NEW ALLIANCES AND MILITARY STRENGTH SURGE AMID YEMEN’S UNWAVERING SUPPORT FOR GAZA

MARCH 22ND, 2024

Source

Ahmed AbdulKareem is a Yemeni journalist based in Sana’a. He covers the war in Yemen for MintPress News as well as local Yemeni media.

Ahmed Abdulkareem

In his traditional Tuhamian clothing, Ali, a Yemeni fisherman from the coastal city of Hodeidah, stands in a gathering of thousands of Yemenis and chants, “With you, with you, O Al-Qassam Brigades… until victory or martyrdom.”

Ali told MintPress News that with the beginning of the holy month of Ramadan, he feels the suffering of his brothers in Gaza more than ever, so he decided to participate in today’s demonstration for the first time out of sympathy with Gaza and in rejection of what he described as the hideous practices carried out by the invaders in the Red Sea against fishermen.

At the beginning of Ramadan, he quit fishing in Yemen’s territorial waters for fear of his life. “Since the scary ships came, whoever goes out to fish will be killed or arrested, and whoever survives will not return with enough fish.”

Ali, a member of the Al-Hammadi family, who depend on fishing as their only source of income, says that one of his relatives, Qasim, was killed by foreign forces protecting Israeli ships at sea near the shores of Hodeidah. But Ali says he is happy that he now shares the suffering with the residents of Gaza.

FISHERMEN RALLY AGAINST FOREIGN AGGRESSION

Qasim and seven other fishermen, all from the Al-Khawkha District in the coastal governorate of Hodeidah, lost their lives to the Western forces in the Red Sea while fishing in Yemen’s territorial waters. On January 26, 2024, a month after their disappearance, their bodies were found on the Dhu al-Harab Islands overlooking the waterway in the sea. The coalition allies control these islands. At that time, the Ministry of Fisheries, based in Sana’a, accused American coalition forces of the crime.

The murder of the eight fishermen: Qasim Hammadi, Ibrahim Mahnish, Zakaria Mansoub, Hamza Abdel Hafeez, Majed Bahidar, Ibrahim Salem, Ahmed Shaif, and Anwar Hattab is not an isolated case, but rather one of the dozens of incidents in which fishermen either lost their lives were injured or were arrested and disappeared, forcing other fisherman to stay in their homes starving rather than risk death or imprisonment.

The Ministry of Fisheries in Sana’a, which recorded dozens of violations against fishermen, including kidnapping and arrests carried out by the U.S. Navy, said in a previous statement that the U.S. Navy’s activity near the Yemeni coast and territorial waters threatens Yemeni fishermen, puts their lives in danger and causes them to lose their only source of income.

It mentioned that U.S. forces and their allies resort to the use of force and threats to prevent fishermen from exercising their right to fish, pointing to the tragic conditions experienced by thirty thousand Yemeni fishermen, who depend on the fishing profession as the only source of income for their families, due to the presence of American forces in the Red Sea.

It added that foreign forces also deplete and plunder fish stocks, leading to declining stocks and fishermen’s wages. “Sometimes we and our brothers in Gaza share the same suffering, siege, and killing,” Ali says.

Ali supports Ansar Allah’s blockade of Israeli ships from the Red Sea and likens his suffering to that of Palestinians. He does not hide his support for the targeting of American and British ships, describing it as a resistance operation against forces that came from the high seas, not to prevent them from fishing and polluting their waters, but rather to kill the people of Gaza. He says Israel, America and Britain should “drink from the same cup.”

Like the fishermen, residents still suffer from the repercussions of ten years of Saudi-led war and the U.S.-backed blockade, despite the relative cessation of bombing from 2022 until the start of the war on Gaza. Yemen is one of the world’s largest humanitarian crises, with more than 21 million Yemenis in need of assistance and suffering from inadequate food, health care, and infrastructure and 6.1 million facing “emergency” levels of food insecurity, according to a recent report from Human Rights Watch.

The situation has become much worse since the onset of the U.S. bombing campaign on the Yemeni mainland, the continuation of the blockade, and the prevention of any political settlement between warring factions in Yemen. The local population, however, does not appear ready to abandon Gaza and supports Ansar Allah’s operations against Israel, U.S. and British ships, even if it makes their own situation worse.

Residents in Hodeidah Governorate were not the only ones who took to the streets in massive demonstrations on Friday to express this sentiment. A massive demonstration took place in more than 140 governorates, cities, and regions, the most important of which was in the Al-Sabeen area in the Yemeni capital, Sana’a, and the cities of Saada, Dhamar, Al-Bayda, Hajjah, Al-Mahwit, Amran, Al-Dhale’, Taiz, Al-Jawf, and Marib governorates. The theme of the protests was “Our operations continue. Stop your aggression.”

ESCALATING TENSIONS: THE YEMENI RESPONSE

Most Yemenis see the aid airdropped by the U.S. in Gaza and the construction of a floating port as little more than a hoax, and Yemen’s leadership intends to escalate its blockade of the Red Sea further. This week, an Israeli ship, the Pacific 1, was targeted for the first time since November 19, 2023, when Yemen announced military operations in support of Gaza.

Recently, the leader of Ansar Allah, Abdulmalik Al-Houthi, announced that Israeli or Israeli-linked ships would not only be prevented from crossing the Red and Arabian Seas but would also be prevented from crossing the Indian Ocean and Cape of Good Hope until the war against Gaza is stopped and the blockade is lifted.

Mohammed Abdul-Salam, the spokesperson of Ansar Allah, confirmed that Yemen has moved towards escalation by targeting Israeli ships in the Indian Ocean and preventing them from sailing towards the Cape of Good Hope. International shipping companies linked to Israel, he said, “must take this escalation very seriously and know that any Israel-linked ship will be exposed to Yemeni missiles.”

ANSAR ALLAH’S PURSUIT OF STRATEGIC SUPERIORITY

In response to U.S. attacks on Yemen, Ansar Allah has not only upgraded their missile and drone capabilities, modifying explosive warheads to double their destructive power but has now manufactured hypersonic missiles with high destructive capability. High-ranking military sources within Ansar Allah told MintPress that Yemen is close to adding hypersonic missiles to its arsenal following testing against sea targets. In early March, Yemeni rocket scientists tested a solid-fuel hypersonic missile that can reach speeds of up to 10,000 kilometers per hour (Mach 8).

In a recent interview with MintPress News, ِMohammed Ali al-Houthi, Ansar Allah’s second-in-command, gave explicit hints about a “surprise” that could change the equation in the Red Sea, even against targets inside of the occupied Palestinian territories.

In a televised speech, which he usually delivers every Thursday to announce the latest developments in Gaza and Yemen, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, the leader of Ansar Allah, said, “There is a noticeable development in Yemeni missiles, among these developments is a missile that arrived to Eilat this week without being detected or intercepted by the enemy. Others reached to the Indian Ocean, however, behind these developments is something more advanced, but we leave it for action first.

Last Thursday, al-Houthi announced that Ansar Allah has used new weapons in recent operations in the Red and Arabian Seas, which “surprised the United States and the United Kingdom.” He added, “Our enemies, friends, and our people will see a level of achievement of strategic importance that will place our country in terms of its capabilities among the few countries in this world.”

Brigadier Abdul-Ghani Al-Zubaid, Brigadier in the Yemeni Army and researcher in political and military affairs said that al-Houthi’s allusion to missile development and failure of Israel’s advanced air defense systems, such as the Hatz system, confirmed that hypersonic missiles are already available, perhaps in significant quantities. He continued, “We may witness qualitative operations targeting the enemy’s depth in the coming days, American and British ships in the Indian Ocean and South Africa.”

Israel acknowledged in a statement released on Monday that “a cruise missile” coming from the direction of the Red Sea from Yemen circumvented Israeli anti-air systems and struck territories in southern occupied Palestine near Eilat.

Ballistic missiles fly on a trajectory, allowing anti-missile systems to anticipate and intercept their path. The more irregular a missile’s flight path, the more difficult it becomes to intercept. Hypersonic missiles fly at speeds greater than Mach 5 and can change directions during flight. Undoubtedly, Ansar Allah’s new hypersonic missiles could pose a formidable challenge to air defense systems employed by the U.S. and Israel due to their speed and maneuverability. Another development that was met with less fanfare but was no less significant than Ansar Allah’s hypersonic missiles was the development of its diplomatic relationship with Russia and China.

YEMEN’S GEOPOLITICAL REBALANCING ACT

Growing feelings of hostility towards the United States and the United Kingdom following their attacks on Yemen and support for Israel’s war in Gaza have not only prompted major countries such as Russia to strengthen their relationship with Ansar Allah to mire the U.S. in the Red Sea swamp, they have also prompted the group to enhance relations with Russia and China in a bid to bring about a strategic defeat for the U.S. in the region.

Member of Ansar Allah’s Political Bureau, Ali al-Qahoum, told MintPress that,

“There is already development in relations between Yemen, Russia, China, and the BRICS countries, exchanging experiences and expertise in various fields. This serves a common interest with the goal of letting America, Britain, and the West sink into a quagmire in the Red Sea so that their unilateral polarity sinks, fades, and weakens.“

Al-Qahoum added,

“This is not just my analysis but a clearly visible fact. Yemen is a state that has already succeeded in supporting Palestine and has been able to stabilize the Red Sea with great efficiency, representing a major strategic victory in the military, security and political spheres.

Thanks to God and our brave leader, Yemen was able to achieve this with unparalleled strength and pride,” he added, “To the point that major countries began coordinating and building relations with us on an equal footing, paving the way for the foreseeable future and laying the groundwork for the historic defeat of the United States, Britain and the West, and by extension, the collapse of the colonial project and Western hegemony over the region and the world.

With the West, led by America and Britain, attacking Yemen and continuing to weave colonial conspiracies and preparing to expand their ongoing aggression against Yemen, and their failure to provide protection for Israel in the Red Sea, there is intensive work and movement by Yemen to support Palestine and continue useful and effective strategic military operations.“

STRATEGIC COORDINATION: PALESTINIAN RESISTANCE

The strengthening of diplomatic ties with Russia, China, and the BRICS countries is no exception. Ansar Allah is also strengthening its relations with various Palestinian resistance factions, specifically the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of the Hamas movement.

Nasr al-Din Amer, a leader in Ansar Allah and deputy head of the Ansar Allah Media Authority, told MintPress that Ansar Allah had given authority over the Israeli ship, the “Galaxy,” detained off of the coast of Yemen as well as its crew, to the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades. Amer emphasized Ansar Allah’s cooperation and coordination with Palestinian resistance movements, most notably Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP).

BRICS member South Africa takes Zionism to court

JAN 10, 2024

Photo Credit: The Cradle

Pretoria’s genocide case against Israel is crucial, not just to stop Tel Aviv’s carnage in Gaza, but to plant the first flag of multipolarism in the globe’s courtrooms: this is the first case of many that will seek to halt western impunity and restore international law as envisioned in the UN Charter.

Pepe Escobar

Nothing less than the full concept of international law will be on trial this week in The Hague. The whole world is watching. 

It took an African nation, not an Arab or Muslim nation, but significantly a BRICS member, to try to break the iron chains deployed by Zionism via fear, financial might, and non-stop threats, enslaving not only Palestine but substantial swathes of the planet.    

By a twist of historical poetic justice, South Africa, a nation that knows one or two things about apartheid, had to take the moral high ground and be the first to file a suit against apartheid Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).  

The 84-page lawsuit, exhaustively argued, fully documented, and filed on 29 December 2023, details all the ongoing horrors perpetrated in the occupied Gaza Strip and followed by everyone with a smartphone around the planet. 

South Africa asks the ICJ – a UN mechanism – something quite straightforward: Declare that the state of Israel has breached all its responsibilities under international law since 7 October. 

And that, crucially, includes a violation of the 1948 Genocide Convention, according to which genocide consists of “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.”

South Africa is supported by Jordan,  Bolivia, Turkiye, Malaysia, and significantly the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which combines the lands of Islam, and constitutes 57 member states, 48 of these harboring a Muslim majority. It’s as if these nations were representing the overwhelming majority of the Global South. 

Whatever happens at The Hague could go way beyond a possible condemnation of Israeli for genocide. Both Pretoria and Tel Aviv are members of the ICJ – so the rulings are binding. The ICJ, in theory, carries more weight than the UN Security Council, where the US vetoes any hard facts that tarnish Israel’s carefully constructed self-image. 

The only problem is that the ICJ does not have enforcement power. 

What South Africa, in practical terms, is aiming to achieve is to have the ICJ impose on Israel an order to stop the invasion – and the genocide – right away. That should be the first priority.   

A specific intent to destroy 

Reading the full South African application is a horrifying exercise. This is literally history in the making, right in front of us living in the young, tech-addicted, 21st century, and not a science fiction account of a genocide taking place in some distant universe.    

Pretoria’s application carries the merit of drawing The Big Picture, “in the broader context of Israel’s conduct towards Palestinians during its 75-year-long apartheid, its 56-year-long belligerent occupation of Palestinian territory, and its 16-year-long blockade of Gaza.”  

Cause, effect, and intent are clearly delineated, transcending the horrors that have been perpetrated since the Palestinian resistance’s Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on 7 October, 2023. 

Then there are “acts and omissions by Israel which are capable of amounting to other violations of international law.” South Africa lists them as “genocidal in character, as they are committed with the requisite specific intent (dolus specialis) to destroy Palestinians in Gaza as a part of the broader Palestinian national, racial and ethnic group.”

‘The Facts,’ introduced from page 9 of the application, are brutal – ranging from the indiscriminate massacre of civilians to mass expulsion: “It is estimated that over 1.9 million Palestinians out of Gaza’s population of 2.3 million people – approximately 85 percent of the population – have been forced from their homes. There is nowhere safe for them to flee to, those who cannot leave or refuse to be displaced have been killed or are at extreme risk of being killed in their homes.”

And there will be no turning back: “As noted by the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Gaza’s housing and civilian infrastructure have been razed to the ground, frustrating any realistic prospects for displaced Gazans to return home, repeating a long history of mass forced displacement of Palestinians by Israel.”

The complicit Hegemon 

Item 142 of the application may encapsulate the whole drama: “The entire population is facing starvation: 93 percent of the population in Gaza is facing crisis levels of hunger, with more than one in four facing catastrophic condition” – with death imminent. 

Against this backdrop, on 25 December – Christmas day – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu doubled down on his genocidal rhetoric, promising: ‘We are not stopping, we are continuing to fight and we are deepening the fighting in the coming days, and this will be a long battle and it is not close to being over.” 

So, “as a matter of extreme urgency,” and “pending the Court’s determination of this case on the merits,” South Africa is asking for provisional measures, the first of which will be for “the state of Israel to immediately suspend its military operations in and against Gaza.”

This amounts to a permanent ceasefire. Every grain of sand from the Negev to Arabia knows that the neocon psychos in charge of US foreign policy, including their pet, remote-controlled, senile occupant of the White House are not only complicit in the Israeli genocide but oppose any possibility of a ceasefire. 

Incidentally, such complicity is also punishable by law, according to the Genocide Convention.   

Hence, it is a given that Washington and Tel Aviv will go no-holds-barred to block a fair trial by the ICJ, using every means of pressure and threat available. That dovetails with the extremely limited power exercised by any international court to impose the rule of international law on the exceptionalist Washington–Tel Aviv combo. 

While an alarmed Global South is moved to action against Israel’s unprecedented military assault on Gaza, where over 1 percent of the population has been murdered in less than three months, the Israeli Foreign Ministry has regimented its embassies to arm-twist host country diplomats and politicians to swiftly issue an “immediate and unequivocal statement along the following lines: To publicly and clearly state that your country rejects the outrageous, absurd, and baseless allegations made against Israel.” 

It will be quite enlightening to see which nations will abide by the order. 

Whether Pretoria’s current efforts succeed or not, this case is likely to be only the first of its kind filed in courts around the world in the months and even years ahead. The BRICS – of which South Africa is a crucial member state – are part of the new swell of international organizations challenging western hegemony and its ‘rules-based order.’ These rules mean nothing; nobody has even seen them. 

In part, multipolarism has emerged to redress the decades-long shift away from the UN Charter and rush toward the lawlessness embodied in these illusory ‘rules.’ The nation-state system that underpins the global order cannot function without the international law that secures it. Without the law, we face war, war, and more war; the Hegemon’s ideal universe of endless war, in fact.

South Africa’s genocide case against Israel is blatantly necessary to reverse these flagrant violations of the international system, and will almost certainly be the first of many such litigations against both Israel and its allies to shift the world back to stability, security, and common sense.

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

MOST POPULAR

• How Israeli forces trapped and killed ravers at the Nova Festival
• Iraqi resistance strikes three US bases in Iraq, Syria
• The West Bank is a ticking time bomb
• US to send 1,500 troops to Syria and Iraq
• IRGC missiles destroy Mossad, ISIS bases in Iraq and Syria

Gaza: a pause before the storm

NOV 23, 2023

Source

The US and its allies will continue backing Israel’s war on Gaza after a brief truce. But as the case for ‘genocide’ grows stronger, the new multipolar powers will have to confront the old hegemons and their Rules-Based Chaos.

Pepe Escobar

While the world cries “Israeli genocide,” the Biden White House is gushing over the upcoming Gaza truce it helped broker, as though it’s actually “on the verge” of its “biggest diplomatic victory.” 

Behind the self-congratulatory narratives, the US administration is not remotely “wary about Netanyahu’s endgame,” it fully endorses it – genocide included – as agreed at the White House less than three weeks before Al-Aqsa Flood, in a 20 September meeting between Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu and Joe “The Mummy” Biden’s handlers.

The US/Qatar-brokered “truce,” which is supposed to go into effect this week, is not a ceasefire. It is a PR move to soften Israel’s genocide and boost its morale by securing the release of a few dozen captives. Moreover, the record shows that Israel never respects ceasefires.

Predictably, what really worries the US administration is the “unintended consequence” of the truce, which will “allow journalists broader access to Gaza and the opportunity to further illuminate the devastation there and turn public opinion on Israel.”

Real journalists have been working in Gaza 24/7 since October 7 – dozens of whom have been killed by the Israeli military machine in what Reporters Sans Frontieres calls “one of the deadliest tolls in a century.” 

These journalists have spared no effort to go all the way to “illuminate the devastation,” a euphemism for the ongoing genocide, shown in all its gruesome detail for the entire world to see.

Even the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine (UNRWA), itself relentlessly attacked by Israel, revealed – somewhat meekly – that this has been “the largest displacement since 1948,” an “exodus” of the Palestinian population, with the younger generation “forced to live through traumas of ancestors or parents.” 

As for public opinion all across the Global South/Global Majority, it “turned” long ago on Zionist extremism. But now the Global Minority – populations of the collective west – are watching raptly, horrified, and bitter that in just six weeks, social media has exposed them to what mainstream media hid for decades. There will be no turning back now that this penny has dropped.

A former Apartheid state leads the way

The South African government has paved the path, globally, for the proper reaction to an unfolding genocide: parliament voted to shutter the Israeli embassy, expel the Israeli ambassador, and cut diplomatic ties with Tel Aviv. South Africans do know a thing or two about apartheid. 

