First Hezbollah aid convoy arrives in Latakia, Syria

Feb 13, 2023

Source: Al Mayadeen Net + Agencies

By Al Mayadeen English 

A convoy of 23 aid trucks sent by the Lebanese Hezbollah resistance group arrive in Latakia, Syria.

First Hezbollah aid convoy arrives in Latakia. February 13, 2023. (AFP)

Al Mayadeen‘s correspondent in Latakia reported on Monday the arrival of the first aid convoy sent by Hezbollah, Rouhama, to help the Syrian people after the catastrophic earthquake. 

The head of the ​​convoy said that there are 23 trucks packed with food, medical supplies, and equipment for those affected by the earthquake. 

The official indicated that the convoy that arrived today will be followed by others soon.

Yesterday, the head of the Hezbollah Executive Council, Hashim Safi Al-Din, announced sending the first batch of aid to Latakia, to be followed by other convoys to Aleppo and other Syrian regions.

Safi Al-Din said, “The affected people need all the help they can get, and Syria has always stood by Lebanon in its ordeals,” He also pledged to the Syrian people to “always stand by them, and with them in this disastrous challenge.”

The Hezbollah official further stressed that “the West revealed the culture to which it belongs, and confirmed that it perpetuates false slogans in defending human rights.”

Hezbollah sends aid convoys to quake-hit Syria

Hezbollah, on February 8, revealed that it was preparing convoys of humanitarian aid to earthquake-affected areas in Syria, in light of the catastrophic earthquake that struck the Arab country amid the inhumane Western sanctions.

Deputy Secretary-General of Hezbollah, Sheikh Naim Qassem, told Lebanon’s Al-Manar television channel that countries around the world must rush to send rescue workers, equipment, and aid to earthquake victims.

Qassem offered his condolences to Syria and the Syrian government, announcing that Hezbollah has dispatched convoys of humanitarian aid to quake-hit areas. 

He argued that US sanctions, backed by most Arab countries, are hindering relief and rescue operations, adding that the coercive measures violate fundamental humanitarian principles.

The top Hezbollah official emphasized that the West must understand that Syrians are united in their fight against Takfiri militant groups. He also emphasized that Hezbollah is standing by Syria and Turkey in the aftermath of the tragic incident.

• Despite All Pain, Quake-hit Syria Neglected as Aid Offers Pour in for Turkey

Russian political thinker Alexander Dugin’s daughter assassinated

August 21, 2022

Source: Agencies

By Al Mayadeen English 

Political commentator Darya Dugin, 30, is assassinated in a massive explosion about 20 km from Moscow following her departure from her father’s lecture.

A large explosion tore into an SUV on a highway 20 km away west of Moscow, instantly killing its driver, who was identified as political commentator Darya Dugina, Russian political analyst and thinker Alexander Dugin’s daughter. Dugin the father is an influential veteran political commentator, also known as one of the Kremlin’s “ideological masterminds”, and an occasional contributor to Al Mayadeen English.

The assassination was carried out at 21:35 Moscow time. Witnesses divulged that the explosion happened in the middle of the road, where debris and metal wreckage scattered in the air right before the car crashed into a fence, according to photos and videos.

According to emergency services, there was only one person inside the car, and it was a female body burned beyond recognition. 

The identity of the victim is yet to be confirmed by authorities – however, multiple Russian media sources and Telegram channels have reported that the victim was Darya Dugina, 30. According to videos circulating social media, her father arrived at the scene just after the explosion, devastated. 

As for the cause of the explosion, preliminary reports suggest that a homemade explosive device may be involved, however, investigators have not yet confirmed it. 

On Saturday evening, Dugin was giving a lecture in Moscow on “Tradition and History” at a traditional family festival in Moscow; Dugina attended the event as a guest. Reports are claiming that Dugin planned to leave the festival with his daughter, but instead took a separate car. Darya took her father’s Toyota Land Cruiser Prado.

Darya, in July 2022, was placed on the UK sanctions list. Her father in 2014 and 2015 was sanctioned by the EU, US, and Canada. 

More details are to unfold.

Related Videos

The murder of the daughter of the thinker Alexander Dugin… the most prominent close associate of President Putin

Western intelligence penetrates Moscow in the assassination of Alexander Dugin, the intellectual mind of Putin

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Military Situation In Ukraine On August 20, 2022 (Map Update)
• US citizens paying to launch slogans scribbled on rockets at Russians
• NYT confirms footage of Ukraine soldiers committing war crime
• Military Situation In Eastern Ukraine On August 18, 2022 (Map Update)
• Ukraine in the Great Game
• HRW urges Ukraine to probe ‘war crimes’

How the US controls Lebanon’s energy supply

Far from helping Lebanon solve its acute energy crisis, the US is leveraging Egypt’s gas supply to pressure Beirut over US-brokered maritime border talks with Israel

August 19 2022

By Yeghia Tashjian

Consider the chaos in Europe today caused by a sudden reduction in Russian gas supplies.

Now imagine the catastrophic state of Lebanon’s energy sector after two years of fuel shortages, limited foreign currency with which to purchase new, urgent supplies, and US-sanctions on Syria impeding Lebanon’s only land route for imports.

US Ambassador to Lebanon Dorothy Shea intervenes in all of Beirut’s energy decisions Photo Credit: The Cradle

After decades of stalled reforms, Lebanon is running out of time and money.

In June 2021, a lifeline was handed to the country in a deal struck with Baghdad to supply two Lebanese power stations with Iraqi fuel. The agreement, which was due to expire in September 2022, has recently been extended for one year.

But while there are short and long term solutions available to remedy Lebanon’s energy crisis, the two main options are both monopolized by US policymakers with stakes in regional geopolitics.

The first option involves transporting fuel to Lebanon via the Arab Gas Pipeline (AGP), whereby Egypt will supply gas through Syria. Although the proposal was originally an American suggestion, this fuel route requires US sanctions waivers that have not yet been approved by Washington.

The second option is for Lebanon to extract its own gas supply from newly discovered fields off its coastline. This too depends entirely on US-mediated, indirect negotiations with Israel to resolve a maritime dispute over the Karish gas field in the eastern Mediterranean Sea.

Accessing its own gas supplies will go a long way to guarantee Lebanon’s own energy security, while providing the state with much needed revenues from exports.

However, the success of either project depends largely on the status of US-Lebanese relations at any given moment. The two options are also inextricably linked to each other: Washington is pressuring Beirut to compromise with Tel Aviv on the maritime border dispute before agreeing to “green light” Cairo’s gas exports via Syria, which is in turn heavily sanctioned by the US’s “Caesar Act.”

While Washington is playing a leverage game, Lebanon is slowly collapsing.

Gas from Egypt

Under the agreement signed with Cairo, 650 million cubic meters of natural gas will be exported annually via the AGP. As it turns out, the actual supply of gas, as per the World Bank’s conditions, awaits US approval to exclude Egypt from sanctions imposed on the passage of goods through Syria.

The AGP is already a functioning pipeline that has supplied Lebanon with Egyptian gas in the past, but operations were halted in 2011 when Syrian pipelines were damaged during the country’s armed conflict.

Under the deal, Egypt will pump gas through the pipeline to supply Lebanon’s northern Deir Ammar power plant, which can then produce 450 megawatts of electricity – adding four hours of additional electricity supply per day. It is a modest but necessary improvement over the barely two hours of electricity currently provided by the state.

The World Bank has pledged to finance the deal on the condition that the Lebanese government implements much needed reforms in the electricity sector, which has created tens of billions of dollars in public debt.

The Syrian equation       

For the Syrian government, the arrangement is perceived as a diplomatic victory as it confers ‘legitimacy’ to the state and represents a step toward its international rehabilitation. The AGP deal was also hailed by Syrian Minister of Oil and Mineral Resources Bassam Tohmy as one of the most important joint Arab cooperation projects.

According to Will Todman, a research fellow in the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the agreement is “a win for the [Bashar al-]Assad government. The deal represents the first major move toward Syria’s economic integration with the region since Arab Spring protests shook Syria in March 2011, halting previous integration efforts.”

However, due to US Caesar Law restrictions, no concrete progress has been made over the past months. Amman and Cairo have both requested guarantees from Washington that they will not be subject to sanctions – to no avail. US President Joe Biden has yet to make a final decision on whether the plan will be considered a violation of sanctions on Syria.

Linking the Egypt deal with Israel talks

In order to create a certain interdependency in the region to minimize the possibility of new conflicts with Israel, the US is attempting to link the Egyptian gas deal with the ongoing, indirect, maritime negotiations between Tel Aviv and Beirut.

Amos Hochstein, the State Department senior adviser on energy security, who acts as chief mediator on the disputed maritime border between Lebanon and Israel, said after arriving in Beirut on 14 June that the US side will look at the final agreement between Egypt and Lebanon to evaluate the sanctions compliance of the natural gas project.

This means that Washington is linking the fate of the gas deal to the maritime dispute with Israel to exert additional pressure on Lebanon.

On 14 October, 2020 – just two months after the Beirut port blast which severed the primary transportation route for seaborne Lebanese imports – Lebanon and Israel began the long-awaited US-mediated talks to demarcate their maritime borders, under the supervision of the UN.

The framework agreement announced by both countries at the time was the most serious attempt to resolve the maritime dispute and secure gas drilling operations through diplomatic means.

However, there are many challenges that can slow or even derail these negotiations.

According to Lebanese estimates, the country has 96 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves and 865 million barrels of oil offshore, and is in urgent need to begin drilling to save its ailing economy.

Israel is also in hurry to resolve this dispute as it wants to finalize the negotiations before September 2022, when the Karish gas rig is expected to begin production. The concern is that if a deal is not signed by then, Hezbollah may take action to halt Israel’s extraction altogether – until Lebanon is able to extract its own fuel from those waters.

Resolution or conflict

Last month, Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah reiterated warnings against Tel Aviv in the event that Lebanon is prevented from extracting its own resources in the Med. “When things reach a dead-end, we will not only stand in the face of Karish… Mark these words: we will reach Karish, beyond Karish, and beyond, beyond Karish,” he cautioned.

Initially, Lebanon took a maximalist position on its maritime borders with Israel: the main dispute was around the percentage both countries should share in the disputed 860 square kilometers, which covers Lebanon’s offshore gas Blocks 8, 9 and 10.

It is worth mentioning that Lebanon does not enter these negotiations from a position of strength and is in dire economic need to unlock foreign aid and begin the flow of potential gas revenues.

Meanwhile, the arrival this summer of the British-based Energean, an oil and gas exploration company, which will begin a drilling operation close to the Karish gas field, has sparked tensions between both countries, prompting US envoy Hochstein to race back to the region on 13 June.

In order to provide Lebanon with some much-needed leverage and accelerate negotiations, Hezbollah dispatched three drones towards the Karish gas field on 2 July. The operation sought several results: to test Israeli military responses to the drones, to scare off the private company contractors working on the rig, and to motivate both Tel Aviv and Washington to step up and strike a deal.

