Monthly Archives: March 2024

Western Hegemony's Collapse

Putin: A Champion of the Global South?

Leave a comment

byJanna Kadri via: Al Mayadeen English

Moscow’s defiance of Western elements, particularly the economic sanctions and the military aid to Ukraine, has not only set an example for other nations to follow but also eroded the legitimacy of the West’s ideological supremacy.

On March 18, Vladimir Putin emerged as the winner of Russia’s presidential elections, marking his fifth term as President of Russia. This occurred despite complications. While it is common for Russia to be the target of cyber-attacks, this year has witnessed record levels of such breaches on the country’s electronic voting platform, with most attacks stemming from the US.

Putin’s landslide victory solicited positive reactions from many across the Global South. Leaders from multiple countries, including Iran, China, South Africa, Belarus, the DPRK, members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), and several Latin American nations have welcomed his reelection.

The Collective West, on its part, has been eerily silent about the win. A few exceptions surfaced on the X platform, with, for instance, President of the European Council Charles Michel reiterating the standard accusation that Russian elections are undemocratic. “No opposition. No freedom. No choice,” the tweet read. So much for being disgruntled. Nevertheless, the bloc has obvious reasons for displaying such dismay.

Ukraine war

Two years into the war in Ukraine, discussions on a potential peace deal involving the withdrawal of Russian troops in exchange for retaining territory have begun to pick up speed. The costs of this war were paramount for both the West and Russia, but particularly for the EU. The de-industrialization accompanying sanctions on Russia has resulted in disastrous outcomes for the Euro economy, pushing millions into financial insecurity, while the bloc grapples with efforts to restore economic growth.

More concerning is a decline in US support which has placed the EU in an awkward position. Although the White House recently unveiled a stopgap aid plan for Ukraine valued at $300 million, prior delays in aid delivery, fueled by congressional disputes over the border crisis, have left NATO allies questioning the US’s commitment to the conflict.

During a recent address before Western leaders at a Ukraine-focused event, French President Emmanuel Macron echoed these concerns by questioning the wisdom of entrusting Europe’s future to the American electorate. “Should we entrust our future to the American electorate? My answer is no. Let’s not wait for the outcome,” he said.

When Macron mentioned the possibility of deploying NATO forces in Ukraine, some perceived his statement as controversial or bold, only for reports to later emerge and reveal that NATO forces are already in Ukraine. But given the fact that the Ukraine war is not considered a de facto war from the Russian perspective, one can only speculate about the potential scale of a full-fledged conflict with the NATO alliance.

Western Hegemony

From a Global South perspective, the true achievement lies in Putin’s defiance of NATO. It lies in challenging the forces that for years have kept the masses in a state of social, ideological, and historical paralysis. Where the West sees aggression and destabilization, the South sees retribution. The fact is that Russia was deceived by the West over the Minsk agreement.

If one finds it peculiar that the Ukraine war garners very little to no support in the South, the case is far from mere coincidence. The extensive legacy of the West spanning hundreds of years serves as a testament to the destructive nature of its foreign policy. In the Global South, where the collective memory of millions who perished under the weight of imperialism and military aggression remains vivid and lucid, the realities at play are crystal clear.

The Ukraine war is not merely a war for the preservation of Russia’s national security but also a war for the thousands of mothers who gave birth to malformed babies due to contamination from NATO’s use of depleted uranium ammunition in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Serbia, a type of shell which has been shown to increase cancer rates and other forms of disease in targeted countries. It is a war for those thousands of people who succumbed to their illnesses as a result of sanctions that prevented the entry of crucial medical aid. It is also a war for the comrades in Iran, Indonesia, and several countries across Latin America and Africa who died resisting injustice and oppression at the hands of imperialist stooges.

Western Hegemony's Collapse

This is the Way the West Ends

Leave a comment

by ADRIEL KASONTA via Asia Times
Image: YouTube Screengrab / Getty

Ukraine’s humiliation and Gaza’s shame accelerating estrangement of West and the rest at a crucial turning point in global power relations

With the United States entangled in conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza and the threat of a war with China looming large, Professor Michael Brenner’s insights and views on the state of the US-led liberal order are arguably as timely and important as ever.

Brenner, a respected luminary on transatlantic relations and international security, is Professor Emeritus of International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh and a Senior Fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS).

He has also served at the Foreign Service Institute, the US Department of Defense and Westinghouse. In a wide-ranging and no-holds-barred interview with Asia Times’ contributor Adriel Kasonta, Brenner lays out how the US and collective West lost their moral authority and way.

Adriel Kasonta: Despite what we hear from the Western political class and the compliant stenographers from the mainstream media, the world doesn’t seem to look as they want us to believe. The hard reality on the ground, known to anyone who lives anywhere but Europe or the US, is that the collective West is experiencing an accelerated decline in political and economic domains, with significant moral ramifications. Could you please tell our readers what is the root cause of this state of affairs and what is the rationale behind continuing this collective suicide?

Michael Brenner: I suggest that we formulate the issue by asking what is the causal direction between the moral decline and the collective West’s political and economic decline? On Ukraine, it has been a fundamental geostrategic error that has had negative moral consequences: the cynical sacrifice of half a million Ukrainians used as cannon fodder and physical destruction of the country, in the cause of weakening and marginalizing Russia.

The stunning feature of the Palestine affair is the readiness of immoral government elites – indeed the near entirety of the political class – to give their implicit blessing to the atrocities and war crimes Israel has committed over the past five months, which is having profound repercussions on the West’s standing and influence globally.

At one moment, they speak proudly about the superiority of Western values while condemning the practices of other countries; at another, they lean over backwards to justify far greater humanitarian abuses, to provide the perpetrator with the arms to destroy to kill and to maim innocent civilians, and in the case of the United States, to extend diplomatic cover in the United Nations Security Council.

In the process, they are dissipating their standing in the eyes of the world outside the West, representing two-thirds of humanity. The latter’s historical dealings with the countries of the West, including the relatively recent past, left a residue of skepticism about American-led claims to being the world’s ethical standard setters. That sentiment has given way to outright disgust in the face of this blatant display of hypocrisy. Moreover, it exposes the harsh truth that racist attitudes never had been fully extinguished – after a period of dormancy, its recrudescence is manifest.

As far as the United States is concerned, the reference points for this judgment are not the mythic image of “the city on the Hill”; the last, best hope of mankind; the indispensable nation for achieving global peace and stability: the Providential people born in a state of Original Virtue destined to lead the world down the path of Enlightenment. None of those idealistic standards. No, it has debased itself when measured against the prosaic standards of human decency, of responsible statecraft, of a decent respect for the opinions of humankind.

Moreover, the ensuing estrangement between the West and the rest is occurring at a turning point in international power relationships. It is a time when the tectonic plates of the political world are shifting, when the old constellations of power and of influence are being successfully challenged, when America has responded to feelings of self-doubt as the ordained global guide and overseer by compulsive, futile displays of muscle flexing.

Anxiety and self-doubt masked by false bravado is the hallmark sentiment among America’s political elites. That is a poor starting point for a re-engagement with reality. Americans are too attached to their exalted self-image, too narcissistic – collectively and individually, too lacking in self-awareness, too leaderless to make that wrenching adaptation. Those appraisals apply to Western Europe as to the United States. Leaving a diminished, aggrieved but unrepentant trans-Atlantic community.

AK: In your recent essay “The West’s Reckoning?”, you mentioned that the situation in Ukraine humiliates the West and the tragedy in Gaza shames it. Can you expand on this a bit more?

Photo: Courtesy of Michale Brenner

MB: Defeat in Ukraine entails much more than the military collapse of the Ukrainian forces that is in the cards. For the United States has led its allies into what amounts to a campaign to permanently diminish Russia, to neutralize it as a political or economic presence in Europe, to eliminate a major obstacle to consolidating American global hegemony.

The West has thrown everything they have into that campaign: their stock of modern weapons, a corps of advisers, tens of billions of dollars, a draconian set of economic sanctions designed to bring the Russian economy to its knees and a relentless project aimed at isolating Russia and undermining Putin’s position.

It has failed ignominiously on every count. Russia is considerably stronger on every dimension than it was before the war; its economy is more robust than any Western economy; it has proven to be militarily superior; and it has won the sympathies of nearly the entire world outside the collective West.

The assumption that the West remains custodial of global affairs has proven a fantasy. Such comprehensive failure has meant a decline in the United States’ ability to shape world affairs on matters economic and security. The Sino-Russian partnership is now ensconced as a rival equal to the West in every respect.

That outcome derives from hubris, dogmatism and a flight from reality. Now, the West’s self-respect and image is being scarred by its role in the Palestine catastrophe. So, now it faces the double challenge of restoring its sense of prowess while at the same time regaining its moral bearings.

AK: Is it accurate to say that Ukraine and Gaza are connected in the sense that both indicate a failing liberal international order that is attempting to prevent itself from collapsing and causing turmoil as it descends into oblivion? If so, what are some potential outcomes for the future?

MB: Let’s bear in mind that the liberal international order serves Western interests above all. Its workings were biased in our favor. That’s one. The regularity and stability that it produced, for which the IMF, World Bank, etc were the institutional cynosure, ensured for decades that it would go unchallenged. That is two.

The rise of new power centers – China, above all, and the wider centripetal forces redistributing assets more generally – has left the United States and its European dependents with two choices. Accommodate themselves to this new situation by: a) hammering out terms of engagement that accorded a larger place for the newcomers; b) resetting the rules of the game so as to remove the current bias; c) adjusting the structure and procedures of international institutions in a manner reflecting the end of Western dominance; and d) rediscovering genuine diplomacy.

Nowhere in the West has that option been seriously considered. So, after a period of ambivalence and muddling, all signed onto an American project to prevent the emergence of challengers, to undermine them and to double down on assertive policies to yield nothing, to compromise nothing. We remain locked on that course despite serial failures, humiliations and the impetus given the BRICS project.

AK: According to some Western politicians and policymakers, other global powers are often treated as passive actors without agency or power to shape the world according to their national interests. This Manichean worldview is marked by a distinction between the “rules-based order” and international law or “democracy vs authoritarianism.” Is there an alternative to this thinking and what are the chances of change occurring before it’s too late?

MB: See above response. There are no signs that Western leaders are prepared intellectually, emotionally or politically to make the necessary adjustments. Necessity is not always the mother of invention. Instead, we see stubborn dogmatism, avoidance behavior and a deeper plunge into a world of fantasies.

The American reaction to manifestations of declining prowess is denial along with compulsion to reassure itself that it still has the “right stuff” through increasingly audacious acts. We are seeing where that has led in Ukraine. Far more dangerous is the reckless dispatch of troops to Taiwan.

As for Europe, it is evident that its political elites have been denatured by 75 years of near-total dependence on America. A complete absence of independent thinking and willpower is the outcome. In more concrete ways, Europe’s vassalage to the United States obliges it to follow Washington down whatever policy road the seigneur takes – however reckless, dangerous, unethical and counterproductive.

In predictable fashion, they have walked (or run) like lemmings over whatever cliff the United States chooses next under its own suicidal impulses. So it’s been in Iraq, in Syria, in Afghanistan, in regard to Iran, in Ukraine, on Taiwan and on all matters involving Israel. The string of painful failures and heavy costs produces no change in loyalty or mindset.

A printed photograph of a US Army soldier in a chair among the trailer trucks, and electronics which sold for the price of iron at a bazaar outside airfield in the Bagram district north of Kabul, Afghanistan, on May 19, 2021. Photo: Asia Times Files / AFP via Anadolu Agency / Haroon Sabawoon

It cannot – for the Europeans have absorbed totally the habit of deference, the Americans’ worldview, their skewed interpretation of outcomes and their shamefully fictitious narratives. The Europeans no more can throw this addiction than a life-long alcoholic can go cold turkey.

AK: There has been a lot of discussion about the negative impact of neoconservatism on US foreign policy and the world. In essence, neoconservatism seeks the role of the US to dominate not only the Western Hemisphere (as per the Monroe Doctrine) but the entire world, as per the Wolfowitz Doctrine.

Although some US think tanks are now advocating for an end to the “never-ending wars” in the Middle East and for Europe to continue the US-provoked proxy war with Russia, it seems that the neoconservative ideology has taken on a new guise of “progressivism” and “realism”, and now aims to focus solely on China, even to the point of replicating the Ukraine scenario in Taiwan. How accurate is this assessment?

MB: The entire foreign policy community in the United States now shares the basic tenets of neoconservatives. Actually, the scripture is Paul Wolfowitz’s notorious memorandum of March 1991 wherein he laid out a comprehensive, detailed strategy for systematizing American global dominance. Everything that Washington is doing, and thinking, now is derivative of that plan.

Its core principles: the United States should use all the means at its disposal to establish American global dominance; to that end, it must be ready to act preventively to stymie the emergence of any power that could challenge our hegemony; and to maintain full spectrum dominance in every region of the globe. Ideals and values are relegated to an auxiliary role as a veneer on the application of power and as a stick with which to beat others. Classic diplomacy is disparaged as inappropriate to this scheme of things.

For Biden himself, a confident, assertive, hard-edged approach to dealing with others derives naturally from belief in Americanism as a Unified Field Theory that explains, interprets and justifies whatever the US thinks and does. Were Biden reelected, this outlook will remain unchanged. And were he to be replaced by Kamala Harris mid-term, which is likely, inertia will keep everything on the fixed course.

AK: Do you think the United States is destined to remain a global empire, constantly in conflict with anyone it perceives as a potential threat to its world dominance? Or is it possible for the country to become a republic that collaborates constructively with other global players to achieve greater benefits for its citizens and the broader international community? As the saying goes, “Those who live by the sword, die by the sword,” right?

MB: I’m a pessimist. For there are no signs that either our rulers, elites or public are susceptible to coming to terms with the state of affairs depicted above. The open question is whether this pretense will simply persist as a gradual weakening of global influence and domestic well-being unfolds, or, rather, will end in disaster.

Europeans and allies elsewhere should not accept to be sideline observers nor, even worse, become co-inhabitants of this world of fantasy as they have in Ukraine, on Palestine and in demonizing China.

Michael Brenner is the author of numerous books and over 80 articles and published papers. His most recent works include “Democracy Promotion and Islam”; “Fear and Dread In The Middle East”; “Toward A More Independent Europe”; “Narcissistic Public Personalities & Our Times.”

