Assisted ‘genocide’: How allied weapons embolden Saudi crimes in Yemen

January 25, 2022

By Farah Hajj Hassan

How the Saudi coalition’s crimes began with weapons from allied nations and why they are determined to remain silent.

Assisted Assassinations: How allied weapons enable Saudi crimes in Yemen

As it turns out, the real-life monsters behind the Saudi-led coalition war on Yemen and the massacre of its people are the same champions and cheerleaders of human rights around the world oozing with hypocrisy and double standards. UNICEF has called the situation in Yemen the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, and the UK, France, Canada, and the US are among the countries responsible for making that nightmare a reality.

The US Department of State reports that human rights abuses of Saudi Arabia include, but are not limited to, “unlawful killings, executions for nonviolent offenses, torture, and cases of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment of prisoners, serious restrictions on free expression, the press, and the internet, severe restrictions of religious freedom,” and many many more. As of 2020, Saudi Arabia remains the world’s largest arms importer. Arms sales from the US alone amounted to $3 billion from 2015-2020, agreeing to sell $64.1 billion worth of weapons to Riyadh. 

In what universe does that sound like a government worth funding with weapons? Why then do we not hear the same cries of human rights resounding in the West? Because the west and its previous administrations have long ago sold their soul to the Saudi regime before any of their current administrations can even remember. 

A permanent [bloody] record

US President Joe Biden made foreign policy commitments to end the selling of “offensive” weapons to the kingdom and “end all support” for a war that created a humanitarian catastrophe. 

How did Biden deliver? A major arms sale two months ago, including 280 air-to-air missiles valued at $650 million.

At the time, the Pentagon’s statement said the sale would help to “improve the security of a friendly country that continues to be an important force for political and economic progress in the Middle East.”

Does the US consider economic progress to be the complete destruction and demolishment of a country along with 3,825 murdered children? 

The former administration under Donald Trump shamelessly embraced arms sales to Saudi Arabia that in no doubt helped prolong the war that has killed thousands in what is considered the Arab region’s poorest nation, further destabilizing the already volatile region. 

Unlike Biden, Trump was very public about the economic and diplomatic benefits that would follow the sale, with no regard to the thousands being killed and maimed as a result of the US-designed and manufactured weapons. 

Entesaf Organization for Women and Child Rights in Yemen reported the data, adding that more than 400,000 Yemeni children are suffering from severe malnutrition, 80,000 of whom are at risk of facing death. The number of displaced families as of November has reached 670, 343 in 15 governorates.  Where exactly does Saudi Arabia intend to implement its economic progress in Yemen to allow those families to prosper? 

Britain has been under increased scrutiny over its arms deals to Saudi Arabia and remains silent on the crimes it repeatedly commits. 

The mind-boggling hypocrisy of the west almost has no end. The frenzy that surrounds the defense of Saudi Arabia by its allies can be mirrored with the hysteric defense of “Israel” while it commits its crimes against the Palestinians on a regular basis.

In numerous TV interviews, British and American officials can be shown echoing the same formula we have heard countless times in the last twenty years. Begin with a dictator or lack thereof, blame the people for overthrowing said dictator or supporting him, blame Iran for “emboldening” and training militias, and bam! Claim your get-out-of-jail-free card in international law.

Clean smiles, dirty hands

Other Saudi allies have had their fair share of arms deals that enabled Saudi aggression.

Canada for instance has long been an arms exporter to Saudi Arabia. In 2020, Canada sent close to $2.9 billion of arms hardware to Saudi Arabia. The exports included light-armored vehicles, 31 large-caliber artillery systems, and 152 heavy machine guns

Justin Trudeau, a man who has repeatedly come out and condemned and apologized about residential schools, remains silent regarding the Yemeni children whose schools have been rendered to piles of dust.

In August, Amnesty International Canada and Project Ploughshares urged Canada to end their sales of weapons to Saudi Arabia as a report surfaced accusing the Prime Minister of violating the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) by exporting weapons to Saudi Arabia. The report detailed evidence that weapons from Canada to the Kingdom were used in the war, including LAVs (light-armored vehicles) and sniper rifles. Under the previous Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Canada inked a $12 billion deal to ship Canadian-made LAVs to Saudi Arabia.

France and the UAE: A match made in hell

In December 2021, France signed a deal with the UAE worth $19.20 billion to supply 80 Rafale fighter planes by Dassault Aviation, the largest single purchase of the Dassault-made Rafale outside of the French Army. Human Rights Watch criticized the sale, saying the UAE has played “a prominent role” in the atrocity-ridden war on Yemen. The statement also said that Riyadh was in 2020 the largest buyer of French weapons.

In a report titled “Arms sales: France and the United Arab Emirates, partners in the crimes committed in Yemen,” numerous organizations list how France failed to respect its human rights commitments according to the UN Arms Trade Treaty which “regulates the international trade in conventional arms.” The report details that the UAE is a strategic ally of France and describes the former as a “repressive dictatorship”, where all dissenting voices risk imprisonment or torture, recalling the unjust sentences issued against 69 human rights activists in 2013 after an unfair trial. 

The investigative French website Disclose revealed that France delivered tens of thousands of arms to Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar during President Francois Hollande’s reign in 2016, despite knowing that they would be used in the war on Yemen.

The website quoted “secret defense documents” that “since 2016, France has allowed the delivery of about 150,000 shells” to its two Gulf allies.

The French President met with Mohammed Bin Salman as one of the first western leaders to visit the kingdom since the murder of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.

The hypocrisy with France, in particular, is that it prides itself in its secular mantra, and its policies have mostly targeted Muslims and adopted highly anti-Islamic rhetoric. Macron’s cozying up to MBS tells a different story, with the Secretary-General of Amnesty International commenting on the move by suggesting that it is part of a “rehabilitation” policy of the Saudi Prince. She expressed, “It grieves me that it is France, a country of human rights, which is used as the tool of this policy.” 

Typhoons of misery for Yemen

Over half of Saudi’s combat aircraft deployed in bombing operations in Yemen are provided by none other than the UK.

The United Kingdom signed off on arms exports worth nearly $1.9 billion to Saudi Arabia between July and September 2020 following the lifting of a ban on weapons sales to the Gulf country. “UK-made weapons have played a devastating role in the Saudi-led attacks on Yemen, and the humanitarian crisis they have created, yet the UK government has done everything it can to keep the arms sales flowing,” said Sarah Waldron, a spokesperson for the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT). 

The published value of UK arms export to the Saudi-led coalition since the beginning of the war is £6.9 billion, and CAAT estimates that the real value is over £20 billion.

Between January 2015 and December 2019, the British government approved 385 licenses for the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia. The UK Government has confirmed that the Saudi-led coalition attacked Yemen with weaponry that was manufactured in the UK, including Typhoon and Tornado fighter planes, Paveway bombs, and Brimstone and Stormshadow missiles. 

The British government has also admitted that precision-guided weapons have also been used in the war on Yemen. 

The Mwatana’s 2019 report “Day of Judgement: the role of the US and Europe in civilian death, destruction, and trauma in Yemen,” dissects the details of UK weapons and attacks on civilians in Yemen including an attack on a community college, warehouse, and multiple factories. 

Raining missiles 

Days ago, the Yemeni Armed Forces announced “carrying out a qualitative military operation, Yemen Hurricane, in response to the escalation of aggression against the country.” The operation targeted Abu Dhabi’s airport, the oil refinery in Mussafah in Abu Dhabi, and several other sites in the UAE.

Ali Al-Qahoum, a member of Ansar Allah Political Bureau, blessed the Yemeni operation in the UAE depth, saying that “this operation and others will continue as long as the aggression and siege continue with strategic goals further ahead.”

Yemeni victims of the Saudi-led war filed a complaint against Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan for financing terrorism.

The complaint was submitted on behalf of the Yemeni NGO, the Legal Center for Rights and Development, which is based in the Yemeni capital, Sanaa.

The war on Yemen in numbers

Nowhere to run

The megaphones of human rights campaigns and global petitions against the war on Yemen must be amplified, keeping in mind that the enemy is not Ansar Allah, neither is it the Palestinians, nor is it the Lebanese, or the Chinese, or the Russians. The true enemy of the West is the Axis of Resistance. Time has proven that a refusal to kneel to the demands of the West is all it takes to become an enemy. 

If the cries of the virtuous remain unheard and the coalition and governments complicit in the massacres refuse to listen, then the Yemeni people surely will be left with the only other alternative. It was, is, and will always be the only key that unlocks the shackles of oppression and brutality; Resistance. 

And one thing will certainly never change. The Saudi royals, no matter how enshrined in gold, can never cleanse themselves of the crimes they have committed against humanity, for conscience is the one thing they cannot buy. 

Biden: Iran Nuclear Talks Advancing, Not Time To Give Up

Jan 20 2022

BY Staff, Agencies

US President Joe Biden said Wednesday that it is “not time to give up” on the Vienna talks aimed at reviving the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran.

“It’s not time to give up,” Biden said at a press conference to mark his first year in the White House.

“There is some progress being made,” he said.

“P5+1 are on the same page but it remains to be seen,” Biden said in a reference to the nations taking part in the negotiations in Vienna.

Talks to restore the 2015 accord between Tehran and world powers — United States, France, Britain, Russia, China, and Germany — began last year but stopped in June after the election of the administration of Iranian President Sayyed Ebrahim Raisi.

The talks resumed in November.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken claimed last week that there were only “a few weeks left” to save the Iran nuclear deal, and the United States is ready to look at “other options” if the talks fail.

The 2015 deal offered Iran relief from some sanctions that have crippled its economy, in return for curbs on its nuclear program.

Then-president Donald Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the deal in 2018 prompted Tehran to walk back on its commitments.

IRG Chief: Totally Defeated Enemies Are Not Safe Anywhere

January 10, 2022

By Staff, Agencies

Chief Commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard [IRG] Major General Hossein Salami said there is no safe territory for the enemies, as “they have been defeated in all their conspiracies and have been rendered helpless, tired, and disappointed.”

General Salami made the remarks while addressing a ceremony in Tehran on Sunday evening, saying, “We are victorious today and this is what the facts of the field say.”

“Today, the swords of the Muslims to fight the enemies have been unsheathed, and [therefore], there is no safe territory for the enemies,” he said.

Salami further underscored that Iran’s missile strikes against US military bases in Iraq in retaliation for the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, commander of the IRG Quds Force, was a “slap on the face” of the US, which saw itself as the world emperor.

“Whose face was this slap delivered on?” he asked, rhetorically. “It was a stinging slap on the face to the United States, which considered itself the emperor of the world and did not stop making threats of tit-for-tat retaliations.”

General Salami also noted that unlike the Americans, “we did not assassinate a defenseless and unarmed commander, who was fighting terrorism across the Muslim world and had traveled to Iraq at an official invitation, with a drone and in the dead of the night.”