They, like other critics of Israel, better be extra wary moving forward. Anything can be expected: an outbreak of foreign intel-conducted “terra terra terra” false flags, artificially induced weather calamities, fake “human rights abuse” charges, the collapse of the national currency, the rand, instances of lawfare, assorted Atlanticist apoplexy, sabotage of energy infrastructure. And more.  

Several nations should have by now invoked the Genocide Convention – given that Israeli politicians and officials have been bragging, on the record, about razing Gaza and besieging, starving, killing, and mass-transferring its Palestinian population. No geopolitical actor has dared thus far. 

South Africa, for its part, had the courage to go where few Muslim and Arab states have ventured. As matters stand, when it comes to much of the Arab world – particularly the US client states – they are still in Rhetorical Swamp territory. 

The Qatar-brokered “truce” came at precisely the right time for Washington. It stole the spotlight from the delegation of  Islamic/Arab foreign ministers touring selected capitals to promote their plan for a complete Gaza ceasefire in Gaza – plus negotiations for an independent Palestinian state. 

This Gaza Contact Group, uniting Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Palestine, made their first stop in Beijing, meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, and then on to Moscow, meeting with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. That was definitely an instance of BRICS 11 already in action – even before they started business on January 1st, 2024, under the Russian presidency.  

The meeting with Lavrov in Moscow was held simultaneously with an extraordinary online BRICS session on Palestine, called by the current South African presidency. Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi, whose country leads the region’s Axis of Resistance and refuses any relations with Israel, supported the South African initiatives and called for BRICS member states to use every political and economic tool available to pressure Tel Aviv. 

It was also important to hear from Chinese President Xi Jinping himself that “there can be no security in the Middle East without a just solution to the question of Palestine.” 

Xi stressed once again the need for “a two-state solution,” the “restoration of the legitimate national rights of Palestine,” and “the establishment of an independent state of Palestine.” This should all start via an international conference.

None of this is enough at this stage – not this temporary truce, not the promise of a future negotiation. The US administration, itself struggling with an unexpected global backlash, at best, arm-wrestled Tel Aviv to enact a short “pause” in the genocide. This means the carnage continues after a few days. 

Had this truce been an actual “ceasefire,” in which all hostilities came to a halt and Israel’s war machine disengaged from the Gaza Strip entirely, the next-day options would still be pretty dismal. Realpolitik practitioner John Mearsheimer already cut to the chase: a negotiated solution for Israel-Palestine is impossible. 

It takes a cursory glance at the current map to graphically demonstrate how the two-state solution – advocated by everyone from China-Russia to much of the Arab world – is dead. A collection of isolated Bantustans can never coalesce as a state.  

Let’s grab all their gas

There has been thundering noise all across the spectrum that with the advent of the petroyuan getting closer and closer, the Americans badly need Eastern Mediterranean energy bought and sold in US dollars – including the vast gas reserves off the Gaza coastline. 

Enter the US administration’s energy security advisor, deployed to Israel to “discuss potential economic revitalization plans for Gaza centered around undeveloped offshore natural gas fields:” what a lovely euphemism. 

But while Gaza’s gas is indeed a crucial vector, Gaza, the territory, is a nuisance. What really matters for Tel Aviv is to confiscate all Palestinian gas reserves and allot them to future preferential clients: the EU. 

Enter the India-Middle East Corridor(IMEC) – actually the EU-Israel-Saudi Arabia-Emirates-India Corridor – conceived by Washington as the perfect vehicle for Israel to become an energy crossroads power. It fancifully imagines a US-Israel energy partnership trading in US dollars – simultaneously replacing Russian energy to the EU and halting a possible export increase of Iran’s energy to Europe.  

We return to the 21st century’s main chessboard here: the Hegemon vs. BRICS.

Beijing has had steady relations with Tel Aviv so far, with lavish investment in Israeli high-tech industries and infrastructure. But Israel’s pounding of Gaza may change that picture: no real Sovereign can hedge when it comes to real genocide.  

In parallel, whatever the Hegemon may come up with in its various hybrid and hot war scenarios against the BRICS, China, and its multi-trillion dollar Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), that will not alter Beijing’s rational and strategically formulated trajectory.   

This analysis by Eric Li is all one needs to know about what lies ahead. Beijing has mapped out all relevant tech roads to follow in successive five-year plans, all the way to 2035. Under this framework, BRI should be considered a sort of geoeconomics UN without the G7. If you’re outside of BRI – and that concerns, to a large extent, old comprador systems and elites – you’re self-isolating from the Global South/Global Majority. 

So what remains of this “pause” in Gaza? By next week, the western-backed cowards will restart their genocide against women and children, and they will not stop for a good long while. The Palestinian resistance and the 800,000 Palestinian civilians still living in northern Gaza – now surrounded on all sides by Israeli troops and armored vehicles – are proving that they are willing and able to bear the burden of fighting the Israeli oppressor, not only for Palestine but for everyone, everywhere, with a conscience. 

Despite such a terrible price to be paid in blood, there will eventually be a reward: the slow but sure evisceration of the imperial construct in West Asia. 

No mainstream media narrative, no PR move to soften the genocide, no containment of “public opinion turning on Israel” can ever cover the serial war crimes perpetrated by Israel and its allies in Gaza. Perhaps this is just what the Doctor – metaphysical and otherwise – ordered for mankind: an imperative global tragedy, to be witnessed by all, that will also transform us all. 

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

Syria’s Al-Assad lands in China on historic visit, marks new era

 September 21, 2023

Source: Al Mayadeen + Agencies

Syria President Bashar Al-Assad alongside his wife Asma Al-Assad during their trip to Hangzhou, China on September 21, 2023 (Social media)

By Al Mayadeen English

President al-Assad’s trip will include a Syria-Chinese summit where a number of agreements are expected to be signed between the two countries.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad touched down in Hangzhou’s China on Thursday, embarking on his first official visit to the Asian nation in nearly two decades as Damascus continues to break its Western-imposed isolation.

The visit holds immense diplomatic significance, as it paves the way for a Syrian-Chinese summit of paramount importance, and comes in response to an official invitation from his Chinese counterpart, President Xi Jinping, exemplifying the warming relations between the two nations.

Al-Assad’s arrival in China underscores the evolving dynamics of international relations and Syria’s renewed commitment to strengthen ties with key global partners.

The Syrian leader is accompanied by a high-level delegation comprising political and economic figures, emphasizing the multifaceted nature of the trip. Multiple industrial agreements between the two countries are expected to happen during the trip.

Related News

• UK intel spun anti-Syria gov. narrative of alleged chemical attack
• Al-Assad to visit China at Xi’s invitation: Syrian Presidency

Read more: China calls for lifting of US sanctions on Syria instead of suspension

Several meetings will be held with senior Chinese officials in the cities of Hangzhou, and later Beijing. Al-Assad is also scheduled to attend the opening ceremony of the Hangzhou 2023 Asian Games on Saturday.

President Assad, first lady Asmaa, and a senior delegation have arrived in #China for meetings in Beijing and Changzhou. Presidents Assad and Xi will also hold a #Syrian–#Chinese summit during the visit.#Syria pic.twitter.com/q3q2EtVS6o

— Al Mayadeen English (@MayadeenEnglish) September 21, 2023

In April, the Syrian leader received Chinese special envoy Chai Jun in Damascus, during which he praised China’s pivotal role in global issues, such as providing a balancing political and economic presence. He also commended the development of Russian-Chinese relations and considered that these growing ties, alongside the BRICS alliance, allow for the creation of a strong multipolar international order.

Syrian and Chinese officials had previously discussed several infrastructure projects, especially in energy, mining, transportation, and water plants.

Read more: US must withdraw troops, stop plundering of oil in Syria: China

Related Videos

Scenes of the official reception of President al-Assad and First Lady Asma al-Assad at Khanjo International Airport

Related Stories

• Al-Assad in China 
• Al-Assad to visit China at Xi’s invitation: Syrian Presidency
• Syrian opposition coalition pronounced dead by former leader
• Syria slams UN inaction over US looting billions worth of Syrian oil

Will a tripartite US-Saudi-Israeli ‘Deal’ make Any difference?

16 Sep 2023

Source: Al Mayadeen English

Old habits, linger … linger well past the time when old rituals (an Israeli PM visit to the Oval Office) had agency and the world hung on the outcome. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Arwa Makki)

Director of Conflicts Forum; Former Senior British Diplomat; Author.

Alastair Crooke

An image of the White House lecturing, and facing off versus Netanyahu’s policies, might look ‘tough’ … but will any of this elaborate ‘dance’ — whether Biden and Netanyahu meet or not — make a jot of difference?

The Financial Times adopts a dour tone: The final statement of the G20 on Ukraine was “a blow to Western countries that have tried to convince developing countries to condemn Moscow – and support Ukraine over the past year,” adding gloomily that this latest declaration was drained of even the previous inclusion of ‘Russian aggression against Ukraine.’ “Now,” the FT laments, “there is no such wording.”

This may seem a symbolic omission, but it links directly to Ukraine’s failure to make any progress with its offensive against Russian defensive lines. Here is where symbolism speaks louder than words: The omission says that the collective Western élites are out-of-sync with the rest of the world. Washington will have to ‘cope’ with the consequences of their ‘project failure’ — and manage it from an unaccustomed position of weakness, rather than through collective pressure on Moscow.

It should have been obvious, coming so soon after the BRICS expansion and the Africa Summit in Saint Petersburg, that collective global sentiment had turned sour on the prevalent ‘Rules-Based Order’, and has entered a quite radical mode.

Yet, much of the ruling strata still do not ‘get it’ – that change is coming.

The habits of the ‘old order,’ however, are slow to evolve. So, we return to an old-style dance, and to a music that evokes another era: Will the Israeli PM meet directly with Biden, either on the margins of the September UN General Assembly, or in the Oval Office of the White House? These pirouettes and swirls have been continuing for nine months now, infused with breathless anticipation.

There are, of course, real issues at the centre of this performance: The US would like Netanyahu to join the tech boycott of China, and generally to help diminish China. Secondly, Team Biden would like the Israeli government to recant its project of Judicial Reform; and thirdly, to ‘throw the Palestinians a bone or two’ as part of persuading Saudi Arabia to normalise with Israel in a tripartite – US-Saudi-Israeli — deal. 

The putative ‘deal’ would be shaped around a US-Saudi defence pact — including US security guarantees, a multibillion-dollar arms deal, and a nuclear reactor — in exchange for Saudi recognition of “Israel,” a cooling-off of relations with China, and tangible Israeli measures to ameliorate the lives of the Palestinians.

With this curt listing of the Biden wish-list, what stands out immediately is that none the US big ‘asks’ are in Netanyahu’s interest:

Severing with China on tech?  No way; “Israel” has billed itself as the ‘Tech Start-Up Nation’.

On September 12, “Israel’s” Supreme Court will consider petitions seeking the disqualification of July’s Knesset law removing ‘unreasonableness’ as the criteria by which the Court can elect to strike down laws passed (validly) in Parliament.

However, Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana has already said that the Supreme Court should recognize the limits of its power; that it cannot strike down a Basic Law; and that the Knesset shall not be trampled upon. Plainly put, the Minster is saying that the government will not comply, were the Court to strike down July’s Knesset vote. And Netanyahu has endorsed Ohana’s statement. So, ‘no’ — endangering his coalition is not in Netanyahu’s interest.

The reality is that Netanyahu is ‘hostage’ to his coalition — and not vice versa. And the reality is also that in recent months, entire Palestinian communities between Ramallah and Jericho have been chased out (i.e. cleansed) by settler violence, paving the way for a total Israeli takeover of thousands of acres of land.

Gideon Levy has warned that ‘an unbelievable population transfer’ is underway in the West Bank.

Yes, a photo-op with Biden is thought likely to lend credibility to Netanyahu’s electoral prospects at home. For Biden, an image of the White House lecturing, and facing-off versus Netanyahu’s policies, might look ‘tough’ … but will any of this elaborate ‘dance’ — whether Biden and Netanyahu meet or not — make a jot of difference?

When set against the tide of geo-politics sweeping the globe towards a new political, trading and economic disposition, it becomes hard to see why such attention is given to this issue.

Even though both Presidents Xi and Putin were absent from the G20, their ‘presence’ dominated the meeting. Will then “Israel’s” cutting back of relations with China halt the tide moving in China’s direction? Will US ‘security guarantees’ for Saudi Arabia, even if approved by Congress, make a significant difference, given the Kingdom’s strategic transposition to join the BRICS and the SCO? Would giving $1 billion to Mahmoud Abbas change the boiling Palestinian cauldron?

The point here is that the rancorous face-off in “Israel” by two irreconcilable blocs of Israeli society is ‘what it is.’ A word here or there from Washington will not change the powerful and volatile dynamics already in motion.

Old habits, however, linger … linger well past the time when old rituals (an Israeli PM visit to the Oval Office) had agency and the world hung on the outcome. As the G18 just demonstrated, however, it is how the Ukraine drama unfolds that will make its impress upon global geo-politics. The Middle East ‘steamer’ is coming to high pressure across Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, and Iraq. Is the West again out-of-synch with uncomfortable realities?

The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.

Most Read

• Netanyahu Coalition Goes Full Provocation — As the US Escalates in Syria
• Declassified: How US deceived Russia over NATO enlargement
• Developing: A bad month for Resistance media just got much worse
• Lebanon Will Become Syrian Refugees’ Transit Stage into Europe: Report
• The deep links between the Iranian opposition and the Israeli lobby

Is the Almighty US Dollar About to Take a Fall?

 SEPTEMBER 5, 2023

Source

BRICS alliance is seeking a multipolar global financial system

Philip Giraldi

August 23^rd was a big news day all over the world. The western media’s focus on the events of that day was solidly on the unproven claims that Russian President Vladimir Putin was behind the sabotage or shooting down of an executive jet that killed his former associate Yevgeny Prigozhin. In reality, however, there was a far more important story that was coming out of South Africa. In fact, Putin had a far more important job to do on that day due to his desire to make progress in stripping the United States of its dollar hegemony. Putin was engaged by videolink in the discussions taking place in Johannesburg regarding expanding the so-called BRICS monetary union, in part to include measures that would diminish the dominance of the dollar in the world economy. That objective would have been damaged severely if Putin had been implicated in the spectacular public assassination of a rival on the same day as the BRICS meeting that would have been not only an embarrassment but also very damaging vis-a-vis his credibility as a statesman. If Putin had really wanted to kill Prigozhin, there were less politically damaging ways to do so and as of this writing the cause of the airplane crash remains unknow. By one theory, the death of Prigozhin was carried out by an airplane bomb planted by US or British intelligence working with Ukrainian agents inside Russia to discredit the Russian leader, knowing that even if he were innocent he would be blamed for the killing, which is precisely how the story has been developing in the US and Europe.

The name BRICS comes from an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill reportedly coined the term BRIC (without South Africa) in 2001 and the group was set up a few years later using the acronym. Recently, the drive to expand BRICS has gained momentum as a result of the completely avoidable Ukraine war. The venerable status quo for international finance was developed in the wake of the Second World War at Bretton-Woods, where the instruments of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) were created, to include endorsing the dollar as the de facto world reserve currency for many transactions. The entire structure is, by design, managed by a transatlantic capitalist cabal based in Washington.

There is currently only limited competition to the IMF and World Bank in the global marketplace for credit, loans, issuance of money and capital, the power to grow and develop economies, project finance, and to stay competitive with the influx of much needed capital to house, clothe, educate, or feed the people of the world. And the United States knows that and uses its control over the financial system to keep countries in line politically.

The BRICS banking model, based as it is on a multipolar world with multiple currencies and lending arrangements, has offered an alternative to this out-of-control monster of a global banking monopoly maintained by the IMF. This is why 132 nations, which had been calling on the UN for a new financial model, immediately saw hope in the BRICS alternative banking and financing initiatives which began to take shape in 2015. Within the first year, 57 countries formally joined the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), constituting the first total break from the Western Bretton Woods institutions, with initial capitalization of the BRICS New Development Bank stated to be $100 billion.

So BRICS has been around in its current form for about eight years, but interest in it exploded with events surrounding the start of the Ukraine War. A little over a year and a half ago, the US responded to the Russian intervention in Ukraine by using its control over the international banking system to slap sanctions on Moscow’s financial assets around the world, including freezing billions of dollars in banks in New York. By one estimate, $1 trillion in Russian assets were frozen and Russian banks were also denied access to the SWIFT global messaging service that connects financial institutions and facilitates rapid and secure payments. Washington subsequently announced that the frozen money would not be returned and would be instead used for Ukraine’s reconstruction. That set off warning lights all around the world, though there had already been similar behavior on the part of the US in relation to Iranian and Venezuelan assets. Many were asking the question “If they can do it to a great power like Russia they can also do it to me to punish me? What should I do?” Of course the simple answer is to get out of dollars as a reserve currency, though that was something difficult to do as most energy sales and purchases continue to be, by arrangement, denominated in dollars. Hence the transition to BRICS away from dollars, permitting financial transactions in a range of currencies.

The annual meeting of BRICS Partner Countries Business Forum, as they refer to themselves, took place in Johannesburg South Africa over August 21st-24th. Meeting host South African President Cyril Ramaphosa announced that Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates will formally join the BRICS group of nations as their candidacies had been approved by leaders of the current member states. The six newcomers will become full-fledged BRICS club members starting in January 2024. The club, which is the inner circle of the banking system, currently consists of the founders Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa though there are many other non-members who enjoy limited banking privileges, including Britain, France, Germany, Italy, New Zealand and Australia. The desirability of BRICS expansion topped the agenda of the summit in Johannesburg all week. Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose nation will take up the rotating BRICS presidency next year, spoke to the attendees via videolink and thanked the host of the summit for his hospitality and contribution to the successful outcome.

Chinese President Xi Jinping actually attended the summit meeting, as did the heads of state of Brazil, China and India to discuss a broad range of geopolitical, economic and trade issues. President Xi declared to the group that in the context of BRICS’s growth “China stands firmly on the right side of history, and believes that a just cause should be pursued for the common good.” He also denounced the United States indirectly, saying that “some country, obsessed with maintaining its hegemony, has gone out of its way to cripple the EMDCs (emerging markets and developing countries).” He argued that attempts to punish and contain developing countries would be “futile,” and that “the collective rise of EMDCs represented by BRICS is fundamentally changing the global landscape…[as] EMDCs have contributed up to 80% of global growth in the past 20 years.” He added that “I am glad to note that over 20 countries are knocking on the door of BRICS. China hopes to see more joining the BRICS cooperation mechanism.”

BRICS multipolar banking model embracing multiple currencies and the resources made available through its New Development Bank are clearly concepts whose time has arrived and its membership will likely surge over the next several years as the US continues to seek to rule the world through sanctions that destroy economies and impoverish whole nations, such as it currently does in Syria and Venezuela. In its closing document from the summit, the attendees indirectly attacked US use of sanctions, stating that there should be “concern about the use of unilateral coercive measures.” There is particular resentment throughout much of the developing world of US attempts to use primary and secondary sanctions to coerce countries that are disinclined to do so into supporting the NATO war effort in Ukraine.

BRICS enjoys certain advantages as it grows including the leadership of China, which might already be the world’s largest economy, as well as the commitment of developed fast growing large economies Russia, Brazil, India, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iran. The expanded BRICS includes 36% of the entire world’s GDP (larger than the G7) and 47% of the world’s population. BRICS member countries will soon control nearly half the world’s energy resources and if Venezuela, Algeria and Kazakhstan are included as new members as early as in 2024, it may control as much as 90% of all oil and gas traded globally. It is reported that as many as forty new countries have applied to join alliance. Even the Vatican has sought membership as an observer.

The rise of BRICS means that the US dollar will, at a minimum, lose its relative monopoly on oil and gas trades and sales. The dominance of dollar economics will thereby inevitably fade and the dollar will surely decline as the world’s top reserve currency, though it will undoubtedly continue to survive in that capacity in parts of the world where the US continues to have considerable political and economic leverage, like Latin America. What will the outcome for the United State economy and for American citizens be? It is hard to calculate, and some are predictably dismissive of possible negative outcomes, but the dollar will inevitably shrink in value, hurting consumers, and Americans will undoubtedly find many potential markets closed to US development and investment. That is in part why there is such a panic about China on Capitol Hill. China does not pose a military threat but it out competes the United States globally and, operating through BRICS and other mechanisms it is already the lead nation in a highly competitive and attractive economic alliance that decisively rejects the American and Western European model. Of course, the US could respond by lightening up on the coercive economic policies that it has for so long employed, but there is little to suggest that either Joe Biden or Donald Trump would choose to go down that path. It is the American consumer and tax payer who will suffer and have to pay the price for whatever missteps they make. And the ultimate possible horror scenario is “Will the US be ‘forced’ to go nuclear against BRICS to save the dollar?” Don’t put anything past the power-mad neocons and globalists dominating Washington. Stay tuned!

WHEN THE TORTURER IS THE SAVIOR: CAN BRICS HELP US ESCAPE THE WEST’S HEGEMONY AND CONTRADICTIONS?

SEPTEMBER 5TH, 2023

Source

Ramzy Baroud & Romana Rubeo

At the zenith of the mass protests in Egypt on January 25, 2011, Twitter, Facebook and other Western-based social media platforms appeared to be the most essential tools for the Egyptian Revolution.

Though some observers later contested the use of the terms ‘Twitter Revolution’ or ‘Social Media Revolution,’ one cannot deny the centrality of these platforms in the discussion around the events that attempted to redefine the power structures of Egypt.

It was hardly a surprise that, on January 26, the Egyptian regime decided to block access to social media in a desperate attempt to prevent the spread of the protests.

Twitter, Google and other platforms quickly responded by “establish(ing) a system that allows users to continue posting 140-character tweets despite the Internet shutdown in Egypt”, France24 reported.

It seemed that US-based technology companies were keen on the removal of Hosni Mubarak and his regime. Indeed, their action was quite elaborate and well-coordinated:

“The solution proposed by the two Internet giants is called ‘speak-to-tweet’ and allows people to publish updates on the famous microblogging site by leaving a message on a voice mailbox. The service is free of charge, with Google offering users three international telephone numbers,” France24 wrote, providing the actual numbers in the US, Italy and Bahrain.

AN OBVIOUS DICHOTOMY

The irony is inescapable. How could these supposedly ‘revolutionary social media platforms’ be part of the same Western structure that is dedicated to attacking and censoring Washington’s enemies while elevating the US’ often-corrupt allies?

While some choose to overlook the obvious dichotomy, one cannot be so gullible.

This subject becomes yet more intriguing when we consider the war on Palestinian and pro-Palestine views on these very social media platforms.

While Palestinian and pro-Palestinian activists are frequently banned, blocked and censored for rejecting Israel’s military occupation and apartheid in Palestine, Israeli propaganda is allowed to flourish on social media with little hindrance.

This is not just a social media phenomenon.

The fact is, social media companies’ attitude towards the upheaval in the Arab world was consistent with the general zeitgeist of the US; in fact, Western societies – governments, mainstream media, and even public opinion polls.

While some – in fact, many – people may have genuinely wanted to support a popular push for democracy in the Middle East, governments and their media allies knew that appearing as if on the ‘right side of history’ would grant them the geopolitical spaces to influence the agendas and, ultimately, outcomes of these revolts. Libya paid the heaviest price of that self-serving Western crusade.

But when the revolts largely failed to create the major paradigm shift that Arab masses had coveted, Western governments were the first to reincorporate the post-revolts Arab regimes back into the embrace of the so-called international community.

THE WEST’S REAL GOALS

For Washington and its Western allies, the entire exercise had little to do with democracy, human rights and representation and everything to do with new opportunities, geopolitics and regional relevance.

By supporting the revolts, the West wanted to ensure the resulting political discourse in the Middle East was simply not anti-Western. Sadly, they partly succeeded, at least in creating a separation between corrupt regimes and the colonial powers that had sustained their corruption.

Though some labored to articulate a discourse that connected those who carried out the oppression – for example, Mubarak – and those who made the oppression possible in the first place – his Western allies – these attempts received little traction when compared to the mainstream Western-driven discourse.

Indeed, the anti-colonial discourse was not allowed to taint what the West wanted to paint as a purely ‘pro-democracy’ rhetoric, one that has no political or historical context that goes beyond the simplified version of the ‘Arab Spring’.

This is precisely why the New York Times, Twitter and the White House – and numerous other Western parties – ultimately parroted the same political line and accentuated the same language – while suppressing all other possible interpretations.

Since then, the political discourse in the Middle East has been rife with contradictions. For example, some of those who rejected the US war and genocide in Iraq in 2003 later joined the chorus of interventionists in Syria in the post-2011 uprising turned civil war.

Not a day passes without the US and other Western governments being called on by an Arab human rights group or civil rights organization to put pressure on this or that regime, to release political prisoners, to withhold funds and so on.

Bizarrely, Washington had become the guarantor of war and peace, chaos and stability in the Middle East. The unrepentant violator of our human rights has become, at least for some of us, our human rights champion.

But this is more than a simple case of unfortunate contradictions. It was done by design.

Sadly, Arab revolts were largely suppressed; the old regimes reinvented themselves and are back in business, again, with the direct support of, and funding by, Western governments.

OUR OWN CONTRADICTIONS

But is a different path possible, or are we simply trapped forever in this conundrum?

We reflected on all of this during the BRICS conference in Johannesburg, South Africa, on August 22-24.

Without downplaying the internal contradictions among the main countries that established the BRICS group – Brazil, Russia, India, China and, later, South Africa – or the newcomers –  Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Argentina, the UAE and Ethiopia – one cannot help but ponder a world without US-Western domination.

For the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the dismantling of the Warsaw Pact, there seems to be a real global political momentum of actual worth that does not emanate from the West and its regional lackeys and representatives.

Without a viable alternative for change, for decades, we have been trapped in these seemingly inescapable contradictions: criticizing Western colonialism, neocolonialism and imperialism while appealing to the moral values of the West; we continue to call for the respect of international law, though we are fully aware of how ‘international laws’ were designed, are interpreted and implemented.

In short, we want the West to leave us alone while beseeching the West to come to our rescue; we suffer the consequences of Western wars and flee to the West as desperate refugees.

We have experienced this dichotomy numerous times in the past – in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and every part of the Middle East – in fact, the Global South.

In truth, the contradiction is hardly Western; it is entirely ours. The ‘West’ rarely attempted to present itself as anything but a political mass that is motivated by sheer economic, geopolitical and strategic interests.

The West’s use of human rights, democracy and so on is but a continuation of an old colonial legacy that extends hundreds of years. The target audience for such double-speak has never truly been the colonized but the colonial entities themselves.

To claim that the West has changed, is changing or is capable of change has no historical basis and no evidence.

THE CASE OF PALESTINE

The case of Palestine remains the most powerful example of Western hypocrisy and our own gullibility. Without the West, Israel would have never been established; and without Western support and protection, Israel would have never continued to exist as a military power and an apartheid regime.

Over a hundred years after the British handed over Palestine to the Zionists, 75 years of Israeli conquest and violence and over fifty years of Israeli military occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza, the West remains Israel’s greatest supporter and benefactor.

These very recent headlines should illustrate our point:

“A Dutch court grants immunity to Israeli leaders from war crimes charges”

“UK slammed for opposing ICJ (International Court of Justice) ruling on Israel Occupation of Palestine”

“Biden dispatches top adviser for talks with Saudi crown prince on normalizing relations with Israel”

This is all taking place when Israel has become a full-blown apartheid regime and when Israeli war crimes in the West Bank are at their worst, at least since 2005.

And there are no signs of things improving for the Palestinians in any way, as Israel is now ruled by government coalitions whose ministers outright deny the very existence of Palestinians and are repeatedly calling for genocide and religious war.

Yes, the West is still financing, protecting, and defending that very racist apartheid entity against the mere possibility of legal accountability.

Mainstream Western media and most social media platforms continue to censor Palestinian voices as if the Palestinian quest for justice is unworthy and, in fact, offensive to Western sensibilities.

THE WAY FORWARD

In the final analysis, neither BRICS alone nor any other economic or political body will save us from our own contradictions.

The new political formations in the Global South, however, should serve as a starting point for confronting our dichotomy, at least through the realization that a whole world, rife with potential, possible allies and new ideas, extends beyond the confines of Washington and Brussels.

In the Global South, we must explore these new margins and possibilities and move forward toward real, substantive and sustainable change. Imploring the West to help us cannot be our strategy because history has taught us, time and again, that our torturers cannot also be our saviors.

No respite for France as a ‘New Africa’ rises

SEP 1, 2023

Source

(Photo Credit: The Cradle)

Like dominos, African states are one by one falling outside the shackles of neocolonialism. Chad, Guinea, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, and now Gabon are saying ‘non’ to France’s longtime domination of African financial, political, economic, and security affairs.

Pepe Escobar

By adding two new African member-states to its roster, last week’s summit in Johannesburg heralding the expanded BRICS 11 showed once again that Eurasian integration is inextricably linked to the integration of Afro-Eurasia.

Belarus is now proposing to hold a joint summit between BRICS 11, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).  President Aleksandr Lukashenko’s vision for the convergence of these multilateral organizations may, in due time, lead to the Mother of All Multipolarity Summits.

But Afro-Eurasia is a much more complicated proposition. Africa still lags far behind its Eurasian cousins on the road toward breaking the shackles of neocolonialism.   

The continent today faces horrendous odds in its fight against the deeply entrenched financial and political institutions of colonization, especially when it comes to smashing French monetary hegemony in the form of the Franc CFA – or the Communauté Financière Africaine (African Financial Community). 

Still, one domino is falling after another – Chad, Guinea, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and now Gabon. This process has already turned Burkina Faso’s President Captain Ibrahim Traoré, into a new hero of the multipolar world – as a dazed and confused collective west can’t even begin to comprehend the blowback represented by its 8 coups in West and Central Africa in less than 3 years. 

Bye bye Bongo 

Military officers decided to take power in Gabon after hyper pro-France President Ali Bongo won a dodgy election that “lacked credibility.” Institutions were dissolved. Borders with Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, and the Republic of Congo were closed. All security deals with France were annulled. No one knows what will happen with the French military base.

All that was as popular as it comes: soldiers took to the streets of the capital Libreville in joyful singing, cheered on by onlookers.  

Bongo and his father, who preceded him, have ruled Gabon since 1967. He was educated at a French private school and graduated from the Sorbonne. Gabon is a small nation of 2.4 million with a small army of 5,000 personnel that could fit into Donald Trump’s penthouse. Over 30 percent of the population lives on less than $1 a day, and in over 60 percent of regions have zero access to healthcare and drinking water. 

The military qualified Bongo’s 14-year rule as leading to a “deterioration in social cohesion” that was plunging the country “into chaos.”

On cue, French mining company Eramet suspended its operations after the coup. That’s a near monopoly. Gabon is all about lavish mineral wealth – in gold, diamonds, manganese, uranium, niobium, iron ore, not to mention oil, natural gas, and hydropower. In OPEC-member Gabon, virtually the whole economy revolves around mining.   

The case of Niger is even more complex. France exploits uranium and high-purity petrol as well as other types of mineral wealth. And the Americans are on site, operating three bases in Niger with up to 4,000 military personnel. The key strategic node in their ‘Empire of Bases’ is the drone facility in Agadez, known as Niger Air Base 201, the second-largest in Africa after Djibouti.  

French and American interests clash, though, when it comes to the saga over the Trans-Sahara gas pipeline. After Washington broke the umbilical steel cord between Russia and Europe by bombing the Nord Streams, the EU, and especially Germany, badly needed an alternative. 

Algerian gas supply can barely cover southern Europe. American gas is horribly expensive. The ideal solution for Europeans would be Nigerian gas crossing the Sahara and then the deep Mediterranean. 

Nigeria, with 5,7 trillion cubic meters, has even more gas than Algeria and possibly Venezuela. By comparison, Norway has 2 trillion cubic meters. But Nigeria’s problem is how to pump its gas to distant customers – so Niger becomes an essential transit country.  

When it comes to Niger’s role, energy is actually a much bigger game than the oft-touted uranium – which in fact is not that strategic either for France or the EU because Niger is only the 5^th largest world supplier, way behind Kazakhstan and Canada. 
Still, the ultimate French nightmare is losing the juicy uranium deals plus a Mali remix: Russia, post-Prighozin, arriving in Niger in full force with a simultaneous expulsion of the French military. 

Adding Gabon only makes things dicier. Rising Russian influence could lead to boosting supply lines to rebels in Cameroon and Nigeria, and privileged access to the Central African Republic, where Russian presence is already strong.  

It’s no wonder that Francophile Paul Biya, in power for 41 years in Cameroon, has opted for a purge of his Armed Forces after the coup in Gabon. Cameroon may be the next domino to fall. 

ECOWAS meets AFRICOM 
The Americans, as it stands, are playing Sphynx. There’s no evidence so far that Niger’s military wants the Agadez base shut down. The Pentagon has invested a fortune in their bases to spy on a great deal of the Sahel and, most of all, Libya. 
About the only thing Paris and Washington agree on is that, under the cover of ECOWAS (the Economic Community of West African States), the hardest possible sanctions should be slapped on one of the world’s poorest nations (where only 21% of the population has access to electricity) – and they should be much worse than those imposed on the Ivory Coast in 2010.  

Then there’s the threat of war. Imagine the absurdity of ECOWAS invading a country that is already fighting two wars on terror on two separate fronts: Against Boko Haram in the southeast and against ISIS in the Tri-Border region.

ECOWAS, one of 8 African political and economic unions, is a proverbial mess. It packs 15 member nations – Francophone, Anglophone and one Lusophone – in Central and West Africa, and it is rife with internal division.

The French and the Americans first wanted ECOWAS to invade Niger as their “peacekeeping” puppet. But that didn’t work because of popular pressure against it. So, they switched to some form of diplomacy. Still, troops remain on stand-by, and a mysterious “D-Day” has been set for the invasion. 

The role of the African Union (AU) is even murkier. Initially, they stood against the coup and suspended Niger’s membership. Then they turned around and condemned the possible western-backed invasion. Neighbors have closed their borders with Niger.  

ECOWAS will implode without US, France, and NATO backing. Already it’s essentially a toothless chihuahua – especially after Russia and China have demonstrated via the BRICS summit their soft power across Africa. 

Western policy in the Sahel maelstrom seems to consist of salvaging anything they can from a possible unmitigated debacle – even as the stoic people in Niger are impervious to whatever narrative the west is trying to concoct. 

It’s important to keep in mind that Niger’s main party, the “National Movement for the Defense of the Homeland” represented by General Abdourahamane Tchiani, has been supported by the Pentagon – complete with military training – from the beginning.  

The Pentagon is deeply implanted in Africa and connected to 53 nations. The main US concept since the early 2000s was always to militarize Africa and turn it into War on Terror fodder. As the Dick Cheney regime spun it in 2002: “Africa is a strategic priority in fighting terrorism.” 

That’s the basis for the US military command AFRICOM and countless “cooperative partnerships” set up in bilateral agreements. For all practical purposes, AFRICOM has been occupying large swathes of Africa since 2007.

How sweet is my colonial franc

It is absolutely impossible for anyone across the Global South, Global Majority, or “Global Globe” (copyright Lukashenko) to understand Africa’s current turmoil without understanding the nuts and bolts of French neocolonialism. 

The key, of course, is the CFA franc, the “colonial franc” introduced in 1945 in French Africa, which still survives even after the CFA – with a nifty terminological twist – began to stand for “African Financial Community”. 

The whole world remembers that after the 2008 global financial crisis, Libya’s Leader Muammar Gaddafi called for the establishment of a pan-African currency pegged to gold. 

At the time, Libya had about 150 tons of gold, kept at home, and not in London, Paris, or New York banks. With a little more gold, that pan-African currency would have its own independent financial center in Tripoli – and everything based on a sovereign gold reserve. 

For scores of African nations, that was the definitive Plan B to bypass the western financial system. 

The whole world also remembers what happened in 2011. The first airstrike on Libya came from a French Mirage fighter jet.  France’s bombing campaign started even before the end of emergency talks in Paris between western leaders. 

In March 2011, France became the first country in the world to recognize the rebel National Transitional Council as the legitimate government of Libya. In 2015, the notoriously hacked emails of former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton revealed what France was up to in Libya: “The desire to achieve a greater share in Libyan oil production,” to increase French influence in North Africa, and to block Gaddafi’s plans to create a pan-African currency that would replace the CFA franc printed in France. 

It is no wonder the collective west is terrified of Russia in Africa – and not just because of the changing of the guard in Chad, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, and now Gabon: Moscow has never sought to rob or enslave Africa. 

Russia treats Africans as sovereign people, does not engage in Forever Wars, and does not drain Africa of resources while paying a pittance for them. Meanwhile, French intel and CIA “foreign policy” translate into corrupting African leaders to the core and snuffing out those that are incorruptible. 

You have the right to no monetary policy 

The CFA racket makes the Mafia look like street punks. It means essentially that the monetary policy of several sovereign African nations is controlled by the French Treasury in Paris.

The Central Bank of each African nation was initially required to keep at least 65 percent of their annual foreign exchange reserves in an “operation account” held at the French Treasury, plus another 20 percent to cover financial “liabilities.” 

Even after some mild “reforms” were enacted since September 2005, these nations were still required to transfer 50 percent of their foreign exchange to Paris, plus 20 percent V.A.T.

And it gets worse. The CFA Central Banks impose a cap on credit to each member country. The French Treasury invests these African foreign reserves in its own name on the Paris bourse and pulls in massive profits on Africa’s dime.

The hard fact is that more than 80 percent of foreign reserves of African nations have been in “operation accounts” controlled by the French Treasury since 1961. In a nutshell, none of these states has sovereignty over their monetary policy. 

But the theft doesn’t stop there: the French Treasury uses African reserves as if they were French capital, as collateral in pledging assets to French payments to the EU and the ECB. 

Across the “FranceAfrique” spectrum, France still, today, controls the currency, foreign reserves, the comprador elites, and trade business. 

The examples are rife: French conglomerate Bolloré’s control of port and marine transport throughout West Africa; Bouygues/Vinci dominate construction and public works, water, and electricity distribution; Total has huge stakes in oil and gas. And then there’s France Telecom and big banking – Societe Generale, Credit Lyonnais, BNP-Paribas, AXA (insurance), and so forth. 

France de facto controls the overwhelming majority of infrastructure in Francophone Africa. It is a virtual monopoly. 

“FranceAfrique” is all about hardcore neocolonialism. Policies are issued by the President of the Republic of France and his “African cell.” They have nothing to do with parliament, or any democratic process, since the times of Charles De Gaulle. 

The “African cell” is a sort of General Command. They use the French military apparatus to install “friendly” comprador leaders and get rid of those that threaten the system. There’s no diplomacy involved. Currently, the cell reports exclusively to Le Petit Roi, Emmanuel Macron.  

Caravans of drugs, diamonds, and gold

Paris completely supervised the assassination of Burkina Faso’s anti-colonial leader Thomas Sankara, in 1987. Sankara had risen to power via a popular coup in 1983, only to be overthrown and assassinated four years later. 

As for the real “war on terror” in the African Sahel, it has nothing to do with the infantile fictions sold in the West. There are no Arab “terrorists” in the Sahel, as I saw when backpacking across West Africa a few months before 9/11. They are locals who converted to Salafism online, intent on setting up an Islamic State to better control smuggling routes across the Sahel. 

Those fabled ancient salt caravans plying the Sahel from Mali to southern Europe and West Asia are now caravans of drugs, diamonds, and gold. This is what funded Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), for instance, then supported by Wahhabi lunatics in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. 

After Libya was destroyed by NATO in early 2011, there was no more “protection,” so the western-backed Salafi-jihadis who fought against Gaddafi offered the Sahel smugglers the same protection as before – plus a lot of weapons.

Assorted Mali tribes continue the merry smuggling of anything they fancy. AQIM still extracts illegal taxation. ISIS in Libya is deep into human and narcotics trafficking. And Boko Haram wallows in the cocaine and heroin market.  

There is a degree of African cooperation to fight these outfits. There was something called the G5 Sahel, focused on security and development. But after Burkina Faso, Niger, Mali, and Chad went the military route, only Mauritania remains. The new West Africa Junta Belt, of course, wants to destroy terror groups, but most of all, they want to fight FranceAfrique, and the fact that their national interests are always decided in Paris. 

France has for decades made sure there’s very little intra-Africa trade. Landlocked nations badly need neighbors for transit. They mostly produce raw materials for export. There are virtually no decent storage facilities, feeble energy supply, and terrible intra-African transportation infrastructure: that’s what Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects are bent on addressing in Africa.  

In March 2018, 44 heads of state came up with the African Continental Free Trade Area (ACFTA) – the largest in the world in terms of population (1.3 billion people) and geography. In January 2022, they established the Pan-African Payment and Settlement System (PAPSS) – focused on payments for companies in Africa in local currencies. 

So inevitably, they will be going for a common currency further on down the road. Guess what’s in their way: the Paris-imposed CFA. 

A few cosmetic measures still guarantee direct control by the French Treasury on any possible new African currency set up, preference for French companies in bidding processes, monopolies, and the stationing of French troops. The coup in Niger represents a sort of “we’re not gonna take it anymore.”

All of the above illustrates what the indispensable economist Michael Hudson has been detailing in all his works: the power of the extractivist model. Hudson has shown how the bottom line is control of the world’s resources; that’s what defines a global power, and in the case of France, a global mid-ranking power.

France has shown how easy it is to control resources via control of monetary policy and setting up monopolies in these resource-rich nations to extract and export, using virtual slave labor with zero environmental or health regulations. 

It’s also essential for exploitative neocolonialism to keep those resource-rich nations from using their own resources to grow their own economies. But now the African dominoes are finally saying, “The game is over.” Is true decolonization finally on the horizon?

US Congresswoman: Rise of BRICS Devastating for US, Dollar to Be Weakened

Sep 1, 2023

By Staff, Agencies

Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene warned that “As BRICS gains momentum, the US economy becomes weaker because the members of the grouping can circumvent American sanctions and trade in their own currencies.”

Speaking to her constituents in Georgia, the Republican congresswoman lashed out at the administration of US President Joe Biden, which she said is turning a blind eye to the rise of BRICS – an economic group which consists of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa and accounts for more than a quarter of global GDP.

The Republican firebrand claimed that while Washington is “doing… nonsense” – including providing all kinds of support to Ukraine which is locked in a conflict with Russia – “there are other countries in the world, powerful countries, organizing together because they are tired of the United States.”

In this sense, the BRICS countries are making serious trade agreements “where they are saying: we’ll buy from you, you’ll buy from us, we don’t care about US sanctions and we’ll sell to one another, buy and sell in our own currency, not the US dollar,” she stated.

 “This is one of the most devastating things that can happen to all of us,” Greene claimed.

As BRICS becomes more powerful, the US dollar gets weaker, she said. “And you know what happens to all of us? We’re going to go broke,” the congresswoman predicted, adding that this dynamic will negatively affect the retirement plans and personal savings of ordinary Americans.

“What is going to happen to our children, when the US dollar means nothing anymore, because Russia, and China, and India with its huge population of billions of people have more buying power in their own currencies than we do? This is a very serious concern,” Greene said.

The congresswoman’s remarks come on the heels of a historic BRICS summit in South Africa, where the group agreed to an unprecedented expansion, admitting six new countries – Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates – which will become full-fledged members in 2024.

Amir Abdollahian to Assad: Iran Stands by Syria to Proceed Fight against Terrorism

August 31, 2023

Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad receives Iranian FM Hossein AMir Abdollahian in Damascus (August 31, 2023).

Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian met with Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad on Thursday, as he voiced the Islamic Republic’s unwavering support to Damascus.

“The Syrian government, nation and army emerged victorious from a global terrorism war against them and now Syria is in its best condition and we are happy that today the region and the world realize Syria’s real power,” Amir Abdollahian said told President Assad, a day after he arrived in the Syrian capital on a two-day visit.

He stated that the enemies of Syria are still pursuing their political goals in dealing with that country through sanctions and economic pressure on the Syrian government and people.

The top Iranian diplomat said, meanwhile, that as the Islamic Republic of Iran stood alongside Syria during the hard time of the campaign against terrorism, affirming that it will continue the same approach in the new era.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran is still standing by Syria’s side in completing the process of fighting terrorism.”

In this context, he emphasized the need for everyone to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria.

Amir Abdollahian noted that he discussed with the Syrian prime minister and foreign minister the process of implementing the agreements reached between the two countries during Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s visit to Syria last May.

He also expressed happiness with the resumption of Syria’s presence and operation in the Arab League and the strengthening of Syrian-Arab relations.

For his part, President Assad congratulated the Iranian nation on the recent accession to the BRICS group.

“This shows that the world is changing and what you and I stood for was right.”

The Syrian president welcomed Iran’s initiative to strengthen relations with the Arab countries of the region as a great strategic action.

He considered the US strategy in the region to be aimed at provoking tensions between the countries of the region, including stirring rows between Shia and Sunni or Iran and Arabs.

In the meeting, the political process of the developments in Syria, the Astana process, the relations between Syria and the Arab League, the developments in Palestine and some other issues in the region were discussed.

Source: Agencies

Related Videos

A press conference for the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates, Faisal Al-Miqdad, and his Iranian counterpart, Hussein Amir Abdullahian

Abdullahian: We strongly condemn the Israeli attacks on Syrian territory

Related Articles

• The Suwayda Protests: A Foreign-Backed Plot to Fragment Syria?
• At Least 25 Dead in Heavy Clashes between US Proxy Militia, Arab Tribes in Eastern Syria
• Syria and its Allies Try to Drive Out US Occupation Forces
• Syria in Turmoil as US, UK, Israel and France Turn Up the Heat
• Syrian and Russian Armies Bomb NATO Forces in Idlib and Hama
• Unravelling the Conspiracy: Western Intelligence Agencies Recycling Syria ‘Revolution’
• The US Deepens the Lebanese Suffering
• BRICS Expansion: Another Impediment to US Policy Goals in the Middle East
• New Israeli Blitz on Syria Puts Aleppo Airport Out of Commission
• Two Years After its Afghan Withdrawal, US Credibility is at Rock Bottom

BRICS and the challenge of solidarity

Aug 30, 2023

Source: Al Mayadeen English

BRICS members, unlike the US and the G7, do not demand political compliance or for other countries to model themselves in their image. As far as they’re concerned, cooperation is paramount. (Illustrated by: Zeinab ElHajj, Al Mayadeen English)

By Karim Sharara

BRICS now holds the potential to be THE significant challenge to the West current world order, particularly with its new expansion. Yet this expansion will not be without difficulty.

“We know that Africa is neither French, nor British, nor American, nor Russian, that it is African. We know the objects of the West. Yesterday they divided us on the level of a tribe, clan and village…They want to create antagonistic blocs, satellites…”

~ Patrice Lumumba in a speech at the opening of the All-African Conference in Leopoldville, DR Congo, August 25,1960.

In that same speech, Lumumba, who would be assassinated less than five months later in a Belgian plot (backed by the US and the UK), would also say, “African unity and solidarity are no longer dreams. They must be expressed in decisions.” 

Lumumba’s body, following his arrest and execution, would be buried in a shallow grave, only to be later exhumed and melted down with acid. The remaining bones would be ground to a fine powder and scattered. All that was left of his remains was a gold tooth, which the Belgians kept to themselves and was only recently given to his children by Belgian authorities last year.

This article clearly doesn’t discuss Lumumba, or Africa for that matter, that much can be ascertained from the title, but it does, however, implicitly tackle the effect of unity and solidarity on challenging a global hegemonic system.

One main question that comes to mind regarding the change in the international scene that we’ve witnessed over the past two years has been that of multipolarity and the new world order, along with the West’s ability to deal with the issue.

Countless articles have been written so far on the subject, but one aspect that hasn’t been discussed as much is that of the interests of BRICS in the organization and the interests held by countries wishing to join it.

Laying the foundation

BRICS did not become an option overnight. It was founded fairly recently in 2009 as BRIC, later including South Africa in 2010, thus becoming BRICS, it allowed for economic cooperation between its members who had witnessed fairly high levels of growth in the late 90s and early 2000s and were poised to collectively dominate the global economy by 2050.

The countries would agree to pool together their resources, amassing $100 billion, in order to found the New Development Bank, which they would grant to each other during times of need. 

Naturally, all of these countries cooperate with global organizations such as the IMF and the World Bank, but to quote former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, “The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank can be said to represent ‘global’ interests, and their constituency may be construed as the world. In reality, however, they are heavily American dominated and their origins are traceable to American initiative, particularly the Bretton Woods Conference of 1944.”

It was only natural that these countries would come together to provide an alternative web for themselves instead of the one in the middle of which the US positioned itself as an indispensable cog.

On their own, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa also have a shared interest in enhancing their geopolitical profile. They all share the want for a stronger political presence in the world and cannot do so under a US-dominated system, but a loose congregation of countries that have a shared goal of fostering prosperity and mutual investments in each other’s economies would not only increase their profile, but also provide them with the economic heft they require in order to advance their positions. 

The icing on the cake was that the deal came without any of the IMF strings they had grown accustomed to (political reforms a la liberal democracy, crippling economic demands) and with little economic and political costs. BRICS members, unlike the US and the G7, do not demand political compliance or for other countries to model themselves in their image. As far as they’re concerned, cooperation is paramount.

The impact of the war in Ukraine

The war in Ukraine, precisely the West’s sanctions on Russia, provided great impetus to the Global South’s consideration of other avenues for economic cooperation. 

Between the New Development Bank, which provides loans through infrastructure projects, the Contingent Reserve Arrangement, which provides protection for members when their currency is facing financial pressures, the BRICS payment system, which is poised to replace the US-dominated SWIFT, and the BRICS common currency to replace the dollar, dozens of countries found great appeal in joining the organization amid the West’s “ride or die” approach against Russia.

This was only natural, as all countries saw clearly that they could be under US pressure at any given moment and could instantly be blocked from any and all SWIFT-dependent financial transactions. Iran’s experience was there for all to see, and here was Russia being embargoed. The difference in this case, in particular, was that the world was not dependent on trade with Iran, but it was dependent on Russia, both in commodities and in energy. 

The reasoning is quite clear-cut here, regardless of where you stand on the war in Ukraine: If the US can exert so much pressure to embargo Russia, then it could do the same to us.

If anything’s been clear over the past decades, it’s that contrary to the US, China does not view politics as a zero-sum game, making its approach with its partners markedly different.

Should BRICS accept them?

The push to provide an alternative for countries from US dominance, particularly countries of the Global South, would remain quite lacking if the Global South is excluded from it.

One of the BRICS’ main goals is to de-dollarize global trade, and it is doing so at the moment by lending in local currencies. An alternative system that would knock the dollar off its throne would need more members for it to succeed, and countries from the Global South would need to be part of the BRICS and its organizations to reap their full benefit while shielding themselves from the impact of any possible sanctions or pressure imposed upon them by the West.

This is a mutually beneficial relationship for both sides, particularly when taking into account the opportunities for investment this would open up, not to mention allowing for them all to remain sheltered from any fluctuations in the US dollar, as evident in the 2008 financial crisis.

As of January 1, 2024, Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE will become official new members of BRICS, and 16 new countries have applied to join. Argentina, which is racked with inflation, is looking for heavy foreign investment to calm local markets. The KSA and UAE are global oil producers whose infrastructure heavily depends on the West and are in need of diversifying their portfolio and investment in non-energy sectors. Iran is looking for export markets and investment in its infrastructure. Ethiopia is still recovering from its Civil War, while the Egyptian economy is still in crisis but offers much opportunity for investors.

Naturally, the process of expansion will not be without its drawbacks.

As the organization grows, so will its decision-making process be faced with additional issues, particularly when interests collide in an increasingly unstable world environment.

One test that BRICS members will come to face over the coming years will be that of solidarity. BRICS, and those willing to join it, will have to express ‘in decision’ their will to remain together, and these limits will be surely tested. For now, the US is attempting to create counter-blocs in Africa, Central Asia, the Asia-Pacific, and Latin America, all in order for them to act as counterweights to the BRICS.

It goes without saying that it will attempt to sow discord among BRICS members, particularly by appealing to their heavyweights, like India.

Not a panacea

Having said this, it’s important to keep in mind that BRICS isn’t an end-all solution for the new world order. It’s not meant or designed to be an alternative to the UN and other post-WW2 global institutions. It’s not meant to be the flag-bearer of multipolarity.

BRICS is one of the many tools that will need to be used in order to pull the rug from under the US, or at the very least render its weapons less effective. 

However, BRICS and the alternative it offers may provoke a change in US-led institutions by challenging them. Brazilian President Lula da Silva said it best in his speech during the BRICS summit a few days ago, “The war in Ukraine highlights the limitations of the Security Council. Many other conflicts and crises do not receive due attention, even though they cause vast suffering for their populations. Haitians, Yemenis, Syrians, Libyans, Sudanese, and Palestinians all deserve to live in peace.”

“The BRICS has established itself as a forum for discussing the main issues affecting world peace and security,” he continued. “We cannot shy away from addressing the main current conflict in Ukraine and its global effects. Brazil has a historic position of defending sovereignty, territorial integrity, and all the purposes of the principles of the United Nations.”

Since the war in Ukraine began, complimented with a sanctions war on Russia, it is noteworthy that the BRICS countries have managed to act as a political entity (though somewhat loose in its connections) and succeeded in unifying their stances vs-à-vis the war, despite the enormous amount of US pressure they faced. The future looks promising indeed.

Related Stories

• BRICS expansion will breed fear of losing hegemony for West: UnHerd
• BRICS expansion could undermine G7 dominance: Financial Times
• Velayati speaks to Al Mayadeen Net about Iran, BRICS, and US reactions

Petrodollar be warned: Three Persian Gulf energy powers just joined BRICS

AUG 28, 2023

The BRICS revealed its geopolitical priorities when it added three Persian Gulf states to its once exclusive roster of members. Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE have been strategically included to put an end to the petrodollar.

MK Bhadrakumar

The leitmotif of the BRICS Summit meeting in Johannesburg on 22-24 August has been, expectedly, the expansion of the group to include six more member states. While this itself is a stand-alone event, in reality, it dovetails nicely into the group’s core agenda of global multipolarity and the creation of a fairer international trade and finance architecture that is crucial to economic growth. 

The Johannesburg II Declaration adopted at the end of the summit modestly mentions toward the very end of the document that the addition of six more members stemmed out of a “consensus on the guiding principles, standards, criteria and procedures of the BRICS expansion process.”

However, the list of six countries – Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE – also gives away some other important clues. For starters, this BRICS consensus is anchored in a profound Russian-Chinese understanding. Also, the BRICS is declaring itself to be a non-western grouping. There is no question that BRICS ascribes the highest importance to Africa and the Persian Gulf region, with Egypt and Ethiopia, the two ancient civilization-states, as the “lynchpin.” 

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov later disclosed that the “consensus” was reached through some “lively discussions” and some serious considerations:

“The weight, prominence and importance of the candidates and their international standing were the primary factors for us. It is our shared view that we must recruit like-minded countries into our ranks that believe in a multipolar world order and the need for more democracy and justice in international relations. We need those who champion a bigger role for the Global South in global governance. Six countries whose accession was announced today fully meet these criteria.”

The BRICS expansion process was thought to be very controversial, but the unity of the group held nicely. The mother of all surprises has been India’s shift to a proactive role, belying all western predictions. This creates a new ambiance for the India-China relationship, as President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Narendra Modi indeed broke the ice. 

With so much focus on West Asia and Africa, Brazil may have seemed like an outlier, but Argentina’s inclusion calmed Brazil’s sense of unease; China sought Ethiopia’s inclusion; Russia wanted Egypt’s inclusion. India, too was gratified that it enjoys historically friendly and close relations with all six newcomers. 

Credit for this may need to go to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, whose diplomatic skill and sheer perseverance put together the algorithm behind the BRICS expansion. 

Lavrov has visited Pretoria no less than four times after Russia’s special military operations [SMO] began in February last year. To be sure, the Kremlin’s hearts and minds machine was steaming ahead: South Africa hosted a joint military exercise with Russia on the first anniversary of the SMO, and President Cyril Ramaphosa visited Moscow twice this year. Simply put, he held President Vladimir Putin’s hands as Russia asserted its “non-isolation.” The BRICS summit’s outcome bears testimony to it. 

Unravelling of the petrodollar  

But what truly stands out in the BRICS expansion is the preponderance of member states from the Persian Gulf region — Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iran. 

So, what has been the game plan in bringing on board three of the world’s most important energy superpowers? Putin has voiced more than once the Russian assessment that for a long time to come, the world economy, including the western economies, cannot do without hydrocarbons as a major source of energy to run efficient, cost-effective means of production. 

Russia and Saudi Arabia alone account for a quarter of the world’s oil production. Russia and Iran hold the world’s first and second-largest gas reserves in the world. 

If the Ukraine war has shown anything, it is that countries rich in commodities cannot be browbeaten. The issue here is about the willingness and space that these resource-rich states enjoyed to exercise their strategic autonomy. The Cold War era didn’t allow for any space. But the co-relation of forces has dramatically changed, especially as the post-Cold War “unipolar moment” has vanished. 

Saudi Arabia and the UAE exemplify this best. Having been close US allies for decades, they are now diversifying their external relations, including with China and Russia, whom Washington regards as sworn enemies. Iran, too, under the burden of extreme US and EU sanctions, today boasts a strategic partnership with both Moscow and Beijing. 

The salience here is that these three oil-producing countries are also open to trading oil in non-dollar currencies. What the US did to Russia last year by seizing its hundreds of billions of dollar reserves sent shock waves all across the so-called petrodollar states of the Persian Gulf and beyond.  

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov expressed satisfaction a few weeks ago that the process of de-dollarization in the global economy “is going relentlessly. The use of national currencies has already become a reality now, a reality growing at a global scale. Not merely countries facing sanction restrictions but also the ones not facing them are resorting to this practice – they understand the benefits of this regime in the foreign economic [activity].” 

In fact, in July, “non-sanctioned” India and the UAE signed an agreement to settle trade in rupees instead of dollars, boosting India’s efforts to cut transaction costs by eliminating dollar conversions. One needs only to know that India-UAE bilateral trade last year was a whopping $84.5 billion. The first transactions between the two countries under the new agreement, including in oil and gold, have already commenced. 

All indications are that the possible creation of a single BRICS currency figured in the discussions in Johannesburg. Putin made a reference to it in his media statement, saying: “I believe that a single settlement currency definitely deserves our attention. This is a complex issue, but we have to move towards resolving it in one way or another.” 

There is every likelihood that this complex discussion will advance through the next two BRICS summits in 2024 and 2025 under the presidency of Russia and Brazil, respectively, two member states that are supportive of the idea of a common currency. 

In sum, with the induction of the three major oil-producing nations of the Persian Gulf, BRICS 2023 will mark the beginning of the petrodollar’s unraveling. This is a huge step toward a multipolar world. The new settlement mechanisms, common currency, et al, will steadily dethrone the dollar, liberating the world economy from the clutches of the US Federal Reserve. 

Fortifying the Global South

The rationale behind the induction of the three West Asian oil states — along with Egypt and Ethiopia — can also be assessed in terms of the imperatives of regional connectivity with the African continent, which Russia and China regard as being on the cusp of a historic economic transformation. By 2050, manufacturing spending alone is projected to reach $1 trillion in Africa, offering tremendous opportunities for global businesses.

But effective intra-African integration will be critical to the continent’s economic transformation. Russia hopes to connect the Persian Gulf region to the International North–South Transport Corridor, a 7,200-km-long multi-mode network of ship, rail, and road route for moving freight, and extend it further beyond to the African market. 

Moscow is discussing with Cairo the establishment of a special economic zone in the vicinity of the Suez Canal. Saudi Arabia is expanding a sweeping railway network connecting the north and south. A string of new ports is being planned along the Saudi and Emirati coastline.  

In the final analysis, the big question is whether what took place in Johannesburg is the expansion of BRICS as a “stand-alone” event. Certainly, the overnight appearance of six important states under its canopy – who will assume full BRICS membership from 1 January, 2024 – short-circuited all procedural, protracted procedures as is customary in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) or the European Union. 

The sense of urgency is palpable. No questions asked; no interrogation ensued; no compliance report expected from the new hand-picked member states. The countries, each a regional power with its own credentials, simply walked into a red carpet welcome. 

To be sure, much confabulation and quiet discussions between Russia and China paved the way. Russians are superb in distinguishing tactics from strategy, and in this case, they happen to blend with the world order that Moscow has been espousing. 

Taken together with the profound reform of trade and payments that is already in the works, what is happening is no less than the replacement of the international trading system that has been governed exclusively by the west for the past few centuries with the objective of transferring wealth from the rest of the world to their manicured “garden.” Unless the collective west shows the sagacity to adjust to new realities, weeds may soon start taking over its “garden” and turn it into a jungle. Europe’s economic recovery is going to be challenging.

Turbulent times ahead

In sum, the historical significance of the BRICS expansion needs to be weighed in the following terms: First, Iran and two erstwhile US regional allies, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, get much-needed space to negotiate an equal relationship with Washington based on mutual respect and benefit. Make no mistake, they are in a mood to capitalize on it. 

Second, the western dominance of West Asia is ending, in a historical sense, heralding a profound shift in the regional order. The process that China kickstarted – with quiet Russian support from behind the curtain – in mediating the Saudi-Iranian reconciliation will now advance toward its logical conclusion sooner rather than later. 

This means that the west’s colonial mindset of “divide and rule” will have no takers anymore among regional states. Thus, what happened in Johannesburg would be consequential for Israel and Turkey as well. 

Finally, most importantly, the de-dollarization process, which would have moved at a snail’s pace, will now accelerate. What Putin had warned when the Biden administration imposed the “sanctions from hell” against Russia — especially its ouster from the SWIFT payment system —namely, that there would be a very heavy price to pay by the United States, is coming true. The blowback is only beginning in the international financial and trading system. 

The west simply cannot win in the looming confrontation with the Global Majority. And the transition can be addressed by Washington only through reconciliation with Moscow and Beijing, not an easy poison for the Americans to swallow. 

That will have to begin with an end to the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine and a retreat or abandonment of the attempt to fuel tensions with China over Taiwan. On the other hand, any change of course in the US strategy away from its belligerent militarized policies will have long-term implications for the entire US-led western alliance system, while in the short term, impacting President Joe Biden’s re-election campaign, too. The humiliating defeat in the Ukraine war cannot be covered up any longer.  

The times ahead will be turbulent as the old, self-centered, hegemonic western mindset won’t surrender easily. As for the entrenched interest groups in the US and Europe, their basic instinct will be to manufacture delaying tactics to stall the march of history. But it won’t work if BRICS stays the course.

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

‘Welcome to the BRICS 11’

AUG 25, 2023

Photo Credit: The Cradle

‘No mountains can stop the surging flow of a mighty river.’ With the addition of six new members that add geostrategic clout and geographic depth to the once sputtering BRICS, the multilateral institution is now gathering the momentum needed to reset international relations.

Pepe Escobar

In the end, History was made. Surpassing even the greatest of expectations, the BRICS nations performed a giant step for multipolarity by expanding the group to BRICS 11.  

Starting on January 1, 2024, the five original BRICS members will be joined by Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). 

No, they won’t turn into an unpronounceable BRIICSSEEUA. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov confirmed the song remains the same, with the familiar BRICS acronym to the Global South or Global Majority or “Global Globe” multilateral organization that will shape the contours of a new system of international relations.  

Here is the Johannesburg II Declaration of the 15^th BRICS summit. BRICS 11 is just the start. There’s a long line eager to join; without referring to the dozens of nations (and counting) that have already “expressed their interest”, according to the South Africans, the official list, so far, includes Algeria, Bangladesh, Bahrain, Belarus, Bolivia, Venezuela, Vietnam, Guinea, Greece, Honduras, Indonesia, Cuba, Kuwait, Morocco, Mexico, Nigeria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkiye and Syria. 

By next year, most of them will either become BRICS 11 partners or part of the second and third wave of fully-fledged members. The South Africans have stressed that BRICS “will not be limited to just one expansion phase.”

Russia-China leadership, in effect 

The road leading to BRICS 11, during the two days of discussions in Johannesburg, was hard and bumpy, as admitted by Russian President Vladimir Putin himself. The final result turned out to be a prodigy of trans-continental inclusion. West Asia was aggregated in full force. The Arab world has three full members, as much as Africa. And Brazil strategically lobbied to incorporate troubled Argentina. 

The global GDP-purchasing power parity (PPP) of BRICS 11, as it stands, is now 36 percent (already larger than the G7), and the institution now encompasses 47 percent of the world’s population.

BRICS+ Countries GDP, GDP (PPP) and Debt. (Photo Credit: The Cradle)

G7 Countries GDP, GDP (PPP) and Debt. (Photo Credit: The Cradle)

Even more than a geopolitical and geoeconomic breakthrough, BRICS 11 really breaks the bank on the energy front. By signing up Tehran, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, BRICS 11 instantly becomes an oil and gas powerhouse, controlling 39 percent of global oil exports, 45.9 percent of proven reserves and 47.6 percent of all oil produced globally, according to InfoTEK. 

A direct BRICS 11-OPEC+ symbiosis is inevitable (under Russia-Saudi Arabia leadership), not to mention OPEC itself. 

Translation: The collective west may soon lose its power to control global oil prices, and subsequently, the means to enforce its unilateral sanctions. 

A Saudi Arabia directly aligned with Russia-China-India-Iran offers a stunning counterpoint to the US-engineered oil crisis in the early 1970s, when Riyadh started wallowing in petrodollars. That represents the next stage of the Russian-initiated and Chinese-finalized rapprochement between Riyadh and Tehran, recently sealed in Beijing.

BRICS+ And G7 Proven Oil Reserves. (Photo Credit: The Cradle)

And that’s exactly what the Russia-China strategic leadership always had in mind. This particular diplomatic masterstroke is rife with meaningful details: BRICS 11 enters the fray on the exact same day, January 1, 2024, when Russia assumes the annual presidency of BRICS. 

Putin announced that the BRICS 11 summit next year will take place in Kazan, the capital city of Russia’s Tatarstan, which will be yet another blow to the west’s irrational, isolation-and-sanctions policies. Next January, expect further integration of the Global South/Global Majority/Global Globe, including even more radical decisions, conducted by the sanctioned-to-oblivion Russian economy – now, incidentally, the 5^th largest in the world by a PPP of over $5 trillion.         

G7 in a coma

The G7, for all practical purposes, has now entered an Intensive Care Unit. The G20 may be next. The new “Global Globe” G20 may be the BRICS 11 – and later on the BRICS 20 or even BRICS 40. By then, the petrodollar will also be on life support in the ICU.

The BRICS 11 climax could not have been accomplished without a stellar performance by the Men of the Match: Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping, supported by their respective teams. The Russia-China strategic partnership dominated in Johannesburg and set the major guidelines. We need to be bold and expand; we need to press for reform of the current institutional framework – from the UN Security Council to the IMF and the WTO; and we need to get rid of those institutions that are subjugated by the artificial “rules-based international order.”     

No wonder Xi defined the moment, on the record, as “historic.” Putin went so far as to publicly call on all BRICS 11 to abandon the US dollar and expand trade settlements in national currencies – stressing that BRICS “oppose hegemonies of any kind” and “the exceptional status that some countries aspire to,” not to mention “a policy of continued neo-colonialism.” 

Importantly, as much as the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is celebrating its 10^th anniversary next month, Putin drove home the necessity to:

“…establish a permanent BRICS transport commission, which would deal not only with the North-South project [referring to the INTSC transportation corridor, whose key BRICS members are Russia, Iran and India], but also on a broader scale with the development of logistics and transport corridors, interregional and global.”

Pay attention. That’s Russia-China in synch on connectivity corridors, and they are preparing to further link their continental transportation projects. 

On the financial front, the Central Banks of the current BRICS have been instructed to seriously investigate and increase trading in local currencies.

Putin made a point of being very realistic on de-dollarization: “The issue of the single settlement currency is a complex issue, but we will move toward solving these problems one way or another.” That complemented Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva’s remarks on how the BRICS has started a working group to study the viability of a reference currency. 

In parallel, the BRICS’ New Development Bank (NDB) has welcomed three new members: Bangladesh, Egypt, and UAE. Yet their road to prominence from now will be even steeper.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa publicly praised NDB President Dilma Rousseff’s report on the nine-year-old institution; but Dilma herself stressed again that the bank aims to reach only 30 percent of total loans in currencies bypassing the US dollar. 

That’s hardly enough. Why? It’s up to Sergey Glazyev, the Minister of Macroeconomics at the Eurasia Economic Commission, working under the Russia-led EAEU, to answer the key question: 

“It is necessary to change the statutory documents of this bank. When it was created, I tried to explain to our financial authorities that the capital of the bank should be spread between the national currencies of founding countries. But American agents madly believed in the US dollar. As a result, this bank today is afraid of sanctions and is semi-paralyzed.”  

No mountains can stop a mighty river 

So yes, the challenges ahead are immense. But the drive to succeed is contagious, perhaps best epitomized by Xi’s remarkable speech at the closing ceremony of the BRICS Business Forum, read out by Chinese Minister of Commerce Wang Wentao. 

It’s as if Xi had invoked a Mandarin version of the 1967 American pop classic “Ain’t No Mountain High Enough.” He quoted a Chinese proverb: “No mountains can stop the surging flow of a mighty river.” And he reminded his audience that the fight was both noble – and necessary: 

“Whatever resistance there may be, BRICS, a positive and stable force for good, will continue to grow. We will forge stronger BRICS strategic partnership, expand the ‘BRICS Plus’ model, actively advance membership expansion, deepen solidarity and cooperation with other EMDCs [emerging market developing countries], promote global multipolarity and greater democracy in international relations, and help make the international order more just and equitable.”

Now add this profession of faith in humanity to the way the “Global Globe” perceives Russia. Even though the Russian economy’s purchasing power parity is by now ahead of the imperial European vassals that seek to crush it, the Global South’s perception of Moscow is as “one of our own.”  What happened in South Africa made this even more clear, and Russia’s ascendency to the BRICS presidency in four months will crystallize it.

It’s no wonder that the collective west, dazed and confused, now trembles as it feels the earth – 85 percent of it, at least – moving under its feet. 

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

Venezuela voices interest in de-dollarization, BRICS membership

24 Aug 2023

Source: Agencies

Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro, Bolivia’s President Luis Arce, and Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva assemble for a group photo during the South American Summit at Itamaraty palace in Brasilia, Brazil, May 30, 2023. (

Maduro adds his country’s intent to establish a new financial architecture allowing transactions to occur via both physical and digital methods in multiple national currencies.

By Al Mayadeen English

During his speech at the BRICS summit in the South African capital of Johannesburg, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro reiterated his country’s interest in the BRICS membership, after applying for it earlier this month, and voiced his intent to contribute to Venezuela’s oil-rich economy while reaping benefits from its common goal with the bloc’s ambition to end the dependence on the dollar.

“Venezuela joins the requests of countries wishing to join BRICS as we have recently confirmed,” Maduro said, adding that Venezuela is home to the largest oil resources in the world and could contribute greatly to the “global integration model”. 

He further urged for establishing a new financial model that does not rely on the US dollar.

Read more: The BRICS, countering Western centuries-long hegemony

“The reality of recent years has demonstrated the necessity to move forward with the de-dollarization of the global economy amid the US currency being used as a mechanism of economic war against the free nations of the world. Recent studies have shown that at least 30 countries, accounting for 28% of the global population, are affected by imperialistic sanctions and other measures of economic war”. 

Road to El-‘De-dollarization’

Maduro added his country’s intent to establish a new financial architecture allowing transactions to occur via both physical and digital methods in multiple national currencies.

Speaking of the economy, Maduro underlined that this would amplify the restoration and growth of the Venezuelan economy – already forecast to grow by over 5%, the highest figure in the region.

This comes the same day after Cuba’s President Miguel Diaz-Canel expressed that the bloc’s New Development Bank (NDB) should serve as the alternative to modern financial institutions that aim “to obtain resources from the countries of the South.” 

“The New Development Bank created by BRICS can and should become an alternative to modern financial institutions that have been using outdated recipes for about a century to obtain resources from the countries of the South,” he said. 

BRICS is attracting countries that aim to steer away from a system controlled by the collective West and adopt a model of international relations based on mutual partnership, South Africa’s minister of public works and infrastructure told Sputnik on Wednesday.

“[The] majority of the countries in the world are yearning for a platform where they could cooperate at a mutual level without being dominated by the so-called superpowers. And that’s why many people are eager to join BRICS,” Minister Sihle Zikalala said.

LATIN AMERICA RISING, WITH OLLIE VARGAS

AUGUST 18TH, 2023

https://www.mintpressnews.com/bolsanaro-butchery-cia-fingerprints-brazil-indigenous-genocide/285536/

Alan MacLeod is Senior Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent, as well as a number of academic articles. He has also contributed to FAIR.org, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, and Common Dreams.

South of the border, an entire region is rising. Latin America is electing radical governments, dismantling cold-war era power structures and moving towards integration and genuine independence.

Today, “MintPress News” speaks to Ollie Vargas about Latin America and just what is going on in the region President Joe Biden called the U.S.’ “front yard.” Ollie Vargas is an award-winning journalist based in Bolivia. He is the co-founder of “Kawsachun News,” an outlet reporting in the English language on Bolivia and Latin America. He has also contributed to “MintPress.”

Key to the latest drive towards Latin America has been the role of Brazil and, in particular, President Lula da Silva, who has taken it upon himself to lead the Global South to take a more active role in world politics.

“The election of Lula da Silva in Brazil last year is key for Latin American unity and a multipolar world. There has always been the aspiration there. But without the leadership of Brazil, which is, of course, the largest country in Latin America, it is very difficult to make it a reality,” Vargas said.

Brazil is currently the only Latin American member of the BRICS economic bloc. However, Mexico, Venezuela, Argentina, Cuba, Nicaragua and a host of other countries in the region have expressed interest in joining, which could turn the tables and provide balance to the U.S. “rules-based international order.”

Another key figure providing pushback to American dominance of Latin America is Mexican president Andrés Manuel López Obrador. AMLO, as he is known, has refused to kowtow to Washington. Indeed, at President Biden’s Summit for Democracy in March, he described the U.S. as nothing more than an “oligarch with a façade of democracy.”

AMLO has proven very popular in Mexico, thanks to his pro-people policies. These include massively raising the minimum wage and state pensions, allowing tens of millions to live in dignity. All the while, he has kept inflation low. He holds a televised press conference every morning, in which he talks directly with the people. As Vargas put it, “While previous leaders stood above the population, AMLO stands with the people.”

AMLO stands, in Vargas’ opinion, in contrast to Chilean president Gabriel Boric. Heralded as a new kind of progressive at the time of his election, Boric has failed to maintain his popularity. Vargas explained that, while Boric has some superficially radical positions, he has changed little about the day-to-day existence of the ordinary people:

Boric is someone who came out of the middle-class student movements in Chile. He’s not someone who comes from the socialist left, from trade unions, or from indigenous movements. I would define his ideology as a liberal centrist. He has taken positions that would probably be considered more progressive than much of the Latin American left on LGBT issues, feminism and things like that. But when it comes to the economic issues, he represents an absolute continuity with the old conservative free-market government of Chile.”

Vargas also talks about the impact of the Russia-Ukraine war on Latin America, about the upcoming elections in Ecuador, and what it was like reporting under the dictatorship of Jeanine Añez in Bolivia in 2020.

If you are at all interested in Latin America, the Global South, or the changing world order, don’t miss out on this episode.

MintPress has launched its annual funding drive. Faced with algorithmic censorship, arrests, financial sanctions and more, it is crucial that our readers and viewers support us. If you are in a financial position to do so, please consider supporting our work. We can only do it with you and can’t do it without you.

MintPress News is a fiercely independent media company. You can support us by becoming a member on Patreon, bookmarking and whitelisting us, and subscribing to our social media channels, including Twitch, YouTube, Twitter and Instagram.

Subscribe to MintCast on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and SoundCloud.

Also, be sure to check out rapper Lowkey’s video interview/podcast series, The Watchdog.

RELATED POSTS

• BRICS and the challenge of solidarity
• Petrodollar be warned: Three Persian Gulf energy powers just joined BRICS
• ‘Welcome to the BRICS 11’
• Venezuela voices interest in de-dollarization, BRICS membership
• Argentina, Egypt, Iran, Ethiopia, UAE, S. Arabia to join BRICS
• How Brics is looking to challenge the western order in the Middle East
• On Military Coups and Starvation: Is Western Media’s Perception of Africa Racist?
• Central Asia is the prime battlefield in the New Great Game
• Reviving hegemony: Israel’s land-and-rail proposal to the Persian Gulf
• BLIND LOYALTY OR SELECTIVE BLINDNESS? AMERICAN POLITICIANS’ PERPLEXING SUPPORT FOR APARTHEID ISRAEL
• What’s behind the US military surge in West Asia?
• Niger and the African struggle against neo-colonialism
• Algeria warns military intervention in Niger to aggravate instability
• Iran Judiciary Chief says West funded, protected MKO, ISIS: Exclusive
• Syrian army mobilizes in response to ISIS, US threat
• Niger Blasts NATO’s Global Narrative Wide Open
• BEHIND CRUMBLING CONCRETE: THE TRAGIC STORY OF AIN AL HILWEH’S DISPLACED PALESTINIANS

Ukraine trap; EU stuck in old era as Global South crafts multipolarity

May 2 2023

Source: Al Mayadeen English

By Hussein Assaf 

Europe must accept the fact that the world today is no longer the Western playground and that the growing anti-hegemonic sentiment among nations is irreversible.

It’s important to emphasize that Europe was not a victim in the current world order run by Washington, but rather a participant. Its contributions were destructive, filled with colonialism, theft, dismantling, and murder of nations that directly led to corruption, poverty, and injustice worldwide.

Europe’s bloody history

Despite Europe joining the global financial systems established by the US in the 20th century, such as the IMF and World Bank, the continent has used these tools to deepen its colonialism and expansion policies towards countries worldwide. It has even leveraged its position with bodies like the UN and UNSC to exploit weaker states and enforce its hegemonic agendas, including wealth looting and proxy wars against rivals politically and economically. 

However, the rise of the Global South in recent years has allowed its nations to counter the hegemonic exploitation of international bodies by funneling their resources into their economies to advance in the new world order. By engaging with the Western coalition while shielding themselves from their malicious agendas, these nations can benefit in the long run. 

Post-WW2 world order

After World War II, the United States emerged as an unrivaled superpower, untouched by the catastrophic destruction of the war and claiming a barely earned victory. Between 1944 and 1949, milestone events secured the unipolar order under the US and placed the EU under Washington’s direct influence for decades to come.

Bretton Woods in 1944 established the USD as the global reserve and trade currency, while the Marshall Plan in 1945 provided funding to Western European countries that agreed to follow America’s dictates to rehabilitate and rebuild their infrastructure and industrial capabilities (note that the plan’s funds were used to purchase American goods). 

The establishment of the IMF and World Bank enforced the new world monetary and financial system crafted by Washington. The Truman Doctrine finally ensured that Western Europe became a follower of Washington’s foreign policies. 

Establishing NATO, a war coalition under Washington’s direct control, was the highlight of that period. It served the interests of the United States and ensured that Europe did not attempt to create a sovereign military power but rather relied on the US for protection. 

The final blows to Europe’s industrial complex in the 20th century were the Nixon Shock in 1971, where the bloc’s member states found themselves stuck with paper notes whose value was solely determined by Washington, and in 1974 when the United States and Saudi Arabia agreed to peg oil to the USD – establishing the petrodollar. This meant that Europe’s access to the world’s largest energy reserve was now controlled by Washington. 

The petrodollar required Europe to maintain an abundance of USD reserves for oil purchases, resulting in increased investment in American treasury bonds and currency inflow to US markets. Despite partnering with the US in its bloody crusades over the past decades, the EU’s interests were not taken into consideration by Washington. 

The US has used its European allies as tools in the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, the destruction of Libya and Syria, and relations with the Arab world (the world’s richest energy region). Although Europe faced similar political and public backlash, it was the US that acquired the real strategic interests. 

Disregarding the changed world we live in, the EU continues to live under a WW2 mentality. 

Despite warnings against militarily provoking Russia, the EU doubled down on the American-NATO illusion that being the strongest military coalition worldwide guarantees inevitable victory, and using force to impose the West’s worldview remains a viable option. 

Self-destructive tendencies

After years of Russia sending signals and after many world vocal warnings, including from prominent Western figures like Kissinger, regarding NATO’s eastward expansion, European member states made the same mistake and adopted Washington’s doctrine on Moscow, leading to a conflict with Russia. Despite the historic failure of this approach, EU leaders repeatedly attempted to humiliate Russia and publicly claimed that the West aimed to bring Moscow to its knees since the beginning of the war in Ukraine until recently. 

The conflict with Russia has deeper repercussions on the EU than just preventing mutually beneficial trade ties that would put both economies on a trajectory of development and growth. The United States aims to fight against the growing Global South, with China at the top, and to cut off any attempts by its European allies to further integrate with Asia’s rising powers.

Following the start of the war in Ukraine, Europe not only faced energy shortages, while US energy companies continued to extract oil from Iraq, Syria, and Libya but also realized how Washington was profiting from the very war they had incited. They were overcharged for LNG at three to four times the price sold within the domestic US market, which itself impacted their major industry’s capabilities to continue production.

On the other hand, the US led an international campaign to force its European allies mainly to adopt a price cap on Russian oil. But despite Washington’s push for this bill, Americans themselves were not affected nor were they directly part of the pressure campaign in Moscow, mainly since they did not rely on Russian oil, and with the petrodollar in place, it did not matter how much the EU paid for oil, as the currency used would go back to US banks. 

Soon, Europe, left alone after countries such as Japan did not abide by the price cap, found that it still had to buy Russian Urals but with additional middlemen fees through countries such as India.

The EU witnessed firsthand the US tearing down their economies, which are under increased levels of deindustrialization, with industry giants moving to the US for lower energy prices and a more business-friendly environment crafted by Washington to lure companies mainly from its European allies.

As a result, Europe found itself seeking energy from African nations that it had previously colonized and destroyed. EU officials scrambled through countries like Algeria and Libya to secure gas and oil. 

As the world order shifts towards a more multipolar one with a center of gravity shifting towards China, Europe has begun to become aware that the US-led model that has dominated the world order for decades has not brought the desired outcome for the bloc. Despite benefiting immorally from genocidal campaigns and being America’s partner in crime, Europe’s gains were short-lived. 

With a history of self-destructive tendencies and after years of psycho-preparation and media propaganda, Europe was politically and economically prepared to repeat its historic mistakes in its approach to Russia and later to China.

The West quickly convinced its public that the rivalry with Russia was ideological and existential, that joining NATO and dropping neutrality (as with Finland and Sweden) was the only secure way to protect against the demons of the East, and that China is at the core of everything against the neoliberal values of the West.

Inevitable Multipolar world order 

During a speech to the Council of Foreign Relations in New York on April 18, European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde noted that the world is becoming more multipolar, with a fragmentation of the global economy into competing blocs. 

Lagarde stated that this new “global map” would have “first-order implications,” with the possibility of two blocs emerging, led by China and the US.

On many levels, Lagarde’s statement hits the core of the current world state of affairs.

The US reintroduced the political bloc mentality on a wider scale through the proxy war in Ukraine, pulling all its strings and employing all its accumulated influence to focus its power on obstructing a Eurasian uprising and realigning Europe’s foreign policy towards dismantling connections with China and Russia.

The post-WW2 era, characterized by bloc politics pushed by the US, is no longer feasible in the current period of deep integration, interest overlaps, and political complexity established by globalization, advanced trading networks, financial intertwining, and complementary production needs.

The West’s expansion of NATO forces to Russia’s border, followed by Moscow’s campaign to protect its national security, has put the global change on a pedestal.

The fallout of the Western-Russian war in Ukraine and the historic barrage of sanctions against Moscow has led to the fracturing of the financial system, and exposed the fragility of the West’s proclaimed “rules-based international world order”.

During an event hosted at Renmin University’s Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies last January to discuss the current state of world powers, the editor-in-chief of the Beijing Cultural Review (BCR) said that the fallout of the Western-Russian war in Ukraine led to events that could have never been imagined earlier.

“These [events] include the fracturing of the financial system, the expropriation and seizure of Russian private assets, and the freezing of Russian foreign exchange reserves. These are all abominable and unimaginable forms of confrontation,” Yang Ping said in his speech.

“The world is moving inexorably in the direction of decoupling. The phenomenon of politics affecting the economy and the capitalist political order no longer upholding the capitalist economic order is extremely striking.”

If not for the war in Ukraine, Ping’s statement regarding the world taking shape would have been shunned by Western experts as an illusion or merely a forecast, but now, and thanks to the West’s undivided efforts, the world is moving inexorably towards decoupling, and the phenomenon of politics affecting the economy is becoming strikingly apparent; a world with limited Western hegemony is on track to becoming an irreversible reality.

Europe’s amputated foreign policy

In recent months, top EU leaders including German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, French President Emmanuel Macron, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, and German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock have visited China amid rising global tensions.

Their visits aimed to balance relations between the US and China as Washington’s hostility towards Beijing escalated, its sanctions against the Asian giant increased, and its provocative actions in the South China Sea intensified.

Macron’s visit, in particular, was noteworthy, as it seemed to reassure China of Europe’s distinct position from Washington’s policies against Asian giants. Despite announcing that the main reason for his visit was to push Beijing against arming Russia and push Moscow to end the war, behind the scenes, Macron’s visit aimed to assert Europe’s position.

He stated that Europe should not be caught up in a disordering of the world and crises that aren’t ours and that the government must build a “third pole.”

“We must be clear where our views overlap with the US, but whether it’s about Ukraine, relations with China, or sanctions, we have a European strategy,” the French leader said then.

“We don’t want to get into a bloc versus bloc logic.”

At first, many European leaders publicly announced or hinted at their support for Macron’s move, considering it a positive approach to their largest trading partner.

But later, some European leaders expressed their rejection of his statements, the most blatant of which was the finance minister in Scholz’s government, Christian Lindner, who said that Macron’s “Idea of strategic autonomy of the European Union,” is “naïve.” Of course, the statement was not objected to by the German Chancellor, signaling that the minister has also voiced Scholz’s opinion.

Following Lindner’s remarks, and after von der Leyen reaffirmed the bloc’s neutral position on the Taiwan Strait issue provoked by the US during an EU parliamentary hearing on April 18, Manfred Weber, who helms the Parliament’s largest group, the center-right European People’s Party (EPP), accused Macron of “destroying” European unity with his trip to China, and that the French president “weakened the EU” and “made clear the great rift within the European Union in defining a common strategic plan against Beijing.”

To counter Macron’s position that the Taiwan issue is not a European concern, Weber also compared the matter to the war going on in Ukraine from Washington’s perspective.

“We shouldn’t be surprised if Washington starts asking whether Ukraine is a European issue,” Weber said. The question they may ask, he warned: “Why should American taxpayers do so much to defend Ukraine?”

His comments, of course, are nothing but shortsighted and delusional, given that the war in Ukraine was created and pushed forward by the US’ decades-long policies on NATO’s take against Russia.

From an outside observer, the contradicting statements – while also taking into account that the bloc members are dividing roles – can only be described as a political mess, a loss of strategic planning, and entails that the union is currently lacking the tools to form a united framework to establish a basis to approach the Global South as a whole, and especially China.

Is the EU’s policy being molded by an actual comprehensive overview of the world’s geopolitical shifts, or is it being dictated by a handful of US pawns that have served nothing but American hawks since they took office?

Blind Economic outlook as bloc 

The disunity in Europe extends beyond just their political approach to China, as trade policies with their largest business partner also show division. 

In 2020, China and the EU agreed on a trade framework, eliminating Chinese restrictions on European companies and investments in China. However, the deal was put on hold after the bloc sanctioned Beijing for alleged human rights abuses and China responded with sanctions of its own.

Just under two weeks after Macron’s and von der Leyen’s trip to China, the EU leaders said that they consider the deal with China as not applicable anymore, following the events since it was reached in 2020.

“We started negotiations around about 10 years ago and concluded the comprehensive agreement on investment two years ago. A lot has happened since then,” she said, adding that Europe’s “position is that we do have to reassess the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment,” she said earlier in April.

On his part, Macron considered that the agreement today is “less urgent,” and “just not practicable”.

On the other hand, Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz lately has been pushing for “reactivating” the agreement and considered it was time to reinstate the deal and put it back on track.

It is understandable that this dynamic is not unusual between world powers, especially at a time when the globe is witnessing historic geopolitical shifts, and it is definitely not unusual considering that the American influence across Europe and its leaders is still very significant, and Washington’s sanctions sword is constantly raised against its allies.

However, the lack of a united foreign policy within the bloc may negatively impact its position in the emerging multipolar world order and lead to the weakening or collapse of the union. Europe’s incomplete and fragile relations with growing global pillars, especially China and the emerging Global South, may also be observed from Beijing’s perspective.

Losing post-WW2 against Global South 

Europe’s lack of clear foreign policy extends beyond its position on China, as it also pertains to the US’s declared soft war on the Asian giant. 

For decades, Brussels relied on the assumption of a long-term realm by Washington as the unipolar power, which led the bloc to neglect sustainable and strong relations with the Global South.

Since the start of the war in Ukraine, the Global South has made unexpected, unprecedented moves, guided by the goal of forming sovereign policies that are far from Western hegemony led by Washington. They declared historic political shifts, leading to the formation of a new and influential world pillar in the multipolar era.

Protectionist economic policies, accompanied by subsidization, act for vital sectors like electric vehicles and batteries.

More systems (such as BRICS and SCO) and countries are growing monetary bodies and alternative trade frameworks to those dominated and influenced directly by the United States. It has become clear that political global organizations such as the UNSC and the UN, which were long exploited by Washington and its European allies to extend their hegemony and colonialism, are slowly losing more relevance and impact on the global arena.

On April 16, US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, in an interview with CNN, said that the United States economic sanctions imposed on Russia and other nations have put the dollar’s hegemony at risk as targeted countries seek out an alternative.

“There is a risk when we use financial sanctions that are linked to the role of the dollar that over time it could undermine the hegemony of the dollar,” she said then.

Financial global institutions and systems such as the IMF, World Bank, and SWIFT, are gradually declining as de-dollarization proceeds and countries are finding alternatives to bypass the West’s complete influence, including mutual lending and local currency trade, sovereign projects, in addition to domestic SWIFT alternatives such as China’s CIPS, Russia’s SFPS, and Iran’s SEPAM, to name some.

The movement today is driven by Beijing along with other powers including Brazil, India,  Russia, Iran, and South Africa, among others.

Despite all signs in previous years of the emergence of the new geopolitical reality, Europe failed to form appropriate policies and outline a vision to engage and adapt to these drastic global shifts, nor did it take advantage of some of the outcomes that fall into its interest, such as de-dollarization and the end of the petrodollar. Instead, Europe insisted on following Washington’s agenda, further sidelining its world influence.

Sidelined 

On March 10, Iran and Saudi Arabia agreed to restore diplomatic relations and reopen missions after seven years of strained ties. 

Talks were brokered in Beijing under the auspices of Chinese President Xi Jinping. The Western role, especially that of Washington, in inciting dispute and rift between the two nations was criminal, leading to tens of thousands of deaths, mass destruction, displacement of hundreds of thousands, and feelings of hate among the people of the region.

China managed in just a few months to achieve what the United Nations and other international political bodies failed to do, marking Beijing’s first public political approach to the Middle East. The Beijing-brokered rapprochement between Tehran and Riyadh reveals Europe’s falling influence in the region and the growing tendency of countries to sideline the West in bilateral issues. It also highlights China’s rise as a peace-bringing and key power in the region.

Oppressed nations rejoice 

Europe’s centuries-long history of producing global superpowers makes it a hybrid bloc with a combined cultural, political, social, economic, and institutional maturity that can quickly adapt to world geopolitical shifts and overcome emerging challenges. 

However, it can be argued that the current world challenges are unprecedented, especially with the concept of globalization and the world’s interconnectedness.

Europe today has limited options that require a new approach and view of the world, with a humble and realistic policy that acknowledges the end of its hegemony and the adoption of sovereignty and mutual respect in bilateral relations.

The EU must also accept that the world is no longer a Western playground and that anti-hegemonic sentiment among nations is irreversible in a multipolar world. Regardless of Europe’s decisions, oppressed nations are watching the declining global influence of the colonial bloc with joy.

Related Stories

• War in Ukraine: A conflict that will decide the global system’s fate
• War in Ukraine united Europe, yet made EU obedient to US orders: WSJ
• Pentagon intel leak shows NATO forces on the ground in Ukraine

Everything is building up to a major showdown

October 24, 2022

Source

By Aram Mirzaei

We live in one of the most important moments in history. Perhaps this moment is even more important than the end of the Cold War. Similar to those events more than 30 years ago, major geopolitical shifts are currently taking place today. If the end of the cold war saw the rise of the Western Bloc to dominance, then the start of this new Cold War has seen the return of a new Eastern Bloc, ready to assert its rightful place in the world.

The era of Western interventions, regime change operations and hit and run tactics is almost at an end. Today, countries such as China, Russia and Iran are challenging the US militarily, economically and politically. Many of the former international equations that were true only a few years ago are changing with great speed, especially after the start of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine.

If we consider the nationalization of Iran’s oil industry as the first part of changing the structures of the world, then the key part that would change the entire structure is the moment when Russia decided to say enough to Washington and put their foot down, once and for all.

This has inspired defiance among the oppressed nations of the world. The conflict in Ukraine has proven that most of the countries in the world, which even the United States counted on as allies, are against the policies of the United States and in practice are not willing to go along with the policies of the United States. OPEC’s recent decision to reduce its oil production, while the United States had tried its best to force OPEC to bear the costs of its adventure in Europe, shows that a new world order is being formed. Indeed Washington did its best to pressure Riyadh, Abu Dhabi and other Persian Gulf countries to put aside their own interests in favour of Washington’s interests. We saw that not only did it not work, but it has also created a diplomatic crisis between the once so great “allies” in this region.

Several US senators and even the White House openly threatened Riyadh with consequences to their crime of not committing suicide for the sake of Washington. This could manifest itself in sudden Western public “awareness” of, and campaigns against the Saudi “human rights record” in the near future, or even worse- western backed riots such as those we’ve seen recently in Iran. So far we’ve only seen talks about “stopping arms sales” and/or “withdrawing troops from the region.”

Such a move would likely lead the Saudis to turn towards Tehran and, in extension the emerging Eastern alliance. This would lead to a major geopolitical shift in the region that would endanger Israel, and thus also raise the risk of a large conflict in the region.

Another US ally that is flirting with the East is Erdogan’s Turkey. Erdogan is many things, and one of those things is being a survivalist. His refusal to follow NATO and US policies vis-à-vis Russia shows that he is also prioritizing his own interests before Washington’s. The Eastern alliance, manifested by institutions such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS are expanding and gaining strength, and today many countries in the world are looking for membership in these international cooperation organizations, especially after Iran’s entry into the SCO group of countries. Both Turkey and Saudi Arabia, two countries wielding considerable influence on smaller countries in the region are looking to join these organizations. These countries used to be allies of the West, and of course some are still their allies, but it shows that even Washington’s once so staunch allies are not satisfied with, and most importantly don’t trust the US hegemony anymore, and are looking for alternatives.

When Russia’s red line was crossed in Ukraine, Moscow made an important decision to intervene. This decision was not just about Moscow’s security, or the security of Donbass. Russian President Putin has on several occasions spoken about the ongoing paradigm shift, where the world is moving toward a multi-polar world order. Words echoed by officials in Tehran as well as the Islamic Republic is also at the forefront, together with Russia and China in the bid to end the unipolar world order. Russia’s SMO in Ukraine is of utmost importance for the oppressed countries of the world. Such an open challenge to US hegemony will strengthen the resolve of other countries, especially China and Iran, two countries facing the same enemy as Russia is currently battling.

Washington is in decline, while the Eastern Bloc is on the rise. Even the staunchest of Empire supporters cannot deny this fact. Since Washington and the collective West are in decline, they are also growing more aggressive. This has been witnessed by us all in Ukraine where the collective West have brought mankind to the brink of nuclear war. This can be seen in the aggressive policies regarding Taiwan, violating previous agreements and commitments to respecting China’s sovereignty. This was as clear as day during the recent foreign-backed riots in Iran. In sum, the US basically tried to extort Tehran into accepting a “temporary” JCPOA deal on Washington’s terms and conditions. Seeing as how Tehran would not yield on its demands for guarantees that Washington wouldn’t renege on the deal once more, they created these riots to force and pressure Tehran to accept Washington’s terms.

A desperate attempt to create a color revolution, with the help of hundreds of thousands of Twitter bots, especially since the riots quickly lost momentum thanks to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps’ (IRGC) vigilance and experience in dealing with foreign-backed plots to overthrow the Islamic Republic. The timing of the riots made it clear for Tehran that it was a desperate move to secure natural gas for the winter, especially since they destroyed Europe’s gas deliveries through NS1 and NS2. If it wasn’t clear enough at first, at least Washington did a good job in clarifying any misunderstandings when both US special envoy for Iran Robert Malley and US State Department spokesperson Ned Price claimed that the revival of the JCPOA is “not our focus right now” and that it “wasn’t even on the agenda”, as Washington was shifting focus to “supporting Iranian protesters.”

Washington’s list of allies will keep growing thinner for every new crisis that Washington creates. There is already widespread dissatisfaction among those countries that constitute the “jungle”, as Joseph Borrell, chief gardener of the EU, so creatively described it, and as we speak, that dissatisfaction is also spreading to the “garden” now. Massive protests are taking place in several EU countries, and these are just the beginning, because it’s not even winter yet! The true pain for European households will come in a month or two.

Washington is fighting on multiple fronts to preserve its hegemony, Secretary of State Blinken was pretty clear about that when he said that Americans “have to be the ones who are at the table who are helping to shape the rules, the norms, the standards by which technology is used,”

“If we’re not, if the United States isn’t there, then someone else will be, and these rules are going to get shaped in ways that don’t reflect our values and don’t reflect our interests.”

The fact that Washington is feeling this pressure makes the Empire more dangerous than ever. It can be said that any chance of saving the world today depends on whether a strong Eastern Bloc can be formed soon enough. If not, the US hegemony will pick off the independent countries one by one, just like they did in Libya.

Sure, if Washington strikes either of Russia, China or Iran militarily, they will have to be prepared for these countries to massively retaliate, unlike the situation in Libya, where Libyans were pretty defenceless on their own. Still, like I said in the beginning of this piece, the era of hit and run tactics is almost at an end. This means that Washington is still bold enough to strike Russia, China and Iran politically and financially through slander, regime change psyops and sanctions. Hence, the need for China, Russia and Iran to hasten the Eastern integration and alliance building projects in order to better be prepared to counter Washington’s long reach.

Of course, even if such an alliance can be formed, there are no guarantees that Washington’s madness wouldn’t still cause a world war that would destroy us all, but at least in such a scenario, they’d go down with the rest of us too. In the end, the leaderships and peoples of the three countries leading the new multi-polar world order would rather die than become slaves of the US hegemony.

Many important countries will soon be forced to pick sides as everything seems to be building up to a major showdown between the East and the hateful West. When and how that will happen is anyone’s guess. The only thing certain at this point is that the end of the Western era of dominance under their “rules based world order” is inevitable.

More

• American Human Rights
• The Iews, China, and World War Xi
• This and that on a calm (before the storm?) Sunday
• A Putin victory would be a defeat for NATO and the West says Stoltenberg
• Giorgia’s Tragedy: On Italy Going Polish

A few updates about the NATO Crusade against Russia

October 18, 2022

Source

Intro: setting the current context

Before we take a look at some of the most interesting recent developments, I think that it is important to clearly state something which needs to be repeated almost constantly: what we are witnessing today is not a war between Russia and the Ukraine, but between Russia and the united, consolidated, West.  In practical terms this means that Russia is at war with the United States and NATO, the latter being no more than a docile, if ineffective, instrument for the latter.  Furthermore, since some NATO countries are now playing a crucial role in the war against Russia (UK, Sweden, Poland and the Ukraine, the latter being a de facto NATO member), I submit that the best and simplest way to describe this was is to say that it is a NATO Crusade against Russia.

As for Banderastan, it is already a full NATO member state with about the same rights as all the other NATO members states besides the US: none.  Right now, the so-called “Ukrainian forces” are already composed of anywhere between 40% to 80% composed of foreign fighters (depending on the importance of the location) and include plenty of actual NATO personnel.  By the way, most of the ex-Soviet kit held by former WTO members has been destroyed by Russia, which poses a very thorny problem to NATO: they cannot ship more Soviet kit to Banderastan, and if they ship their own, they will not only lose it forever but the general public (or, at least, those who need to know) will know that western weapons systems are anything but a Wunderwaffe: some is very good, some okay, most of it is useless against a modern adversary.  Remember the “awesome” Bayraktars?  Where are they now?  The same goes for all the other Wunderwaffen of course…

Why a Crusade?  Many reasons, ranging from the fact that western imperialism was born with the original Crusades to the fact that, as always, the West is hating and trying to destroy Russia with a truly religious fervor, albeit a clearly satanic one (all western Crusades were satanic in inspiration, but that is a topic for another time).

By the way, understanding this has major force planning implications for Russia.  First, the SMO in the Ukraine is only one special case in a much wider war which, in reality, already involves most of our planet (at least in economic and political terms).  Second, while Russia has to conduct her SMO, she also has to prepare for a overt, full-scale, war with the West, possibly a nuclear one.  Simply put: Russia has to keep the vast majority of her resources and capabilities ready for much larger conflict than the one we are currently witnessing.   Put differently, Russia does not want to commit the same mistake as the one made by NATO when it flooded the Ukraine with so much weapon systems that it now lacks them for its own use.  With this in mind, I suggest that we look at a few interesting developments:

One: is Russia using Iranian drones or not and, if yes, why?

First, let’s state the obvious: both Russia and Iran have denied that Iran had exported drones to Russia.  Next, let’s state something equally obvious: while this might be true, most observers don’t seem to believe that Tehran and Moscow are being truthful here.

One major problem is that most observers make very questionable assumptions including the following.  If Russia is indeed using Iranian drones, it is because:

• Iranian drones are superior to Russian ones
• Russia is running out of drones

So let’s address those two points.

Are Iranian drones superior to Russian ones?  This question cannot be answered as such because two terms are not properly defined: the term “drone” and the term “superior”.

First, “drones” (aka UAV) range from tiny quads you can place in the palm of your hand to large, aircraft sized, and very sophisticated drones.  So let’s arbitrarily decide that all drones can be placed into one of five categories: A, B, C, D and F.  Next, when we compare Russian and Iranian drone capabilities, we need to avoid the “apples and oranges” logical trap and compare category by category.  It might be that in categories A, B, D and F Russia has much more capable drones than Iran, but that Iran is in the lead for C type of drones.

Is that possible, even in theory?

Oh yes, absolutely!  Iran has been developing very sophisticated UAV and missiles and it has used them in Iraq or the KSA with devastating effectiveness.  More importantly, for the Iranian authorities, developing a very strong UAV/missile capability is a national priority and, possibly, the key to deter the AngloZionists.  And while in Russia the military industrial complex has developed plenty of sophisticated drones, I would argue that before the initiation of the SMO drones were a lesser priority for Russia than for Iran.  Thus is is quite possible that while Russia might lead in some types of drones, Iran might have superior capabilities in another type(s) of drones.

Then there is the issue of costs.  Iranian drones are very *very* cheap, especially when compared to some much more expensive Russian equivalents.

Finally, there is the issue of availability.  Even if Russia’s drone X is superior to the Iranian drone Y, that does not mean that Russia can produce enough X drones for her needs, so why not purchase much cheaper but very effective Iranian Y drones for a fraction of the cost AND with immediate delivery?

So what are we to make from the uncanny resemblance of the Russian between the Russian Geranium-2 drone vs the Iranian Shahed-136?

My advice: absolutely nothing.

Yes, they do look alike but, frankly, convergent evolution is very common in technology, especially in aerospace.  In this case, both the Geranium-2 and the Sahed-136 look alike, sound alike, and generally are hard to distinguish.  Can you tell a 152mm shell apart from a 155mm one?  What about two shells of the same caliber, but built by different manufacturers?

So what do we know for sure?  We know that Russia has dramatically increased her use of drones and that some really look Iranian.  But even Iranian-looking drones might be built in Russia (with or without a license).  Should an Iranian designed drone built in Russia (or a Russian designed drone built in Iran) be considered Iranian or Russian?

Last but not least – what difference does it make anyway?

We know that Iran is a very solid and trustworthy ally of Russia (I would argue by far the best Russia has right now).  I know for a fact that the behind the scenes ties between Russia and Iran are numerous and deep.  Of course, in the West Iran is almost as demonized as Russia, so for the Neocons to lump the two together makes for a good talking point.  But we should not declare that these are all “Neocon lies” just because the Neocons are using Russia to demonize Iran and Iran to demonize Russia.  If anything, I think that Iran very much deserves a public expression of gratitude and admiration by Russia.  Because even if the Iranians have not sold a single drone to Russia, they are clearly and openly supporting Russia in her desire to overcome the Great Satan and create a multipolar world.

Whatever may be the case, I think that this entire Iranian drone topic is a non-issue other than I very much welcome an increase in the effective use of UAV by Russia against NATO absolutely irrespective of where these UAVs have been built or who designed them.

Did I mention that the crazies in Kiev has declared that they have a “anti-UAV dome” over Kiev (the name must be an attempt to copy/brown-nose Israel)?  Here is how this all looks like:

1: the mystery UAV. 2: the Ukie anti-UAV “dome” in action. 3: the inevitable outcome

Finally, this begs the question “are the Russian lying about the Iranian drones”?

Frankly, I don’t know.  But here is what I do know:

In his recent press conference Putin declared: ” There is no need for massive strikes now. Other tasks are on the agenda because I think out of the 29 targets the Defence Ministry had planned to hit, only seven were not. But now they are dealing with them gradually. There is no need for massive strikes, at least for now. As for the future, we’ll see.”

Which was immediately interpreted by the usual war-mongering 6th columnist and assorted (pseudo-) “friends of Russia” as a sign of weakness, irresolution and, of course, imminent defeat.

Now, Putin, besides being a former intelligence officer is also a jurist and he is very careful with words.  So let’s take the sentence “There is no need for massive strikes now“.  There are at least three very ambiguous words here: “need”, “massive” and “now”.  Let’s look at them one by one:

• Need: means just what it says, that there is no *need* for X.  That does not mean that there is no “desire” or “rationale” or “advantage” in doing X.  Putin bashers “missed” that.
• Massive: well, if 200 missiles is massive, would 180 be less than massive?  How about 150? 100?  Of course, the Putin bashers also “missed” that.
• Now: did he mean “today” or “this picosecond” or maybe “this month”?  Nobody knows. And, yes, of course, the Putin bashers also “missed” that.

But the main thing which Putin bashers missed, or did not want to see, is that the missile strikes DID continue.  In fact, accordintg to “Ze” they have already destroyed at least 30% (which means that in reality the damage is much bigger!) of Ukrainian power generation capabilities and there are no signs that these strikes will stop anytime soon.

Besides, Putin also said “As for the future, we’ll see“.  When does “the future” begin?  Technically, as soon as these words were spoken!

So did Putin *lie*?  No, not technically, but he was definitely “cute with words” and that was good enough for the idiots in NATO to believe that the missile strikes were over.  They found out the next day that they were very mistaken, but by then it was too late.

Another example – here is what Peskov said about the Iranian drones: ““No, we have no such information. Russian hardware is being used. You know it well. It has Russian designations. All further questions can be addressed to the Defense Ministry“.  Wait, what?!  What “further questions”?  Also, you can apply a Russian “designation” to anything, even something procured abroad.  Peskov is also being “cute with words” here.

The bottom line is this: deception is a key instrument of war, but constant lies destroy your credibility.  Are the Russian capable of lying?  Absolutely, let’s not be naive.  But, when given the option, Russian politicians prefer to be ambiguous, “cute with words” or any other expression you like.  They try to lie less than NATO (which is solely and only about optics, PYSOPS, PR, propaganda, etc. etc. etc.) and they try to not be to crude about it.

So can we take Russian or Iranian denials to the bank?

I would highly advise against it.

Two: the NS1/NS2 sabotage rigmarole (aka MH17 revisited)

You got to give it to EU politicians: they are funny.  Unless you live under their yoke that it.  In this case, the Eurolemmings first declared that Russia would have zero access to investigation of the sabotage of NS1/NS2 (MH-17 anyone?) only to then declare that they will all investigate separately but not share results.  Especially Sweden which was clearly given the “cleanup job” by Uncle Shmuel.  As for the Germans, they really don’t fear ridicule: they announced that it was definitely sabotage, but nobody knows by whom.  Apparently, being Uncle Shmuel’s bitch is what is expected of the comprador leaders of occupied Germany…

Check out this footage of the damage for yourself:

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/wSu7GMdvibp8

You can also access the Rumble version by clicking here: https://rumble.com/v1okzp2-ns12-footage-of-damage.html.

Even with Biden’s direct admission on record, the Eurolemmings have absolutely NO IDEA who could possibly have sabotaged NS1/NS2.  At best, they will mention Russia as a possible culprit 🙂

We can expect these ridiculous and spineless losers to go “full MH17” and use all the same bag of dirty tricks (beginning, of course, with the exclusion of Russia from the investigation because… … uh… … well, Russia is evil, you know?!)

Sure, the “winter is coming”, metaphorically and literally, but for the time being the folks in the West keep themselves entertained with the usual russophobic hatred:

In reality this image shows a Serbian bridge destroyed by NATO!

Then there is this masterpiece:

Which brings us right back to this during the NATO aggression against Libya:

I guess some things never change, including the Western political discourse…  That, and a very pathological obsession with sexual topics (the West is clearly the most sexually dysfunctional part of the planet right now).

Three: so where do we go from here?

First, there is going to be more of the same, that is that the West will continue to rely on terrorism as one of its main weapons against Russia.  Most of you must have heard about the massacre of Russian soldiers in training by Takfiri terrorists (and we all know who runs the Takfiri terrorists wordwide!) but you probably did not hear that the Belarussian security services have prevented a number of terrorist actions in Belarus (see machine translated article about this here).

And since there are always more potential targets than resources to guard them, we can, alas, safely assume that terrorist attacks in Russia will continue.  And no, Putin will not resurrect the Smersh (sorry nostalgic emo-Marxists!) and Russia will not turn into the USSR or WWII.  Not because Putin does not want that (and he does definitely NOT want that), but because the people of Russia don’t want that: Russia will remain a free and open society even if the price to pay for that are regular terror attacks.  Now, eventually and inevitably, the Russian society will change as the war against NATO will take many months, possibly years, and the entire Russian society will have to gradually switch over to a full “war mode” including not only the economy, but also counter-terrorism operations.

[Sidebar: this war has already profoundly changed Russia and, I would argue, for the better.  The 5th column is basically dead.  The Atlantic Integrationists either gone or in deep concealment.  The 6th column made the max of the so-called Russian “defeats” and “imminent collapse” but right now only a really terminally dumb person can still fail to “smell the coffee” and wake up to reality.  Scores of “Russian” liberals (who were very much represented in the media, entertainment, music, arts, etc.) have either emigrated (usually to Israel, Poland, the UK or one of the three Baltic statelets) or gone into a deep depression.  The Russian legislature is passing law after law to make it harder to deliberately spread NATO PSYOPs and now rather than facing the support and admiration of “liberals” in Russia and abroad, doing so exposes you to fines and even incarceration.  What used to be a fun lifestyle for the “Russian” liberals is gradually turning into a nightmare.  The bottom line is this: wars polarize and that polarization makes it much easier to get a grasp of “who is really who”.  Even a hardcore 6thy columnist like Strelkov/Girkin eventually had to stop flipping is lips and volunteered to join the Russian forces in combat.  Whatever his real motives, I will say that is an honorable and courageous action which not 5th columnist or liberal has had the courage to imitate – at least so far and to my knowledge.  I am pretty sure that the Russia which will emerge (victorious, of course) from this war will be a very different Russia from the Russia which fought it until now.  In a terrible way this war might well be salvific for the peoples of Russia: it is, after all, a war for the very survival of the Russian civilizational realm!]

There are also a lot of rumors and “things brewing” which we should prepare for.  I will just bullet point a few of them here:

• Right now large NATO forces are assembling in several locations to continue the current “lives for optics” operation in which the Ukrainians exchange lives en masse for the pleasure of twitting about “strategic advances” while gaining a few square kilometers here and there.
• Russian sources are claiming that some kind of unconventional attack is being prepared against Kherson and the ZNPP.
• Russian sources are also claiming that NATO is concentrating artillery/missile forces for massive (?) strikes against the city of Kherson.
• For these reasons, the authorities in Kherson have made it possible for the civilians who want to leave to do so and temporarily relocate to a safer location.  That does, of course, NOT mean that the Russians plan to withdraw from Kherson, if only because under Russian law it is now Russian territory.
• Russian missile strikes are continuing, mostly against power plants and command posts.  Since “Ze” has made the posting of videos of Russian attacks illegal, only the attacks on big cities/towns are featured in the social media.  The Russian attacks on military command centers are almost never recorded or shown.
• The Russians are also doing “something” to Starlink and Musk (whose “proud resistance” to the Pentagon lasted less than 24 hours!) even claimed that the Russians might take the entire system down.  Right now Russian interference seems to be centered around the areas near the line of contact, but that could change anytime the Russian GS decides that the time has come.  If things get even worse, western UAV and AWACS will experience “technical problems” next.
• In what I call “Zone B” (i.e. the free world) the US is losing one ally after another, the latest one to defect to the Russian side is, of all countries, Saudi Arabia which first told Biden to get lost over OPEC+ and which now wants to join the BRICS!  Can’t say I am a big fan of the KSA, but I am all for it joining the BRICS if that is what they want.

Last but not least, is the “something’s up” feeling,

As of today, the Russians and Belorussians have created a joint force which is of great concern the the folks in Kiev and Lvov.  This does not mean that Belarusian units (or individual soldiers) are about to cross the border and attack but, just as with the initial feint around Kiev, this creates a major headache for NATO planners who cannot allocate all their resources towards the lines of contact in the eastern Ukraine.  And, if and when needed, this force (whose size is unclear, but appears to be significant) could, of course, be used, especially if the Hyena of Europe decides to bite off a piece of Banderastan (or Belarus!).  There is overwhelming evidence that Russia is also preparing a large force for some kind of operation, but I cannot even guess where this force(s) might be used or how.

Conclusion: a planet divided for the foreseeable future

What we are seeing is the creation of two parts of our planet: the AngloZionist Hegemony (in which only the USA and Israel have agency, the rest are colonies, occupied countries, volunteer slaves, etc.) and the Multipolar Free World.  While the two blocks are not technically at war with each other, in reality they already very much are.  Russia and Iran are bearing most of the military burden while other free countries quietly try to either stay out and keep a low profile or, even more quietly, assist China and rest of the Multipolar Free World to prevail economically.  Of course, the AngloZionist Hegemony is using every means it has to subvert not only Russia, but also China, Iran and any other country daring to declare even a modicum of sovereignty.

The eventual and inevitable outcome of this confrontation is not in doubt, at least not to those who are aware of reality.  It is not the outcome which I fear (in fact I await it with great anticipation!) but the potentially enormous costs of defeating the West’s last Crusade (last time Russia lost 27 million people, most of them innocent civilians, and that did not even do the full job – hence today’s war).  I will never stop repeating that while most of the US and NATO forces are a sad joke, the US nuclear triad and the USN’s submarine force are both still world class and extremely dangerous and capable (and US SSNs come with not only anti-submarine and anti-surface capabilities, but also with land-attack missiles).

This is why it is absolutely crucial for Russia to turn up the pain dial steadily but SLOWLY.

Those dimwits who constantly advocate for “firm Russian actions” and simply “hit them hard!” are clueless civilians from countries who never won a real war adn who have no idea whatsoever about modern warfare or about the immense risks their warmongering hysterics create for our entire planet.  I can sincerely say that I thank God that Putin is a very careful type who fully understands that there are no “quickfix solutions” to denazifying and demilitarizing the AngloZionist Hegemony.

And yes, Russia will continue to unilaterally and gradually rotating up the pain dial, and Russia will do so without feeling the need to seek approval from those who have never won a war but who believe that wars are won by “showing toughness”.

Andrei

Russia courts Muslim countries as strategic Eurasian partners

Thursday, 13 October 2022 7:10 PM  [ Last Update: Friday, 14 October 2022 9:14 AM ]

Iranian President Ebrahim Raeisi (L) and Russian President Vladimir Putin (R) attend the CICA summit in Astana, Kazakhstan on October 13, 2022.

By Pepe Escobar

Everything that matters in the complex process of Eurasia integration was once again at play in Astana, as the – renamed – Kazakh capital hosted the 6th Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA).

The roll call was a Eurasian thing of beauty – featuring the leaders of Russia and Belarus (EAEU), West Asia (Azerbaijan, Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Qatar, Palestine) and Central Asia (Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan).

China and Vietnam (East and Southeast Asia) attended at the level of vice presidents.

CICA is a multinational forum focused on cooperation toward peace, security, and stability across Asia.,Kazakh President Tokayev revealed that CICA has just adopted a declaration to turn the forum into an international organization.  

CICA has already established a partnership with the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU). So in practice, it will soon be working together side-by-side with the SCO, the EAEU and certainly BRICS+.

The Russia-Iran strategic partnership was prominently featured at CICA, especially after Iran being welcomed to the SCO as a full member.

President Raeisi, addressing the forum, stressed the crucial notion of an emerging  “new Asia”, where “convergence and security” are “not compatible with the interests of hegemonic countries and any attempt to destabilize independent nations has goals and consequences beyond national geographies, and in fact, aims to target the stability and prosperity of regional countries.”

For Tehran, being a partner in the integration of CICA, within a maze of pan-Asia institutions, is essential after all these decades of”maximum pressure” unleashed by the Hegemon.

Moreover, it opens an opportunity, as Raeisi noted, for Iran to profit from “Asia’s economic infrastructure.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin, predictably, was the star of the show in Astana. It’s essential to note that Putin is supported by “all”nations represented at CICA.

High-level bilaterals with Putin included the Emir of Qatar: everyone that matters in West Asia wants to talk to “isolated” Russia.      

Putin called for “compensation for the damage caused to the Afghans during the years of occupation” (we all know the Empire of Chaos, Lies and Plunder will refuse it), and emphasized the key role of the SCO to develop Afghanistan.

He stated that Asia, “where new centers of power are growing stronger, plays a big role in the transition to a multipolar world order”.

He warned, “there is a real threat of famine and large-scale shocks against the backdrop of volatility in energy and food prices in the world.”

Hefurther called for the end of a financial system that benefits the “Golden billion” – who “live at the expense of others” (there’s nothing “golden” about this “billion”: at best such definition of wealth applies to 10 million.)

And he stressed that Russia is doing everything to “form a system of equal and indivisible security”. Exactly what drives the hegemonic imperial elites completely berserk.

“Offer you can’t refuse” bites the dust

The imminent juxtaposition between CICA and the SCO and EAEU is yet another instance of how the pieces of the complex Eurasia jigsaw puzzle are coming together.

Turkey and Saudi Arabia – in theory, staunch imperial military allies – are itching to join the SCO, which has recently welcomed Iran as a full member. 

That spells out Ankara and Riyadh’s geopolitical choice of forcefully eschewing the imperial Russophobia cum Sinophobia offensive.  

Erdogan, as an observer at the recent SCO summit in Samarkand, sent out exactly this message. The SCO is fast reaching the point where we may have, sitting at the same table, and taking important consensual decisions, not only the “RICs” (Russia, India, China) in BRICS (soon to be expanded to BRICS+) but arguably the top players inMuslim countries: Iran, Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Qatar.

This evolving process, not without its serious challenges, testifies to the concerted Russia-China drive to incorporate the lands of Islam as essential strategic partners in forging the post-Western multipolar world. Call it a soft Islamization of multipolarity.  

No wonder the Anglo-American axis is absolutely petrified.

Now cut to a graphic illustration of all of the above – the way it’s being played in the energy markets: the already legendary Opec+ meeting in Vienna a week ago.

A tectonic geopolitical shift was inbuilt in the – collective – decision to slash oil production by 2 million barrels a day.

The Saudi Foreign Ministry issued a very diplomatic note with a stunning piece of information for those equipped to read between the lines.

For all practical purposes, the combo behind the teleprompter reader in Washington had issued a trademark Mafia threat to stop “protection” to Riyadh if the decision on the oil cuts was taken before the US mid-term elections. 

Only this time the “offer you can’t refuse” didn’t bite. OPEC+ made a collective decision, led by Russia, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. 

Following Putin and MBS famously getting along, it was up to Putin to host UAE President Sheikh Zayed – or MBZ, MBS’s mentor – at the stunning Konstantinovsky Palace in St. Petersburg, which datesback to Peter the Great.

That was a sort of informal celebration of how OPEC+ had provoked, with a single move, a superpower strategic debacle when it comes to the geopolitics of oil, which the Empire had controlled for a century. 

Everyone remembers, after the bombing, invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003, how US neo-cons bragged, “we are the new OPEC”.

Well, not anymore. And the move had to come from the Russians and US Persian Gulf “allies” when everyone expected that would happen the day a Chinese delegation lands in Riyadh and asks for payment of all the energy they need in yuan.

OPEC+ called the American bluff and left the superpower high’n dry. So what are they going to do to “punish” Riyadh and Abu Dhabi? Call CENTCOM in Qatar and Bahrain to mobilize their aircraft carriers and unleash regime change?

What’s certain is that the Straussian/neocon psychos in charge in Washington will double down on hybrid war.

The art of “spreading instability”

In St. Petersburg, as he addressed MBZ, Putin made it clear that it’s OPEC+ – led by Russia, Saudi Arabia and the UAE – that is now setting the pace to “stabilize global energy markets” so consumers and suppliers would “feel calm, stable and confident” and supply and demand “would be balanced”.

On the gas front, at Russian Energy Week, Gazprom CEO Alexey Miller made it clear that Russia may still “save” Europe from an energy black hole.

Nord Stream (NS) and Nord Stream 2 (NS2) may become operational: but all political roadblocks must be removed before any repairing work starts on the pipelines.

And on West Asia, Miller said additions to Turk Stream have already been planned, much to the delight of Ankara, keen to become a key energy hub. 

In a parallel track, it’s absolutely clear that the G7’s desperate gambit of imposing an oil price cap – which translates as the weaponization of sanctions extended to the global energy market – is a losing proposition.

Slightly over a month before hosting the G20 in Bali, Indonesian Finance Minister Sri Mulyani Indrawati could not make it clearer: “When the United States is imposing sanctions using economic instruments, that creates a precedent for everything”, spreading instability “not only for Indonesia but for all other countries.”

Meanwhile, allMuslim-majority countries are paying very close attention to Russia. The Russia-Iran strategic partnership is now advancing in parallel to the Russia-Saudi-UAE entente as crucial vectors of multipolarity.

In the near future, all these vectors are bound to unite in what ideally should be a supra-organization capable of managing the top story of the 21^st century: Eurasia integration.    

Pepe Escobar is a veteran journalist, author and independent geopolitical analyst focused on Eurasia.

(The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of Press TV.)

---

Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.ir

www.presstv.co.uk

Asia’s future takes shape in Vladivostok, the Russian Pacific

September 08, 2022

by Pepe Escobar, posted with the author’s permission and widely cross-posted

Sixty-eight countries gathered on Russia’s far eastern coast to listen to Moscow’s economic and political vision for the Asia-Pacific

The Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) in Vladivostok is one of the indispensable annual milestones for keeping up not only with the complex development process of the Russian Far East but major plays for Eurasia integration.

Mirroring an immensely turbulent 2022, the current theme in Vladivostok is ‘On the Path to a Multipolar World.’ Russian President Vladimir Putin himself, in a short message to business and government participants from 68 nations, set the stage:

“The obsolete unipolar model is being replaced by a new world order based on the fundamental principles of justice and equality, as well as the recognition of the right of each state and people to their own sovereign path of development. Powerful political and economic centers are taking shape right here in the Asia-Pacific region, acting as a driving force in this irreversible process.”

In his speech to the EEF plenary session, Ukraine was barely mentioned. Putin’s response when asked about it: “Is this country part of Asia-Pacific?”

The speech was largely structured as a serious message to the collective west, as well as to what top analyst Sergey Karaganov calls the “global majority.” Among several takeaways, these may be the most relevant:

• Russia as a sovereign state will defend its interests.
• Western sanctions ‘fever’ is threatening the world – and economic crises are not going away after the pandemic.
• The entire system of international relations has changed. There is an attempt to maintain world order by changing the rules.
• Sanctions on Russia are closing down businesses in Europe. Russia is coping with economic and tech aggression from the west.
• Inflation is breaking records in developed countries. Russia is looking at around 12 percent.
• Russia has played its part in grain exports leaving Ukraine, but most shipments went to EU nations and not developing countries.
• The “welfare of the ‘Golden Billion’ is being ignored.”
• The west is in no position to dictate energy prices to Russia.
• Ruble and yuan will be used for gas payments.
• The role of Asia-Pacific has significantly increased.

In a nutshell: Asia is the new epicenter of technological progress and productivity.

No more an ‘object of colonization’ 

Taking place only two weeks before another essential annual gathering – the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Samarkand – it is no wonder some of the top discussions at the EEF revolve around the increasing economic interpolation between the SCO and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

This theme is as crucial as the development of the Russian Arctic: at 41 percent of total territory, that’s the largest resource base in the federation, spread out over nine regions, and encompassing the largest Special Economic Zone (SEZ) on the planet, linked to the free port of Vladivostok. The Arctic is being developed via several strategically important projects processing mineral, energy, water and biological natural resources.

So it’s perfectly fitting that Austria’s former foreign minister Karin Kneissel, self-described as “a passionate historian,” quipped about her fascination at how Russia and its Asian partners are tackling the development of the Northern Sea Route: “One of my favorite expressions is that airlines and pipelines are moving east. And I keep saying this for twenty years.”

Amidst a wealth of roundtables exploring everything from the power of territory, supply chains and global education to “the three whales” (science, nature, human), arguably the top discussion this Tuesday at the forum was centered on the role of the SCO.

Apart from the current full members – Russia, China, India, Pakistan, four Central Asians (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan), plus the recent accession of Iran – no less than 11 further nations want to join, from observer Afghanistan to dialogue partner Turkey.

Grigory Logvinov, the SCO’s deputy secretary general, stressed how the economic, political and scientific potential of players comprising “the center of gravity” for Asia – over a quarter of the world’s GDP, 50 percent of the world’s population – has not been fully harvested yet.

Kirill Barsky, from the Moscow State Institute of International Relations, explained how the SCO is actually the model of multipolarity, according to its charter, compared to the backdrop of “destructive processes” launched by the west.

And that leads to the economic agenda in the Eurasian integration progress, with the Russian-led Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) configured as the SCO’s most important partner.

Barsky identifies the SCO as “the core Eurasian structure, forming the agenda of Greater Eurasia within a network of partnership organizations.” That’s where the importance of the cooperation with ASEAN comes in.

Barsky could not but evoke Mackinder, Spykman and Brzezinski – who regarded Eurasia “as an object to be acted upon the wishes of western states, confined within the continent, away from the ocean shores, so the western world could dominate in a global confrontation of land and sea. The SCO as it developed can triumph over these negative concepts.”

And here we hit a notion widely shared from Tehran to Vladivostok:

Eurasia no longer as “an object of colonization by ‘civilized Europe’ but again an agent of global policy.”

‘India wants a 21st Asian century’

Sun Zuangnzhi from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) elaborated on China’s interest in the SCO. He focused on achievements: In the 21 years since its founding, a mechanism to establish security between China, Russia and Central Asian states evolved into “multi-tiered, multi-sector cooperation mechanisms.”

Instead of “turning into a political instrument,” the SCO should capitalize on its role of dialogue forum for states with a difficult history of conflicts – “interactions are sometimes difficult” – and focus on economic cooperation “on health, energy, food security, reduction of poverty.”

Rashid Alimov, a former SCO secretary general, now a professor at the Taihe Institute, stressed the “high expectations” from Central Asian nations, the core of the organization. The original idea remains – based on the indivisibility of security on a trans-regional level in Eurasia.

Well, we all know how the US and NATO reacted when Russia late last year proposed a serious dialogue on “indivisibility of security.”

As Central Asia does not have an outlet to the sea, it is inevitable, as Alimov stressed, that Uzbekistan’s foreign policy privileges involvement in accelerated intra-SCO trade. Russia and China may be the leading investors, and now “Iran also plays an important role. Over 1,200 Iranian companies are working in Central Asia.”

Connectivity, once again, must increase: “The World Bank rates Central Asia as one of the least connected economies in the world.”

Sergey Storchak of Russian bank VEB explained the workings of the “SCO interbank consortium.” Partners have used “a credit line from the Bank of China” and want to sign a deal with Uzbekistan. The SCO interbank consortium will be led by the Indians on a rotation basis – and they want to step up its game. At the upcoming summit in Samarkand, Storchak expects a road map for the transition towards the use of national currencies in regional trade.

Kumar Rajan from the School of International Studies of the Jawaharlal Nehru University articulated the Indian position. He went straight to the point: “India wants a 21st Asian century. Close cooperation between India and China is necessary. They can make the Asian century happen.”

Rajan remarked how India does not see the SCO as an alliance, but committed to the development and political stability of Eurasia.

He made the crucial point about connectivity revolving around India “working with Russia and Central Asia with the INSTC” – the International North South Transportation Corridor, and one of its key hubs, the Chabahar port in Iran: “India does not have direct physical connectivity with Central Asia. The INSTC has the participation of an Iranian shipping line with 300 vessels, connecting to Mumbai. President Putin, in the [recent] Caspian meeting, referred directly to the INSTC.”

Crucially, India not only supports the Russian concept of Greater Eurasia Partnership but is engaged in setting up a free trade agreement with the EAEU: Prime Minister Narendra Modi, incidentally, came to the Vladivostok forum last year.

In all of the above nuanced interventions, some themes are constant. After the Afghanistan disaster and the end of the US occupation there, the stabilizing role of the SCO cannot be overstated enough. An ambitious road map for cooperation is a must – probably to be approved at the Samarkand summit. All players will be gradually changing to trade in bilateral currencies. And creation of transit corridors is leading to the progressive integration of national transit systems.

Let there be light

A key roundtable on the ‘Gateway to a Multipolar World’ expanded on the SCO role, outlining how most Asian nations are “friendly” or “benevolently neutral” when it comes to Russia after the start of the Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine.

So the possibilities for expanding cooperation across Eurasia remain practically unlimited. Complementarity of economies is the main factor. That would lead, among other developments, to the Russian Far East, as a multipolar hub, turning into “Russia’s gateway to Asia” by the 2030s.

Wang Wen from the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies stressed the need for Russia to rediscover China – finding “mutual trust in the middle level and elites level”. At the same time, there’s a sort of global rush to join BRICS, from Saudi Arabia and Iran to Afghanistan and Argentina:

“That means a new civilization model for emerging economies like China and Argentina because they want to rise up peacefully (…) I think we are in the new civilization age.”

B. K. Sharma from the United Service Institution of India got back to Spykman pigeonholing the nation as a rimland state. Not anymore: India now has multiple strategies, from connecting to Central Asia to the ‘Act East’ policy. Overall, it’s an outreach to Eurasia, as India “is not competitive and needs to diversify to get better access to Eurasia, with logistical help from Russia.“

Sharma stresses how India takes SCO, BRICS and RICs very seriously while seeing Russia playing “an important role in the Indian Ocean.” He nuances the Indo-Pacific outlook: India does not want Quad as a military alliance, privileging instead “interdependence and complementarity between India, Russia and China.”

All of these discussions interconnect with the two overarching themes in several Vladivostok roundtables: energy and the development of the Arctic’s natural resources.

Pavel Sorokin, Russian First Deputy Minister of Energy, dismissed the notion of a storm or typhoon in the energy markets: “It’s a far cry from a natural process. It’s a man-made situation.” The Russian economy, in contrast, is seen by most analysts as slowly but surely designing its Arctic/Asian cooperation future – including, for instance, the creation of a sophisticated trans-shipment infrastructure for Liquified Natural Gas (LNG).

Energy Minister Nikolay Shulginov made sure that Russia will actually increase its gas production, considering the rise of LNG deliveries and the construction of Power of Siberia-2 to China: “We will not merely scale up the pipeline capacity but we will also expand LNG production: it has mobility and excellent purchases on the global market.”

On the Northern Sea Route, the emphasis is on building a powerful, modern icebreaker fleet – including nuclear. Gadzhimagomed Guseynov, First Deputy Minister for the Development of the Far East and the Arctic, is adamant: “What Russia has to do is to make the Northern Sea Route a sustainable and important transit route.”

There is a long-term plan up to 2035 to create infrastructure for safe shipping navigation, following an ‘Arctic best practices’ of learning step by step. NOVATEK, according to its deputy chairman Evgeniy Ambrosov, has been conducting no less than a revolution in terms of Arctic navigation and shipbuilding in the last few years.

Kniessel, the former Austrian minister, recalled that she always missed the larger geopolitical picture in her discussions when she was active in European politics (she now lives in Lebanon): “I wrote about the passing of the torch from Atlanticism to the Pacific. Airlines, pipelines and waterways are moving East. The Far East is actually Pacific Russia.”

Whatever Atlanticists may think of it, the last word for the moment might belong to Vitaly Markelov, from the board of directors of Gazprom: Russia is ready for winter. There will be warmth and light everywhere.”