The operation achieved its goals. Israel’s military now can’t rule out the possibility that the Lebanese resistance movement will launch additional attacks on the gas field in the near future, or provoke Israel in a different manner – if the maritime dispute is not ironed out, and soon.

Beyond the Mediterranean Sea

The negotiations have also been impacted by international developments, chiefly, the war in Ukraine and the growing energy crisis in Europe. Sweeping western economic sanctions on Moscow’s economic interests have dried up Russian exports to the continent, driving Europe to seek alternative sources of energy, few of which are readily available.

In May 2022, the US and EU unveiled a plan to reduce Europe’s dependence on Russian fossil fuels and in June, the EU and Israel signed an agreement to export Israeli gas to Europe. These external factors have further motivated the US and Israel to hasten the negotiation process with Lebanon, all of which are overshadowed by the aforementioned US pressure on the Lebanese government.

Energy expert Laury Haytayan believes that linking Lebanon to regional energy projects makes it harder for Lebanon to go to war with Israel. Haytayan told The Cradle: “Lebanon needs gas, Israel needs stability, and the US wants to give both what they want.”

It is important to recognize that a final maritime demarcation agreement also means defusing the tensions on the Lebanese-Israeli border, which may require a broader US-Iranian agreement, something that is unlikely in the short term.

If the gas deal is successful and the US approves the Egyptian energy exports, the move will only increase US leverage over Lebanon when it comes to future negotiations on energy security.

It is in Lebanon’s interest to ensure that one party, the US, does not continue to hold all the cards related to its vital fuel needs. A recent offer from Iran to supply the country with monthly free fuel was tacitly accepted by Lebanon’s prime minister and energy minister, but needs work. Other states have offered to build power generation plants to enhance the nation’s infrastructure and efficiency.

But with Lebanon so deeply affected by Washington’s whims – and punishments – it isn’t at all certain that the country can steer itself to these more independent options.

The US and Israel have never been this highly incentivized to solve the maritime dispute. If the deal fails, Hezbollah may proceed with military action, especially before the conclusion of political ally President Michel Aoun’s term this Fall.

Furthermore, the gas issue may turn into a contentious domestic political issue ahead of Israel’s November parliamentary elections. In that instance too, a military conflict between Israel and Hezbollah may be triggered.

The only solution is to strike a deal, get gas flowing, and avert war. Will saner minds prevail, or will the region’s high-stakes geopolitical competition continue to escalate blindly? More importantly, can Washington bear to allow Lebanon the breathing space after three years of severe economic pressure to control Beirut’s political decisions?

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

Lebanon Elections 2022: Lebanese Cast Ballots for New Parliament Amid Economic Crisis

May 15, 2022

By Staff, Agencies

The Lebanese people started voting this morning in key parliamentary elections, which many hope can set the stage for a recovery from economic woes fueled by US-led sanctions on the country.

Polling stations opened at 7:00 a.m. local time across 15 electoral districts on Sunday, with nearly four million people eligible to vote and 718 candidates competing to win 128 parliamentary seats.

The vote comes as the country has been rocked by an economic meltdown that the World Bank has blamed on the ruling class and the 2020 devastating port blast in the capital, Beirut.

The economic crisis, which began in 2019, led to a currency collapse of some 95 percent and the plunging of more than 80 percent of the Lebanese population into poverty.

Lebanon’s parliament is equally divided between Christians and Muslims.

The last vote in 2018 saw Lebanon’s Hezbollah resistance movement and its allies, the Christian Free Patriotic Movement [FPM] of President Michel Aoun and the Shia Amal party of Speaker Nabih Berri, secure a majority by winning 71 of the parliament’s seats.

The absence of former Prime Minister Saad Hariri has left a vacuum for Sunni votes, which both Hezbollah allies and opponents are seeking to fill.

Hezbollah has said it expects few changes to the make-up of the current parliament, though its opponents, including the Saudi-aligned Lebanese Forces party, say they are hoping to scoop up seats from the FPM.

The economic and financial crisis in Lebanon is mostly linked to the sanctions that the United States and its allies have imposed on the country as well as foreign intervention in the Arab nation’s domestic affairs.

The final results of the parliamentary elections in Lebanon are expected to be announced on Monday, with the new legislature set to elect a new president after Aoun’s term ends in October.

Israeli interest in the Lebanese parliamentary elections

Lebanon.. Elections of options

Venezuela Floods: Massive Natural Disaster Displacing 20,000 Families

APRIL 30, 2022

 ARABI SOURI

Venezuela floods led to massive outages in water, electricity, and communication, it destroyed homes, and farms, and cut off roads; over 20,000 families were displaced.

The government in Caracas announced emergency measures for relief and construction as thousands of more homes were damaged by heavy rains and mudslides, especially in the western regions of the country with flash rain reaching three times the seasonal average.

The video is also available on BitChute, Odysee, and Rumble.

Meanwhile, Venezuela continues to suffer under the inhumane US and Western European embargo and illegal unilateral coercive measures resisting the hegemony of the regimes in Washington to take over the country’s oil industry and gold reserves.

Multiple US-led regime-change operations were foiled by the Venezuelan security, some carried out by Israeli assassins against President Nicolas Maduro.

The current natural disaster hitting the country will not sway the ‘civilized west’ to lift their evilness off the country, they will double down to try to squeeze concession out of the Venezuelan people, their history around the globe spells such behavior.

Venezuela: Biden Regime Invades Airspace, Provocation to War

Syria News is a collaborative effort by two authors only, we end up most of the months paying from our pockets to maintain the site’s presence online, if you like our work and want us to remain online you can help by chipping in a couple of Euros/ Dollars or any other currency so we can meet our site’s costs.

• Iran, Venezuela to Sign Energy Deal Despite US Sanctions

Boomerang Sanctions

March 12, 2022

Source

by Ghassan Kadi,

Do Western sanctions have any chance of achieving their objectives? Perhaps we need to look back at history and see how the earliest recorded sanctions were implemented.

Before the age of electronic transfers and massive international trading and complex technology came into existence, warring factions enforced sanctions on each other by way of imposing sieges, and therefore cutting off food and water supplies to heavily fortified cities. Those cities had to ration out their supplies, and when they ran out, they often capitulated.

Much has changed since, but the only way for any sanction to work now is in the ability to deprive a nation from goods and services that are essential. But this is now easier said than done.

In today’s age of technology and all what comes with it, the world depends on a huge array of manufactured goods for its economy and the services that support that economy to run. Manufactured good are themselves made of parts often made in different countries and assembled together somewhere else. Many, if not most of those goods and parts, are made in China, and this is fact.

How do we know that the manufacturers of American/NATO military hardware do not use parts and components that are made in China and no longer made in the West? They can be as simple as special size or shape screw, but without it, the strategic weapon cannot be assembled. And if one of the suppliers of hardware to the Pentagon suddenly wakes up to the realization that it needs the part that is made in China to put together a strategic defence weapon, what will happen then? Alternative Western productions lines can be put to work, but these things take time, and time is precious commodity in the event of a military blitz.

But here is more. Even if in peacetime an American buys a T-shirt made in America from American grown cotton, the cotton crop is highly likely to have been fertilized with urea imported from China. As a matter of fact, China controls a huge sector of the global fertilizer market, and when one controls food and its production, no other leverage becomes comparable in magnitude. Having control of the food supply is tantamount to the ancient city sieges.

The dependence of the West on China therefore is alarming, and the examples mentioned above, have been selected to demonstrate that Western sanctions against China, if ever implemented, would boomerang and hit the West in the guts.

The whole world and particularly the West are reliant on and addicted to Chinese goods. All the way from T-shirts to iPhones, a huge percentage of global consumable goods are made in China.

China is therefore the ultimate example of where American sanctions would fail abysmally. As a matter of fact, if anything at all, a Chinese export sanction against America would bring the latter to its knees in a few weeks if not less.

What about Russia? Are American sanctions effective against Russia? Thus far, they haven’t been. Time will tell if new ones will, but Russia does not ‘need’ any American imports or franchises. Russia does not need either McDonald’s or Starbucks. It doesn’t need those fast-food chains that litter its streets. Honestly, what a manner to sanction Russia with? What is next, the Disney Channel?

It is America that needs Russian rocket engines and not the other way around. Fancy this, comparing rocket engines to hamburgers.

And with its ties with China, Russia has a huge export market of gas and petroleum crude, all the while Western EU slumps into cold nights or enormous power bills. In the last couple of days alone, the price of gas has nearly doubled.

What is pertinent here is going back to the basics and remembering that any talk of sanctions can only be effective if based on depriving an adversary from what its people 1) need and 2) want. Currently, there is no product, no commodity, no technology, absolutely nothing that is essential for the rest of the world, that the West exclusively produces and the rest of the world cannot.

The current Western sanctions on nations that refuse to follow the directives of the West do not carry any weight at all; or anything that comes close. Non-Western countries can survive without Tesla, Porsche and Ferrari cars. Earth will continue to spin without French perfumes and champaign.

With those facts known though unspoken, the USA continues to impose sanctions on other nations by utilizing the power of the Greenback, ie US Dollar of USD for short.

But this approach is foolish to say the least, and it is bound to backfire.

America is determined to keep the stature of the USD as the single reserve world currency. But to maintain this stature, America must make sure that the rest of the world needs to use the USD and that it has no other alternative. But when successive American administrations impose sanctions on other nations that prevent them from using the USD, they are effectively shooting their last and only remaining asset in the foot.

This is not a complex issue that requires a PhD in macro-economics to understand. It is very simple in fact. You cannot coerce people to do something by way of banning them from doing it. This is a simple logical contradiction that even children can understand.

This oxymoronic comedy of errors appears more ludicrous when we see that the USD is the only asset left that the USA can use to impose sanctions with. Do successive American administrations really believe that sanctioned and potentially sanctionable nations, are going to sit idle and starve themselves to death without taking pre-emptive measures to avert this?

If anything, sanctions over the years have taught even small and developing countries like Cuba, Syria and Iran to be self-reliant and innovative. Those countries have produced whole ‘armies’ of technicians who are able to manufacture spare parts even for old American cars. When you see photos of 1950’s Chevvies in Cuba, rest assured that there are hardly any original made-in-America parts left in them. If an American owns such an antique model and cannot find parts for it in the US, he/she may be able to find them in Cuba.

What makes the situation more farcical is that America knows well that China and Russia are intent to replace the USD as the single global reserve currency with China having a good chance to have it replaced by the Renminbi. It is also no secret that both Russia and China have been buying huge amounts of gold, and this is not to mention that they already have an alternative to the SWIFT system (СПФС or SPFS) of international banking transfers.

Back in the days of city sieges, the Athenians built their infamous horse, the original horse that coined the term ‘Trojan Horse’ and tricked the Trojans to take it into Troy. But in the West right now, there are no such strategists.

The current soaring fuel prices at service stations world-wide are not an outcome of the Russian action in Ukraine. They are the outcome of the sanctions.

These sanctions can only turn back and hurt the hand that created them. They are not arrows aimed at targets. They are boomerangs, but even boomerangs are meant to return to the hand that launched them when they miss the target. But Western sanctions are sharply-pointed boomerangs that can only hit back, and hit with vengeance, and the soaring fuel prices may just be only the beginning.

Evening update about the Donbass (Feb. 20th 00:00 MSK)

February 19, 2022

First, here is a machine translation of a summary of developments by Boris Rozhin:

1. The standard positional war with shelling continued on the front line today. The UAF recognized 2 dead and 4 wounded in a day. They also showed a staged race of the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine against the background of artillery shelling. The frontline settlements of the DPR and LPR were subjected to mortar and artillery fire. The response to the Ukrainian shelling is now being given in an adult way, without any sentimentality, which is good.

2. The evacuation of civilians from the DPR and LPR to Russia continues. Already 11 regions have announced their readiness to temporarily accept residents of Donbass on their territory. The Ministry of Emergency Situations of the Russian Federation conducts organizational measures for the accommodation of refugees. So far, the evacuation is far in size until the spring-summer of 2014, but in the event of the outbreak of intense hostilities, the flow of refugees will be very significant and the strain on the social security of the Russian regions hosting refugees will be serious.

3. Zelensky rushed to Munich, where he said that “the separators have gone mad and are firing at themselves,” began begging for money and weapons and tried with all his might to inflate his importance, although it initially looked pathetic and worthless. Zelensky’s demands for a meeting with Putin will obviously lead to nothing – Pushilin might as well have started demanding a meeting with Biden in Novoazovsk. Neither one nor the other solves anything at the strategic level anyway, and there is a deadlock in the negotiations between the United States and the Russian Federation on Ukraine and security guarantees. Therefore, all the chatter about negotiations with Ukraine now has near-zero value. The exchange of “answers” between the United States and the Russian Federation showed irremediable contradictions that cannot be resolved within the framework of the existing world order.

4. Russia continues to face various sanctions, including a ban on Russian oligarchs to travel to London. This is not a threat at all, but a bonus attached to the defeat of the APU. Also, some Europeans make it clear by all means that sanctions are sanctions, of course, but they should not touch gas, because the dependence on gas is too great, especially in winter. Gazprom phlegmatically reported that gas reserves in storage facilities in Europe have reached a historic low. Sanctions against the Russian Federation will certainly be imposed, one way or another. Therefore, it is unlikely that this issue will somehow affect certain decisions related to Ukraine. The process of imposing sanctions has long entered the saturation stage. Moreover, further sanctions will lead to further fragmentation of the global financial and economic system, destroying the remnants of the globalist project.

5. The United States continues to play the hurdy-gurdy about the inevitability of an attack, and Blinkin demanded evidence from Russia that it does not want the restoration of the USSR and the Finlandization of Ukraine. “Russia must…” Of course, our anti-Soviet authorities are not going to create any USSR, but in the West this scarecrow is the subject of holy faith. As for the Finlandization of Ukraine, it is just in the West that they mostly talk about it, mainly various Europeans who do not smile at the prospect of a war that the Americans are fomenting.

6. Germany and Austria urge their citizens to get out of Ukraine as soon as possible. Lufthansa stops flights to Ukraine from Monday (the last flights on the weekend). Also, the NATO office was closed in Kiev. Some of the staff has left for Lviv, the rest are being taken to Brussels.

7. Suddenly there was a document with commitments not to expand NATO to the east. And they told me for so long that they only promised verbally, but not in writing. But of course, even in this case, they will say that these obligations were given to the USSR, and since there is no USSR, then the obligations do not count. This is again to the question of the value of papers and obligations in the modern world.

8. The Russian Federation held exercises of strategic nuclear forces today, launching various missiles. In any case, playing with a nuclear baton will not be superfluous in order to preserve the cause of global peace even in the event of intense hostilities in Ukraine. The time of the Caribbean crisis 2.0 has not yet come. But it is approaching – in the conditions of the destruction of the previous nuclear security architecture, a new crisis that will lead to the emergence of new rules of nuclear coexistence is inevitable. The crisis is inevitable precisely because diplomatic methods of developing such rules do not yield results, since the United States does not consider the Russian Federation an equal party to the negotiations, whose position must be taken into account. Exactly for the same reasons, there is a crisis in Ukraine, as an integral part of the crisis generated by the expansion of NATO in Eastern Europe.

***

Next, I decided to share a few videos with you.  They are all in Russian, but they are also self-explanatory.  Please check out these videos, especially showing what kind of weapons systems Russia will use to obliterate the Ukie forces should they chose to cross the LOC.

Evacuation of civilians from the LDNR:

Here is what the Russian armed forces have been up to:

Russian multiple rocket launchers filed at the firing position:

Here is what this looks like on the receiving end:

Next, here is what a strike by the TOS-1A heavy flamethrower system looks like:

and if that is not enough and the West is dead set on actually taking the fight to Russia, here is what the Russians were doing today (checking their strategic deterrence – nuclear and conventional – capabilities):

Now some news from the “civilized West”:

Pro-Russian language politician sucker punched during a “debate” on Ukie TV:

Now some news from the “civilized West”:

Pro-Russian language politician sucker punched during a “debate” on Ukie TV:

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/prVN1SXhiUQt

Next, the German Chancellor declared on TV that it was “laughable” to speak of a genocide in the Donbass.

Coming from a German leader, this was especially “warmly” received in the Donbass and in Russia!

Lastly, and as always, I invite you to check out Andrei Martyano’v latest:

https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2022/02/a-bit-of-broadside-and-misnomer.html

That’s it for today on my end.  It is almost midnight in Moscow and I will try to take a few hours off.

Andrei

PS: duno if it is because they are clueless or stupid, but the Ukros managed to fire two missiles inside Russia (right across the border, so it is more likely a testimony to how advanced Ukie reconnaissance-strike capabilities really are.  Here is a photo from the scene:

Russian options in the LDNR – my personal take

February 18, 2022

Okay, this will be a short bulletpoint reminder of how I see the Russian position and options in response to the Ukronazis attack.

First, a few key assumptions:

• Russia does not want to invade/liberate the Ukraine
• Russia would prefer not to get openly involved in the LDNR
• The best outcome for Russia would be for the LDNR to be able to hold without overt Russian support
• Throughout this entire battle, Russia will always prefer to do less than to do more.

Next, here is a summary of how I expect Russia to act in the next couple of days:

Event	Consequence	Russian option
Ukronazi shelling but not ground attack	Civilian casualties and infrastructure destruction	Let the LDNR handle it while reporting about this at home
Ukronazis attempt to move ground forces across the LOC	Risk to the LDNR defenses	Ideally, Russia would only use “indirect” means such as counter-battery fire, strikes on advancing Ukronazi forces, EW.
Ukronazis forces break through the LDNR defenses	Potential existential risk to the LDNR	Imposition of a no-fly zone, sustained artillery/rocket attacks on Ukie forces
Full scale Ukronazi attack	Existential threat to the LDNR	Russia moves her forces into the LDNR and stops it all.

Notice that in all the scenarios above, Russia does not initiate a fullscale attack on the Ukraine.

Why?

Because the decision to launch a fullscale attack on the Ukronazi state would be based not on events along the LOC (line of contact) but upon a much “bigger picture” of what the West might, or might not do, in the Ukraine and the rest of Europe.

In other words, the problem of the LDNR is separate from the much greater problem of the future security arrangement of Europe.

Also, another much needed reminder: when does it makes sense to negotiate with your enemies?

• Not when you “trust” them.
• Not when you hope to “convince” them.
• Not when you hope to “show a peaceful face” to the general public.

No, it makes sense to negotiate with your enemy when:

• You hope to achieve more by negotiations then by using military force.
• Time is on your side.
• When you need to buy more time (for whatever reasons).

The US and its EU colonies have been predicting a Russian intervention for months now.  That intervention has not happened (yet) and this is driving the leaders of the West into total despair.  This is good for Russia and that is how she wants to keep the situation for as long as possible.

I am personally convinced that the only way to solve both the specific LDNR option and to create a new security architecture in Europe will have to be achieved by Russian unilateral military operation: the folks in the West need yet another military defeat to come back to their senses (they need one about every century or so).  If the Russians also see that as inevitable, they still have two things they need to do first:

• To delay an open intervention as much as possible in order to subvert the western narrative
• To engage in what could be called the “psychological preparation of the theater of operations” which, in plain English, to create such a level of anger in the LDNR and also inside Russia that the public opinion will DEMAND an intervention.

There WILL be real negative economic and political repercussions for Russia when she intervenes.  Thus it is vital for Putin and the government to create such a political dynamic inside Russia that the Russian people will not only support an intervention, but DEMAND one.  Then, when the western “sanctions from hell” are imposed, the people will not blame Putin for the very real price Russia will have to pay to prevail.

Right now, you could say that the Russian bear has been awoken by all the noise, it has come out of its lair and is just looking.  Just that has the entire West in a state of total panic.

Good.

But when that bear will actually attack will not be decided by anyone but that bear.

The Ukies have declared on numerous occasions that they will not implement the Minsk Agreements.  That is very good.

Now their attack on the LDNR seems to show that the Ukies now want to provoke a Russian response.  This is also very good, as the level of public outrage on the RuNet and even on Russian TV has gone through the roof.  The Russian PSYOP preparation of the battlefield is progressing in the right direction.

As for the LDNR defenses, they seem to be holding, but the real, major, Ukie ground offensive has not begun yet!

That is the next thing we need to look for: a Ukie ground attack.  Specifically, we don’t need to worry primarily about the initiation of that coming Ukie attack, but what it yields in the first 4-6 hours or so.  Once the Ukies are fully committed, then they become a legitimate target for counter-strikes.

So this is The Big Question now: will the LDNR defenses hold?

==>>So this is the key thing to observe is this: is the LOC moving and, if yes, how far and how fast?<<==

My personal guess is that yes, they will, which will leave only two options to the Ukronazis:

• Give up
• Launch a massive, full-scale attack

The latter is much more likely than the former.

And, in the meantime, the pain dial for the West is slowly turning up pretty much on all fronts.

So for Russia it makes sense to let that process take as long as possible before deciding to interrupt it and overtly intervene.

I hear one argument: what about the innocent civilians murdered in the LDNR?

What about them?

Does anybody seriously think that a Russian intervention will result in less casualties than what is currently taking place?

The horrible truth is that loss of life will happen no matter how the situation evolves.  So the only real choice is not “save civilians or let them die” the choice is “make sure that every civilian death counts”.  Sound cynical?  It is, but that is the reality of real warfare (as opposed to the Hollywood & Tom Clancy nonsense folks in the West are brainwashed with since birth).

So, to all those who are constantly demanding that Russia intervene *now* and who don’t understand why Lavrov agreed to meet with Blinken, I will say this: do not project your own emotions and reactions unto Putin or, if you prefer, the “Russian bear”.  The Russians did not create the biggest country on earth and defeated all their enemies by being naive or by being unable to calculate when/how to react against a foreign aggression.

If you think that you know better, good for you, just don’t expect Putin to act the way you would in the same situation.

Lastly, there is something morally repugnant in the attitude of those who see warfare as anything but the weapon of last resort.  Christ said “blessed are the peacemakers” not “blessed are the warmakers”.  Yes, as I said, I believe that Russia will have to intervene, openly and directly.  But I also believe that Putin will wait as much as possible.  That is not only operationally wise, it is morally correct.

Andrei

ADDENDUM: I remember how the western media said that the city of Sarajevo was “intensively shelled” by the Serbs.  Utter nonsense!  These folks simply don’t understand modern warfare.  When a shell lands every few minutes or so this is NOT any “intense artillery fire”.  Now, when an area the size of one, or even several, football field instantly goes up in flames, that is a serious artillery strike.  What we see as of right now in the LDNR is what could be called “disturbing fire”.  When the Ukies used de-mining vehicles yesterday that could be part of a preparation for a ground assault.  This has NOT happened YET.  As for a ground assault, so far the Ukies have only sent in special forces and, apparently, they got detected, took casualties, and had to retreat.

All this is way below the threshold at which Russia will have to intervene.

Kazakhstan and Russia (Andrei Martyanov)

January 05, 2022

Source

العروض الإيرانية بالليرة اللبنانية فمن ينافس؟

أكتوبر/ 8 تشرين الأول 2021

ناصر قنديل

لا يحتاج الأمر إلى تحليل ونقاش لاستنتاج محورية قطاع الكهرباء في أزمة لبنان المالية، فأزمة المازوت هي فرع من أزمة الكهرباء، ومتى توافرت الكهرباء تراجعت الحاجة للمازوت إلى أقل من الربع، وتأمين الكهرباء يستدعي زيادة الإنتاج، وهذا يتطلب تمويلاً لإنشاء المعامل ومثله لتشغيلها، ومن دون زيادة الإنتاج فإن تشغيل المعامل القائمة يستدعي توفير الوقود اللازم، وهذا يحتاج للتمويل، والتمويل بالعملات الصعبة، والدولة ومصرفها المركزي لم يعد لديهما القدرة على تأمين هذا التمويل، وشراء العملات الصعبة من السوق سيرفع سعر الصرف ويدفع بالدولار إلى أسعار مقلقة تعني مزيداً من الانهيار، والذهاب لتمويل عبر القروض بلا أفق، لأنه تراكم لديون لا يملك لبنان جواباً عن كيفية سدادها، وعندما يجري البحث بتمويل معامل جديدة من قروض خارجية سواء عبر صندوق النقد الدولي أو سواه، مهما كانت ميسرة ومؤخرة، تبقى كلفة التشغيل بقروض كمثل قرض البنك الدولي المفترض لتمويل استجرار الغاز المصري وشراء الكهرباء من الأردن، وهي قروض قد تتوافر لجزء من الحاجة وجزء من الوقت، لكنها لن تتوافر لكل الحاجة وكل الوقت.

–

أمام لبنان طريق وحيد لتفادي السقوط، وهو أن يحصل على وقود التشغيل بطريق يشبه المساعدة العراقية، ولا يبدو أن الحكومات العربية الأخرى التي تملك قدرات نفطية جاهزة للسير على خطى العراق، لكن إيران سبقت الجميع وقالت بلسان مسؤوليها مراراً، وكرر الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله التأكيد على جاهزية إيران لتأمين المحروقات التي يحتاجها لبنان، بما فيها وقود تشغيل معامل الكهرباء بالليرة اللبنانية، وهذا العرض الذي لم يلق الاهتمام اللازم تحول إلى مبادرة مباشرة من حزب الله بجلب سفن كسر الحصار، التي قدمت حلاً لجانب من أزمة فقدان المازوت من الأسواق، وأصابت سلم تسعير الاحتكارات التي فرضت معادلات تتحكم بموجبها بالتسعير والسوق، وإذا كانت معامل توليد الكهرباء التي يسعى لبنان لتأمينها تحت شعار زيادة التغذية ثم زيادة التعرفة، لوضع حد لخسائر كهرباء لبنان، فهذا يستدعي ربط التعرفة الجديدة للكهرباء بسعر الدولار، الذي سيضرب سقوفاً قياسية إذا بقي تأمين الوقود اللازم للتشغيل مرتبطاً بتمويل يعتمد على شراء الدولارات من السوق، وهذا يعني الانتقال “من تحت الدلف لتحت المزراب”.

–

خيار لبنان الوحيد الإنقاذي الذي ربما لا ينتبه له المسؤولون، أو يخافون أن ينتبهوا له، هو أن يكون لدى لبنان من يزوده بالوقود اللازم لتشغيل معامل الكهرباء بالليرة اللبنانية، فذلك هو الطريق الوحيد الذي يمنع إسهام الطلب على الدولارات اللازمة لشراء الوقود في التسبب برفع متواصل لسعر الصرف وبالتالي سعر التعرفة، وصولاً لحد الانفجار، وتأمين الوقود بالليرة اللبنانية يقع في صلب العروض الإيرانية المتكررة، والعرض الذي أعاد تقديمه وزير الخارجية الإيراني حول بناء معامل الكهرباء يستحق من يناقش تفاصيله مع الجانب الإيراني، لأن لا نقاش حول الجوانب التقنية وأهلية الشركات الإيرانية وقد قامت بإنهاض قطاع الكهرباء في بلادها، وصولاً لتحقيق فائض تبيعه إيران لباكستان والعراق وعدد من دول آسيا الوسطى، وحالياً لأفغانستان وفقاً للتفاهم الجديد بين الحكومتين الإيرانية والأفغانية، ومسؤولية الحكومة اللبنانية كبيرة اليوم في أن تحمل العرض الإيراني بمضمونه التفصيلي لجهة الاعتماد على تمويل بالليرة اللبنانية، وأن تذهب للمعترضين داخلياً وخارجياً وتقول إنه الحل الوحيد الذي يناسب لبنان، وعلى من يعترض أو يرفض أو يهدد بعقوبات أن يقول لا تشتروا من إيران فنحن جاهزون لتزويدكم بالمثل بذات الشروط والأسعار وبالتسعير بالليرة اللبنانية، وما لم نحصل على مثيل فالأمر يستحق المخاطرة بالتعرض للعقوبات، لأنه طريق وحيد لعدم الانهيار، فما نفع الموت وأنت غير معاقب طالما أمامك فرصة العيش ولتكن معاقباً، وعندها تعرف العدو من الصديق.

–

تجربة سفن كسر الحصار تقول إن حكومة تملك بعض الشجاعة تستطيع أن تستفيد من العروض الإيرانية لتحفيز الآخرين لعروض مقابلة، أو على الأقل للاستثناء من العقوبات.

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

• السيد نصر الله مستقبلًا عبد اللهيان: إيران أثبتت أنها حليف صادق ووفيّ لا يخذل أصدقاءه
• زيارة عبد اللهيان تخطف الأضواء..عروض إيرانية سخية وشيا توبخ مجموعاتها..والانتخابات في 27 اذار
•  دعم إيراني متجدّد للبنان: عرض مُغرٍ لقطاع الطاقة
• تقرير صندوق النقد ومصرف لبنان
• عبد اللهيان: عرض إيراني بمعامل كهرباء وإعادة إعمار المرفأ… فهل من يتعامل بجدية؟ / قانون الانتخاب: الموعد 27 آذار … ولا مقاعد للاغتراب… ولا كوتا نسائية / بيطار يسرّب نفياً لما سرّب عنه… وتسريبات عن نوايا بمذكرات بحقّ النواب /
• هل يتحقق حلم الشعب ويأتي الإنقاذ قبل فوات الأوان؟
• خريف أمريكا في لبنان

النفط الإيراني… شريان للحياة

السبت 21 آب 2021

حسن عليق

(مروان بو حيدر)

«بكرا بيتعوّدوا»، العبارة المنسوبة إلى رياض سلامة تعليقاً على تعامل اللبنانيين مع انهيار قيمة الليرة، باتت دستور أكثرية قوى السلطة. منذ سنتين، عاش لبنان ثلاث صدمات اقتصادية كبرى، يجري التعامل معها كما لو أنها لم تكن: صدمة إفلاس القطاع المصرفي المكابر على إعلان إفلاسه وانهيار الليرة، وصدمة رفع الدعم، وصدمة انقطاع الطاقة الكهربائية والمحروقات معاً.

كل واحدة من هذه الصدمات كفيلة، وحدها، بهدم اقتصاد ولو كان قوياً، وبتدمير قدرات السكان المعيشية. الانهيار لا يُمكن أن يستمر، ولو في أفشل دول العالم، من دون خطة إنقاذ، لوقف الانهيار وعكس المسار نحو العودة إلى «الحياة الطبيعية». رفع الدعم لا يمكن أن يتم، ولو في أكثر الرأسماليات توحشاً، من دون شبكة أمان اجتماعي. حتى البنك وصندوق النقد الدوليّان، وسواهما من مؤسسات نظام سيادة رأس المال في العالم، يوصيان بأن يكون قرار إلغاء الدعم عن السلع الأساسية متزامناً مع برامج حماية اجتماعية، للطبقات الأكثر ضعفاً. وأكثر ما ينبغي الامتناع عنه، هو رفع الدعم فجأة عن الغذاء والدواء والاستشفاء والمحروقات والطاقة. صدمات متتالية أصابت سكان لبنان، مترافقة مع جائحة كورونا العالمية، وانفجار المرفأ، وأزمة سياسية مستمرة منذ ما قبل انسحاب الجيش السوري أنتجت عدم انتظام في المؤسسات الدستورية (فراغ حكومي، فراغ رئاسي وتمديد نيابي…) استهلك أكثر من نصف الأعوام الـ 16 الماضية.

صدمات متتالية، أتت بعد إجراءات حصارية نفّذتها الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، بدأت عام 2011 بقرار إعدام البنك اللبناني الكندي (وهو العام الذي بدأ فيه ميزان المدفوعات اللبناني يشهد عجزاً استمر حتى اليوم)، ثم إجراءات حصار سوريا تزامناً مع اندلاع الحرب فيها، وقرارات العقوبات بحق شركات وأفراد لبنانيين، وصولاً إلى إعدام بنك الجمال صيف عام 2019 (صاعق الانهيار) وإقفال المصارف بعد 17 تشرين الأول 2019 (قرار اتخذته جمعية المصارف أثناء وجودها مع سلامة في واشنطن). طوال تلك الفترة، كانت البنوك تكنز الودائع في مصرف لبنان الذي اتخذ حاكمه كل الإجراءات الممكنة من أجل خنق الاقتصاد، وتوّجها، بغطاء من أكثرية سياسية عابرة للانقسام التقليدي، بقرار رفع الدعم عن المحروقات. وسبق ذلك القرار قانونٌ أصدره مجلس النواب في نيسان 2021 منح فيه سلفة خزينة لمؤسسة كهرباء لبنان بقيمة 300 مليار ليرة. هذا القانون يمكن تسميته بقانون العتمة. فالمؤسسة كانت تطلب 1500 مليار ليرة لتأمين ثمن الوقود الكافي لتوليد الطاقة الكهربائية وصيانة معامل الإنتاج حتى نهاية العام الجاري. لكنّ عدداً من الكتل النيابية (القوات اللبنانية والحزب التقدمي الاشتراكي وتيار المستقبل وحركة أمل) ضغطت لخفض قيمة السلفة حتى 300 مليار ليرة، تحت طائلة عدم إصدار القانون. وشنّ ممثلون عن هذه الكتل عملية تضليل شنيعة للسكان، متعمّدين الكذب عبر القول إن خفض قيمة السلفة هدفه الحفاظ على أموال المودعين التي لم تحرّك هذه الكتل ساكناً لحمايتها، لا قبل الانهيار استباقاً، ولا بعده حفاظاً على ما تبقى منها. ببساطة، صدر قانون العتمة، عبر حجب الأموال عن مؤسسة كهرباء لبنان. ثم غطّت هذه الكتل، وغيرها، قرار سلامة رفع الدعم عن المحروقات. هذه الكتل تنقسم إلى قسمين. القوات والاشتراكي والمستقبل فعلوا ما فعلوه امتثالاً لأوامر أميركية بإيصال البلاد إلى الدرَك الأسفل من الانهيار. أما كتلة حركة أمل، ففعلته نكاية بالتيار الوطني الحر. وفي خلفية قانون العتمة وقرار رفع الدعم، انحياز كلي لأصحاب الثروات والمصارف.

ما جرى كان تأثيره كارثياً. لم يسبق أن اتخذت دولة، عن وعي كامل، قراراً بتدمير اقتصادها بالصورة التي فعلتها السلطة اللبنانية. ما يشهده لبنان حالياً من انقطاع للطاقة الكهربائية والمحروقات لا يمكن أن تشهده أي دولة من دون حرب مدمّرة. فالطاقة هي العمود الفقري للحياة في القرن الحادي والعشرين بعد الميلاد. ونتائج وقف إنتاج الكهرباء وقطع المحروقات لا تعيد سكان لبنان إلى المستوى الذي كانوا يعيشون فيه بعد الحرب الأهلية مباشرة، بل تُرجعهم إلى زمن ما قبل إنشاء سكة الحديد وإقامة أول معامل إنتاج الكهرباء زمن السلطة العثمانية. والدولة التي فُرِض عليها هذا الواقع، بقرار خارجي وداخلي، هي دولة يقول حاكم مصرفها المركزي إن بين يديه 14 مليار دولار «نقداً»، و17 مليار دولار ذهباً.

مجلس النواب، بوصفه المؤسسة الدستورية الأمّ، كان ينبغي أن يكون الحصن الأخير دفاعاً عن حقوق أبناء «الأمة» ومصالحهم. كان يُنتظر منه إصدار قوانين تُجبر مصرف لبنان على استمرار الدعم إلى حين إقامة شبكة أمان اجتماعي، وعلى ضمان استمرار إنتاج الكهرباء بالطاقة القصوى، وعلى تمويل إقامة معامل إنتاج جديدة تكفي لتغطية كامل حاجة البلاد. كان يُنتظر منه أن يكون على قدر المسؤولية، لإخراج البلاد من صدمة الانهيار.

جلسة مجلس النواب، أمس، يمكن اعتبارها خاتمة الاستقالة من بذل أيّ جُهد إنقاذي. هذا الواقع الداخلي، متشابكاً مع الحصار الخارجي، لا يواجَه بقرارات تقليدية. البلاد تعيش حالة انهيار تام يُعبَّر عنها بانقطاع التيار الكهربائي، وفقدان المحروقات. موازين القوى في المؤسسات الدستورية موزعة بين شريك لدول الحصار (سياسياً ومالياً)، ومستقيل من مسؤوليته وعاجز عن التغيير من الداخل

ومشتغل بالنكاية. والواقع أشبه ما يكون بحالة حرب غير معلنة. وإزاءه، لا بد من حلول غير تقليدية، على رأسها تأمين مصادر الطاقة، في وجه الاحتكار والحصار، والتفافاً على العجز التام للمؤسسات. إجراءات طوارئ هدفها إنعاش المريض والحؤول دون وفاته. هنا تحديداً تكمن أهمية استيراد النفط من إيران. إنه ليس حلاً للأزمة في لبنان، لكنه بالتأكيد شريانٌ للحياة، في وجه قوى الموت الداخلية والخارجية.

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

• “إسرائيل” تفقد زمام المبادرة
• الباخرة الإيرانية إلى لبنان.. هل بدأ حزب الله مرحلة الحسم؟
• أبعد من سفينة.. أكبر من باخرة
• لبنان يواجه خطر فقدان الوصول إلى خدمات المياه الأساسية
• الجيش يوضح حقيقة البوارج في المياه الإقليمية
• 3 اقتراحات قوانين معجّلة مكررة من «الجمهورية القوية»
• باسيل يستكمل هجومه على المجلس: أوقفوا المؤامرة!

Resistance Groups: US Sanctions Won’t Weaken Our Resolve to Defend Iraq

11 Aug 2021

By Staff, Agencies

The Iraqi resistance groups targeted by US sanctions said the restrictive measures show that their counter-terrorism campaign poses a challenge to the Americans, stressing that the bans will fail to weaken their resolve to protect the homeland and restore its sovereignty.

The Asaib Ahl al-Haq and Kataib Hezbollah, both subdivisions of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units [PMU], better known in Arabic as Hashd al-Shaabi, said on Tuesday that they would remain impervious to the US sanctions.

A day earlier, the US State Department said it had imposed sanctions on the two Iraqi resistance factions under the so-called Iran, North Korea, and Syria Nonproliferation Act [INKSNA], which prohibits arms transfer to those targeted.

Asaib politburo spokesman Mahmoud al-Rubaie told Iraqi al-Ahad news website that the US restrictive measures against resistance groups as “a battle between right and wrong,” saying they represent the extent of the failure that successive US administrations have suffered in the Middle East.

The US sanctions did not catch Asaib by surprise since the group “expects anything from them [the Americans],” he added. “Whatever they do will not affect us because we are strong.”

Rubaie also said that the United States “is concerned about the political presence of the resistance and is therefore seeking a way to escape … Of course, the [Iraqi] government is also weak and cannot counter US pressure.”

Washington wants a “poor Iraq,” where the youths are jobless, he said.

Similarly, Asaib politburo member Ahmad al-Mousavi said that Washington was trying to drive the resistance out of the Iraqi political equation because it had brought about the failure of US schemes in the Arab country.

“US sanctions will not affect the performance of the Asaib Ahl al-Haq and will not remove this resilient Iraqi group from the political scene,” he added.

Mousavi expressed hope that the Iraqi government would take a clear stance on the new US bans, complaining, however, about Baghdad’s silence in the face of US restrictions against resistance groups over the past year.

Meanwhile, the Kaf Telegram channel, a Kataib Hezbollah-affiliate, said, “Let them impose on us whatever sanctions they have at their disposal. It is an honor that we are still a difficult challenge in their calculations.”

“We will continue our path to restoring [Iraqi] sovereignty and dignity by relying on God,” it said.

In early 2003, the US invaded Iraq under the later debunked pretext that the regime of Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction.

It withdrew soldiers from Iraq between 2007 and 2011, but redeployed them in 2014 along with other partners to allegedly counter the threat of Daesh.

Iraq managed to end the territorial rule of the Takfiri terrorist group in the country thanks to the sacrifices of the national army and Hashd al-Sha’abi, which had the backing of neighboring Iran.

On January 3, 2020, the US assassinated Iran’s anti-terror commander General Qassem Soleimani and his Iraqi trenchmate Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, deputy head of Hashd al-Sha’abi, two influential figures in the fight against Daesh.

Two days later, the Iraqi parliament unanimously approved a bill, demanding the expulsion of all foreign military forces led by the United States from the Arab country.

Since then, however, Washington has been dragging its feet on the troop pullout and targeting anti-terror groups from time to time.

Margarita Simonian on Biden’s call to the “killer”

April 15, 2021 

Note: in my analysis yesterday I quoted Margarita Simonian, the head of Russia Today.  Today I have asked my director of research, Scott, to translate yet another thought provoking series of comments made by Simonian yesterday.  Now that we see that Biden has imposed even more sanctions on Russia (right after his phone call), her words take on an even deeper meaning.

The Saker
——-

In regard to Biden’s phone call and his summit with Putin. The phone call took place, so what? Will this negotiation take place, or they won’t take place, regardless, it won’t change anything in their attitude towards us. Our relations towards them is our reaction to their actions. We don’t want the same things for them as they want for us. We don’t have the aim to destroy the USA, and to break the United States apart into 50 small independent countries. We don’t seek to disarm the US and strip away their nuclear weapons, and to take away their every potential in every way. In other world, everything they are trying to do to us. We don’t have plans against them similar to those they, actually, harbor towards us.

Interviewer: We don’t even want to democratize them and to demand from them to stop human rights abuse. They elected a new president, but their police officer just again killed an Afro-American. They have unsolved racial problems. Biden criticized Trump for exactly the same Trump criticizes now Biden.

Simonyan: The United States’ attitude towards us will not change. The United States, due to their nature, won’t tolerate anyone who even in theory could threaten their existence. We are, in theory, threaten their existence and they cannot agree with this. And they will continue to do everything to make sure that we as such would disappear .

In these conditions, a meeting between Putin and Biden will be just a protocol event. The meeting will be just for pictures. There cannot be any serious discussion and decision taken during such meeting. Even if something were decided during this meeting, it will be overwritten and nullified the very next day. I don’t believe there could be any substance and any common sense to this meeting.

To stand by their word is not a part of American mentality. It’s something we do. And our president follows this rule. He does certain things, not because it’s profitable, but because he had an agreement. They don’t have the same attitude to their agreements. Gorbachev had an agreement about the West not extending NATO eastward towards Russia’s borders. What had happened to this agreement? Or, take, for example, American national pastime of bringing troops home from Afghanistan.

An American easy attitude to words explains Biden’s words about a “killer”. They simply don’t attach the same meaning to words. I don’t know what exactly took place there, but I imagine that a fame seeking journalists, a Lary King wannabe,RIP, asked a provocative question and Biden responded as he could. It was impossible to cut it out, because everyone leaks there. They leak even secret government negotiations. Everyone would know in ten minutes that Biden’s people demanded to cut out a part of an interview concerning president Putin. Biden would be forced to explain himself for the next three months. I would incline to thing that it was a guff, not as serious as it looks from our point of view. We take this things seriously. We say that since you call our leader a “killer” then we won’t communicate with you and will be in a state of war. Listen to their election debates and how they verbally abuse each other. We would be terrified, but for them it’s absolutely normal.

As for the Ukraine, I think that the United States as they urged Georgia to attack back in 2008, they are trying to push the Ukraine to do something equally stupid. The most important are Patrushev’s words about a provocation that might take place with the participation of Ukrainian military that would provide the Ukraine with a chance to start a war against, and I am quoting here, against Crimea. In simple terms, to start a war against Russia. America, like a Santa-Clause of steroids, presents us with such “presents” for many years, now. We wouldn’t recognize an independence of Ossetia and Abkhazia for twenty years. But we had it done thanks to an American gift. We would never consider to start creating a sovereign internet, if it weren’t for the American gifts of blocking us online and demonstrating us a need for such thing. We wouldn’t be able to develop our agriculture and food production if it weren’t for their sanctions and our contra-sanctions. And, there wouldn’t be reunification with Crimea, if we had normal relations with the Ukraine. This new gift in a shape of the Ukraine attacking Crimea is unavoidable. Its a medical fact.

اتفاق استراتيجي بين إيران والصين لربع قرن.. ماذا في الدلالات والتوقيت؟ A strategic agreement between Iran and China for a quarter of a century. for a quarter of a century.

**English Machine translation Please scroll down for the Arabic original version **

When Tehran, Beijing and Moscow decide to unite together

When Tehran, Beijing, and Moscow decide to come together in the face of destructive foreign policies of successive U.S. administrations, the White House must inevitably calculate the consequences.

Iran and China are moving beyond a new phase of bilateral relations, after years of talks and discussions put the points on the letters within the framework of a strategic cooperation document in all fields, while China is advancing in an upward, strong and rapid way to the consolidation of the global economy, and Iran has huge energy resources and prospers scientifically and is active industrially, and here liesthe importance of convergence between them.

The two sides describe this document as a roadmap for the future of bilateral relations, its provisions include trade, economic, military, and cultural cooperation in a way that gives the two sides mutual privileges in accordance with the mutual profit equation.

The agreement details cooperation from crude oil and nuclear power to railways, telecommunications, banking and the use of the national currency, to Iran’s role in the Belt and Road Initiative.

It is an agreement of great geopolitical importance because it also includes the exchange of military expertise, defense capabilities, security cooperation and support in international    forums.

It is true that economic cooperation is the cornerstone of this treaty, but according to observers it is a political challenge to the common adversaries of the two countries, and it opens the door to a new kind of confrontation against the European-Americancamp.

The importance of the agreement lies not only in substance, in the form of the timing of a thousand accounts as well, where China simultaneously is subjected to threats from the United States and Iran to sanctions and Russia to blockade. With the signing of the cooperation agreement, it highlights the role Tehran will play in the horizon of this agreement, which will serve as a benefit to its growingrole.

Iran’s important location, located on the land route of the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative, gives it an opportunity to link to regional infrastructure, which is inseparable from port andrail networks.

On this basis, the above will reflect huge economic gains, but also a strategy that is no less important than economic ones, as deepening Iran’s ties to regional infrastructure will result in international interests in defending Iran to counter U.S.policies.

On the other hand, China’s military and economic expansion and technological superiority are the most feared by Washington and its officials, and reducing Chinese influence has become one of the top priorities of the new U.S. administration.

The United States sees China as its biggest threat, and to its leading position in the world, its president Joe Biden  has positioned since entering the White House to outdo China and prevent it from expanding further on the international scene as its first target.

U.S. concern stems from a reality in which China has imposed its power, through its success in gradually expanding and considering with reliable allies such as Iran, Russia and others, as well as raising the level of its military readiness.

China’s access to Iranian ports as part of a strategy of access to as many seaports as possible limits U.S. dominance in the Gulf as Chinese presence, specifically at the port of Jask near the Strait of Hormuz, is limited by U.S. Fifth Fleet’s headquarters in Bahrain.

China’s expansion comes on the heels of the failure of the Alaska-U.S. meetings, the first between the two parties under Biden, in the absence of common ground for understanding, and the tyranny of sharpness on bilateral talks, which were punctuated by an unprecedented verbal scathing, during which Beijing’s behavior was evident on the basis of the club.

These are important strategic shifts in China’s policy toward the world order and regional politics and evidence that the increasing deterioration in relations between Washington and Beijing is no longer manageable and, according to observers, threatens to widen theconfrontation.

“The partnership with China allows Iran to support its economy very much,” said Jamal Wakim, a professor of history and internationalrelations.

“The Iran-China partnership allows the heart of Eurasia to be closed to U.S. penetration,” Wakim said, noting that “seaports are essential for controlling navigation routes and international trade.”

“There is strategic integration between Iran, China and Russia on geopolitical issues,” Wakim said, noting that “Washington’s problem is that it wants absolute dominance on the course of things in theworld.”

“Washington is afraid of Chinese expansion,” said Khaled Sfouri, political advisor at the Meridian Center for Strategic Studies, adding that “America fears that China’s economic progress will turn into politicalinfluence.”

“China is a key economic partner ofthe United States thatcannot be easily abandoned,” he said, adding that “The Chinese influence that is entering the areas of American influence is makingthe clash between the two sidessoon.”

“If the Russian-Chinese agreement is signed, there is hope that the trilateral alliance with Iran will become a trilateral alliance with Iran, “said Imad Absinas, editor-in-chief of Iran Diplomat, noting that “the formation of the Trilateral Sino-Iranian-Russian alliance will be a source of danger toAmerica.”

“According to the agreement, Iran will be theheart of East-West trade,” Hesaid, noting that “the agreement stipulates that China will produce a lot of goods in Iran.”

“If Washington wants to continue its policy of imposing its will on the world, it will lose a lot,” He said, adding that “the Israeli-American and Saudi media reflects the extent of anger over the Iran-China  agreement.”

Related Videos

Related Articles

• China, Iran Ink 25-Year Comprehensive Deal
• Rouhani: Iran, China Determined to Boost Long-Term Strategic Ties, Fight Terrorism
• U.S. Pressures China and Iran, They Move Closer to Their Own Deal
• Iran Exports Nanotech Products to 49 Countries
• Iranian Majlis Speaker: Unilateral Sanctions Imposed on Iran Blatant Example of Economic Terrorism

إيران والصين توقعان الوثيقة الشاملة للتعاون لمدة 25 عاما

عندما تقرر طهران وبكين وموسكو الاتحاد معاً في مواجهة سياسات خارجية مدمرة للإدارات الأميركية المتعاقبة، فعلى البيت الأبيض حتماً احتساب العواقب

عندما تقرر طهران وبكين وموسكو الاتحاد معاً

واشنطن حددت خصومها، فاختاروا التقارب رداً طبيعياً لمن يرفض الهمينة الأميركية 

المصدر: الميادين

27 آذار 23:18

تخط إيران والصين مرحلة جديدة من العلاقات الثنائية، فبعد سنوات من المحادثات والنقاشات وضع الطرفان النقاط على الحروف في إطار وثيقة تعاون استراتيجية في المجالات كافة، فيما تتقدم الصين على نحو متصاعد وقوي وسريع لتتسيد الاقتصاد العالمي، وإيران تملك موارد ضخمة للطاقة وتزدهر علمياً وتنشط صناعياً، وهنا تكمن أهمية التقارب بينهما.

يصف الطرفان هذه الوثيقة بخارطة الطريق لمستقبل العلاقات الثنائية، فبنودها تشمل التعاون تجارياً واقتصادياً وعسكرياً وثقافياً بشكل يمنح الطرفين امتيازات متبادلة وفق معادلة الربح المتبادل.

تتحدث الاتفاقية بالتفصيل عن أوجه التعاون من النفط الخام والطاقة النووية إلى سكك الحديد والاتصالات والعمل المصرفي واستخدام العملة الوطنية، وصولاً إلى دور إيران في مبادرة الحزام والطريق.

هي اتفاقية تمتلك أهمية جيوسياسية كبرى لكونها تشمل أيضاً تبادل خبرات عسكرية وقدرات دفاعية وتعاوناً أمنياً واسناداً في المحافل الدولية. لا بل أكثر من ذلك، هو اتفاق على توسيع التعاون بين الجامعات وأقسام التكنولوجيا والعلوم والسياحة.

صحيح أن التعاون الاقتصادي يشكل عمود الأساس في المعاهدة هذه، إلا أنه بحسب مراقبين يعتبر تحدياً سياسياً لخصوم البلدين المشتركين، وهو يفتح الباب على نوع جديد من المواجهة ضد المعسكر الأوروبي الأميركي.

ولا تكمن أهمية الاتفاقية في المضمون فقط، ففي الشكل يحسب للتوقيت ألف حساب أيضاً، حيث بالتزامن تتعرض الصين للتهديدات الأميركية وإيران للعقوبات وروسيا للحصار. ومع توقيع اتفاقية التعاون، يسلط الضوء على الدور الذي ستؤديه طهران في أفق هذا الاتفاق الذي سيصب لمصلحة تعاظم دورها.

فموقع إيران المهم الذي يقع على المسار البري لمبادرة الحزام والطريق الصينية، يمنحها فرصة للارتباط بالبنية التحتية الإقليمية، وهو ما لا ينفصل عن شبكات الموانئ والسكك الحديدية.

على هذا الأساس، سينعكس ما سبق وفق مراقبين مكاسب اقتصادية ضخمة، لا بل استراتيجية أيضاً لا تقل أهمية عن الاقتصادية منها، فتعميق الارتباط الإيراني بالبنية التحتية الإقليمية سينتج مصالح دولية في الدفاع عن إيران لمواجهة السياسات الأميركية.

من الناحية الأخرى، فإن التوسع العسكري والإقتصادي للصين وتفوقها التكنولوجي، أكثر ما تخشاه واشنطن والمسؤولين فيها، حتى بات الحد من النفوذ الصيني أحد أبرز الأولويات للإدارة الأميركية الجديدة.

ترى الولايات المتحدة في الصين التهديد الأكبر لها، ولموقعها القيادي في العالم، رئيسها جو بايدن وضع منذ دخوله البيت الأبيض التفوق على الصين ومنعها من التوسع أكثر على الساحة الدولية هدفاً أولاً له.

القلق الأميركي ينبع من واقع فرضت فيه الصين قوتها، عبر نجاحها في التوسع التدريجي والمدروس مع حلفاء موثوقين مثل ايران وروسيا  وغيرهما إضافة إلى رفع مستوى جهوزيتها العسكرية.

كذلك، فإن وصول الصين إلى الموانئ الإيرانية ضمن استراتيجية تقوم على النفاذ إلى أكبر عدد ممكن من الموانئ البحرية، يحد من الهيمنة الأميركية في الخليج حيث اقترب الحضور الصيني، وتحديداً في ميناء “جاسك” القريب من مضيق هرمز من مقر الأسطول الخامس الأميركي في البحرين.

توسع صيني يأتي على وقع فشل اجتماعات ألاسكا بين الصين وأميركا، الأول بين الطرفين في عهد بايدن، في ظل غياب أرضية مشتركة للتفاهم، وطغيان الحدة على المحادثات الثنائية، التي تخللها تراشق كلامي لم يسبق له مثيل، وبدا واضحاً أثناءها تصرف بكين على أساس الندية.

هي تحولات استراتيجية مهمة في السياسة الصينية تجاه النظام العالمي والسياسات الإقليمية ودليل على أن التدهور الذي يتزايد في العلاقات بين واشنطن وبكين، لم يعد ممكنا ضبطه، وبات ينذر، وفق مراقبين، باتساع رقعة المواجهة.

أستاذ التاريخ والعلاقات الدولية جمال واكيم، قال إن “الشراكة مع الصين تتيح لإيران أن تدعم اقتصادها جداً”.

وفي حديث للميادين، أضاف واكيم، أن “الشراكة الإيرانية الصينية تتيح إغلاق قلب أوراسيا أمام التغلغل الأميركي”، مشيراً إلى أن “الموانئ البحرية أساسية للسيطرة على طرق الملاحة والتجارة الدولية”.

أستاذ التاريخ والعلاقات الدولية جمال واكيم في #المسائية: الشراكة الإيرانية الصينية تتيح اغلاق قلب أوراسيا أمام التغلغل الأميركي.#الصين #إيران pic.twitter.com/S8A1TnStDv

— قناة الميادين (@AlMayadeenNews) March 27, 2021

من جهته، قال المستشار السياسي لمركز ميريديان للدراسات الاستراتيجية خالد صفوري، قال إن “واشنطن تخشى من التوسع الصيني”، موضحاً أن “أميركا تخشى أن يتحول التقدم الاقتصادي الصيني إلى نفوذ سياسي”.

صفوري أكد للميادين، أن “الصين شريك اقتصادي أساسي للولايات المتحدة لا تستطيع التخلي عنها بسهولة”، معتبراً أن “النفوذ الصيني الذي بدأ يدخل مناطق النفوذ الأميركي يجعل الصدام بين الطرفين قريباً”.

المستشار السياسي لمركز ميريديان للدراسات الاستراتيجية خالد صفوري في #المسائية: النفوذ الصيني الذي بدأ يدخل مناطق النفوذ الأميركي يجعل الصدام بين الطرفين قريباً.#الصين #إيران #أميركا pic.twitter.com/nYmFRMDcZ2

— قناة الميادين (@AlMayadeenNews) March 27, 2021

مقالات ذات صلة

• “نيوزيوك”: التعاون بين طهران وبكين يتجاوز مجرّد مواجهة واشنطن
• اتفاق لـ25 عاماً.. الشراكة بين الصين وإيران تبدأ بوثيقة استراتيجية
• بايدن يقترح على جونسون خطة لمنافسة مشروع الحزام والطريق الصيني
• مسؤول أميركي بشأن الاتفاق النووي: ليس الخلاف على التحرّك بل على الخطوات
• توسيع الانتشار وزيادة الرؤوس النووية: بريطانيا تتقدَّم الجبهة الأميركية ضدّ الصين
• واشنطن ــــ بيونغ يانغ: تصعيد تحت سقف الدبلوماسية

US/NATO vs. Russia-China in a hybrid war to the finish

March 27, 2021

The unipolar moment is six feet under, the hegemon will try to break Eurasian integration and there’s no grownup in the room to counsel restraint

By Pepe Escobar, posted with permission and first posted at Asia Times

Let’s start with comic relief: the “leader of the free world” has pledged to prevent China from becoming the “leading” nation on the planet. And to fulfill such an exceptional mission, his “expectation” is to run again for president in 2024. Not as a hologram. And fielding the same running mate.

Now that the “free world” has breathed a sigh of relief, let’s return to serious matters – as in the contours of the Shocked and Awed 21st Century Geopolitics.

What happened in the past few days between Anchorage and Guilin continues to reverberate. As Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stressed that Brussels “destroyed” the relationship between Russia and the EU, he focused on how the Russia-China comprehensive strategic partnership is getting stronger and stronger.

Not so casual synchronicity revealed that as Lavrov was being properly hosted by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Guilin – scenic lunch in the Li river included -, US Secretary of State Tony Blinken was visiting NATO’s James-Bondish HQ outside Brussels.

Lavrov made it quite clear that the core of Russia-China revolves around establishing an economic and financial axis to counterpunch the Bretton Woods arrangement. That implies doing everything to protect Moscow and Beijing from “threats of sanctions by other states”; progressive de-dollarization; and advances in crypto-currency.

This “triple threat” is what is unleashing the Hegemon’s unbounded fury.

On a broader spectrum, the Russia-China strategy also implies that the progressive interaction between the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) will keep apace across Central Asia, Southeast Asia, parts of South Asia, and Southwest Asia – necessary steps towards an ultimately unified Eurasian market under a sort of strategic Sino-Russo management.

In Alaska, the Blinken-Sullivan team learned, at their expense, that you don’t mess with a Yoda such as Yang Jiechi with impunity. Now they’re about to learn what it means to mess with Nikolai Patrushev, head of the Russian Security Council.

Patrushev, as much a Yoda as Yang Jiechi, and a master of understatement, delivered a not so cryptic message: if the US created “though days” for Russia, as they “are planning that, they can implement that”, Washington “would be responsible for the steps that they would take”.

What NATO is really up to

Meanwhile, in Brussels, Blinken was enacting a Perfect Couple  routine with spectacularly inefficient head of the European Commission (EC) Ursula von der Leyen. The script went something like this. “Nord Stream 2 is really bad for you. A trade/investment deal with China is really bad for you. Now sit. Good girl.”

Then came NATO, which put on quite a show, complete with an all-Foreign Minister tough guy pose in front of the HQ. That was part of a summit – which predictably did not “celebrate” the 10th anniversary of NATO’s destruction of Libya or the major ass-kicking NATO “endured” in Afghanistan.

In June 2020, NATO’s cardboard secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg – actually his US military handlers – laid out what is now known as the NATO 2030 strategy, which boils down to a Global Robocop politico-military mandate. The Global South has (not) been warned.

In Afghanistan, according to a Stoltenberg impervious to irony, NATO supports infusing “fresh energy into the peace process”. At the summit, NATO ministers also discussed Middle East and Northern Africa and – with a straight face – looked into “what more NATO could do to build stability in the region”. Syrians, Iraqis, Lebanese, Libyans, Malians would love to learn something about that.

Post-summit, Stoltenberg delivered a proverbially somnolent press conference where the main focus was – what else – Russia, and its “pattern for repressive behavior at home, aggressive behavior abroad”.

All the rhetoric about NATO “building stability” vanishes when one examines what’s really behind NATO 2030, via a meaty “recommendation” report written by a bunch of “experts”

Here we learn the three essentials:

1. “The Alliance must respond to Russian threats and hostile actions (…) without a return to ‘business as usual’ barring alterations in Russia’s aggressive behavior and its return to full compliance with international law.”

2. China is depicted as a tsunami of “security challenges”: “The Alliance should infuse the China challenge throughout existing structures and consider establishing a consultative body to discuss all aspects of Allies’ security interests vis-à-vis China”. The emphasis is to “defend against any Chinese activities that could impact collective defense, military readiness or resilience in the Supreme Allied Commander Europe’s (SACEUR) Area of Responsibility.”

3. “NATO should outline a global blueprint (italics mine) for better utilizing its partnerships to advance NATO strategic interests. It should shift from the current demand-driven approach to an interest-driven approach (italics mine) and consider providing more stable and predictable resource streams for partnership activities. NATO’s Open Door Policy should be upheld and reinvigorated. NATO should expand and strengthen partnerships with Ukraine and Georgia.”

Here’s to The Triple Threat. Yet the Top of the Pops – as in fat, juicy industrial-military complex contracts – is really here:

The most profound geopolitical challenge is posed by Russia. While Russia is by economic and social measures a declining power, it has proven itself capable of territorial aggression and is likely to remain a chief threat facing NATO over the coming decade.

NATO may be redacting, but the master script comes straight from the Deep State – complete with Russia “seeking hegemony”; expanding Hybrid War (the concept was actually invented by the Deep State); and manipulating “cyber, state-sanctioned assassinations, and poisonings – using chemical weapons, political coercion, and other methods to violate the sovereignty of Allies.”

Beijing for its part is using “force against its neighbors, as well as economic coercion and intimidatory diplomacy well beyond the Indo-Pacific region. Over the coming decade, China will likely also challenge NATO’s ability to build collective resilience.”

The Global South should be very much aware of NATO’s pledge to save the “free world” from these autocratic evils.

The NATO interpretation of “South” encompasses North Africa and the Middle East, in fact everywhere from sub-Saharan Africa to Afghanistan. Any similarity with the presumably defunct “Greater Middle East” concept of the Dubya era is not an accident.

NATO insists this vast expanse is characterized by “fragility, instability, and insecurity” – of course refusing to disclose its own role as serial instability perpetrator in Libya, Iraq, parts of Syria and Afghanistan.

Because ultimately…it’s all Russia’s fault: “To the South, the challenge includes the presence of Russia and to a lesser extent China, exploiting regional fragilities. Russia has reinserted itself in the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean. In 2015, it intervened in the Syrian Civil War and remains there. Russia’s Middle East policy is likely to exacerbate tensions and political strife across the region as it extends an increasing amount of political, financial, operational, and logistical assets to its partners. China’s influence across the Middle East is also growing. It signed a strategic partnership with Iran, is the largest importer of crude oil from Iraq, wedged itself into the Afghanistan peace process, and is the biggest foreign investor in the region.”

Here, in a nutshell, and not exactly in code, is the NATO road map all the way to 2030 to harass and try to dismantle every relevant nook and cranny of Eurasia integration, especially those directly linked to New Silk Roads infrastructure/connectivity projects (investment in Iran, reconstruction of Syria, reconstruction of Iraq, reconstruction of Afghanistan).

The spin is on a “360-degree approach to security” that will “become an imperative”. Translation: NATO is coming for large swathes of the Global South, big time, under the pretense of “addressing both the traditional threats emanating from this region like terrorism and new risks, including the growing presence of Russia, and to a lesser extent China.”

Hybrid war on two fronts

And to think that in a not so distant past there used to be some flashes of lucidity emanating from the US establishment.

Very few will remember that in 1993 James Baker, former Secretary of State under Daddy Bush, advanced the idea of expanding NATO to Russia, which at the time, under Yeltsin and a gang of Milton Friedmanesque free marketeers, was devastated, but ruled by “democracy”. Yet Bill Clinton was already in power, and the idea was duly discarded.

Six years later, no less than George Kennan – who invented the containment of the USSR in the first place – determined that the NATO annexation of former Soviet satellites was “the beginning of a new Cold War” and “a tragic mistake”.

It’s immensely enlightening to relieve and re-study the whole decade between the fall of the USSR and the election of Putin to the presidency through the venerable Yevgeny Primakov’s book Russian Crossroads: Toward the New Millenium, published in the US by Yale University Press.

Primakov, the ultimate intel insider who started as a Pravda correspondent in the Middle East, former Foreign Minister and also Prime Minister, looked closely into Putin’s soul, repeatedly, and liked what he saw: a man of integrity and a consummate professional. Primakov was a multilateralist avant la lettre, the conceptual instigator of RIC (Russia-India-China) which in the next decade evolved towards BRICS.

Those were the days – exactly 22 years ago – when Primakov was on a plane to Washington when he picked up a call by then Vice-President Al Gore: the US was about to start bombing Yugoslavia, a slav-orthodox Russian ally, and there was nothing the former superpower could do about it. Primakov ordered the pilot to turn around and fly back to Moscow.

Now Russia is powerful enough to advance its own Greater Eurasia concept, which moving forward should be balancing – and complementing – China’s New Silk Roads. It’s the power of this Double Helix – which is bound to inevitably attract key sectors of Western Europe – that is driving the Hegemon’s ruling class dazed and confused.

Glenn Diesen, author of Russian Conservatism: Managing Change Under Permanent Revolution, which I analyzed in Why Russia is Driving the West Crazy , and one of the best global analysts of Eurasia integration, summed it all up: “The US has had great difficulties in terms of converting the security dependence of the allies into geoeconomic loyalty, as evident by the Europeans still buying Chinese technologies and Russian energy.

Hence permanent Divide and Rule, featuring one of its key targets: cajole, force, bribe and all of the above for the European Parliament to scotch the China-EU trade/investment deal.

Wang Yiwei, director of the Center for European Studies at Renmin University and author of the best made in China book about the New Silk Roads, clearly sees through the “America is back” bluster: “China is not isolated by the US, the West or even the whole international community. The more hostility they show, the more anxiety they have. When the US travels around the globe to frequently ask for support, unity and help from its allies, this means US hegemony is weakening.”

Wang even forecasts what may happen if the current “leader of the free world” is prevented from fulfilling his exceptional mission: “Don’t be fooled by the sanctions between China and the EU, which is harmless to trade and economic ties, and EU leaders won’t be that stupid to totally abandon the China-EU Comprehensive Agreement on Investment, because they know they would never get such a good deal when Trump or Trumpism returns to the White House.”

Shocked and Awed 21^st Century Geopolitics, as configured in these crucial past two weeks, spells out the Unipolar Moment is six feet under. The Hegemon will never admit it; hence the NATO counterpunch, which was pre-designed. Ultimately, the Hegemon has decided not to engage in diplomatic accommodation, but to wage a hybrid war on two fronts against a relentlessly demonized strategic partnership of peer competitors.

And as a sign of these sorry times, there’s no James Baker or George Kennan to advise against such folly.

Syria, Venezuela sanctions | The Communiqué with Richard Medhurst

Venezuela and Syria are both under siege warfare by the United States and its allies. Richard Medhurst speaks with Alena Douhan, United Nations Special Rapporteur on sanctions, about her preliminary report after recently returning from Venezuela.

US Sanctions: Shooting Blanks Against the Resiliency of Targeted Nations

By Stephen Lendman

Global Research, October 27, 2020

As explained many times before, Security Council members alone may legally impose sanctions on nations, entities and individuals.

When used by countries against others, they breach the UN Charter, how the US, NATO and Israel operate time and again.

The Charter’s Article II mandates all member states to “settle…disputes” according to the rule of law.

US/Western sanctions are weapons of war by other means — used to pressure, bully and terrorize targeted nations into submission.

Though widely used, most often they fail to achieve intended objectives.

US sanctions war and other hostile actions against Cuba for 60 years, Iran for 40 years, Venezuela for 20 years, and against countless other nations largely shot blanks.

Most often, they’re counterproductive.

Hardships imposed on people in targeted nations fuel anti-US sentiment — blaming Washington, not their governments, for what they endure.

Under international law, nations are prohibited from intervening in the internal affairs of others.

Military action against an adversary is only legal in self-defense if attacked — never preemptively for any reasons.

Hardcore US bipartisan policy targets all independent nations unwilling to subordinate their sovereign rights to its interests.

That’s what US hostility toward China, Russia, Iran, and other targeted countries is all about.

Since WW II, no nations threatened the US militarily or politically.

Like all other empires in world history now gone, a similar fate awaits the US — because of its counterproductive geopolitical policies, over time making more enemies than allies, weakening, not strengthening, the state.

Last week in response to US sanctions on Russia’s Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline to Germany, Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the following:

“(T)his unfriendly and destructive policy of constant introduction of various restrictions in relation to us, our economic operators, our economy, unfortunately, this has already become an integral part of unfair competition, undisguised hostile takeover competition on the part of Washington.”

Last month, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova slammed the US, saying:

“We condemn (US) calls for forging a certain coalition against the pipeline, wherein German and other companies have already made multi-billion dollar investments.”

In response to EU sanctions on Russia over the Navalny novichok poisoning hoax, its Foreign Ministry demanded to know “who is behind the anti-Russian provocation,” adding:

“In response, we get aggressive rhetoric and outright manipulation of the facts” — by the EU in cahoots with the US.

Sergey Lavrov slammed Berlin for being in breach of its international obligations for failing to provide Moscow with information it claims to have about the Navalny incident — because none exists.

In mid-October, protesters outside the US embassy in London accused Washington of attempting to “strangle” Cuba’s economy by a virtual blockade on the island state.

The so-called Rock Around The Blockade solidarity campaign called for breaking the illegal action, chanting “Cuba si! Yankee no! Abajo el bloqueo/Down with the blockade!”

Despite annual UN General Assembly measures against US blockade of the island state, it’s been in place for decades without success because of Cuban resiliency.

Trump regime Office of Foreign Assets Control threatened to sue “anyone who trades with Cuba” or has property in the country.

Despite decades of US war on Cuba by other means, aiming to regain imperial control over the island state, policies of Republicans and Dems consistently failed.

US war on China by sanctions and other means widens the breach between both countries.US Sanctions: Weapons of War by Other Means on Targeted Nations

On October 21 in a Foreign Affairs article titled “How China Threatens American Democracy” (sic), Trump regime national security advisor Robert  O’Brien invented nonexistent threats.

Instead of fostering productive bilateral relations with all nations, policies of both right wings of the US one-party state go the other way against nations Washington doesn’t control — how the scourge of imperialism operates.

China fosters cooperative relations with other nations, threatening none — polar opposite longstanding US policy, seeking dominance over planet earth, its resources and populations.

Undeclared US initiated Cold War against China, Russia, and other targeted nations threatens to turn hot by accident or design — especially in East Asia, the Middle East, and near Russia’s borders.

On Sunday, O’Brien expressed frustration, saying:

“One of the problems that we have faced with both Iran and Russia is that we now have so many sanctions against these countries that we have very little (opportunity) to do anything about it,” adding:

“But we are looking at all possible deterrent measures that we can apply to these countries, as well as others…”

Last Thursday, the US Treasury Department announced new sanctions on Iran’s IRGC, its Quds Force, and Bayan Rasaneh Gostar Institute “for having directly or indirectly engaged in, sponsored, concealed, or otherwise been complicit in foreign interference” in US November 3 elections.

Fact: Throughout US history, no evidence showed that any foreign nations ever interfered in its electoral process — a US specialty against scores of nations throughout the post-WW II period.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh slammed the hostile action, saying:

Its government “strong(ly) reject(s) baseless and false claims” by the US, adding:

“(I)t makes no difference for Iran who wins the US election.”

On core domestic and foreign policy issues, both right wings of the US one-party state operate largely the same way.

Rare exceptions prove the rule.

On Monday, Pompeo announced more illegal sanctions on Iran — part of longstanding US war on the country by other means.

Tehran’s “Ministry of Petroleum and Minister of Petroleum, the National Iranian Oil Company, the National Iranian Tanker Company, and 21 other individuals, entities, and vessels” were targeted for unjustifiable reasons.

Iran, its ruling authorities, and entities foster cooperative relations with other countries — hostile actions toward none, except in self-defense if attacked, the legal right of all nations.

US imperial policy targets all countries, entities and individuals not subservient to its rage to rule the world unchallenged.

US maximum pressure on Iran and other nations is all about wanting them transformed into vassal states.

Separately on Monday, convicted felon/US envoy for regime change in Iran and Venezuela Elliott Abrams said the following:

“The transfer of long-range missiles from Iran to Venezuela is not acceptable to the United States and will not be tolerated or permitted,” adding:

“We will make every effort to stop shipments of long-range missiles, and if somehow they get to Venezuela they will be eliminated there.”

Was the above threat a possible US declaration of hot war on Venezuela, on Iran as well?

Last week, Pompeo announced new US sanctions on “the State Research Center of the Russian Federation FGUP Central Scientific Research Institute of Chemistry and Mechanics (TsNIIKhM).”

He falsely claimed the research institute conducts “malware attacks (that threaten) cybersecurity and critical infrastructure (sic).”

No evidence was cited because none exists, including alleged Russian malware against “a petrochemical plant in the Middle East,” along with “scann(ing) and prob(ing) US facilities.”

Pompeo falsely accused Russia of “engag(ing) in dangerous and malicious activities that threaten the security of the United States and our allies (sic).”

The above is what the US and its imperial partners do time and again — falsely blaming others for their own high crimes.

The Trump regime also imposed unlawful sanctions on Iran for supplying Venezuela with gasoline — the legal right of both nations to conduct bilateral trade relations.

Last month, former Trump regime acting DNI Richard Grenell met secretly with Venezuelan Vice President for Communications Jorge Rodriguez in Mexico, according to Bloomberg News.

It was a futile attempt to get President Maduro to step down ahead of US November 3 elections, Trump seeking a foreign policy success to tout that failed.

US war on Venezuela by other means, notably by Trump, imposed great hardships on its people alone — failing to achieve regime change.

US-designated puppet-in-waiting Guaido’s involvement in the scheme made him widely despised by the vast majority of Venezuelans.

Separately, Russia’s US embassy responded to unacceptable tightening of visas for its journalists by the Trump regime, creating “artificial barriers (that impede) their normal work,” adding:

“In particular, the limitation of the period of stay for foreign media employees to 240 days (with the possibility of extension up to 480 days) will not allow them to consistently cover local events.”

Journalists “will have to leave the United States for a considerable time to obtain a new visa.”

This new policy flies in the face of what “freedom of speech and equal access to information” is supposed to be all about.

On Monday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova slammed US accusations of alleged Moscow cybersecurity threats, calling them “unfounded,” adding:

“(T)his time (the US outdid itself) in anti-Russia rhetoric with extremely harsh statements occasionally bordering on bizarre rudeness.”

“Such an approach will not benefit the State Department and is indicative of the fact that they treat the culture and norms of state-to-state communication with disdain.”

Businessman Trump sought improved relations with Russia — the aim thwarted by surrounding himself with Russophobic hardliners.

The same holds for US hostility toward China, Iran, and other countries on its target list for regime change.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Featured image is from podur.orgThe original source of this article is Global ResearchCopyright © Stephen Lendman, Global Research, 2020