His writings include books with Cambridge University Press (“Nuclear Power and Non Proliferation”), the Center For International Affairs at Harvard University (“The Politics of International Monetary Reform”), and the Brookings Institution (“Reconcilable Differences, US-French Relations In The New Era”). He is reachable at mbren@pitt.edu

Uncategorized

The Crocus Mall Slaughter, Who Did It?

Leave a comment

by Claudiu Secara

The Crocus Mall attack, who did it? Was it the Ukrainian Zionists? Or maybe the British Zionists? How about the Israeli Zionists? Or better yet, was it the American Zionists, better known as the neocons? Maybe all of the above, what’s the difference?

The perpetrators were not religious fundamentalists, as recognized by Peskov, Patrushev, and others. They were indeed Muslims, but they were hired guns for money. No Allahu Akbar, no suicide attack, just a transactional deal. Paid killers.

I was about to say paid professional killers, but while they were killers, they were not professionals. “Professionals” would mean at the very least that they would have dispersed and disappeared in the general population afterward. Instead, they were driving at 137 Km an hour on 80 to 100 Km/h roads, straight into the police dragnet waiting for them at the Ukrainian border.

From the other end of the world, the US came forward to point to the usual bogus suspects. The only scapegoats the US has for all-weather bad events are the ubiquitous Arabs, Muslims, or a combination thereof.

But who could have had the motive? Sure, the illegitimate Ukrainian government had a motive. Just 2 days before, their entire energy infrastructure was wiped out by the rain of Russian Kalibr missiles. For the first time, there was no more room to brag about how many Russian missiles they’ve downed. The evidence and the irreparable damage were immense. So, yes, they were motivated to show the Russians that they are not dead yet.

As for the Israelis, they were boxed in by a Russian government who at the very least supported and pleaded at the UN for an immediate ceasefire. The Russians were defiantly sending cargos of food aid to the Palestinians in Gaza, and they had a plan for a role for Hamas in Gaza, post-war, as well as working hard to unify all the Palestinian factions into a united front against the illegal Israeli occupation. Furthermore, they tacitly support the Iranians, who support the Houthis who declared an embargo on shipping vessels connected to Israel.

The British Jews have always been enthralled to strike at Russian interests (for over 200 years) and should there be a plot to do that, why would they miss a good thrill and not support it unconditionally? That’s their modus operandi in world affairs.

Now, the American neocons. They are on record, getting up to all kinds of tricks to shake Russia’s sovereignty and shatter its defenses. But not just defense, the neocons openly profess their manifest intent to break up the Russian state, to terminate Russia’s economic survival, Russia’s very existence.

It is easy to see that the rush to create an immediate counterattack against Russia in a massive terrorist act causing mass casualties while at the same time hiding behind full deniability only left more fingerprints, more holes in the narrative, which together with the capture of the perpetrators leaves very little doubt about the West’s duplicity and complicity.

We have two simultaneous wars going on: one is the actual hot war and the other is the blame war. Regardless of the true identities of the perpetrators, the perception of who can be blamed in the most useful way by each of parties is just as important. Just as the Anglozionists’ scapegoats are always the Arabs, so are the Ukrainians these days for Russia. Have you noticed that the people around Putin never call out Mossad or Israel or Netanyahu, never mention one unsavory act done by Israel? Never condemn Israel for killing Palestinians, never condemn Israel for the illegal occupation, never condemn any of the outrageous statements made by the members of Netanyahu’s cabinet, never condemn the mass bombings of Palestinian cities, never condemn the Gulag imposed by Israel on the native population of Palestine, etc., etc. Why is that?!

On the other hand, Moscow’s mere abstention from joining the anti Hamas chorus was reason enough for Amir Weitmann, of Israel’s ruling Likud Party, to promise revenge on Russia: “Russia is supporting Nazis who want to commit genocide against us. Russia will pay the price.”

That is a direct threat. And so is the threat made by the Israeli ambassador to the UN, Gilad Erdan, against Russia: “Russia is hosting those who are responsible for intentionally murdering babies, raping women, and burning families alive,” Erdan stated. He added that “this meeting in Moscow [with Hamas] is a result of something more dangerous. Russia is now deepening its ties with global forces of destabilization.”

“Both of our countries – Ukraine and Israel – are fighting a battle for our survival,” Erdan stated, underscoring that Jerusalem and Kyiv were standing strong together in solidarity while “the free world stands on the sidelines divided.” — “We, Israel and Ukraine, are the canaries in the coal mine. To the rest of the free world, I say: Wake up! Wake up!” Erdan stated.

And to make it even clearer, he highlighted “the similarities between Ukraine, which was attacked by Russia that invaded its territory and fires missiles at civilians, and Israel, which suffered a massacre and an invasion by Hamas that fires missiles at Israeli citizens.”

These statements in themselves position Israel as a declared enemy of Russia, and those words are only outmatched by President Biden’s calling President Putin a “thug” and a “butcher” to be dealt with. So who did it? They all did it as one.

Anglozionism

UN Expert’s Report Accuses Israel of Committing Genocide in Gaza

Leave a comment

by Mary Manley via Sputnik

The expert is not the first to warn that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians. Scholars and states, including a case brought by South Africa in December, have warned that offensive acts carried out by Israel in their war against Hamas have amounted to acts of genocide against civilians in the Gaza Strip.

A United Nations-appointed expert has found that there are “reasonable grounds” to believe Israel is committing genocide in the Gaza Strip, according to a report released on Monday. The expert said there are clear indications that Israel has violated three of the five acts listed under the UN Genocide Convention.

“It is my solemn duty to report on the worst of what humanity is capable of and to present my findings,” Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in the Occupied Territories, told the UN Human Rights Council on Tuesday. The Italian lawyer is one of dozens of independent human rights experts mandated by the UN to report and advise on specific themes and crises.

The UN expert wrote that she found “reasonable grounds to believe” that the “threshold indicating the commission of the crime of genocide against Palestinians as a group in Gaza has been met”.

“I implore member states to abide by their obligations, which start with imposing an arms embargo and sanctions on Israel and so ensure that the future does not continue to repeat itself,” she said.

The report, “The Anatomy of a Genocide”, writes that after “five months of military operations, Israel has destroyed Gaza”. It notes that over 30,000 Palestinians have been killed, including more than 13,000 children.

At least 71,000 Palestinians have also been injured, the report says, with many receiving “life-changing mutilations”. At least 70% of residential areas have also been destroyed, and 80% of the whole population has been “forcibly displaced”.

“This report concludes that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the threshold indicating Israel’s commission of genocide is met,” the report writes. “One of the key findings is that Israel’s executive and military leadership and soldiers have intentionally distorted jus in bello principles, subverting their protective functions, in an attempt to legitimize genocidal violence against the Palestinian people.”

Albanese was prohibited by Israel to visit the war-torn region, therefore the report was based on “data and analyses from organizations on the ground, international jurisprudence, investigative reports and consultations with affected individuals, authorities, civil society and experts.”

Nor did the report examine the crimes committed by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups in Israel on October 7—which it “firmly condemns” and urges the accountability of—as it is beyond the “geographic scope” of the expert’s mandate. It also noted that Israel has carried out “five major assaults” on Palestine since it imposed the siege on Gaza in 2007.

“By Day 9, this assault had already caused more deaths (2,670) than Israel’s previous deadliest war against Gaza, in 2014 (2,251). Only a fraction of the mass killing, severe harm and ruthless, life-threatening conditions inflicted on Palestinians over the following five months of assault can be captured in this report,” she writes.

The 1948 Genocide Convention, which was enacted in the wake of the mass murder of Jews in the Nazi Holocaust, defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious groups”. Israel’s diplomatic mission in Geneva has rejected the report and maintained that the war is targeting the Islamist group Hamas and not Palestinian civilians.

An official from the US, Israel’s top ally, told AFP that Washington is “aware” of the report but has “no reason to believe Israel has committed acts of genocide in Gaza”.

“Many could not bury and mourn their relatives, forced instead to leave their bodies decomposing in homes, in the street or under the rubble,” the report writes. “Thousands have been detained and systematically subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment. The incalculable collective trauma will be experienced for generations to come.”

“Israel’s actions have been driven by a genocidal logic integral to its settler-colonial project in Palestine, signaling a tragedy foretold.”

Anglozionism

RFK Jr Kennedy, Another Slimy Creature of the Swamp

Leave a comment
via ZeroHedge
Watch RFK Jr announce his running-mate pick live here…

The Wall Street Journal reports that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has picked Nicole Shanahan, a California-based attorney who was previously married to Google co-founder Sergey Brin, as his running mate for his long-shot presidential bid, according to people familiar with the decision.
Shanahan, 38, also runs a foundation focused on reproductive rights, criminal justice and the environment.
Before backing Kennedy’s independent bid, Shanahan had previously been a donor to Democratic campaigns, including supporting Joe Biden’s election in 2020.
Kennedy was slated to announce his choice Tuesday in Oakland, Calif., where Shanahan grew up.

Shanahan, a political novice, was thrust into the spotlight over her public split with Brin amid a brief alleged affair she had with Elon Musk in 2021 that ruptured the billionaires’ long friendship, The Wall Street Journal reported.
After the article published, Musk denied the allegations and Shanahan later followed suit.
It isn’t clear yet whether Shanahan plans to assist by tapping into her own wealth.
The Kennedy campaign declined to comment. 
Shanahan didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Ahead of the announcement, Kennedy’s campaign manager confirmed on X that Shanahan was under consideration, along with several others including New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers and Mike Rowe, host of Discovery Channel’s Dirty Jobs.
Meanwhile, lured by the promise of turnkey ballot access across the country, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr is seriously considering a run to win the Libertarian Party presidential nomination. However, his stance on the Israel-Gaza war and other issues could make his candidacy a tough sell with non-interventionist libertarians. 
Navigating the varied and complex patchwork of state ballot-access qualifying rules is one of the most grueling and expensive impediments to anyone seeking to challenge America’s two-party duopoly — to say nothing of the legal challenges filed by the Republican and Democratic parties along the way. So far, reports Politico, Kennedy’s backers say they’ve cleared the key hurdles in just eight states.  Meanwhile, it’s already pretty much a given that the Libertarian Party will be on the ballot in all 50.   
The top ticket will be selected by delegates at the party’s national convention in Washington DC over Memorial Day weekend. Selected by state conventions, those delegates are free to vote for whomever they like at the national convention. 

Kennedy spoke at the the Free State Project’s annual “PorcFest” last summer (Ryan David Brown for New York Times) 

Kennedy’s flirtation with Libertarian Party members has been simmering since last year, and has included appearances on libertarian podcasts and an interview with Reason magazine. His most direct outreach came with a February appearance at the party’s California state convention, which has been credited for helping set a new California Libertarian convention attendance record.  
“I’ve always been aligned with libertarians on most issues,” Kennedy told Reason last summer. “I mean, there’s tweaks that I have.” 
Some of those tweaks are doozies. For example, Kennedy said if Congress passed a so-called assault weapon ban, “I would sign it.” (On the other hand, he also said, “Anybody who tells you that they’re going to be able to reduce gun violence through gun control at this point, I don’t think is being realistic.”) He’s also called for a $15 national minimum wage, more free childcare, and abolishing interest on all federal student loans  
However, it’s Kennedy’s statements on Israel-Palestine that seem to have caused the most damage to his prospects with staunchly non-interventionist libertarians — which is to say, most libertarians — who oppose entangling alliances, foreign aid, and US-enabled warfare.
Kennedy has called for the United States to arm the “moral nation” of Israel, has expressed skepticism about a ceasefire in Gaza, and said “the Palestinian people are arguably the most pampered people by international aid organizations in the world.” Some libertarians are also put off by Kennedy’s embrace of controversial Israel advocate Shmuley Boteach.  

In December, one of Kennedy’s campaign staffers resigned, criticizing him for, among other things, saying that collective punishment in Gaza is “ok” because “for ten years we did collective punishment of Iraq.” 
On the other side of the ledger, Kennedy’s opposition to Covid vaccine mandates resonated with libertarians. He’s also pushed for more border security, accused the government of using Ukraine as a pawn to weaken Russia,”and promised to  “unwind” the US empire.  
RFK Jr’s few overlaps with libertarian philosophy aren’t likely to be enough, nor are arguments that Kennedy’s name recognition would result in higher national vote counts for the party and thus easier ballot access going forward.
That’s because, in 2022, the Libertarian Party was taken over by members of the Mises Caucus, a group that counts Ron Paul, Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises among its chief philosophical influencers. 

Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises (Mises Institute)

In February, the Mises Caucus issued a statement flatly refuting any suggestion that it was open to considering Kennedy as a presidential candidate:

“We firmly oppose any strategy that would ‘rent out’ our party’s place on any state’s ballot to RFK, or indeed any candidate who has so many disqualifying deviations from the essential principles of libertarianism.”

The group also reiterated its endorsement of Michael Rectenwald for president and Clint Russell for vice president. Meanwhile, in a fiery but mostly peaceful February tweet, author, podcaster and Libertarian Institute director Scott Horton urged party members to prevent Kennedy from become the Libertarian Party’s standard-bearer: 

“Jeffrey Epstein’s blood-guzzling friend RFK Jr. must be stopped. Can you imagine OUR candidate out their shilling for Israel in the middle of a massive ethnic cleansing campaign? Our party back in the hands of those who want to fight Russia and China over not being trans enough?
The LP in the hands of libertarians can be the one of the most effective vehicles we have for obstructing the state and spreading the message of liberty. Let’s not blow it now after we’ve already won.”

Others have expressed their own opposition…

Military Affairs

The Nuland – Budanov – Tajik – Crocus Connection

Leave a comment


© Photo: Public domain

by Pepe Escobar

The Russian population has handed to the Kremlin total carte blanche to exercise brutal, maximum punishment – whatever and wherever it takes.

Let’s start with the possible chain of events that may have led to the Crocus terror attack. This is as explosive as it gets. Intel sources in Moscow discreetly confirm this is one of the FSB’s prime lines of investigation.

December 4, 2023. Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen Mark Milley, only 3 months after his retirement, tells CIA mouthpiece The Washington Post: “There should be no Russian who goes to sleep without wondering if they’re going to get their throat slit in the middle of the night (…) You gotta get back there and create a campaign behind the lines.”

January 4, 2024: In an interview with ABC News, “spy chief” Kyrylo Budanov lays down the road map: strikes “deeper and deeper” into Russia.

January 31: Victoria Nuland travels to Kiev and meets Budanov. Then, in a dodgy press conference at night in the middle of an empty street, she promises “nasty surprises” to Putin: code for asymmetric war.

February 22: Nuland shows up at a Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) event and doubles down on the “nasty surprises” and asymmetric war. That may be interpreted as the definitive signal for Budanov to start deploying dirty ops.

February 25: The New York Times publishes a story about CIA cells in Ukraine: nothing that Russian intel does not already know.

Then, a lull until March 5 – when crucial shadow play may have been in effect. Privileged scenario: Nuland was a key dirty ops plotter alongside the CIA and the Ukrainian GUR (Budanov). Rival Deep State factions got hold of it and maneuvered to “terminate” her one way or another – because Russian intel would have inevitably connected the dots.

Yet Nuland, in fact, is not “retired” yet; she’s still presented as Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs and showed up recently in Rome for a G7-related meeting, although her new job, in theory, seems to be at Columbia University (a Hillary Clinton maneuver).

Meanwhile, the assets for a major “nasty surprise” are already in place, in the dark, and totally off radar. The op cannot be called off.

March 5: The New York Times publishes a story about CIA cells in Ukraine: nothing that Russian intel does not already know.

March 5: Little Blinken formally announces Nuland’s “retirement”.

March 7: At least one Tajik among the four-member terror commando visits the Crocus venue and has his photo taken.

March 7-8 at night: U.S. and British embassies simultaneously announce a possible terror attack on Moscow, telling their nationals to avoid “concerts” and gatherings within the next two days.

March 9: Massively popular Russian patriotic singer Shaman performs at Crocus. That may have been the carefully chosen occasion targeted for the “nasty surprise” – as it falls only a few days before the presidential elections, from March 15 to 17. But security at Crocus was massive, so the op is postponed.

March 22: The Crocus City Hall terror attack

ISIS-K: the ultimate can of worms

The Budanov connection is betrayed by the modus operandi – similar to previous Ukraine intel terror attacks against Daria Dugina and Vladimir Tatarsky: close reconnaissance for days, even weeks; the hit; and then a dash for the border.

And that brings us to the Tajik connection.

There seem to be holes aplenty in the narrative concocted by the ragged bunch turned mass killers: following an Islamist preacher on Telegram; offered what was later established as a puny 500 thousand rubles (roughly $4,500) for the four of them to shoot random people in a concert hall; sent half of the funds via Telegram; directed to a weapons cache where they find AK-12s and hand grenades.

The videos show that they used the machine guns like pros; shots were accurate, short bursts or single fire; no panic whatsoever; effective use of hand grenades; fleeing the scene in a flash, just melting away, almost in time to catch the “window” that would take them across the border to Ukraine.

All that takes training. And that also applies to facing nasty counter-interrogation. Still, the FSB seems to have broken them all – quite literally.

A potential handler has surfaced, named Abdullo Buriyev. Turkish intel had earlier identified him as a handler for ISIS-K, or Wilayat Khorasan in Afghanistan. One of the members of the Crocus commando told the FSB their “acquaintance” Abdullo helped them to buy the car for the op.

And that leads us to the massive can of worms to end them all: ISIS-K.

The alleged emir of ISIS-K, since 2020, is an Afghan Tajik, Sanaullah Ghafari. He was not killed in Afghanistan in June 2023, as the Americans were spinning: he may be currently holed up in Balochistan in Pakistan.

Yet the real person of interest here is not Tajik Ghafari but Chechen Abdul Hakim al-Shishani, the former leader of the jihadi outfit Ajnad al-Kavkaz (“Soldiers of the Caucasus”), who was fighting against the government in Damascus in Idlib and then escaped to Ukraine because of a crackdown by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) – in another one of those classic inter-jihadi squabbles.

Shishani was spotted on the border near Belgorod during the recent attack concocted by Ukrainian intel inside Russia. Call it another vector of the “nasty surprises”.

Shishani had been in Ukraine for over two years and has acquired citizenship. He is in fact the sterling connection between the nasty motley crue Idlib gangs in Syria and GUR in Kiev – as his Chechens worked closely with Jabhat al-Nusra, which was virtually indistinguishable from ISIS.

Shishani, fiercely anti-Assad, anti-Putin and anti-Kadyrov, is the classic “moderate rebel” advertised for years as a “freedom fighter” by the CIA and the Pentagon.

Some of the four hapless Tajiks seem to have followed ideological/religious indoctrination on the internet dispensed by Wilayat Khorasan, or ISIS-K, in a chat room called Rahnamo ba Khuroson.

The indoctrination game happened to be supervised by a Tajik, Salmon Khurosoni. He’s the guy who made the first move to recruit the commando. Khurosoni is arguably a messenger between ISIS-K and the CIA.

The problem is the ISIS-K modus operandi for any attack never features a fistful of dollars: the promise is Paradise via martyrdom. Yet in this case it seems it’s Khurosoni himself who has approved the 500 thousand ruble reward.

After handler Buriyev relayed the instructions, the commando sent the bayat – the ISIS pledge of allegiance – to Khurosoni. Ukraine may not have been their final destination. Another foreign intel connection – not identified by FSB sources – would have sent them to Turkey, and then Afghanistan.

That’s exactly where Khurosoni is to be found. Khurosoni may have been the ideological mastermind of Crocus. But, crucially, he’s not the client.

The Ukrainian love affair with terror gangs

Ukrainian intel, SBU and GUR, have been using the “Islamic” terror galaxy as they please since the first Chechnya war in the mid-1990s. Milley and Nuland of course knew it, as there were serious rifts in the past, for instance, between GUR and the CIA.

Following the symbiosis of any Ukrainian government post-1991 with assorted terror/jihadi outfits, Kiev post-Maidan turbo-charged these connections especially with Idlib gangs, as well as north Caucasus outfits, from the Chechen Shishani to ISIS in Syria and then ISIS-K. GUR routinely aims to recruit ISIS and ISIS-K denizens via online chat rooms. Exactly the modus operandi that led to Crocus.

One “Azan” association, founded in 2017 by Anvar Derkach, a member of the Hizb ut-Tahrir, actually facilitates terrorist life in Ukraine, Tatars from Crimea included – from lodging to juridical assistance.

The FSB investigation is establishing a trail: Crocus was planned by pros – and certainly not by a bunch of low-IQ Tajik dregs. Not by ISIS-K, but by GUR. A classic false flag, with the clueless Tajiks under the impression that they were working for ISIS-K.

The FSB investigation is also unveiling the standard modus operandi of online terror, everywhere. A recruiter focuses on a specific profile; adapts himself to the candidate, especially his – low – IQ; provides him with the minimum necessary for a job; then the candidate/executor become disposable.

Everyone in Russia remembers that during the first attack on the Crimea bridge, the driver of the kamikaze truck was blissfully unaware of what he was carrying,

As for ISIS, everyone seriously following West Asia knows that’s a gigantic diversionist scam, complete with the Americans transferring ISIS operatives from the Al-Tanf base to the eastern Euphrates, and then to Afghanistan after the Hegemon’s humiliating “withdrawal”. Project ISIS-K actually started in 2021, after it became pointless to use ISIS goons imported from Syria to block the relentless progress of the Taliban.

Ace Russian war correspondent Marat Khairullin has added another juicy morsel to this funky salad: he convincingly unveils the MI6 angle in the Crocus City Hall terror attack (in English here, in two parts, posted by “S”).

The FSB is right in the middle of the painstaking process of cracking most, if not all ISIS-K-CIA/MI6 connections. Once it’s all established, there will be hell to pay.

But that won’t be the end of the story. Countless terror networks are not controlled by Western intel – although they will work with Western intel via middlemen, usually Salafist “preachers” who deal with Saudi/Gulf intel agencies.

The case of the CIA flying “black” helicopters to extract jihadists from Syria and drop them in Afghanistan is more like an exception – in terms of direct contact – than the norm. So the FSB and the Kremlin will be very careful when it comes to directly accusing the CIA and MI6 of managing these networks.

But even with plausible deniability, the Crocus investigation seems to be leading exactly to where Moscow wants it: uncovering the crucial middleman. And everything seems to be pointing to Budanov and his goons.

Ramzan Kadyrov dropped an extra clue. He said the Crocus “curators” chose on purpose to instrumentalize elements of an ethnic minority – Tajiks – who barely speak Russian to open up new wounds in a multinational nation where dozens of ethnicities live side by side for centuries.

In the end, it didn’t work. The Russian population has handed to the Kremlin total carte blanche to exercise brutal, maximum punishment – whatever and wherever it takes.

Saving Europeans from Themselves

Russia. Is. At. War.

Leave a comment

via Moon of Alabama

Due to a flurry of western support for Ukraine, now escalating to ground troop insertions, Russia had to move its special military operation in Ukraine into the bigger scope of a full fledged war.

Over the last month the Ukrainian military intelligence directorate GUR and its civilian secret service SBU have attempted to disturb the recent presidential election in Russia. They did this by:

  1. sending forces, with U.S. made equipment (Bradleys), to attack Russian border villages in the direction of Belgorod (Belgograd),
  2. by launching missiles from Czech Vampire (RM-70) multiple launch rocket systems towards Belgorod,
  3. by launching somewhat successful drone strike against Russian oil refineries.

The election in Russia saw a record turnout. As expected President Putin did win by a very large margin. His legitimacy is a geopolitical reality:

If Nato expansion is about the perpetuation of US hegemony and de-dollarisation is about the burial of the western financial system that underpins that hegemony, Putin is playing a pivotal role in that historical process. If Putin remains in power till 2030 and fulfils even one half of the ambitious blueprint of social and economic programme for Russia that he outlined in his landmark speech at the Federal Assembly of the parliament, the global strategic balance will have shifted irrevocably and cemented a multipolar world order as the anchor sheet of 21st century politics.

The West knows it, the Russian people know it, the vast majority of nations realise it. That said, it must be understood as well that this is not only Putin’s victory personally but also a consolidation of Russian society around him. And that accounts for the last week’s election turning into such a high-stakes affair.

With the election out of the way Russia was free to hit back.

Moon of Alabama @MoonofA – 13:24 UTC · Mar 20, 2024Ru Ministry of Defense claims 1725 Ukrainian casualties over the last day (650 in Belgograd direction alone)
https://function.mil.ru/news_page/…

Over the last six days the Russian MoD reports claimed no less than nine hits on the Czech Vampire systems which targeted Belgorod.

The Ukrainian incursion towards Belgorod has thus been defeated.

On Wednesday Jake Sullivan, the U.S. National Security Advisor, had visited Kiev. He was noticed for what he did not say:

Jake Sullivan, US National Security Adviser, has said that Ukraine will win if it comes out of the war as a sovereign, democratic and free country. At the same time, he did not mention restoring Ukraine’s territorial integrityamong the conditions of victory.

It is believed that Sullivan delivered a warning to Kiev. As the Financial Timesreported (archived):

The US has urged Ukraine to halt attacks on Russia’s energy infrastructure, warning the drone strikes risk driving up global oil prices and provoking retaliation, according to three people familiar with the discussions.The repeated warnings from Washington were delivered to senior officials at Ukraine’s state security service, the SBU, and its military intelligence directorate, known as the GUR, the people told the Financial Times.

Both intelligence units have steadily expanded their own drone programmes to strike Russian targets on land, sea and in the air since the start of the Kremlin’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.

The U.S. concern is not about Ukraine but about Biden’s chance for reelection:

Russia remains one of the world’s most important energy exporters despite western sanctions on its oil and gas sector. Oil prices have risen about 15 per cent this year, to $85 a barrel, pushing up fuel costs just as US President Joe Biden begins his campaign for re-election.
…
The US objections come as Biden faces a tough re-election battle this year with petrol prices on the rise, increasing almost 15 per cent this year to around $3.50 a gallon.“Nothing terrifies a sitting American president more than a surge in pump prices during an election year,” said Bob McNally, president of consultancy Rapidan Energy and a former White House energy adviser.

The Ukrainian government denied and confirmed the FT report (machine translation):

Earlier, Deputy Prime Minister Olga Stefanashina actually confirmed the information to the Financial Times , saying that “we understand the calls of American partners,” but Ukraine responded to such calls by “achieving its goals” and “very successful operations” on the territory of the Russian Federation.

Sullivan’s warning about provoking retaliation was too late.

Yesterday, for the first time in 44 day, Russia launched a missile attack against Kiev (archived):

The Ukrainian Air Force said that air defense systems had intercepted all 31 of the Russian missiles that targeted Kyiv. Still, debris from the downed missiles fell in various parts of the city, causing the injuries and damage. No deaths have been reported so far.
…
In the Podilskyi district, which is home to industrial facilities that Russia has targeted in the past, a plume of black smoke was rising early in the morning, suggesting a hit. Mr. Klitschko said a fire had broken out at a power substation in the area. Ukrainian officials rarely confirm strikes on strategic industrial and military targets.
…
Thursday’s attack on Kyiv echoed a strategy used by Russia during air assaults in late December that consisted of overwhelming Ukraine’s air defenses with multiple launches of various types of missiles, including ballistic and hypersonic ones.Russia has launched relatively few large-scale missile attacks in recent months, despite a capacity to produce more than 115 long-range missiles per month, according to Ukrainian officials.

Yesterday’s Russian MoD report said:

Last night, the Russian Aerospace Forces delivered a strike by long-range precision weaponry including Kinzhal hypersonic missiles at AFU decision-making centres, logistic bases, temporary deployment areas of special operations forces and foreign mercenaries.The goal of the strike has been achieved. All the targets have been engaged.

Such Russian strikes are complex. Drones are send first to reveal Ukrainian air defense systems. Then follows a wave of attacks against those system. A third strike is then launched against the real targets of the attack. In this case those were a drone factory in Kiev as well as a headquarter of the military intelligence service GUR.

Another large scale strike followed today. The primary targets were elements of the electricity infrastructure:

Large areas of Ukraine are suffering blackouts after Russian missiles targeted energy infrastructure.There is no electricity in the second-largest city of Kharkiv, says regional head Oleg Synehubov.

Fifteen blasts were reported in Kharkiv, while more than 53,000 households in Odesa were without power.

Ukraine’s energy minister, German Galushchenko, accused Russia of trying to provoke “a large-scale failure of the country’s energy system”.

A power line feeding the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant had been cut, he added.

Regional head Ivan Fedorov said the power station was “on the verge of a blackout”, adding that seven buildings in the region had been destroyed and 35 others damaged.

President Volodymyr Zelensky said Russia had launched more than 60 Shahed drones and about 90 missiles into Ukraine during the wave of overnight attacks.

Internet access in Ukraine has dropped significantly.

This was again a complex attack:

Lord Bebo @MyLordBebo – 9:42 UTC · Mar 22, 2024Russian missile attack on Ukraine during March 22nd, 2024.

-> Notice the flight patterns of the missiles.

Aviation:
At 01:12, the takeoff of 3⨯ Tu-95ms from the Olenya air base was noted.
At 02:30, information on the movement of 13 Tu-95ms to the launch lines was clarified.
At 03:34, the launch of the KRPB Kh-101/555/55 was carried out from the Volgograd region.
At 04:18, the takeoff of 5 Tu-22m3s from the Mozdok air base was noted.
During the attack, a total of 10 MiG-31Ks were raised (7 were used before the attack).

Armament:
55/63x “Shahed-136/131” Type Shock Unmanned Aerial Vehicles;
0/12x OTR “Iskander-M”;
35/40 X-101/X-555 cruise missiles;
0/5x NKR Kh-22;
0/7x ARPB Kh-47M2 “Dagger”;
2/2x CAR X-59;
0/22x ZKR S-300/S-400.

The targeted air attack vector during today’s day is marked on the map.

bigger

The Ukrainian air defense claimed to have shut down 55 of 63 Shahid drones. But the Iskander, Dagger and S-300 fired against it all came through.

The Russian MoD reports (machine translation):

Today, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation delivered a massive strike with high-precision long-range weapons of air, sea, land-based and unmanned aerial vehicles against energy facilities, military-industrial complex, railway junctions, arsenals, places of deployment of formations of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and foreign mercenaries.As a result of the strike, the functioning of industrial enterprises for the production and repair of weapons, military equipment and ammunition was disorganized.

In addition, foreign military equipment and weapons delivered to Ukraine from NATO countries were destroyed, transfers to the front line of enemy reserves were disrupted, and units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and mercenaries in the areas of restoring combat capability were hit.

All the goals of the massive strike have been achieved.

Some European politicians are eager to join the fight.


bigger

As demonstrated today, Russia is ready for it. But unlike a still training Macron Russia has taken its gloves off (machine translation):

Peskov: Russia is in a state of war, everyone should understand thisRussia will continue to act in such a way that the military potential of Ukraine could not threaten the security of its citizens and its territory, he said in a conversation with reporters.

“What is the president talking about? We have four new regions of the Russian Federation. And the main thing for us is to protect people in these regions and liberate the territory of these regions, which is currently de facto occupied by the Kiev regime,” Peskov said.

According to the presidential press secretary, Russia cannot allow the existence of a state on its borders that has documented the intention to use any methods to take Crimea from it, not to mention the territory of new regions.

“We are at war. Yes, it started out as a special military operation, but as soon as this little group was formed there, when the collective West became a participant in this on the side of Ukraine, it already became a war for us. I am convinced of this. And everyone should understand this for their internal mobilization,” Peskov added.

In parallel to Peskov’s declaration of war talk, Russias announced the mass production of the three ton heavy FAB-3.000 aerial bombs with 1,400 kg of explosives. These will be fitted, like the currently used FAB 500 and FAB 1.500, with the universal planning and correction module (UMPC) which allows the bombs to glide some 40 miles after being launched to then hit its planned target with high precision. There is little that can survive such a strike.

In his (highly recommendable) book “The Russian Art of War”, the former Swiss military intelligence officer Jacques Baud described the reason why the current fighting in Ukraine started out as a “Special Military Operation” within a larger context:

The use of the word “war” would imply a different structure of conduct than that envisioned by the Russians in Ukraine, and would have other structural implications in Russia itself. Moreover – and this is a central point – as NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg himself acknowledges,”the war began in 2014” and should have been ended by the Minsk Agreements. The SMO is therefore a “military operation” and not a new “war”, as many Western “experts” claim.

That was then. Now Russia is at war.

This will have, as Baud says, a different structure of conduct and other structural implications in Russia and beyond.

Those ‘western’ politicians who are dreaming of fighting Russia have no idea of what will hit their troops the moment they try to join the war.

NATO however, and especially the United States, will not go to war. At least not yet.

President Biden has his hands full with the genocidal war the Zionists are waging against the Palestinian population. There is also a chance for a war to suddenly start in Asia. (Could North Korea be asked to flex its muscles?)

Neither the U.S. nor Europe are in the shape of winning a multi-front war of global dimensions. The military leaders in the relevant countries know this well.

In consequence ‘Western’ politicians will have to bite the bitter pill of a decisive strategic defeat.

Anglozionism

Washington, London and Tel Aviv entangled in Palestine

Leave a comment

by Thierry Meyssan via Voltairenet

Following Washington’s intervention, Israel stopped massacring Gazans in order to ethnically cleanse Palestine and expand its settlements. Israel has also agreed to allow humanitarian aid to pass through to the civilians it has trapped.

However, nothing has been resolved by both Benjamin Netanyahu’s revisionist Zionists and Ismail Haniyeh’s Hamas. These two groups, which claim to defend Jews and Arabs respectively, are in fact pursuing the British colonial project, formulated in 1915 by Lord Spencer, of a region incapable of defending itself.
Since 1948, the only solution, which has always been postponed, is that of a single bi-national state, as set out in UN Resolution 181.

Benny Gantz traveled to London to meet with National Security Advisor Tim Barrow. To his surprise, the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, insisted on talking to him to tell him that there was no question of Israel becoming a state like any other. The British colonial project continues to stand in the way of peace.

The United States, which had planned to provoke early elections in Israel and influence the election of General Benny Gantz, was disappointed [1].

Invited to Washington, Gantz proved less pliable than expected: while he distinguished himself from Benjamin Netanyahu’s “revisionist Zionists” by recognizing the right of Arabs to live on their land, he was determined to eradicate Hamas from Gaza. And yet, the historic Hamas is none other than the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, an instrument of UK domination.

As a reminder, since 2017, Hamas has officially withdrawn from the Brotherhood, but its main leaders are still members and implement its long-term strategy. During the war against Syria, Hamas fought alongside Nato and Israel against the Syrian Arab Republic.

The Hamas current, which broke with the Brotherhood, made peace with Syria. October 19, 2022. President Bashar el-Assad received his leader, Khalil Hayya, in Damascus. On the other hand, he still refused to meet the Muslim Brotherhood current incarnated by Khaled Mechal.

Since the start of Operation Iron Glaive, Israel has been hunting down and killing Hamas members who have joined the Palestinian Resistance, and sparing those who have remained members of the Brotherhood. In Beirut, for example, the Israeli General Staff assassinated Saleh al-Arouri [2] the 2nd in command of the political branch of Hamas. He had been expelled from Qatar because of his opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood.

General Benny Gantz stopped off in London on his way back to Israel. It is known that he himself initiated this stopover, and that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did everything in his power to ensure that he did not enjoy diplomatic immunity in the UK, at the risk of being arrested there for complicity in crimes against humanity Be [3]. that as it may, Benny Gantz made the same remarks in London as he had in Washington: he showed himself anxious both to stop the massacre in Gaza and to continue the operation against Hamas. He confirmed to his astonished interlocutors that he feared as much as they did the threats made by Rabbi Uzi Sharbaf at the “Conference for the Victory of Israel” [4], but that he would also fight the Muslim Brotherhood.

Whatever they say, the British still control the Brotherhood. We saw this during the wars against Libya and Syria. They have taken charge of communications for this secret organization and all the militias that emanate from it. In some cases, they have supplied them with arms and intelligence.

So the Anglo-Saxons are back where they started: in 1915, in Lord Herbert Samuel’s memorandum on The Future of Palestine (i.e., before Lord Balfour’s Declaration), they intended to support an independent Jewish state in Palestine, but not strong enough to defend itself. Subsequently, the followers of Volodymyr Jabotinsky, a historic ally of Benito Mussoloni and therefore a “fascist” in the full sense of the word, broke with London and attempted to pursue their colonial project in the same way as Rhodesia did a little later. The British were forced, along with the Americans, to recycle their enemies during the Cold War. 75 years later, the situation is identical: Israel is not strong enough to defend itself alone, but the Anglo-Saxons refuse to sanction the massacre of the Arabs of Palestine in broad daylight. If they arm Israel, they cover themselves in public blood; if they don’t, they lose the last remnant of the British Empire [5].

Contrary to popular belief, the Muslim Brotherhood has never sought to establish a Palestinian state independent of a Jewish state (as proposed by Lord William Peel’s colonial commission and popularized as the “two-state solution”), nor a Palestinian state federated with a Jewish state within a binational state (as decided by the United Nations). The difference between these two projects is that the former ensures equality between Arabs among Arabs and between Jews among Jews, while the latter is concerned with equality between every man, whether Arab or Jew.

In his letter to the (pro-British) Egyptian Prime Minister Mustafa el-Nahhas Pasha, Hassan el-Banna, the founder of the Brotherhood, asks him to prepare “the restoration of the Caliphate, in application of the unity demanded by Islam”.

Similarly, during its first period, Hamas proclaimed in its charter that it wanted to build a state for Muslims (the Caliphate). However, in 2017, when part of its base rejected the Brotherhood, which had just lost in Syria, it adopted a charter that was in favour of an independent Palestinian state (in the sense of the Peel Commission and the “two-state solution”). However, the latest Hamas brochure, Our narrative… Operation Al-Aqsa Flood [6], marks a step backwards by presenting the eight demands of historical Hamas. It states that Hamas rejects the Israeli occupation, but in particular does not support a Palestinian state, since the Brotherhood’s aim is to re-establish a Caliphate, i.e. a supranational state for all Muslim peoples.

Israel, for its part, is also at an impasse. It no longer knows what to do. The war cabinet (i.e. both Benjamin Netanyahu’s Jewish supremacists and Benny Gantz’s democrats) intends to destroy Hamas, including at Rafah. Yet all the experts, including former heads of the Shin Bet and Mossad, agree that the problem is not a particular organization, but the political situation that fuels the Resistance. Under these conditions, even if Hamas were to be completely destroyed, this would only encourage the creation of a new Resistance network, and would not guarantee that a new October 7th could take place.

Incidentally, the “revisionist Zionists” have not given up their plan to expel the Arabs from Palestine (“a land without a people, for a people without a land”). From their point of view, the Pentagon’s creation, within the next two months, of a floating island off the Gaza coast could revive this plan. As the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (FLPL) has denounced, the landing stage for humanitarian aid could be transformed almost instantly into a landing stage for exile. At the start of the crisis, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, announced in Cairo that the EU was ready to receive one million Gazans. African states had been contacted by Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet. The press cited Chad, Rwanda and Congo, all three of which denied this .

If such a turn were taken, the Egyptian-Palestinian border crossing at Rafah would lose its usefu [7]lness. Israel would take advantage of the situation to exclude Egypt from any political decisions. Cairo has long refused to let Gazans go into exile, and only last month set up a camp to house 1 million of them [8].

In fact, US intervention has forced Israel to cease its ethnic cleansing of Gaza and to agree to let humanitarian aid through. This is an enormous step forward. But Washington has not paved the way for peace, which would require not only the removal of the Jewish fascists, but also the end of the British colonial project in Palestine.

Translation
Roger Lagassé

Anglozionism

Two Voices: World Sees Gaza as ‘US Genocide’ Not Just Israel’s

1 Comment

Jeffrey Sachs and Mohammad Marandi speak out, but where is Russia, where is President Putin when it comes to Israel’s atrocities ?!


“Israel has the most extremist religious nationalist government in its history… there’s no end game here politically other than complete domination or ethnic cleansing or slaughter” – Prof. Jeffrey Sachs to Piers Morgan

**********************************************

 

Americans do not understand how badly the United States’ reputation has been damaged across the world, which sees Gaza as “a US genocide” and “not just an Israeli genocide,” Mohammad Marandi, a professor of English literature and Orientalism at the University of Tehran told Sputnik’s The Critical Hour on Thursday.

“It’s revealing the reality of [the US] empire in a way that not even [author of ‘A People’s History of the United States, Howard Zinn] could do because it’s being done in front of our eyes, it’s being done in front of a global audience. We’ve never seen such a thing before,” Marandi said, adding that he suspects that is why the US is attempting to ban TikTok.

“The United States has lost credibility across the world. I don’t think many Americans understand how bad this has become for the United States. People across the world see this as a US genocide, it’s not just an Israeli genocide.”

Co-host Wilmer Leon asked about a recent freeze on Canadian arms shipments to Israel, which Marandi said showed that “public opinion is shifting” but that ultimately “stopping Canadian exports of weapons is nothing.” Marandi said Canada needs to take a much tougher approach.

“They sanctioned Syria… they’ve imposed sanctions on Cuba, on Venezuela, on Iran, on Yemen. Why don’t they impose sanctions on Israel? They’re carrying out a holocaust. Why don’t they hit the economy?” Marandi asked, noting that Israel will, unlike Russia, be allowed to participate in the Olympics. “No one takes this seriously. And, of course, the bulk of the weapons come from the United States anyway.”

“In any case, there is no reason to believe that the Canadian government cares about Palestinians, that they oppose the genocide because they’ve done absolutely nothing to stop it,” Marandi added.

Ultimately, Marandi believes that Israel has laid the path for its destruction through its actions in Gaza. “I believe that the Israelis have made a fatal mistake and that what they’ve done in Gaza will be the beginning of the end of the Zionist project,” he asserted. “The real catastrophe for the Israeli regime is the fact that it’s been carrying out the genocide for almost six months in front of the world and it has demolished the facade that the regime had created for itself… about it being a democracy… All that is gone now and across the board the regime is despised and the image of the United States has been destroyed.”
Marandi noted that he has been to China twice and public opinion there has shifted as well. He noted that he does not think China will ever invest in Israel again.

“They see on their own social media networks what you and I are seeing,”he noted.

via Sputnik