General Qassem Soleimani, Iran’s world-renown counter-terrorism commander, along with Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, second-in-command of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units [PMU], and their companions were killed in a US drone strike authorized by former US president Donald Trump near Baghdad International Airport on January 3, 2020.

Two days after the attack, Iraqi lawmakers approved a bill that requires the government to end the presence of all foreign military forces led by the US in the country.

Both commanders were highly revered across the Middle East because of their key role in fighting the Daesh [Arabic for ‘ISIS/ISIL’] Takfiri terrorist group in the region, particularly in Iraq and Syria.

On January 8, 2020, the IRG targeted the US-run Ain al-Assad in Iraq’s western province of Anbar by launching a volley of missiles in retaliation.

According to the Pentagon, more than 100 American forces suffered “traumatic brain injuries” during the counterstrike on the base.

Iran has described the missile attack on Ain al-Assad as a “first slap.”

Elsewhere in his remarks, General Salami asserted that Iran’s enemies have been defeated.

“Depression and despair can now be seen on the faces of officials from our enemies since they cannot advance their policies,” he noted.

“If we had not resisted, they [enemies] would have taken away our identity, prestige, honor, security, and dignity. The United States, the Zionist regime, some European countries, and reactionary regimes in the region cannot stand the Iranian nation’s stability, splendor, and strength,” the IRG chief added.

General Soleimani’s ’Heroic Struggles Will Never Be Forgotten’ – EU Lawmaker

Jan 09 2022

By Staff, Agencies

A member of the European Parliament condemned “unlawful” US assassination of Iran’s top anti-terror commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani and his Iraqi trenchmate, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.

Clare Daly said the two commanders’ heroic efforts to combat terrorism will never be forgotten and that their legacy will prevail.

“Thinking today of #GeneralSoleimani & #AbuMahdialMuhandis unlawfully assassinated by the #US on this day two years ago..#Anti_terrorism_hero. Their heroic struggles against terrorism will never be forgotten..their legacy will prevail,” Daly said in a tweet on January 3 on the second martyrdom anniversary of the two anti-terror commanders.

Daly embedded in her tweet a Twitter post by the Iranian Embassy in Croatia, in which the diplomatic mission had hailed General Soleimani’s effort to restore regional peace and fight against the Takfiri Daesh [Arabic for ‘ISIS/ISIL’] terrorist group.

The Embassy said former US president Donald Trump, who ordered the assassination, aimed to save Daesh terrorists and protect the legacy of his predecessor, Barack Obama, by conducting such a heinous act. 

“Efforts to bring peace to the region and the fight to save defenseless people from a demon called Daesh, were great concerns of Qassem Soleimani. With the assassination of the Iranian General, Trump sought to save Daesh criminals and protect Obama’s legacy,” the Iranian Embassy tweeted.

General Soleimani, the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard [IRG]’s Quds Force, and his Iraqi comrade al-Muhandis, the second-in-command of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units [PMU], were martyred along with their companions in a US drone strike authorized by Trump near Baghdad International Airport on January 3, 2020.

Both commanders were highly revered across the Middle East because of their key role in fighting Daesh in the region, particularly in Iraq and Syria.

Five days after the barbaric crime, in a military operation codenamed Operation Martyr Soleimani, the IRG launched a volley of ballistic missiles at the Ain al-Assad airbase in Iraq’s western province of Anbar.

Iran said the missile strike was only a “first slap” in its process of taking “hard revenge” and that it would not rest until the US military leaves the Middle East in disgrace.

Iran Blacklists 51 US Officials, Cmdrs. for Involvement in Soleimani Assassination

Jan 09 2022

By Staff, Agencies

Tehran has updated the list of American individuals it blacklisted for involvement in the US assassination of top Iranian counter-terrorism commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani and his companions, adding 51 US officials and commanders to the list.

In a statement released on Saturday, Iran’s Foreign Ministry said the United States, by conducting the “callous terrorist act,” acted in glorification of terrorism and in violation of the fundamental human rights.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran underlines that the heinous terrorist act will not in any manner diminish the resolute determination and resolve of the Islamic Republic of Iran in following the path of the revered General Soleimani in fighting terrorism and terrorist groups, in particular, the US-backed terrorist groups,” the statement read.

On January 3, 2020, the US military conducted an air operation under Trump’s order targeting General Soleimani near Baghdad International Airport after his arrival. The attack also killed the general’s companions, including Deputy Commander of the Popular Mobilization Units [PMU] Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.

The following is the full text of the Iranian Foreign Ministry’s statement and the name of the individuals freshly blacklisted:

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran, in accordance with the “Act on Countering Violations of Human Rights and Adventurist and Terrorist Actions of the United States of America in the Region”, particularly, Articles 4 and 5, and in addition to the American individuals including Donald Trump, Michael Pompeo, John Bolton, Mark Esper, Gina Haspel, Christopher Miller and Steven Mnuchin and also Matthew Tueller, Steven Fagin and Rob Waller, who were listed respectively on 19 January 2021 and 23 October 2020, identifies and imposes sanctions as set forth in the abovementioned Act on the following persons for the role they played in the terrorist act of the United States against Martyr General Qassem Soleimani and his companions, in glorification of terrorism and in violating the fundamental human rights. The said persons, as the case may be, have taken part in decision-making, organizing, financing, and carrying out the terrorist act or have otherwise justified terrorism which is a threat to the international peace and security through supporting such egregious terrorist attack.

It is reiterated that the United States, by conducting the callous terrorist act, has flagrantly breached its international legal obligations in countering terrorism and terrorism-financing, in particular, the obligation to refrain and desist from organizing and participating in terrorist acts and the obligation to respect, protect and fulfill human rights which constitute internationally wrongful acts entailing the international responsibility of the United States. As such, the Islamic Republic of Iran, in conformity and compliance with its human rights obligations and also duties in combating terrorism and countering terrorism financing, in particular the state terrorism perpetrated by the United States and to ensure the international peace and security, imposes the sanctions as stipulated in the Act on the said persons on a reciprocal basis.

The Islamic Republic of Iran underlines that the heinous terrorist act will not in any manner diminish the resolute determination and resolve of the Islamic Republic of Iran in following the path of the revered General Soleimani in fighting terrorism and terrorist groups, in particular, the US-backed terrorist groups.

In the light of the above and taking into account the provisions of the “Act on Countering Violations of Human Rights and Adventurist and Terrorist Actions of the United States of America in the Region”, all relevant national authorities will take appropriate measures for effective implementation of the sanctions set forth in the Act.

The freshly designated Americans are:

Mark Alexander Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Robert Charles O’brien Jr., former national security advisor, Paul M. Nakasone, director of the National Security Agency [NSA] and commander of United States Cyber Command, Robert Greenway, former deputy assistant to the president and senior director for Middle Eastern and North African Affairs at the National Security Council, Victoria C. Gardner Coates, former deputy national security advisor, Matthew F. Pottinger, former deputy national security advisor, Joseph Keith Kellogg Jr., former national security advisor to the vice president, Frank Dixon Whitworth, director for Intelligence of the Joint Staff, Andrew P. Poppas, former director of operations of the Joint Staff, Kenneth Franklin McKenzie Jr., commander of the United States Central Command [CENTCOM], Richard Douglas Clarke, commander of the United States Special Operations Command [SOCOM], Scott Alan Howell, former commander of Joint Special Operations Command [JSOC], James C. Slife, commander of Air Force Special Operations Command [AFSOC], Joseph Thomas Guastella, former commander of United States Air Forces Central Command, David L. Goldfein, former chief of staff of the Air Force, Stephen R. Jones, Jason B.Bell, Andre T. Johnson, Kevin Auger, Jordan Smith, Abishai Giles, Landon Quan, Mark R. August, Bradley Chance Saltzman, Mark Holmes Slocum, Nathan Andrew Mead, Timothy Garland, Staci Coleman, Kurt A. Wendt, Alexus Gregory Grynkewich, Daniel H. Tulley, Rodney Lee Simpson, Allen Ray Henderson, Jason Colon, Brenden Endrina, Tayler Arbaugh, Ryan Kuhn, Jordan Cornelius, Korbin Steinwehr, Antonio Dorce, Charles Seth Corcoran, James Neal Blue, Linden Stanely Blue, Michael Anthony D’andrea, John M. Keane, Reuel Mark Gerecht, Andrew Croft, Nimarta Nikki Haley, John Michael Mulvaney, and Erik Dean Prince.

As Israel Plots Endgame in Occupied Golan, Bennett Must Remember Lessons of the Past

January 5, 2022

Israeli Government approves a plan to double the number of illegal Jewish settlers in the Golan Heights. (Photo: via Prime Minister of Israel Twitter page)

By Ramzy Baroud

With Syria still embroiled in its own war, Israel has been actively rewriting the rule book regarding its conduct in this Arab country. Gone are the days of a potential return of the illegally occupied Golan Heights to Syrian sovereignty in exchange for peace, per the language of yesteryears. Now, Israel is set to double its illegal Jewish settler population in the Golan, while Israeli bombs continue to drop with a much higher frequency on various Syrian targets.

Indeed, a one-sided war is underway, casually reported as if a routine, everyday event. In the last decade, many ‘mysterious’ attacks on Syria were attributed to Israel. The latter neither confirmed nor denied. With the blanket support given to Israel by the Donald Trump administration, which recognized Israel’s illegal annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights of 1981, Israeli reluctance to take credit for the frequent and increasingly destructive and bloody air raids has dissipated.

Briefly, some in the Israeli government were concerned by the possible repercussions of the advent of Joe Biden to the White House in January 2021. They worried that the new president might reverse some of the pro-Israel decisions enacted by his predecessor, including the recognition of the “Sovereignty over the Golan Heights,” due to the “strategic and security importance to the State of Israel”. Biden, a long-time supporter of Israel himself, did no such thing.

The initial concern about a shift in US policy turned into euphoria and, eventually, an opportunity, especially as Israel’s new Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, is eager to break the Right’s historic dominance over the Jewish settlement movement in occupied Palestinian and Arab lands.

“This is our moment. This is the moment of the Golan Heights,” Bennett declared triumphantly at an Israeli government cabinet meeting held specially to officiate plans regarding the further colonization of the Golan on December 26.

The following statement by Bennett speaks volumes about the context of the Israeli decision, and its future intentions: “After long and static years in terms of the scope of settlement, our goal today is to double settlement in the Golan Heights.” The reference to ‘static years’ is an outright rejection of the occasional freezing of settlement construction that mostly took place during the so-called ‘peace process.’ Bennett – who, in June 2021, was embraced by Washington and its western allies as the political antithesis to the obstinate Benjamin Netanyahu – has effectively ended any possibility of a peaceful resolution to Israel’s illegal occupation of the Golan.

Aside from predictable and clichéd responses by Syria and the Arab League, Israel’s massive push to double its settlement activities in the Golan is going largely unnoticed. Not only Israel’s right-wing media, but the likes of Haaretz are also welcoming the government’s investment – estimated at nearly $320 million. The title of David Rosenberg’s article in Haaretz tells the whole story: “Picturesque but Poor, Israel’s Golan Needs a Government Boost to Thrive.” The article decries government ‘neglect’ of the Golan, speaks of employment opportunities and merely challenges Bennett’s government on whether it will “stay the course”. The fact that the occupation of the Golan, like that of Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza, is illegal under international law is absent from Israeli media coverage.

Namely, Israel’s main focus currently is to normalize its occupation of Arab land entirely. But if that mission has failed over the course of 54 years, can it succeed now?

For Israel, the illegal settlement enterprise, whether in the Syrian Golan or in occupied Palestine, is synonymous. It is inspired by deep-rooted ideological and religious beliefs, compelled by economic opportunities and political interests and assuaged by the lack of any meaningful international response.

In the case of the Golan, Israel’s intention was, from the onset, to expand on its agricultural space, as the capture of the fertile Syrian territory almost immediately attracted settlers, who set the stage for massive agricultural settlements. Although the home of merely 25,000 Jewish settlers, the Golan became a major source of Israeli apples, pears and wine grape production. Local tourism in the scenic Golan, dotted with numerous wineries, thrived, especially following the Israeli annexation of the territory in 1981.

The plight of the steadfast Golan Arab Druze population of nearly 23,000 is as irrelevant in the eyes of Israel as that of the millions of occupied Palestinians, whether under siege in Gaza or living under a perpetual occupation or apartheid in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The Golan population is equally isolated and oppressed but, like the Palestinians, continues to resist despite the heavy price of their resistance. Their hardship, however, is likely to increase with the expected doubling of the Jewish settler population.

Israel is, of course, aware that popular uprisings will eventually be mounted in response to its latest colonial endeavors, but various factors must be giving Bennett the confidence to continue with his plans. A major source of reassurance is that it could take Syria years to achieve any degree of political stabilization before mounting any source of challenge to the Israeli occupation. Another is that the Palestinian leadership is in no mood for confrontation, especially that it is, once again, on good terms with Washington, which has resumed its funding of the PA soon after Biden’s inauguration.

Moreover, in Israel, the anti-settlement movement has long subsided, crystallized mostly into smaller political parties that are hardly critical in the formation or toppling of government coalitions.

More importantly, Washington has no interest to initiate any kind of diplomatic efforts to lay the ground for future talks involving Israel, the Palestinians and certainly not Syria. Any such attempt now, or even in coming years would represent a political gamble for Biden’s embattled administration.

Israel understands this absolutely and plans to take advantage of this opportunity, arguably unprecedented since the Madrid talks over thirty years ago. Yet, while Bennett is urging Israelis in their quest for settlement expansion with such battle cries as “this is our moment’, he must not underestimate that the occupied Palestinians and Syrians are also aware that their ‘moment’, too, is drawing near. In fact, all popular Palestinian uprisings of the past were initiated at times when Israel assumed that it had the upper hand, and that people’s resistance has been forever pacified.

Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. His latest is “These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons” (Clarity Press). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website iswww.ramzybaroud.net

Top IRGC’s commander: Trump, other assassins of Gen. Soleimani not safe

January 5, 2022

By IFP Editorial Staff

, Esmail Qa’ani

A senior commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) says ex-US President Donald Trump, who ordered the assassination of Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, and his other partners in crime won’t be out of harm’s way.

At a ceremony on Tuesday marking the martyrdom anniversary of his predecessor, Esmail Qa’ani, who heads the IRGC’s Quds Force, said Iran is determined to avenge General Soleimani’s blood “in its own style.”

“Criminal Trump and his overt and covert partners, such as [his foreign minister] Pompeo are known to us. Martyr Soleimani had repeatedly humiliated Pompeo in the region and they thought they had achieved a victory by assassinating him,” he said.

Nevertheless, Trump and his other partners remain “under the magnifying glass” and they will not be safe, he added.

Addressing the Americans, Qa’ani said, “You imagined that you hit and ran, but the Islamic society and the world’s freedom-seekers will take revenge in a way that you won’t forget as long as you’re alive,” he said.

In the wake of Gen. Soleimani’s murder, Iran and other regional nations were seeking the US withdrawal from the region, Qa’ani said. Something worse, however, happened to the Americans and they were instead expelled.

He added that the people of Iraq, where Gen. Soleimani was targeted in a drone strike in early 2020, and the country’s resistance forces will not tolerate the presence of the remaining 2,000 US troops on their soil.

More on the topic

‘US has no control over consequences of General Soleimani’s assassination’

January 5, 2022

By IFP Editorial Staff

The Iranian Foreign Ministry has announced the assassination of Iran’s top military commander General Qassem Soleimani was a clear example of state terrorism and a violation of the obvious principles of international law.

The ministry made the announcement in a tweet, adding the assassination of the anti-terrorism icon also showed Washington could commit a crime without having any control over consequences thereof.

It also said the absence of rationality in the US actions is the main cause of its decline.

Monday, January 3rd, was the second anniversary of the assassination of General Soleimani in a US drone strike. Iran has called for the trial of the perpetrators of the attack, vowing to also exact revenge on them.

The drone strike, which also killed General Soleimani’s companion Abu Mahdi Muhandis and a few others, was carried out by direct order of former US president Donald Trump.
Trump’s secretary of state Mike Pompeo was instrumental in pushing for the assassination of General Soleimani as well.

More on the topic

Scared Pompeo: Raisi “Arousing All Muslims to Murder Trump and Me” 

 January 4, 2022

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo speaks onstage during a briefing on the past 72 hours events in Mar a Lago, Palm Beach, Florida on December 29, 2019. – Pompeo says they came to brief POTUS on events of past 72 hours Pompeo: We will not stand for the Islamic Republic of Iran to take actions that put American men and women in jeopardy. (Photo by Nicholas Kamm / AFP) (Photo by NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images)

The former US State Secretary Mike Pompeo showed extreme fear and concern during an interview with Fox News in which he intended to respond to the Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi.

President Raisi said Monday that if former US president Trump and Secretary of State Pompeo are not brought to justice, Muslims will avenge the crime they both committed against General Qassem Suleimani Suleimani, the former Head of IRGC’s Quds Force.

On January 3, 2020, a US drone attack claimed the two martyrs Suleimani and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis, the former deputy chief of Hashd Shaabi Committee, after targeting their convoy near Baghdad airport.

Scared Pompeo considered that Raisi’s remarks were unprecedented and posed a risk, adding that the Iranian President is arousing all the Muslims to murder Trump and him.

Calling on Biden administration to “keep every American safe against the threat from Iran”.

Source: Al-Manar Engish Website

Iran Asks UNSC to Hold US, Israel Accountable for Assassination of General Soleimani

Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° 

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran’s Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations Majid Takht Ravanchi called on the UN Security Council to make the US and Israel account for plotting and performing assassination of anti-terror commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani.

“Given the dire implications of this terrorist act on international peace and security, the Security Council must live up to its Charter-based responsibilities and hold the United States and the Israeli regime to account for planning, supporting and committing that terrorist act,” Takht Ravanchi said in a letter to President of the UN Security Council Mona Juul on Sunday.

“Concurrent with the second anniversary of the horrific assassination of Martyr Lieutenant General Qasem Soleimani, the Commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – an official branch of the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran – and his companions, on 3 January 2020 at Baghdad International Airport, at the direct order of the then President of the United States, I would like to bring to your attention the recent information concerning the involvement of the Israeli regime in this heinous terrorist act,” he added.

Takht Ravanchi said that in a recent interview, the former military intelligence chief of the Israeli regime admitted the involvement of the Israeli regime in the premeditated assassination of Martyr Soleimani, stating that the “Israeli intelligence played a part” in that assassination, and described it as “an achievement” and one of the two significant and important assassinations during his term.

“As I have on numerous occasions underlined, including in my letters dated 3 January 2020 (S/2020/13), 7 January 2020 (S/2020/16) and 29 January 2020 (S/2020/81) addressed to the Secretary-General and the President of the Security Council, this internationally wrongful criminal act was a grave breach of the obligations of the United States under international law, thus entails its international responsibility,” he said.

Takht Ravanchi noted that the criminal act also entails the criminal responsibility of all those who had aided, abetted or otherwise assisted and supported, by any means, directly or indirectly, the planning or perpetration of this terrorist act, the clear example of which is the supportive role and the involvement of the Israeli regime in it.

He underlined that martyr Soleimani played a significant role in combatting international terrorism and accordingly was rightfully given the title of the Hero of the Fight against Terrorism and the General of Peace, and therefore his cowardly assassination was a big gift and service to Daesh (ISIL) and other Security Council designated terrorist groups in the region who welcomed his assassination, calling it “an act of divine intervention that benefitted” them.

“Given the dire implications of this terrorist act on international peace and security, the Security Council must live up to its Charter-based responsibilities and hold the United States and the Israeli regime to account for planning, supporting and committing that terrorist act.”

“In line with our rights and obligations under international law, the Iranian armed forces are determined to vigorously continue Martyr Soleimani’s path in actively assisting regional nations and governments, upon their requests, to combat foreign-backed terrorist groups in the region until they are uprooted completely,” the Iranian envoy concluded.

Former Commander of the IRGC Qods Force Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, his Iraqi trenchmate Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the second-in-command of Iraq’s PMU, and ten of their deputies were martyred by an armed drone strike as their convoy left Baghdad International Airport on January 3, 2020. The attack was ordered by then US President Donald Trump.

To date, Iran’s chief civilian prosecutor has indicted tens of individuals in connection with the assassination, among them former president Trump, the head of US Central Command General Kenneth McKenzie Jr., and former US Secretaries of State and Defense Mike Pompeo and Mark Esper.

The file remains open to the further addition of individuals that Tehran determines to have played a role in the killing.

Both commanders were highly popular because of their key role in fighting against the ISIL terrorist group in the region, particularly in Iraq and Syria.

Back in January 2020, two days after the assassination, the Iraqi parliament passed a law requiring the Iraqi government to end the presence of the US-led foreign forces in the Arab country.

Last year, Baghdad and Washington reached an agreement on ending the presence of all US combat troops in Iraq by the end of 2021.

The US military declared the end of its combat mission in Iraq this month, but resistance forces remain bent on expelling all American forces, including those who have stayed in the country on the pretext of training Iraqi forces or playing an advisory role.

Since the assassination, Iraqi resistance forces have ramped up pressure on the US military to leave their country, targeting American bases and forces on numerous occasions, at one point pushing the Americans to ask them to “just leave us alone”.

Iran and Iraq in a joint statement earlier this month underlined their determination to identify, prosecute and punish the culprits behind the assassination of General Soleimani and al-Muhandis.

Iran and Iraq have issued a joint statement on an investigation into the “criminal and terrorist” assassination by the US of top anti-terror commanders of the two countries in Baghdad in 2020, Iranian Judiciary Deputy Chief and Secretary-General of Iran’s Human Rights Headquarters Kazzem Qaribabadi said.

He added that the statement was issued during the second session of a joint Iran-Iraq committee investigating the murder of General Soleimani and al-Muhandis.

Qaribabadi said that in the statement, Iran and Iraq stressed that the assassinations were a “violation of the rules of international law, including relevant international conventions on the fight against terrorism”.

Martyr Soleimani More Powerful than General Soleimani

January 4, 2022

By: Kayhan Int’l Staff Writer

Today, the 3rd of January, the Iranian nation is all geared up to commemorate the 2nd anniversary of the martyrdom of one of its greatest generals in history who without the least doubt was also one of the astute diplomats that Iran has produced – and so also several nations of the region whom the martyr inspired.

His funeral and that of his equally brilliant colleague of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units [PMU] was attended by millions of mourners as the coffins passed through several cities of Iraq and Iran.

Yesterday, millions of Baghdadis had poured into the streets to pay tributes to the Martyrs Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, with the determination to achieve the goals for which the two had strived, including the driving out of the US occupation forces from the region.

Qassem Soleimani needs no introduction. He was a Hammer of terrorists, whether non-state actors like the takfiris, or state actors like the US and the illegal Zionist entity.

Though assassinated in the most cowardly manner by the Americans on the orders of the scoundrel Donald Trump, he continues to wield a growing influence on the Resistance Forces, to the horror of the US and ‘Israel’, which had thought that killing the judicious general who was on a diplomatic mission to Iraq, would remove the greatest obstacle to their devilish designs.

They have been proved totally wrong as Martyr Soleimani looms larger than life today, inspiring not just the Iranians, but also the Iraqis, Syrians, Lebanese, Yemenis, Bahrainis, and all other freedom loving oppressed nations determined to drive the CENTCOM terrorists from the region.

As a matter of fact, Martyr Soleimani is today more powerful than General Soleimani, who had ably guided the Iraqis and Syrians in routing the macabrely murderous US-supported Daesh terrorists and thus saving their homelands from becoming a large ‘Takfiristan’ stretching from the Mediterranean Sea to the Gulf.

As a sincere student of the school of that Sage of the Age, Imam Ruhollah Khomeini [RA], he had grown up on the battlefronts of the 8-year war the US had imposed on Iran in the 1980s through its agent Saddam of the repressive Ba’th minority regime of Baghdad.

He soon evolved into a shrewd diplomat during negotiations and a brilliant military strategist on the battlefields – rolled into one – who through his personal courage on the frontlines, molded the Lebanese, Syrians, Iraqis, Palestinians, Yemenis, and resistance units of other countries into formidable forces instilling fears in the hearts of terrorists and their mentors.

This was the reason the dastardly US forces feared him, the takfiri terrorists were terrified of him, the Zionists were frustrated of their plot to dismember Syria, and the filthy rich reactionary Arab regimes hated him for the hundreds of billions of dollars of losses they had incurred in vain in funding and fanning terrorism in Muslim countries.

As commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolution Guard [IRG], his cherished goal was the liberation of holy al-Quds and all of Palestine, which will indeed be achieved, in view of the fact, no less a revolutionary figure that Hamas’ Ismail Haniyeh had hailed him at his funeral ceremony as “Martyr of al-Quds.”

A martyr does not die but is alive and receives sustenance from the Lord Most High in Whose path he gave his life, as is evident by the Ayahs of the holy Quran.

This means the blood of martyrs always triumphs over the swords and other instruments of death that the cowardly use in the vain hope of silencing the brave, as was demonstrated by Imam Husain [AS] in Karbala, and as Martyrs Soleimani, Abu Mahdi, and others have shown, by following the immortal path of the grandson of Prophet Muhammad [SAWA].

No wonder that the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Sayyed Ali Khamenei has hailed Soleimani as a symbol of hope, self-confidence and bravery and a manifestation of resistance and victory.

Related Videos

شهادة قادة النصر وصناعة معادلات القوة/ مع الحدث
Certificate of victory leaders and the manufacture of force equations
The blood of the martyr Soleimani pumped determination into the spirit of the resistance
commemorates the second anniversary of the martyrdom of the two leaders, Soleimani and Al-Muhandis

Related Posts

Raisi: Trump must face justice for Martyr Soleimani

3 Jan 2022

Source: Agencies

By Al Mayadeen Net

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi says Trump and his co-conspirators must face justice for his crime of assassinating Martyrs Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandes

Raisi, speaking at a mass congregation on the anniversary of Soleimani’s martyrdom

Iran has vowed revenge against former US President Donald Trump if he is not put to trial for the killing of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani.
 
“The aggressor and the main assassin, the then president of the United States, must face justice and retribution,” Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi said in a speech today, marking the second anniversary of Soleimani’s martyrdom.
 
“It would be ok if the trial of Mr. Trump, Pompeo and other criminals was held in a fair court where their horrible crimes were addressed and they faced justice for their actions,” he said. “Otherwise, I will tell all US leaders that without a doubt the hand of revenge will emerge from the sleeve of the Muslim nation.”
 
Raisi was addressing a mass gathering at Tehran’s largest prayer hall, at Iran’s main event during the week of commemorations in honor of the martyred general.
 
The Iranian president also called Soleimani a symbol of the Iranian revolution and of “bravery and rationality”.

Iran: 125 suspects identified in assassination

The Assistant Head of the Iranian Judiciary for International Affairs, Kazem Gharibabadi, considered that the United States is directly responsible for the assassination of the martyr Qassem Soleimani.

Gharibabadi revealed in a statement to Iranian television on Sunday that “the majority of the accused are members of the US administration’s structure,” declaring that 125 suspects had been identified in the assassination, explaining that in addition to these accused, there are some other countries that were involved.

Regarding whether the trial for the assassination will be held in Iran or some other place besides the site of the crime, he said, “Deciding on the file is a request to ensure justice worldwide, and Iraq, being the location of the crime, undoubtedly has a court qualified to decide on the crime.”

He stressed that the file of Soleimani’s assassination is being decided on from a criminal standpoint and will be completed soon.

Gharibabadi considered that the US “preemptive” step “has no legal basis,” adding that “according to Article 51 of the United Nations charter, legitimate defense is contained by a state only when there is an act of armed aggression.”

The China Distraction and U.S. Destabilization

December 30, 2021

by Joaquin Flores

Source

Today’s war is a class war of the super elites, and this can be fought and won by the great masses of people against their own oligarchs.

The American deep state is playing upon the public’s distaste of China towards its own ends, and just as with the present global mystery illness, they will blame China for a social credit system which in reality was made in the USA. We can deconstruct the anatomy of this scam through the handling of Covid and biological warfare in general.

This same deep state is trying to springboard or otherwise utilize the incessantly bad behaviour of its own rapacious oligarchy, who it must serve, an oligarchy trapped in a system of capital accumulation at all and any costs, even collective suicide, into some sort of controlled paradigm collapse. The incentive to destroy society is just too great compared to the costs of keeping it together. The super elites themselves, like some super virus, can always just vacate the premises and find some other host to infect. This is a pandemic of speculation, usury, and greed.

An interesting twist which Senator Rand Paul exposed in public hearings on the senate floor, was that the novel Corona virus was produced at Dr. Anthony Fauci’s discretion. This was a project of the U.S. corporate state, of a corrupted U.S. intelligence agency, we conclude from Senator Paul’s findings.

This much is also so well known by now, that it’s reached the level of common knowledge. But we say it again now not to preach about it, but to connect it to a broader problem with social credit and China.

Digging further, we see it was all based upon long-standing plans to upwards distribute wealth and strip away constitutional rights from citizens, further concentrate socio-economic power, and destroy medium and small businesses. By any definition of the term, this is open class warfare being waged by the ruling class against all other classes.

And so this same ruling class has used the politics of normalized class war to divide and conquer the citizenry along race and gender lines, using new-left tropes, to shift focus away from real economic issues over to abstract identity issues. A portion of the intelligentsia and student/youth are weaponised into a faux ‘progressive’ militancy against ‘Trumpism’, Antifa and BLM and the non-profit industrial complex all connected to Democracy Action and Sorosian wonderworks.

The non-event which was January 6th is used as some sort of newfangled Oklahoma City bombing which only emboldens the parasitic proclivities of the prosecution and investigation power fetishists, which American authoritarianism has allowed to fester in its crevices. Well, a non-event except for the unjustified killing of Ashli Babbitt by Capitol Police. Four officers who died, actually died ‘by suicide’ within a week of the event. What did they know? Why were they ‘suicided’?

Meanwhile the real opponents of Trump are those behind the entire Great Reset and class war of ‘some against all’ underway right now in the U.S.

And that this is already a burgeoning civil war and inter-elite conflict is also openly known.

On December 20th, CNN ran video under the heading, “How close is the U.S. to Civil War? Closer than you think, study says”.

The accuracy or motivations of the study itself are neither here nor there, we can develop a superior metric and method probably at random, because the situation is obvious. The real point of interest is that America’s flagship fake news outlet is openly pushing the story. What could the reason for it be?

What was said is of particular interest:

Host: “The rigid refusal of lawmakers of compromise underscore the disturbing findings of one study on democracy in the U.S. According to a Washington Post editorial, data from the Center for Systemic Peace finds that the U.S. no longer qualifies as a democracy. After the Trump administration years, it’s somewhere between a democracy and an autocratic state.

Barbara Walter is a professor of International Relation at the School of Global Policy and Strategy at the University of California at San Diego, she joins me now, I’m delighted. When we look at the research it’s frankly frightening, and you conclude that the U.S. is closer to civil war than any of us would like to Believe. How close?”

Barbara Walter: “Well I’ve been studying civil wars for the last thirty years across the globe, and in fact the last four years I’ve been on a task force run by the CIA that tries to predict where outside the U.S. a civil war, political violence, and instability is likely to break out. And we actually know now that the two best predictors of whether violence is likely to happen are whether a country is an Anocracy, and that’s a fancy term for partial democracy, and whether ethnic entrepreneurs have emerged in a country that are using racial, religious, or ethnic divisions to try to gain political power. And the amazing thing about the United States is that both of these factors currently exist, and they have emerged at a surprisingly fast rate.”

Naturally CNN twists words and reason, and makes implications at odds with the real dynamic now working. The ‘Trump administration years’ is thrown in to make us think the erosion of constitutional rights was his doing. It was the opposite: it was those opposed to Trump that eroded the republic.

It was the collusion of the Great Reset technocracy, the collusion of the IMF, the WEF and domestic players in the Transition Integrity Project (which we have written so much about), big media, big tech, big pharma, the too big to fail, that subverted a populist movement and their rightful electoral outcome.

They openly bragged about it and showed the receipts. It is not a conspiracy theory, but something already openly confessed.

In truth, a better study from Princeton concluded in 2014 that the U.S. was no longer a Democracy.

A new study from Princeton spells bad news for American democracy—namely, that it no longer exists.

Asking “[w]ho really rules?” researchers Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page argues that over the past few decades America’s political system has slowly transformed from a democracy into an oligarchy, where wealthy elites wield most power.

Using data drawn from over 1,800 different policy initiatives from 1981 to 2002, the two conclude that rich, well-connected individuals on the political scene now steer the direction of the country, regardless of or even against the will of the majority of voters.

Of course Barbara Walter is either a liar or an idiot, probably a bit of both, because there is no correlation between a democracy index and stability. Well, there is a connection: once the U.S. targets a country or region for destabilization, they begin to point out features of its society that are less than the progressive idealist dream of a utopian democracy. An easy task and a useful trick, given that we are in reality and not a dream. Then they go on to lay a trade embargo and other punitive measures, thereby exacerbating the tensions within that society, tensions which all societies in reality actually have.

The intelligence agencies foster ‘gangs’, counter-gangs, and political violence in the targeted states, to create failed states. They do this across Africa. They did it in Yugoslavia, in Ukraine, etc.

The idea that democracy and stability are directly related works against the truth exposed in the fact of the general tendency of elites in struggling countries to tilt towards dictatorship, in order to bring stability to the instabilities which democratic institutions are subject to, once broader economic issues come to bear. The optimal situation of course are strong democratic institutions which are both justified by, and in turn support, economic prosperity.

Likewise, the U.S. tilts towards dictatorship not as the result of ‘ethnic entrepreneurs’, whatever that means, nor should their appearance (just now?) give us any pause. Rather, the developing system of internal passports, digital ID’s, Covid pass, forced vaccination and imprisonment under the pretext of ‘pandemic’, these are what ought to, and do, give us cause for great concern.

Which brings us back to China.

The pretext of the virus was certainly used in China towards its own ‘national security’ ends in the digital age. Russia has done the same. Neither country, however, has promoted vaccines which are experimental, opting instead to use this U.S. manufactured crisis towards its own security advantage. All while not using it to experiment upon the population with untested gene therapies.

But China will do China, and a country so far away and so far out of reach of the will and moral authority of American citizens to be concerned about, is hardly the proper focus of American citizen concerns.

The biggest problem that Americans face is certainly its own deep state and super elite, who seem to have a penchant for bizarre rituals, child abuse, elective warfare, and the fetishization of power dynamics observed under late capitalism.

The focus on China’s social credit system has a positive effect on western movements against the system insofar as westerners view the developments in Chinese society as negative.

But the blame placed on Chinese society has worked against understanding social credit. While the Chinese social credit system may utilize some of the same technologies as in the U.S., it is different in context, history, and meaning. Most understandable is that China’s social credit system preferences traditional and socially conservative values, whereas the emergent one in the U.S. imposes bourgeois-libertine values.

While Americans transform their justified fears over social credit, alongside the decline of meaningful work and living standards, into anti-China rhetoric, the focus on China serves as a distraction from what is entirely a domestic and technology-driven phenomenon.

If the lesson drawn is that ‘we must not become like Chinese society’, it is missing the mark. China sits in a markedly different position, where its automated industrial production techniques surpass those of the U.S. in many cases, while its large rural population lives in pre-industrial conditions.

China’s social credit system was initially aimed at big firms: imagine something like a ‘better business bureau’ and consumer reporting that actually had teeth. China’s system did not place profitability as the only determining factor for credit worthiness, and given its scale and anonymity, required a numerated system. Imagine if Pfizer, for example, had reduced access to capital because of its criminal activity. That’s exactly the sort of thing that has come about in the Chinese system, one of the few countries that is prone to execute a billionaire oligarch on occasion.

Chinese billionaire businessman, Liu Han was executed after being found guilty of murder and running a mafia-style criminal gang. Credit BBC, February 10, 2015

When China’s system was moved forward, its aim was to develop a non-monetary credit system for rural inhabitants who are still living in pre-industrial conditions. It’s also a massive country, really a civilizational sphere in its own right, with many regions and varying, even conflicting, credit and legal policies.

It is very difficult to implement the modern system of monetary credit when people live on barter, and their psychological motivations relate to not just pre-industrial but pre-modern and onymous social standing.

Bear in mind that China moved through three industrial revolutions within the span of about eighty years, whereas the 1st Industrial Revolution in the U.S. began around 1750.

Big tech mirrors aspects of China’s social credit system, and there is no doubt that social credit is ‘growing’ in the U.S. if we compare it to the Chinese system. But that’s precisely where we will get it wrong.

In our work on Oriental Despotism and Hydraulic societies, we demonstrated the present push by western elites is to prepare for a transition away from a money-regulated (i.e. labor driven) society. This leads to their need for a social credit system that matches the post-labor age of the 4th Industrial Revolution.

There are certainly Chinese people unhappy with the Chinese social credit system. The broader point is that that is their issue to solve. It’s a pattern for other countries’ elites to blame its internal woes on the U.S. Whatever truth value those claims have are muddied with the convenience it gives, relieving those political elites of their own responsibilities to govern fairly and justly.

Likewise, the focus on the ‘China virus’ disguises the fact that it was probably created on Dr. Fauci’s watch, coordinating with Bill Gates and other oligarchs invested in the vaccine mandate scheme.

Social credit works the same. It’s far too convenient to misplace both blame and understanding of social credit onto China. Chinese elites, the CCP, the PLA, all have absolutely nothing to do with the growth of social credit on American soil.

Social credit in the U.S. has distinctly American characteristics, based in new-left tropes, backed by American companies and none of the Chinese.

In the U.S., social instability has come about through the logic and process of its own machinations, the socio-economic disparity. The growth of authoritarianism in the U.S. and the implementation of social credit is, if anything, a mitigating force meant to manage the other crises of its own making.

What elites do love to do, however, is blame other countries for their own-goals. When empires collapse, they often like to engage in ‘great resets’, often total wars. Today’s war is a class war of the super elites, and this can be fought and won by the great masses of people against their own oligarchs. Introducing China as a responsible party for either the mystery virus or social credit, however, will only serve to embolden our own oligarchy in a great distraction from their own crimes and programs.

Two Years since the Assassination of Commander Soleimani: Biography and Goals

December 30 2021

By Ali Abadi

Why was the assassination of Major General Qassem Soleimani and his companion Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis an exceptional event? What are the motives behind the assassination? And how did the regional reality change two years after the assassination?

The fact that the United States of America committed this crime against a high-ranking Iranian military official and then declared responsibility, constitutes a significant regional development. It clearly meant that the US administration had lost its indirect tools of influence and deterrence in the face of the axis of resistance and that it needed to change the rules of engagement and restorte to the old methods based on assassinations and bullying.

Why Soleimani in particular?

Choosing Major General Soleimani as a direct target was based on two factors:

The first factor: The effective role the Quds Force played under his leadership over a period of three decades that undermined American hegemony and the tyranny of the Zionist occupation.

This role had different dimensions: arming the resistance wings, training, and coordination. The martyr realized the importance of countering the US political influence, not just its military presence.

For example, he was keen to track and thwart American projects and steps aimed at perpetuating the US presence in Iraq. And whenever the Americans tried to gather the threads of their political proxies in this country, Commander Soleimani would obstruct it. His presence disrupted those proxies and plans.

If he heard that the Americans were supporting the nomination of so-and-so to a senior position in this country, he pushed things in the opposite direction, knowing that the Americans want their interests first and foremost.

Of course, he wouldn’t have assumed such a great role had it not been for the leadership of the Islamic Republic and its various apparatuses forcefully backing the Quds Force in carrying out its duties.

The second factor: The unique personality of the martyr, which combines several traits, the most prominent of which were:

1- The clarity of the ideological-political premise of the school he represents, which is the school of Imam Khomeini. This school produced many cadres and leaders who became martyrs in the battlefields of Iran, Iraq, and Syria.

By ideological premise, we mean here the radical stance against the Zionist entity and the American policies that the late Imam described as arrogant policies. It is well-known that Hajj Qassem was asked by a US commander in Iraq to discuss the possibility of coordinating the war against Daesh, and he refused to open a dialogue with the American.

2- The strategic vision: Martyr Soleimani had a comprehensive vision of the conflict with the American and “Israeli” enemies. He viewed the region from Afghanistan to Palestine as an integrated field of action, even if the circumstances of each country differed from the other. For example, he was fully aware of the importance of removing the American occupation from the region, specifically from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, considering this presence as a factor of instability and a reason for direct intervention in determining the future of these countries and a direct threat to the Islamic Republic. He was also very serious in strengthening the capabilities of the resistance against the Zionist occupation, both quantitatively and qualitatively.

3- Field presence: Martyr Soleimani was distinguished as a man of the battlefield. He had a special dynamic. He was fond of being on the frontlines among the fighters so he could get a closer look at the nature of the situation, to strengthen them, and to show the importance of their battle at these pivotal stations. This had a significant impact on recharging the resolve, concentrating military and political efforts, and achieving victories.

4- The role model and the example: He was keen to set an example in the fraternal and cordial dealings with the fighters to give the battle its true moral dimension. The two opposing fronts are not distinguished by military force or political position, but rather by the spiritual values that each group carries and translates into Islamic behavior based on the teachings of the Messenger’s household [PBUT].

5- The initiative: It is true that Major General Soleimani was a military leader, but he was distinguished from many military leaders in that he was a man of initiative; he did not wait to receive the taklifs [obligations]. Rather, by virtue of his long experience and his all-pervading sense, he diagnosed what was required and then moved to obtaine approval from the leadership.

The Goals of the Assassination:

Far from the American pretext that was given to justify the assassination, which centered on allegations that martyr Soleimani planned an imminent attack on the American embassy in Baghdad – the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions Agnes Callamard described the killing of General Qassem Soleimani was an “arbitrary killing” that violated the UN Charter, and that the United States did not provide evidence that planning was underway for an “imminent attack” on its interests – motives for this crime and the manner in which it was committed can be identified as follows:

– Spreading fear and demoralizing within the resistance axis (through the method of intimidation) and trying to re-establish deterrence in the face of Iran and push it to withdraw its support from its allies. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo expressed this trend at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution in January 2020, in a symposium titled “The Restoration of Deterrence: The Iranian Example”. He noted that Soleimani was killed as part of a broader strategy to deter challenges posed by Washington’s opponents, focusing in particular on Iran.

This strategy was previously eroded by the axis of resistance amid the decline in the American prestige and presence in the region, which was established by almost no achievement in all areas. Meanwhile, the axis of resistance was advancing and besieging the American military presence and influence in Iraq and was pushing Washington to think about withdrawing its forces from Syria as it failed to arrange any gains that would contribute to changing the reality there.

The failure of America’s allies in Yemen, the accumulated American military deficit in Afghanistan, and the failure of the Zionist entity to confront the resistance in Palestine and Lebanon were additional reasons for demolishing the image of US policy in the Middle East.

During the Trump era, the Americans felt that the axis of resistance was becoming increasingly emboldened. There are numerous examples – the attack on the Abqaiq oil facility in Saudi Arabia, Iran’s downing of a 130-million-dollar American drone, and the intensification of the frequency of operations against American forces in Iraq.

– Getting Iran to submit to its nuclear program. Trump’s ambition was to reformulate the nuclear agreement in a way that takes into account the viewpoint of his allies on the Zionist right.

– Restoring the confidence of America’s allies in Iraq and the region. This confidence and bets on the United States have been shaken by the experiences in recent years, despite the massive American military spending. Washington realized that removing its forces from Iraq again (after the first exit in 2011) means losing the greatest political influence in this country and its surroundings. That is why the Americans were keen to maintain a military presence there to install their allies and tools.

– Attempting to enhance the image of the Trump administration inside the United States and rallying up the masses against external enemies (specifically Islamic ones). This is important in light of the sharp internal partisan polarization in this country.

– Was Soleimani’s assassination also an “Israeli” demand? This may be one of the most important and perhaps main motives in light of Netanyahu’s and the Zionist lobby’s extraordinary influence on the American president at the time. And Donald Trump recently – about a year after his exit from office – expressed his dissatisfaction with Netanyahu for believing that he used him to assassinate Soleimani.  According to the American Axios news website, Trump said that Netanyahu was “willing to fight Iran to the last American soldier.”

The former head of the “Israeli” Military Intelligence Division, Tamir Hayman, also revealed that the Mossad played a role in the assassination of the commander of the Quds Force, Qassem Soleimani, according to the “Israeli” Kan radio station.

We can guess the reason why the enemy pushed the US administration to get rid of a high-ranking leader of Soleimani’s stature, in light of the role he played at the head of the Quds Force in terms of strengthening the resistance wings, providing them with the means of strength, and deterring the Zionist entity.

The strategic response

All these motives and goals did not change the outcome of the reality of US policy in the region. The axis of resistance was affected for some time by the assassination of Soleimani, but it has maintained its goals and program of work and is continuing to implement the strategy of removing US forces from the region, starting with Iraq and Syria.

Here, it’s worth recalling what the Leader [Imam] Khamenei said on the anniversary of the martyrdom of the Quds Force commander, when he stressed that “driving out the American forces from the region will be the most powerful blow” to respond to his assassination, after the initial bold response to the crime.

He also vowed to avenge Soleimani by punishing those responsible for giving orders and carrying out the assassination “whenever the opportunity arises.” His Eminence called for accelerating technological, scientific, and military progress to enhance deterrence against the enemy, which is becoming evident day after day.

Thus, Washington and those who seek refuge under its umbrella were disappointed that Soleimani’s absence had no impact on the strategy of the axis of resistance. And the rush by the United States to arrange its military presence in Iraq before the end of 2021 is an indication of the continuing presence and influence of this axis, despite all the tremendous pressures exerted by successive US administrations.

Hajj Qassem Soleimani in the Words of Imam Khamenei

The Staff of Soleimani

Related Videos

To Be Firm With The Disbelievers But Compassionate With One Another, Qassem Soleimani As Example
Qassem Soleimani the Grandfather

Related Articles

’Israel’ Was Involved In Gen. Soleimani Assassination: Ex-military Intel Chief

Dec 21 2021

By Staff, Agencies

Former chief of the Zionist military intelligence Major General Tamir Hayman said the Tel Aviv regime was involved in the 2020 assassination of top Iranian anti-terror commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani in a US drone strike near the Iraqi capital’s international airport.

“Soleimani’s assassination is an achievement, since our main enemy, in my eyes, are the Iranians,” Hayman told Malam magazine in an interview that was published by the ‘Israeli’ Intelligence Heritage and Commemoration Center.

Hayman’s remarks mark the first time a top Zionist official confirms the ‘Israeli’ occupation regime’s role in the US-led operation.

Back in May, it was reported that the Tel Aviv regime provided the US with key intelligence support, including tracking Gen. Soleimani’s cellphone.

“In Tel Aviv, US Joint Special Operations Command liaisons worked with their ‘Israeli’ counterparts to help track Soleimani’s cellphone patterns,” Yahoo News reported on May 8. “The ‘Israelis’, who had access to Soleimani’s numbers, passed them off to the Americans, who traced Soleimani and his current phone to Baghdad.”

In remarks in October, Hayman said the assassination made a “significant contribution” to the Zionist regime’s security, after saying that it was “one of the most significant and important events in my time.”

However, former US president Donald Trump was described by a former official as unhappy with the Tel Aviv regime’s level of involvement in the assassination, according to an Axois report, as he “expected ‘Israel’ to play a more active role in the attack.”

General Soleimani, the commander of the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard [IRG], and his Iraqi trenchmate Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy head of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units [PMU], were assassinated along with their companions in a US terrorist drone strike authorized by Trump near Baghdad International Airport on January 3, 2020.

Iraqi lawmakers approved a bill two days later, demanding the withdrawal of all foreign military forces led by the United States from the country.

Both commanders were admired by Muslim nations for eliminating the US-sponsored Daesh [Arabic for ‘ISIS/ISIL’] Takfiri terrorist group in the region, particularly in Iraq and Syria.

The US assassination drew a wave of condemnation from officials and movements throughout the world and triggered huge public protests across the region.

Early on January 8, the IRG targeted the US-run Ain al-Assad airbase in Iraq’s western province of Anbar with a barrage of missiles to retaliate the assassination of General Soleimani.

In wake of the operation, the US War Department claimed that more than 100 American forces suffered “traumatic brain injuries” during the counterstrike on the base.

Iran has described the missile operation on Ain al-Assad airbase as a “first slap.”

Iranian Judiciary Chief Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei on October 18 underlined the need for the most serious prosecution of the perpetrators of the assassination of Lieutenant General Soleimani and a number of Iranian scientists.

“We will not allow the blood of these innocent people to be wasted,” Mohseni-Ejei said, blaming the US and the ‘Israeli’ regime for the terrorist attack.

US Exit From JCPOA ‘Disastrous’- Sullivan

Dec 18 2021

By Staff, Agencies

US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan strongly criticized the previous administration of President Donald Trump over its “disastrous” withdrawal from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action [JCPOA].

Sullivan made the remarks at an event hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations on Friday as the seventh round of the talks in Vienna aimed at reviving the JCPOA wrapped up.

He said the past few days have brought “some progress” at the negotiating table, but Tehran has “raced” its nuclear program since Washington pulled out of the agreement in 2018 under Trump.

“Getting that program back into a box through a return to mutual compliance with the JCPOA has proven more difficult through the course of this year than we would have liked to see,” he added. “And we are paying the wages of the disastrous decision to leave the deal back in 2018.”

Sullivan further said that the Vienna talks are “not going well in the sense that we do not yet have a pathway back into” the JCPOA.

The comments echoed those of Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who earlier admitted that abandoning JCPOA “isolated” the United States, not the Islamic Republic.

Blinken also said that the US maximum pressure campaign against Iran only pushed the country to “inexorably rebuild the nuclear program that the agreement had put in a box.”

Trump unilaterally left the JCPOA in May 2018 and re-imposed the anti-Iran sanctions that the accord had lifted. He also placed additional sanctions on Iran under other pretexts not related to the nuclear case as part of his “maximum pressure” campaign.

Following a year of strategic patience, Iran decided to let go of some of the restrictions on its nuclear energy program, resorting to its legal rights under the JCPOA, which grants a party the right to suspend its contractual commitments in case of a non-performance by the other side.

The US administration of President Joe Biden had voiced a willingness to compensate for Trump’s mistake and rejoin the deal, but it has retained the sanctions as leverage.

Envoys from Iran and the P4+1 group of countries — Britain, France, Russia, and China plus Germany — began negotiations in the Austrian capital in April in a bid to resurrect the JCPOA.

The seventh round of the talks, the first under Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s administration, started on November 29 following a five-month pause.

On December 17, Iran’s top negotiator, Ali Baqeri Kani, announced on Twitter that “good progress” had been made, and that the negotiations would continue after a “break of a few days.”

During the discussions, Iran presented two draft texts which address, separately, the removal of US bans and Iran’s return to its nuclear commitments under the JCPOA.

Related Videos

Swinging in positions on the Vienna negotiations, and NATO escalates its threatening tone towards Russia
The scene in Vienna with the end of the round of negotiations

Related Articles

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov’s interview with Izvestia, December 13, 2021

December 13, 2021

Russian media is discussing this interview actively today.

https://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/4992391

Question: Mr Ryabkov, is there any predictability in relations with the United States today?

Sergey Ryabkov: There is one-sided negative predictability, in fact. As for any prospects for improvement, everything is completely unpredictable. This is a sad conclusion based on the results of the long journey that we have travelled with the current US administration, with Donald Trump, and with Barack Obama. These problems did not emerge yesterday. They have to do with the US tendency, by and large, to deny Russia the role of a major independent player in international relations while trying to impose its own approaches to a whole range of issues, including how we should live in our own country.

All of the above certainly limits our prospects for straightening out relations – at least at the present stage, I would not risk giving any optimistic forecasts. We can definitely say there is predictability in that we will have to continue to deal with just this kind of America and this kind of American policy. And we are ready for this.

Question: Does this mean we cannot expect any transformation of the US approach to relations with Russia?

Sergey Ryabkov: We cannot see any progress, with the exception of the launch of several structured dialogues in areas that are certainly important as pivotal aspects of international security – I am referring to strategic stability and ICT security. Even so, we have just created channels for dialogue, and it would be premature to say that we are going to reach some global, significant, breakthrough decisions in the process. We are working towards this; we are striving for this, calling on the Americans to take a responsible approach to international security. We hope that our calls and signals will be heard. At the same time, we will not try and add issues that are not related to strategic stability, ICT security to the mix – such as our bilateral difficulties regarding visas and the activity of foreign missions. These are important questions as well, but we must not allow one to become dependent on the other. We will work where opportunities arise, where the Americans at least try to heed common sense and listen to our approaches.

Question: Can you tell us about progress on the New START Treaty?

Sergey Ryabkov: New START has been extended for five years. However, the first of these five years will expire on February 5, 2022. We have launched a dialogue on strategic stability, which will hopefully lead to the signing of a document or several documents that would be a good replacement for New START, which expires in four years.

We are working quite well within the framework of New START, holding meetings of the Bilateral Consultative Commission. The practice of mutual inspection visits will resume as the sanitary situation improves. Meanwhile, we are exchanging information in full measure and issuing notifications in accordance with the treaty. In short, work is proceeding well.

As for the other areas, there have been some wrinkles, which we are working to remove.

Question: How would you explain the growth in tension over Ukraine?

Sergey Ryabkov: It is primarily Washington’s geopolitical project, an attempt to expand its sphere of influence by getting new instruments for strengthening its positions, which Washington hopes will eventually allow it to dominate this region. It is also a way of creating problems for us by endangering our security. We have openly pointed out that there are red lines which we will not allow anyone to cross, and we also have certain requirements, which have been formulated exceedingly clearly. I believe everyone is aware of the signal President Vladimir Putin issued that Moscow needs maximally reliable legal guarantees of security. The President has instructed the Foreign Ministry to thoroughly address this matter. We are doing this. In particular, we are preparing definitive proposals and ideas, which we will submit for consideration by the Americans, and possibly their allies.

Question: Is it possible to mark red lines jointly with the United States?

Sergey Ryabkov: I believe that this is inherently impossible. There is such a wide gap in our approaches to international affairs and priorities in the so-called Euro-Atlantic that common red lines are unthinkable. There is only one red line we have marked jointly, which is very good. I am referring to the unacceptability of a nuclear war. By adopting the relevant statement issued by our leaders last June, Russia and the United States pointed out that they are aware of their joint responsibility. There will be no winners in a nuclear war, which must never be waged. This has been emphasised most definitely. I believe that this is a major positive factor during the current alarming period in international relations.

As for geopolitical red lines, no, we are rivals and opponents in this sense, and we will not suggest that the Americans do anything like this. We will demand that they do not cross our red lines, which we mark based on our national interests.

Question: Russia has mentioned the unacceptability of NATO’s eastward expansion. The bloc has replied that it has an open-door policy, and that any country complying with its membership principles can join it. What is Moscow’s attitude to this?

Sergey Ryabkov: This is really one of the biggest problems in the Euro-Atlantic region. NATO’s unrestrained expansion over the past decades has shown that Western advances, promises and commitments are of little value unless they are legally formalised. Soviet and later Russian leaders were told by responsible officials that NATO would not expand eastwards. We see that the situation is diametrically opposite.

NATO says that every country is free to decide how to guarantee its security, up to and including by joining military-political alliances. I would like to point out that the freedom to join alliances cannot be absolute. It is as it is in human societies, your freedom ends where the freedom of others begins. There must be clear boundaries and mutual obligations and responsibilities. This is why the phrase about the freedom to join alliances is always balanced by the phrase that this must not be done at the expense of the security of other states. This is the underlying principle of the OSCE, for example.

Regrettably, NATO’s expansion has long come into a dramatic conflict with this principle. We will continue to tell our opponents, both NATO states and the non-members, which would like to join the alliance, that it is impossible to do both things simultaneously. Therefore, there should be no further expansion of NATO. The attempt to present the matter by saying that Russia has no right of veto here is a futile attempt. We will continue to say that if our opponents act contrary to this truth, they will not strengthen their security but will instead face grave consequences.

Question: How does the alliance explain the need to move eastwards?

Sergey Ryabkov: There are no arguments. Moreover, they are trying to deny the validity of the very question of NATO’s eastward expansion. They are rejecting the opportunity to discuss this issue ostensibly as a matter of principle. But this is a mistake that could weaken their own security.

Question: Joseph Biden announced his readiness to discuss with Russia its concern over NATO’s expansion. When and in what format might consultations on this issue take place?

Sergey Ryabkov: We see the US readiness to continue discussing this issue, and this is a good sign. We have well-established channels – our dialogue with the United States is conducted in various areas. For one thing, there are the consultations on strategic stability, which I mentioned. Two working groups are involved in this.

One of them will be dealing with actions that exert a strategic effect. Understandably, security guarantees and non-crossing of red lines is exactly what we are talking about now. These are actions with a strategic effect.

We have channels of political dialogue with the United States as well. There are also formats of cooperation and discussion of these issues with NATO countries – albeit, not with all of them but with some, they are active, and we will probably use these formats eventually, as well.

Finally, the OSCE Forum for Security is operating as a pan-European venue in Vienna. After all, the venue of our dialogue doesn’t matter as much. What matters is the gist of our discussion.

For the time being, we do not quite understand how serious our opponents are. Therefore, we still need to conduct some probing surveys to find this out.

I would like to express the hope that this process will lead to a dramatic improvement in the entire strategic stability situation. We are talking about global security, including Russia’s. NATO and the US have now focused on the allegedly threatening concentration of our troops and hardware along the border with Ukraine.  But permit me, in the first place, they are talking about our actions on our own territory. Is there a limit to geopolitical audacity, not to say, the impudence of those who are trying to dictate to us regarding what we can and cannot do within our own borders?

There is a second, no less important point: they are concentrating on specific developments in certain areas whereas we lay emphasis on the need to ensure security on a broad scale for decades to come. They are using a microscope whereas we are looking forward through binoculars in an effort to prevent unfavourable developments in the future.

Question: Do you know the date for talks on visa issues with the United States? What objectives is the Russian Federation pursuing in its consultations with Washington on this? Is there a chance to make any progress in this area by the end of this year or the beginning of the next?

Sergey Ryabkov: I sympathise with those who are having difficulties with US visas, and I would like to emphasise that the current situation in this area reflects the reluctance of the US to take obvious and very simple decisions. That is, to send the personnel necessary within the quota to Russia, a quota that has been in place for a long time and which has not been filled – neither in Moscow at the Embassy’s Consular Department, nor at the Consulates General in Yekaterinburg or Vladivostok – so they can restore regular service for Russian citizens. Instead, they maintain their absurd accusations to the effect that we are allegedly putting obstacles in the way of this. We haven’t done this; we just cannot unilaterally issue visas to Americans while our personnel cannot enter the United States because visa issuance to diplomatic personnel and holders of service passports has, in fact, been frozen.

It is a vicious cycle. We continue to suggested to the Americans a mutual resetting to restart normal operations at foreign missions. Instead they have ever more requests and ultimatums. The most questionable among them was the request that our diplomatic mission staff who have been in the United States for over three years need to leave. Why, on earth, three and not five years? We are forced to mirror their actions.

Unless the situation in this area changes, US staff here will have to leave here after the same time period. This may simply result in our foreign missions becoming unable to operate any more.

As for meetings, we expect the Americans to regard our proposals seriously – we have made a lot of them. As soon as they respond, we will be ready to arrange the consultations within the shortest notice possible: by the end of this year, by the end of December. So far the United States has yet to give a proper response. We call on them again to resolve this issue and this intolerable situation. It hurts not only our compatriots but also US citizens themselves, who also cannot get timely consular services.

Question: After the last Russian-US video summit we heard that contacts will continue in a different format. Are there any timeframes or understanding as to when such a meeting can take place?

Sergey Ryabkov: So far, no. However, the main thing is that we achieved an understanding about the need to maintain contact whether it is in a video format, by telephone or, of course, a face-to-face meeting. Still, it is too early to talk about specifics. Let’s first move at least toward implementing what the leaders talked about on December 7. Once again: the Foreign Ministry is working on this very closely, in accordance with our instructions.

Another Erdogan Assassination Attempt Foiled; All Signs of a False Flag!

ARABI SOURI 

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey

Erdogan was miraculously saved from an assassination attempt, a bomb was discovered under a car of a low-ranking riot control police officer parked far away from the Turkish madman Erdogan during events in the southeast of Turkey.

As the Turkish Lira continues its free-fall in exchange rates, the inflation is growing among the highest in the world, the anti-Islamic Muslim Brotherhood control of Muslim-majority countries failed, the popularity of Erdogan at its lowest ever since he was the mayor of Istanbul, Erdogan’s propagandists are promoting a story of a foiled plot to kill him.

In the details: a bomb was planted beneath a car of one of the riot control officers who was heading near a place where Erdogan was opening some development projects in the southeastern Siirt Province, a province of Kurdish majority which happens to be a constant target of bombing and oppression by the consecutive Turkish regimes and increased by Erdogan. A colleague of the officer noticed the bomb, somehow, beneath the car and called on non-other than the National Intelligence Organization (Millî İstihbarat Teşkilatı, MİT).

MİT officers cordoned the area, dismantled the bomb, and Erdogan was notified but since he’s the nation’s hero and doesn’t fear death, he instructed to continue the ceremonies because he loves the people and doesn’t want to spoil their joy of his presence among them, actually among his security details who usually outnumber the crowds in areas of his hardcore loyalists, and later said ‘There is no place for terrorists among us.’

That’s the whole story as of now of the latest episode in the foiled Erdogan assassination attempts.

Some points to note that are out of the norms in Turkey and for Erdogan:

  • Erdogan is visiting the southeast of Turkey of Kurdish majority, the people he hates most.
  • Erdogan is opening ‘development projects’ in Siirt province, not only he hates the Kurds he is opening development projects for them.
  • A colleague of the owner of the vehicle where the bomb was planted beneath it saw the bomb, were there arrows pasted obviously on the rear of the car pointing to the bomb which is usually concealed when the goal of it was supposed to be detonated and not discovered?
  • The MİT was notified, now here’s where it becomes laughable; the MİT is headed by Erdogan’s most loyal mini-madman Hakan Fidan, the man who is well known for his ideas of false flags like the one of bombing Turkish forces to justify attacking certain areas.
  • Erdogan has a history of failed assassination attempts in which he uses to the max to consolidate his powers, get rid of his opponents and opposition figures, gain popularity among his die-hard ignorant loyalist, and divert the attention of the public away from their daily living pressing issues.
  • The timing couldn’t be more convenient with today’s price of 13.70 Turkish Liras for a dollar down from its previous record-breaking which we reported of 9.22 Liras for a dollar on 15 October, and from 1.54 Liras for a dollar in the year 2010, that’s just before Erdogan waged his war of terror on Syria.

Merely 3 days ago, Erdogan fired his minister of finance who barely completed one year in his post trying to save the Turkish economy from its deteriorating status because of policies set by the former minister of finance who happens to be Erdogan’s son-in-law Berat Albayrak, yeah Turkey is a ‘role model of a democracy’ in the Muslim world [sic]. Erdogan appointed Nureddin Nebati as his new minister of finance, a deputy of his predecessor known to praise Erdogan’s economic policies.

The Turkish madman met Joe Biden on the margins of the G20 Summit on the 31st of October, Erdogan had high hopes for the meeting with the man who vowed in his presidential elections to get rid of Erdogan ‘democratically’ and left the meeting totally disappointed. In the same year, not only did Erdogan lose his idols and main supporters Trump at the White House and Netanyahu in Israel, Trump’s replacement doesn’t like him, and Netanyahu’s replacement is dumb in politics.

What’s better than a failed assassination attempt with no risk at all on Erdogan to boost his popularity, tighten his security grip on the country, and avert the public’s attention from their chasing of bread struggle?

The Turkish opposition figures need your prayers, not all of them, some of them were Erdogan’s closest friends and allies who helped him in his early days and share much of the blame for the bloodshed spilled at his hands and share the responsibility of Erdogan’s policies who became opposition only after fearing Erdogan’s dagger being sharpened for them.

If you want us to remain online, please consider a small donation, or see how you can help at no cost.
Follow us on Telegram: https://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

The US Should Concede to Its Diminishing Role in the Region As Iran Will Not Accept Compromise

Nov 5, 2021

By Mohammad Youssef

Beirut – The world scene seems very confusing, a lot of tension and strain stretching and extending across the continents, nonetheless, there are doorways that can lead to temporary solutions or compromises in the worst case scenario.

  • The escalating tension between Russia and the western world over Ukraine, and the western military measures there
  • The western-eastern tension between China and the western world over Taiwan
  • The continuous strain in world politics over the Iranian nuclear file, and Vienna negotiations taking place without any hope looming about a longstanding agreement that could be finalized.

This file is preoccupying the world because of its repercussions and ramifications that could translate all over.

Washington has dragged itself and the whole Western governments into a tough place when it unilaterally and without any reasonable justification withdrew from the agreement with Tehran.

Iran proved credibility and has delivered over the agreement with all its articles and subdivisions.

Contrary to this, the US did not respect its commitments nor delivered its share of conditions in the agreement.

It is Tehran’s right to ask for more guarantees from the world society involved in the negotiations to make sure Washington would not dare to breach its commitments again.

One of the issues at stake during the current negotiations is that Tehran wants a direct and complete lift of American and Western sanctions, meanwhile Washington continues the procrastination policy.

Washington, furthermore, is attempting to add new files to the negotiating table, especially those in link to Tehran’s role in the region, more particularly, those in relation with advancing its rockets arsenal and supporting the resistance movements.

Iran continued to insist in limiting the negotiations to the same issues discussed before without adding any extra point.

What are the anticipated results for the ongoing Vienna negotiations?

It seems clearly that the Americans are not in anyway in a position to hand the Iranians guarantees that former US president Donald Trump’s scenario of pulling out of any reached  agreement would not be repeated again. So, the most probable outcome is to reach a temporary agreement that would generally ease the tensions in the region, especially in Iraq and allow for mutual intersection points that would secure a level of stability over different issues.

For its part, Tehran that has never aimed  anytime to have a nuclear weapon, has given and is ready to give necessary assurances to this effect, but will never accept to compromise its full sovereign position vis-a-vis other issues that boils down to its basic interests and principles.

Washington, who day and night preaches about real politics and pragmatism, should accept its dwindling position and diminishing role in the region and the world. 

This entails a different approach that renders the US accept to abandon its arrogant policy, and strike a settlement that would necessarily recognize the vital interests and role of Iran in its surrounding region. This is the most likely scenario; otherwise, we would be entering another vicious cycle of escalation!

To see Putin and die

November 29, 2021

by Rostislav Ischenko for Ukraina.ru
source: 
Note: this machine translated text

Joseph Biden, the 46th president of the United States, has asked Russian President Vladimir Putin for a meeting for the second time in six months. This would not be surprising: in the end, international tensions have reached a limit, and not only the most alarmist of experts, but also the most cautious of politicians have already started talking about the high probability of war

In such circumstances, responsible leaders of great powers are simply obliged to meet and seek compromises.

But this is the same Biden, whose team cried all the tears over Russian interference in the American elections and twice tried to organize the impeachment of the 45th US President Donald Trump, accusing the latter of surrendering American interests to Russia and working for Putin. Meanwhile, Putin and Trump had only one full-format meeting (in Helsinki, July 16, 2018, a year and a half before the expiration of Trump’s powers), and the rest — about five short conversations “on the sidelines” of various summits.

Relations between Russia and the United States had sunk to the freezing point even before Trump. At the same time, the 45th American president, although he negotiated more harshly, was still much more constructive than the 46th. Trump was inclined to seek a compromise, despite all the contradictions, because only a mutually acceptable compromise can ensure a long and lasting peace.

Biden, in a typical American manner, is trying to deceive a partner in the negotiation process, seeking only a truce – a postponement of confrontation for some time, during which the United States will try to solve its problems in order to take up the old with renewed vigor later.

That is why Biden’s team is begging for meetings with Putin, as if their ancient boss is afraid to die without telling Vladimir Vladimirovich something important. Pay attention to the diplomatic activity of the American president who does not always adequately perceive reality during the first year of his term:

* spring – activation of the US-European Union, an attempt to force the EU to go to a sharp deterioration in relations with Russia and abandon the SP-2;
* summer – a sudden request for a meeting with Putin, insistence on its early organization, declared readiness to resolve the entire spectrum of controversial issues. In fact, absolutely empty and unacceptable hints for Russia about the readiness of the United States not to interfere if the Kremlin decides to restore its exclusive sphere of influence in the post-Soviet space by force, so that, as a reciprocal courtesy, Russia refuses an informal (but very problematic for the United States) alliance with China. The rest of the summer is devoted to spreading disinformation that Moscow is ready to negotiate with the United States at the expense of Beijing;
* autumn — the formation of an anti-Chinese alliance of US vassals in the Asia-Pacific region and part of the European powers, followed by a sharp and persistent desire to organize a personal meeting between Xi Jinping and Biden (the meeting took place, was in vain, after which the United States began spreading disinformation that Beijing is ready to negotiate with Washington at the expense of Moscow);
* winter — against the background of the sharp aggravation of the situation on the borders of Russia and Belarus that began in the autumn and an undisguised attempt to draw Russia into a war with the participation of Eastern European members of NATO and the EU, a new insistence on a personal meeting with Putin.

In my opinion, there is no need to have an outstanding intellect to see the “swing” on which the United States is trying to “rock” Russia and China in order to break their partnership (absolutely nullifying all attempts by the United States to regain the status of a global hegemon) and suppress Moscow and Beijing one by one and one by one. The United States offers everyone something unnecessary, but seriously binding their hands and requiring large resource costs, they try to link everyone with a regional war with their allies (who, however, are not in a hurry to drag chestnuts out of the fire for Washington), they inspire everyone that the partner has almost agreed to the American proposal and we must hurry to negotiate ourselves so as not to be made fools of.

The method is simple, has been used since ancient times and quite often led to success. The United States understands that neither Russia nor China want to win right now and annex the post-Soviet territories in Europe and Taiwan (respectively).

Moscow and Beijing would prefer to solve these problems peacefully and later. At this stage, the too clearly expressed intention to return the fallen imperial territories may not only limit the possibilities of cooperation between Russia and China to resist the military-political and financial-economic pressure of the United States, but also undermine the entire system of Eurasian unions built by them.

Therefore, the United States, in order to persuade Russia and China to make concessions in the negotiations, frighten both of them with an unnecessary regional war, while at the same time offering to negotiate and solve this problem. If someone gives up and starts at least discussing options, Washington will immediately provide a proof leak of information in order to persuade the second partner to make a concession, and then bargain with both from a favorable position to bring down the price.

Realizing all this, the Russian leadership is in no hurry to talk with Biden. Peskov, on behalf of the Kremlin, said that the exact date has not yet been determined. However, the Kremlin has agreed in principle to organize a videoconference before the end of the year. Why did they do that?

Every month (not to mention a year) without war, Russia and China strengthen and weaken the United States. If we hold out for two or three years, the war will become meaningless for the United States, because, by their own admission, after 2024 they do not see the possibility of defeating China militarily. Consequently, in two years, the opportunities for American blackmail will decrease sharply, and America’s allies, who are already unwilling to risk themselves because of the Washington games, will become even more thoughtful, it will be even more difficult to persuade them to demonstrative aggressive actions against Moscow and Beijing. A certain US deadline is approaching, we need to act already. Under these conditions, Washington, having lost hope of achieving its goal by peace, can really bet on provocation of war.

Any negotiations are a way to delay time. While they are preparing and while they are going, it is unprofitable for the United States to be unconstructive, which means they will try to keep their allies on a short leash. But vassal states are not trained dogs that can be set on an object or calmed down in one second, rocking the situation takes time (albeit a little). The solution suggests itself: as long as possible to delay the time in determining the date of negotiations, postponing them for later. As soon as it becomes impossible to pull further – to hold negotiations and try, without giving a single opportunity to interpret their outcome as a willingness to take seriously American proposals for the surrender of an ally, to involve the United States in the preparation of the next meeting by creating permanent expert groups in the areas.

Any diplomatic department is a complex bureaucratic machine that is extremely difficult to force to move simultaneously in two directions. If you give the task to begin diplomatic preparations for war, this apparatus will move in one direction, if you set the task of finding a compromise, then in another. At the same time, it will have a serious informational impact on both the international and domestic agenda. That is, even meaningless, but regular meetings of experts reduce (though not completely remove) the risk of fatal confrontation.

Russia’s actions indicate that the Kremlin clearly sees the threat and has chosen the right tactics. The agreement on the creation of expert groups was reached during the first meeting with Biden, with the organization of which they stretched out as much as they could. However, America countered this agreement by saying that the expert groups did not work. So, now Russian diplomats will point this out and demand more constructive.

The current meeting is also being delayed as much as they can, having already postponed it until the end of December. If it works out, then under the pretext of New Year’s holidays they will postpone it until the middle-end of January (however, this is unlikely, the United States is in a hurry). The current meeting will be held online: the coronavirus. Although he does not interfere with Putin and Biden’s meetings with other politicians, but in this case only online. And not because I don’t want to waste time on flights, knowing in advance that the negotiations will be in vain. The online mode does not allow the organization of fake leaks about the content of negotiations. This is not a face-to-face conversation (in the presence of only unknown and controlled translators, in an office protected from wiretapping) – everything is recorded, and by both sides.

Thus, Russia is trying to win one and a half to two months out of the 48 required. Will it be possible to win the world completely?

This question has no definite answer. On the one hand, time is running out, and with the approach of 2024, the United States has nothing to lose, and in the vassal countries designated by them for slaughter, there are their own war parties that (for personal gain) are ready to start even a losing war that destroys their states. On the other hand, the current authorities, who are now in charge of American consumables, are doing everything possible to get rid of the honorable mission of pointlessly dying for the interests of the United States. How strong will they have enough strength to continue maneuvering on the verge of a foul? How ready are Americans to increase pressure on the dependent elites of limitrophs? Where is the weak link ready to break: in Europe or in Asia and who is it (Ukraine, Taiwan, someone else)? We can only assume with more or less certainty.

Often the expected danger comes at all from where it is not expected or when they stopped waiting and relaxed.

%d bloggers like this: