the Romans. The US followed it rather carefully, for instance when they divided Russia from China under Nixon’s administration. Now they’re provoking China in Taiwan at the same time as they’re fighting a hybrid war with Russia in Ukraine, and with their imaginary third arm they believe to be able to overturn the Ayatollahs. Evidently, this hubris has since long divorced reason. The US could not deal the coup the grace in the ‘90s and early 2000s, when Russia and China were busy with their own problems if not actively helping the West. Imagining that it could succeed in after decades of internal decline, while fighting an emboldened decolonizing coalition, and at the same time pursuing contradictory attempts at détente to signal discontinuity with Trump is worse than preposterous. The SCO should reward #Iranianlivesmatter, #Iranrevolution, women cutting hairlocks worldwide and such as its most effective PR campaign.

    However relevant, this is not even the most significant and impressive turn that has been taken in recent days. Even Western press could not ignore the “detail” that OPEC+, at its summit in Vienna, has brutally smashed US hopes to avoid a reduction in oil outputs in order to keep the prices low. After having played with his declarations, journalists challenged the Saudi representative, who ended up refusing to answer questions from Reuters. They probably did not get the memo that the imperial arrogance of the US is not swallowed with the same servility all the world over anymore. But most interestingly, the Saudis have also explained that they have not been convinced by Russia about the oil prices but are simply protecting their country’s economic interests. Even more outrageous to American ears! They speak of interests that are not our own! How dare they!

    At this point, even Biden must be realizing that there were deeper reasons behind the Saudi prince’s decline of his phone call already in March, besides inflicting him and the American government the umpteenth humiliation on the world stage. Not only the US are finally given the brush-off in one of the most important regions of the world: the latter is actively being reshaped by the hatred of them. The Middle East connects three continents, including the two largest, not to mention oceans and seas, and by controlling its straits the Anglo-American have been able to choke the world economy for well over a century. Add the infamously rich resources of the region. It is no coincidence that the same Raymond Geuss considers the British loss of control of the Suez strait in 1956 as the end of their empire, more than the independence of India. Let’s not forget this was “facilitated” by Khrushchev’s threat at the UN to resort to missiles in case the colonial powers did not withdraw from Egypt.

    The region continued to be torn apart by the West’s skillful exploitation of its ideological, social, national, and especially religious diversity: first of all, the conflict between Shia and Sunni Muslims. These are behind the most dramatic – and almost completely ignored – humanitarian crisis of our time: the devastation of Yemen.

    It won’t be easy, but if the interests of such opposite countries as Saudi Arabia and Iran were to align, with a little help by American hostile resentment against the independence of both, and perhaps a friendly nudge by Russia (and China), this would be a massive blow to Western hegemony. Much more than the temporary occupation of I don’t know how many soccer fields in rural Ukraine.

    Last but not least, let’s not forget the Americas. One of the most outspoken admirers of Russia, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, is currently not represented at the Organization of the American States. Still, when the OAS voted on a resolution to condemn Russia’s referendums on October 7th, Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico voted against.

    Of course, in the perspective of the West’s rigged “democracy” the 24 states that voted in favor count more. But excepting the US and Canada for obvious reasons, the like of St. Kitts and Nevis are no match to the largest nations and economies of the continent. It’s the same logic why Biden’s bragging about a majority of states condemning Russia at the UN General Assembly is delusional: if three fourth of the countries actually voted in favor, among those abstaining there were India, China, Pakistan, Vietnam and other immense world players. Even more evident is the diplomatic defeat over the resolution to remove representatives of the Venezuelan opposition from the OAS: only the US, Canada, Guatemala and Paraguay voted against. The resolution didn’t pass, due to a significant number of abstainers and the requirement of a 2/3 majority, but is still a resounding slap in the US face in its very backyard.

    So, while the heralds of the Empire are cheerfully selling us memes and Tik-Tok videos about the terrorist bonfire on the Crimea bridge, we still retain many and big reasons to nod in re-reading Putin’s diagnosis about the emergence of a free, sovereign, multipolar world and the end of Western hegemony being inevitable.

    Jo Red is “lucky enough to be born in Italy: studied a lot, knows nothing”

    The real US agenda in Africa is hegemony

    September 21, 2022

    by Pepe Escobar, first published at The Cradle and posted with the author’s permission

    Forget development. Washington’s primary interest in Africa today is keeping the Chinese and Russians out.

    In a rational environment, the 77th session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) would discuss alleviating the trials and tribulations of the Global South, especially Africa.

    That won’t be the case. Like a deer caught in the geopolitical headlights, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres issued platitudes about a gloomy “winter of global discontent,” even as the proverbial imperial doomsayers criticized the UN’s “crisis of faith” and blasted the “unprovoked war” started by Russia.

    Of course the slow-motion genocide of Donbass russophone residents for eight years would never be recognized as a provocation.

    Guterres spoke of Afghanistan, “where the economy is in ruins and human rights are being trampled” – but he did not dare to offer context. In Libya, “divisions continue to jeopardize the country” – once again, no context. Not to mention Iraq, where “ongoing tensions threaten ongoing stability.”

    Africa has 54 nations as UN members. Any truly representative UNGA meeting should place Africa’s problems at the forefront. Once again, that’s not the case. So it is left to African leaders to offer that much-needed context outside of the UN building in New York.

    As the only African member of the G20, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa recently urged the US not to “punish” the whole continent by forcing nations to demonize or sanction Russia. Washington’s introduction of legislation dubbed the Countering Malign Russian Activities in Africa Act, he says, “will harm Africa and marginalize the continent.”

    South Africa is a BRICS member – a concept that is anathema in the Beltway – and embraces a policy of non-alignment among world powers. An emerging 21st century version of the 1960s Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) is strengthening across the Global South – and especially Africa – much to the revulsion of the US and its minions.

    Back at the UNGA, Guterres invoked the global fertilizer crisis – again, with no context. Russian diplomacy has repeatedly stressed that Moscow is ready to export 30 million tons of grain and over 20 million tons of fertilizer by the end of 2022. What is left unsaid in the west, is that only the importation of fertilizers to the EU is “allowed,” while transit to Africa is not.

    Guterres said he was trying to persuade EU leaders to lift sanctions on Russian fertilizer exports, which directly affect cargo payments and shipping insurance. Russia’s Uralchem, for instance, even offered to supply fertilizers to Africa for free.

    Yet from the point of view of the US and its EU vassals, the only thing that matters is to counter Russia and China in Africa. Senegal’s President Macky Sall has remarked how this policy is leaving “a bitter taste.”

    ‘We forbid you to build your pipeline’

    It gets worse. The largely ineffectual EU Parliament now wants to stop the construction of the 1,445 km-long East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) from Uganda to Tanzania, invoking hazy human rights violations, environmental threats, and “advising” member countries to simply drop out of the project.

    Uganda is counting on more than 6 billion barrels of oil to sustain an employment boom and finally move the nation to middle-income status. It was up to Ugandan Parliament Deputy Speaker Thomas Tayebwa to offer much-needed context:

    “It is imprudent to say that Uganda’s oil projects will exacerbate climate change, yet it is a fact that the EU block with only 10 percent of the world’s population is responsible for 25 percent of global emissions, and Africa with 20 percent of the world’s population is responsible for 3 percent of emissions. The EU and other western countries are historically responsible for climate change. Who then should stop or slow down the development of natural resources? Certainly not Africa or Uganda.”

    The EU Parliament, moreover, is a staunch puppet of the biofuel lobby. It has refused to amend a law that would have stopped the use of food crops for fuel production, actually contributing to what the UN Food Program has described as “a global emergency of unprecedented magnitude.” No less than 350 million people are on the brink of starvation across Africa.

    Instead, the G7’s notion of “helping” Africa is crystallized in the US-led Build Back Better World (B3W) – Washington’s anaemic attempt to counter Beijing’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) – which focuses on “climate, health and health security, digital technology, and gender equity and equality,” according to the White House. Practical issues of infrastructure and sustainable development, which are at the heart of China’s plan, are simply ignored by the B3W.

    Initially, a few “promising” projects were identified by a traveling US delegation in Senegal and Ghana. Senegalese diplomatic sources have since confirmed that these projects have nothing whatsoever to do with building infrastructure.

    B3W, predictably, fizzled out. After all, the US-led project was little more than a public relations gimmick to undermine the Chinese, with negligible effect on narrowing the $40-plus trillion worth of infrastructure needed to be built across the Global South by 2035.

    Have YALI, will travel

    Imperial initiatives in Africa – apart from the US military’s Africa Command (AFRICOM), which amounts to raw militarization of the continent – brings us to the curious case of YALI (Young African Leaders Initiative), widely touted in the Washington-New York axis as “the most innovative” policy of the Obama years.

    Launched in 2010, YALI was framed as “empowering the new generation of Africa leadership” – a euphemism for educating (or brainwashing) them the American way. The mechanism is simple: investing in and bringing hundreds of young African potential leaders to US universities for a short, six-week “training” on “business, civil leadership, entrepreneurship, and public management.” Then, four days in Washington to meet “leaders in the administration,” and a photo op with Obama.

    The project was coordinated by US embassies in Africa, and targeted young men and women from sub-Saharan Africa’s 49 nations – including those under US sanctions, like Sudan, Eritrea, and Zimbabwe – proficient in English, with a “commitment” to return to Africa. Roughly 80 percent during the initial years had never been to the US, and more than 50 percent grew up outside of big cities.

    Then, in a speech in 2013 in South Africa, Obama announced the establishment of the Washington Fellowship, later renamed the Mandela-Washington Fellowship (MWF).

    That’s still ongoing. In 2022, MWF should be granted to 700 “outstanding young leaders from sub-Saharan Africa,” who follow “Leadership Institutes” at nearly 40 US universities, before their short stint in Washington. After which, they are ready for “long-term engagement between the United States and Africa.”

    And all that for literally peanuts, as MWF was enthusiastically billed by the Democrat establishment as cost-efficient: $24,000 per fellow, paid by participant US universities as well as Coca-Cola, IBM, MasterCard Foundation, Microsoft, Intel, McKinsey, GE, and Procter & Gamble.

    And that didn’t stop with MWF. USAID went a step further, and invested over $38 million – plus $10 million from the MasterCard Foundation – to set up four Regional Leadership Centers (RLCs) in South Africa, Kenya, Ghana, and Senegal. These were training, long distance and in-class, at least 3,500 ‘future leaders’ a year.

    It’s no wonder the Brookings Institution was drooling over so much “cost-efficiency” when it comes to investing “in Africa’s future” and for the US to “stay competitive” in Africa. YALI certainly looks prettier than AFRICOM.

    A few success stories though don’t seem to rival the steady stream of African footballers making a splash in Europe – and then reinvesting most of their profits back home. The Trump years did see a reduction of YALI’s funding – from $19 million in 2017 to roughly $5 million.

    So many leaders to ‘train’

    Predictably, the Joe Biden White House YALI-ed all over again with a vengeance. Take this US press attache in Nigeria neatly outlining the current emphasis on “media and information literacy,” badly needed to tackle the “spreading of disinformation” including “in the months leading up to the national presidential election.”

    So the US, under YALI, “trained 1,000 young Nigerians to recognize the signs of online and media misinformation and disinformation.” And now the follow-up is “Train the Trainer” workshops, “teaching 40 journalists, content creators, and activists (half of whom will be women) from Yobe, Borno, Adamawa, Zamfara, and Katsina how to identify, investigate, and report misinformation.” Facebook, being ordered by the FBI to censor “inconvenient,” potentially election-altering facts, is not part of the curriculum.

    YALI is the soft, Instagrammed face of AFRICOM. The US has participated in the overthrow of several African governments over the past two decades, with troops trained under secrecy-obsessed AFRICOM. There has been no serious Pentagon audit on the weaponizing of AFRICOM’s local “partners.” For all we know – as in Syria and Libya – the US military could be arming even more terrorists.

    And predictably, it’s all bipartisan. Rabid neo-con and former Trump national security adviser John Bolton, in December 2018, at the Heritage Foundation, made it crystal clear: the US in Africa has nothing to do with supporting democracy and sustainable development. It’s all about countering Russia and China.

    When it learned that Beijing was considering building a naval base in oil-rich Equatorial Guinea, the Biden White House sent power envoys to the capital Malabo to convince the government to cease and desist. To no avail.

    In contrast, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was received like a superstar in his recent extensive tour of Africa, where it’s widely perceived that global food prices and the fertilizer drama are a direct consequence of western sanctions on Russia. Uganda leader Yoweri Museveni went straight to the point when he said, “How can we be against somebody who has never harmed us?”

    On 13-15 December, the White House plans a major US-Africa Leaders Summit in Washington to discuss mostly food security and climate change – alongside the perennial lectures on democracy and human rights. Most leaders won’t be exactly impressed with this new showing of “the United States’ enduring commitment to Africa.” Well, there’s always YALI. So many young leaders to indoctrinate, so little time.

    %d bloggers like this: