Pages

Saturday, 3 July 2021

من كابول إلى بغداد مفاوضات الجلاء تحت النار


 محمد صادق الحسيني

أصوات عالية بدأت تسمع في واشنطن مفادها بأن بايدن رئيس ضعيف وأنّ إيران تستغلّ ضعفه لإخراجنا من كل من أفغانستان والعراق، كما جاء على لسان السيناتور الجمهوري في الكونغرس الأميركي ليندسي غراهام والذي صرّح بالحرف الواحد:

“الإيرانيون يبذلون جهداً لإخراجنا من العراق وأفغانستان ليسيطروا على هذين البلدين، كما يسعون لصناعة قنبلة نوويّة ويبحثون عن تدمير إسرائيل”.

 أضاف: “إنني لم أقلق يوماً كما أقلق الآن من إمكانية نشوب حرب بين إيران وإسرائيل”.

من جهة أخرى، فإنّ كلّ التقارير الميدانية الواردة من أفغانستان والعراق وإنْ بشكل متفاوت ومختلف، تفيد بأنّ واشنطن يتقلص نفوذها هناك وهي في طريقها للرحيل صاغرة أمام تحوّلات البلدين المتسارعة نحو التحرّر من الهيمنة الأميركية.

وهذا قانون من قوانين السنن الكونية بعد خسارة الأميركيين كل معاركهم ضدّ هذين البلدين كما ضدّ شعوب المنطقة.

في المقابل، فإنّ هذا لا يعني سقوط أميركا وهزيمتها الكاملة، والأهمّ إقرارها هي بهذه الحقيقة.

بل إنّ ثمة ما يشي بذهاب واشنطن الى خطط جديدة تقيها دفع الأثمان الباهظة نتيجة هذا الانسحاب بالإكراه ولو مؤقتاً…!

ففي أفغانستان ظلت واشنطن لفترة طويلة تحشد حوالي هذا البلد الإسلامي (جمهوريّات الاتحاد السوفياتيّ السابقة) بمجموعات من المسلّحين الإرهابيين من داعش والقاعدة في مناورة مكشوفة لإشعال حروب اثنية تجعل الاستقرار في هذا البلد الذي يمثل الكوريدور الحيوي شمال – جنوب، صعب المنال ليس فقط للأفغان، بل وأيضاً لإعدائها وتحويل هذا الطريق لكلّ من روسيا وإيران بمثابة حزام ناري يلفّ كلّ الحيّز الحيوي الجيوبوليتيكي لهذين البلدين الصاعدين دولياً الى جانب الصين.

هذا كما لجأت واشنطن مؤخراً الى حارس مرمى الناتو الجنوبي ومخلبها المتقدّم أردوغان لتسليم أمن مطار كابول أولاً ومن ثم المدينة أيضاً (حسب ما جاء في محادثات بايدن وأردوغان في بروكسل أثناء قمة الناتو) ربما في مقدّمة لإحداث قاعدة عسكريّة هناك لهم كما هي الحالة في قطر والصومال (علماً انّ هناك الآن نحو 500 جندي تركي في أفغانستان)، على افتراض ان تتحوّل هذه المعادلة الأمنية الجديدة بمثابة التفاف جديد للناتو حول رقبة كلّ من إيران شرقاً وموسكو جنوباً والصين غرباً…!

في ما يخص العراق تحاول واشنطن أن ترمي بالعراق الجديد الذي تؤكده كلّ حقائق الجغرافيا والتاريخ بمثابة الجار الطبيعي الحليف لإيران، بمثابة حلقة “إبراهيمية” في تحالف “شامي” مزيّف مع كلّ من الأردن ومصر، لترميه في غياهب اللاهوية واللا قرار، غصباً عن أهله وطبيعته الناصعة في الانتماء العربي والإسلامي المقاوم.

ولما كانت تظنّ كما في أفغانستان أنها في طريقها لفقدان نفوذها المباشر وعليها الرحيل في أقرب الآجال فهي تحاول من خلال تعطيل او الإخلال في الانتخابات المقبلة بهدف الإبقاء على بقايا من بقاياها في نسيج السلطة!

إنّ واشنطن تعرف تماماً أنّ موازين القوى العالمية والإقليمية الجديدة تتحدث على أرض الواقع بأنّ وجودها في بحارنا وأراضينا لم يعد مقبولاً، وانّ عليها الرحيل، وهي تحزم حقائبها في إطار دفع هذا الثمن، لكن دفع هذا الثمن بالأقساط وتحت النار، نار الفتن الإثنية والمذهبيّة، وإشغال قوى محور المقاومة وأصدقائنا من الروس والصينيين في معارك جانبية عديدة لمنعهم من ملء الفراغ…!

وقد أتت معركة سيف القدس الأخيرة بمثابة إضافة نوعية مهمة ليس فقط في رفع قدرات محور المقاومة في موازين القوى العالميّة والإقليمية، بل وفي تخفيض وزن العدو “الإسرائيلي” لدى واشنطن أيضاً وليس فقط بالمقارنة مع قوّتنا الصاعدة، ما يجعل واشنطن أكثر حماساً في الرحيل السريع، وأكثر إحجاماً عن الدخول في حروب جديدة منعاً لاستنزاف قواتها في حروب لم تعد مضمونة كما كانت في القرن الماضي…!

ما يجري في لبنان وسورية من ضغوط عالية جداً في مجال التضييق على أهلنا في الغذاء والدواء والمحروقات، ومحاولة وقف عجلة إعادة البناء او التسريع في الانهيارات الاقتصادية، إنما يتمّ بشكل ممنهج ومنظم من قبل عملاء وأدوات أميركا من كارتيلات وحيتان مال وبقايا أمراء حروب، تلعب في الوقت الضائع لصالح سيدها، الى حين تنتهي معركة التفاوض بين إيران وأميركا وروسيا والصين مع أميركا، تحت النار، لا أكثر ولا أقلّ…!

عملية العدوان الغادر على مقار الحشد الشعبي على الحدود العراقية السورية، بأمر من بايدن شخصياً، جاءت لخدمة السياسة الآنفة الذكر وفي رسالة ردع يائسة لمنع العراق من الالتحاق بمعركة “الحرب الإقليميّة من أجل القدس” القادمة لا محالة.

وفي هذا السياق لا فرق إن تمّ التوافق بين طهران وواشنطن في فيينا أو ذهبت الأمور الى نهاياتها المسدودة وهو الأرجح، وكذلك لا فرق أن تعزّز توافق بوتين وبايدن للحفاظ على التوازن الاستراتيجي الذي تمّ في جنيف مؤخراً، أو عاد الطرفان الى تسعير الحرب الباردة بينهما من جديد، فالأمر سيان.

ففي كلتا الحالتين فإنّ المرحلة الانتقالية هذه ستظلّ سائدة الى حين، وأنّ نهاياتها لا بدّ منتهية بنصر وانفراج كبيرين لمحور المقاومة المنتصر.

والمعسكر المهزوم ليس أمامه سوى عدّ أيامه المتبقية في المنطقة بانتظار ترتيبات المغادرة والانسحاب من دون شك أو ترديد.

إنهم راحلون لأنهم طارئون ونحن الباقون لأننا أصحاب الأرض والحق، والسنن الكونية الواضحة والجازمة تعمل كما يجب، وهي في هذه الحالة لصالحنا وهي التي تقطع بأنّ المنهزم عليه دفع الثمن، وانّ المنتصر هو من يحدّد شروط الهزيمة والإذعان، وليس العكس.

بعدنا طيبين قولوا الله…


فيديوات متعلقة


مقالات متعلقة


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Question for COVID-dissidents and anti-vaxxers

 July 02, 2021

Question for COVID-dissidents and anti-vaxxers

Introductory note: I saw the aphorism above spray-painted by some unknown person on one of the walls of my high-school.  Of course, it was written in French (“l’éclat des certitudes m’amène à tuer“).  Only years later did I understand that it refers to the dangers of certitudes which we often elevate into dogmas and into a valid cause for both physical and spiritual fratricide (this is the sin we commit every time we kill, either physically or spiritually a fellow human being).  I think that aphorism is very fitting whenever discussing the issues below.

First, let me begin by an excerpt from the recent 4 hours long Q&A with Putin (emphasis added)


The Russian journalist, Nailya Asker-zade, mentions the topic of the the anti-vaxers.

Vladimir Putin: And not only anti-vax dissidents, there are enough of them both in this country and elsewhere.

What is happening in the world? What are specialists saying? When a sweeping vaccination campaign against the main infections is afoot, it seems that everything is fine and there is no need, as some people believe, to get vaccinated. “Why get a jab? Almost no one is sick.” But as soon as the vaccination level drops to a certain threshold – bang, all of a sudden there is an outbreak and everyone is scrambling to get vaccinated as soon as possible.

We should take our cue from the specialists, not people who do not know much about this matter and listen to rumours. After all, this is happening all around the world. You know, the things I heard: that there is nothing at all, that in reality there is no epidemic. Sometimes I listen to what some people are saying – they seem to be grown-up, educated people. I do not know where they are taking this from. When you tell them that this is happening all over the world, they reply: “Right, country leaders have come into collusion.” Do they have any idea of what is happening in the world, of the contradictions that are plaguing today’s world, where all leaders allegedly upped and conspired with each other? It is all absolute rubbish.


Now that I set the context, I have a simple question for all COVID-dissidents and anti-vaxxers (all restrictions on discussing the medical aspects of COVID (cf moderation rules numbers #19 and #20 are suspended, but ONLY for this comments section, under this post only!!!).

Xi Jinping, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Maduro, Arce (and Morales!) and new leader of Cuba, Díaz-Canel – all agree with Putin.  Fully.

Six very different countries, six very different leaders, six very different political and social systems and six totally different economies.  Yet they very much all agree with each other.

(Truth be told, all of Latin America – except maybe Bolsanaro – agrees with these six countries!)

So here is my question.  There are four logical explanations of this for COVID-dissidents/anti-vaxxers:

  1. Putin, Xi, Khamenei, Maduro, Arce (and Morales!) and Diaz-Canel are all less well informed that we (COVID-dissidents/anti-vaxxers) are.
  2. Putin, Xi, Khamenei, Maduro, Arce (and Morales!) and Diaz-Canel all know the truth, but they are all lying.
  3. Putin, Xi, Khamenei, Maduro, Arce (and Morales!) and Diaz-Canel all working with the Great-Replacers and “chippers” from Davos, with the Bohemian grovers, with Bill Gates and CFR, etc. etc. etc.  They all want to create a single world government, kill a few billion people and usher in the Times of the Antichrist.
  4. Don’t confuse me with facts, I got my opinion and, dammit, I am right!!!

Which one do *you* pick?

Personally, it is my choice to trust the best political leaders on the planet, especially when their conclusions are supported by the best (both in quality and honesty!) scientific community on the planet.  That will remain my choice until somebody points out to me either evidence that all these leaders are “in cahoots with the Empire” or, alternatively, that the COVID-dissidents/anti-vaxxers know more about microbiology, virology or epidemiology than the very best Russian (and Chinese, and Iranian, and Cuban, and etc. etc. etc.) scientists.

Furthermore a truism, really, but this logical/common sense rule of thumb seems to be often forgotten today: as Carl Sagan correctly pointed out, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence“.  So before you post some absolute nonsense such as “Putin and Biden are in cahoots” (“Putin and Bennett are in cahoots” also qualifies!) or “I know so much more about this virus that the folks at the Gamaleia institute and Vektor virology centers!” I ask you to please keep Sagan’s truism in mind and stop the crazy nonsense! (unless you are a diagnosed narcissist and you absolutely and sincerely believe that you know more than everybody else, including Russian professors and academicians; for you I will make an exception and allow you to post such a claim).

Finally, please don’t waste your (and my) time by insulting me, calling me a “gatekeeper” or an “uncritical Putin fanboy” (oh, I am VERY MUCH a Putin-fanboy, that is true, but I am a very critical one, my articles prove this).  Your fellow COVID-dissidents have already called me lots of names, many times, and I already heard it all.  Of course, if you sincerely believe that your opinion if single most important thing in the universe (vide supra), by all means, insult me some more (this makes Pareto-optimal-sense I suppose).

However, please don’t send me what I call “divorce letters” à la “since you don’t agree with my views, I will stop reading your blog, posting on your blog or sending you donations“.  Not that I mind them, I just find them a waste of everybody’s time.  Why?  Because this blog is about REAL diversity and REAL pluralism.  This is not an “ideologically pure” blog which tries to raise advertisement revenue by catering to a specific population.  First, I don’t have advertisements (I *entirely* depend on the kindness of others, all donations I get are 100% voluntary, there is not quid pro quo here!).  And if you are such an intolerant bigot that you absolutely DEMAND that the entire human race agrees with you, then I really don’t want you anywhere near this blog.

Just leave quietly and lock yourself in your ideological prison:  it may be small and ugly, but all your fellow inmates will be just as “pure” and “right” as you are (yeah!!!).  As for donations, I noticed that for every “divorce letter” I get, I also get more people understanding what I am trying to do and offering me their support.  And let me also add here that there is no sum of money out there which would convince me to lie or care more about how much money comes in than my personal integrity.  Besides, my “trick” is simple:  I simply count on God to provide the blog, my family and myself everything we need: my help shall come from the Lord, who made the heaven and the earth (Ps 121:2 LXX).

The Saker

PS: I will add one more thing: I have spoken, at length, to many COVID-dissidents/anti-vaxxers.  I also read a lot of the stuff they sent me (and, believe me, nobody spams you like fanatics, because they really REALLY want/need to convert you to their beliefs!).  And while I still am mostly agnostic about most COVID medical aspects (the only thing I am sure of is that it was not a leaked bio-weapon) I can say with absolute certainty: the level of ideological fantasization of COVID-dissidents/anti-vaxxers is at least as high as it must have been in the Soviet Komsomol or the Hitlerjugend.  And yes, it is also at least as intolerant and bigoted as the Homopride/BLM/Antifa crowds.  Far from being a triumph for critical thinking and free investigations, the mental world of these folks in straight out of Orwell’s 1984.  It is a sad irony that these folks sincerely think of themselves as both “well informed” and “free thinkers”.

PPS: I fully expect this to turn into the usual hate-fest when dealing fanatics.  I ask all of you, my friends, not to defend me in any way shape or form.  I really don’t care anymore and I expect nothing less 🙂  cheers

PPPS: I leave you all with a cute image I saw in some Russian outlet (forgot which one)

Translation: Kübler-Ross model five stages of grief for COVID-dissidents: 1. Denial 2. Anger 3. Bargainin 4. Depression 5. Certificate of vaccination


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Palestinian women journalists speak out against ‘deliberate’ attacks by PA forces

 Palestinian Authority forces have violently assaulted women reporting on protests in Ramallah

A recent protest in Ramallah, where Palestinian Authority forces have been targeting women journalists including Najlaa Zaitoun, photographed here (Supplied)

By Aziza Nofal in RamallahPublished date: 2 July 2021 14:49 UTC | Last update: 2 days 1 hour ago

For several days now, Palestinian journalist Najlaa Zaitoun has been trying to convince her children, 11-year-old Haytham and 8-year-old Zein, to leave the house. 

‘A person wearing plain clothes threatened me, to my face, that he would rape me, and then defame my reputation’

– Najlaa Zaitoun, journalist

“I’m afraid the person who beat you will come and beat me,” Zein said to her, as she urged them to keep up their training at the sports club they usually go to every day. 

On 26 June, the 35-year-old was assaulted by plainclothes security forces while she was covering protests called following the death of popular Palestinian activist Nizar Banat while in Palestinian Security Forces custody two days earlier. 

The security forces chased Zaitoun, seized her phone, which she was using to film the protest, and violently attacked her with a truncheon. She was also threatened with rape.

“A person wearing plain clothes threatened me, to my face, that he would rape me, and then defame my reputation,” she tells Middle East Eye.

Palestinian female journalists attacked by PA forces
Bruises Najlaa Zaitoun sustained while covering the protests can be seen on her arm (Supplied)

Zaitoun has been living in a state of fear ever since and the violent beating she received has left visible marks on her body.

“I don’t feel safe, not even in my own home,” she says. Since the attack, Zaitoun has been staying at her parents’ house. 

Meanwhile, the assault on the journalist has moved online, with a smear campaign targeting her on social media accounts affiliated with the Palestinian Authority (PA) and accusing her of being the “one who attacked the security forces.” 

Targeted attacks

The attack on Zaitoun is one of several instances of violence against women journalists in the course of their work covering the protests. The incidents indicate that Palestinian security forces are specifically targeting women journalists, as reflected in the escalating levels of hostility and violence towars them compared to their male counterparts.

Attacks on women journalists have included physical violence, as was the case with Zaitoun and four others; confiscation of electronic devices used to cover the events; intimidation and harassment; chasing journalists in the street; arrest attempts and a ban on reporting. 

The assaults have continued even after the protests were over, with many female journalists receiving veiled threats that they will be discredited and defamed.

Saja al-Alamy is one of those attacked while reporting on the protests. On 24 June, Alamy was subjected to several attempts by security forces to prevent her from doing her job, and had to show her Palestinian Journalists Syndicate membership card each time. 


Palestinian female journalists attacked by PA forces

‘My press armour helped the perpetrators to identify me as a journalist, and attack me’, Saja Alamy says (Supplied)

Two days later, expecting journalist to go on being obstructed, Alamy wore her bulletproof press body armour and affixed her press card on the back of her phone, which she was using to film the events. 

None of this stopped her from being attacked. Instead, she believes the measures did her more harm than good.

“My press armour helped the perpetrators to identify me as a journalist, and attack me,” she says, adding that she was only able to escape the scene after she had taken off her press vest and concealed her identity as a journalist.

“There was a direct attack on us. One of the security officers in plainclothes was pointing at my female journalist colleague and me, asking his partner to take a photo of us so that he can identify us later,” she says.

Security forces had first attacked a group of journalists, including Alamy, with tear gas, but upon noticing her filming an attack on protesters, she was directly targeted. Alamy resisted the officers’ violent attempt to confiscate her phone, and refused to hand it over. She then managed to flee the scene to a nearby building and hide in a women’s toilet.

Alamy tried for more than an hour to reach her colleagues for help, but all entrances were being watched by security officers, including those who had chased her. She was eventually able to escape, after shedding her press armour, and pretended to be out shopping.

Life threatening

MEE reporter Shatha Hammad was also among the women journalists who were targeted in the attacks of 26 June.

She sustained a shrapnel wound to her face from a tear gas canister that a security officer shot directly at her after failing to confiscate her phone. 

Hammad says that security officers in plainclothes had focused their attention on women reporters, singling them out by pointing at them, even before the clashes erupted, which, she believes, suggests that the assault was planned and deliberate.

According to Hammad, the unprecedented violence against women journalists made her feel insecure and trapped.

“What happened is life threatening,” she says, demanding immediate action from local and international organisations to provide the necessary protection for them.


Palestinian female journalists attacked by PA forces
Shatha Hammad sustained wounds to face after being directly targeted with a tear gas cannister 

The detailed testimonies of women journalists were shocking to many, especially the Palestinian Authority’s use of cultural norms to shame and intimidate women, exercising social pressure against them as an attempt to silence and prevent them from performing their work. 

According to Ghazi Bani Odeh, head of the monitoring and documentation unit at the Palestinian Centre for Development and Media Freedoms (Mada), these exponential attacks against women journalists are unprecedented and planned. 

“The assaults on female journalists have two levels. The first is the direct physical violence in the streets; then comes the online attacks designed to incite people to exert social pressure on them,” Bani Odeh tells MEE, in reference to the smear campaigns that use hate speech that could fuel violence against them. 

Smear campaigns

One of the journalists targeted by a defamation campaign was Fayhaa Khanfar, who was beaten up in the street on 26 June, with her phone stolen from her as she covered the protest.

‘When I regained consciousness, I went to security officers crying and asking for help. But no one moved a muscle’

– Fayhaa Khanfar, journalist

Security officers in plain clothes had chased Khanfar to confiscate her device and knocked her to the ground, causing her to briefly lose consciousness. 

No one had intervened to help her. The attack resulted in a hairline fracture to her shoulder and bruises all over her body.

“I was attacked by security officers wearing plain clothes. They pushed me to the ground and stole my phone,” Khanfar tells MEE.

“When I regained consciousness, I went to security officers crying and asking for help. But no one moved a muscle.”

Orchestrated online attacks targeted Khanfar, who wears the hijab, aimed to discredit her in a conservative society by circulating images of a girl in beachwear, who looks very similar to Khanfar, and falsely identifying her as the journalist.

Khanfar was later summoned for interrogation at the intelligence headquarters in Ramallah, in the occupied West Bank, and told that she had to appear if she wanted to collect her phone, a move she considered an attempt to lure her in and arrest her.

Wafa Abdulrahman, the director of Filistiniat, a civil society organisation, sees the attacks on journalists as a chilling attempt to silence the women who have been spearheading the protests. 


Palestinian female journalists attacked by PA forces
Fayhaa Khanfar suffered a hairline fracture to her shoulder and bruises all over her body (Supplied)

Abdulrahman says that the systematic targeting of women journalists is intended to first send them a threatening message, and second, to warn the society that women reporters will not be spared and that the power of the security forces is unbreakable. 

As attacks on women journalists continue through online defamation campaigns and veiled threats, they find themselves living in constant danger and feeling personally insecure. 

According to Majid Arori, a media freedom activist and a human rights specialist, there has to be individual and collective legal actions to deter such attacks in the future. 

“The attacked women journalists must file legal complaints, providing the necessary documentation via local and international legal organisations to exert pressure on those who perpetrated the assaults,” he says, adding that these attacks are attempts to suppress critical voices and any protests against corruption. 


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Straight Talk by Russia on Hegemon USA

 

July 2, 2021

By Stephen Lendman

Source

Under both right wings of its war party, hegemon USA is an unparalleled threat to everyone everywhere.

On June 30, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov minced no words, saying the following:

“(T)he Americans want to implement all the issues discussed in Geneva (by Vladimir Putin and Biden’s double) primarily through promotion of their interests, rather than through balancing the interests of the US and” Russia,” adding: 

Moscow is willing to discuss all issues relating to bilateral relations — “but only on a mutually respectful basis and taking into account the balance of each other’s interests.”

Addressing “the humanitarian plight of the Syrian people” from over a decade of US war on country, Lavrov condemning the Trump regime’s “styfling…inhumane 2020 Caesar Act” that all about suffocating its people into submission to Washington’s will.

He also denounced “the illegal seizure of Syrian assets from foreign banks,” plundering them, and “refusal to ensure delivery of humanitarian aid (from international organizations) through Damascus.”

The diabolical US/Western agenda is all about “perpetuat(ing)” misery of Syrians as long as the nation is free from their control.

Russia supports Syrian territorial integrity — free from foreign occupation and control as mandated by international law.

“We can see that attempts are being made east of the Euphrates to promote separatist tendencies (by the US, West and Turkey),” said Lavrov, adding:

“They receive external support, including financial and material assistance. We regard this as unacceptable.” 

“We will continue to act in accordance with the principles set out in the documents of the Astana Format, namely, our categorical rejection of any attempts to split up Syria.”

Separately on June 30 at the Security Council, Russia’s UN envoy Vassily Nebenzia slammed earlier “Illegitimate (US) attempts to re-impose UN sanctions on Iran and introduce an unprecedentedly strict arms embargo against that country via the Security Council.” 

“The Council almost unanimously rejected those destructive approaches.” 

The Biden regime remains in noncompliance with Security Council Res. 2231 that unanimously affirmed the landmark 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal.

Iran is in full compliance with its obligations, in stark contrast to flagrant US/E3 breaches since May 2018.

Addressing unacceptable US/E3 allegations about Iran’s legitimate ballistic missile program that’s solely for self-defense — not offense like US-dominated NATO and Israel — Nebenzia called them “groundless,” adding:

The Biden regime’s UN envoy falsely accused Iran of “violating missile provisions of resolution 2231” — leaving unexplained that “the US itself continues to violate this resolution.”

“Unilateral (illegal) withdrawal of the US from the JCPOA and its subsequent steps to undermine the deal left behind huge piles of rubble (not easily) clear(ed) out.”

“Iran is an equal partner that has its interests, concerns, its own understanding of national security risks.” 

“Being a sovereign state, it is perfectly entitled to all that.” 

“When it comes to international relations, states do not have to like each other.” 

“But they have to treat each other with respect” as mandated by theUN Charter and other international law.

“Iran’s nuclear program is nothing different from similar programs of any other member of the NPT that does not possess nuclear weapons.”

Nor does the Islamic Republic threaten other nations like the US/West and belligerent neighboring states.

Yet hegemon USA and its imperial partners unacceptably call for imposing “renew(ed) restrictions (on) Iran’s (legitimate) nuclear activity” by making the JCPOA ‘longer and stronger” in flagrant breach of SC Res. 2231.

Its unanimous adoption had nothing to do with deterring Iran.

It’s all about normalizing relations with the nonbelligerent country threatening no one.

What took years to finalize was illegally unraveled with a stroke of Trump’s pen — based on fabricated accusations against Iran and its leadership.

Nebenzia called what happened “US destructive action aimed at undermining the JCPOA” — a policy so far continued by Biden regime hardliners and complicit E3 partners for refusing to comply with their obligations under the deal.

Nebenzia stressed it, saying:

“Unfortunately, we still do not see the decisions of the previous US (regime) being reconsidered.” 

“The US side continues its policy of (illegal) maximum pressure on Iran (in flagrant breach of) UNSC Resolution 2231.”

“There is no alternative to the JCPOA. We must be conscious of that.” 

“Let’s for just one second imagine the world without the deal.” 

“Will it be safer for anyone than the world we have now?”

Yet Biden regime hardliners, their complicit E3 partners, and apartheid Israel oppose the JCPOA unless revised to include unacceptable draconian restrictions no responsible government would accept — with intent to kill the deal altogether.

During Wednesday’s Security Council session, Iran’s UN envoy Majid Takht-Ravanchi stressed that abandonment of the JCPOA by the Trump regime was illegal, irrational and unjustifiable.

Unlawful US/Western maximum pressure on Iran followed, maintained by Biden regime hardliners without letup.

Nearly three months of talks in Vienna failed to bring the US and E3 back into compliance with their JCPOA obligations.

Iran justifiably demands complianc as required by international law, along with “assurances and a guarantee that such a thing will never be repeated again.”

“Those who broke their promise are the ones who must prove their sincerity and genuine political will.” 

“They are the ones who must take hard decisions” by returning to what they illegally abandoned.

The prospect that either wing of the US war party would guarantee anything positive to Iran is virtually nil.

After six rounds of talks in Vienna since April 6, the US and complicit E3 partners remain in noncompliance with their JCPOA obligations.

There’s virtually no chance that they’ll return to the landmark agreement in its original form as mandated by SC Res. 2231.

International law demands no less.


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Saudi Arabia: Why Biden will leave Mohammed bin Salman in charge


Madawi al-Rasheed

2 July 2021 11:43 UTC 

Despite Biden’s rhetoric, American national interests are allied with those of the authoritarian crown prince in Riyadh

US President Joe Biden and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (AFP)

In the Middle East in general, and Saudi Arabia in particular, many activists and human right defenders hoped that newly elected US President Joe Biden would turn the page on the Trump era, when rulers in the region had carte blanche to continue their authoritarian practices and repressive measures.

Many hoped that Biden would exert pressure on the US’s most loyal Arab dictators to reverse the tide and respond to calls for democracy, ensure freedom of speech, and halt mass executions. 

It is unlikely that Biden will encourage his removal from office or openly challenge his abuse of human rights domestically

But in Riyadh, among other places, such unrealistic wishful thinking is beginning to be dashed. Realpolitik is settling in, to the demise of Washington’s reputation and its endless rhetoric about promoting democracy. 

American myths about the country’s own historical position as the leader of the free world, promoter of democratic values and protector of individual rights are always exposed in the Arab world at the hands of none other than its most loyal man in Riyadh. Indeed, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman continues his campaign of detentionsexecutions and surveillance, unchecked by Washington.

Biden slightly embarrassed the crown prince when his intelligence services published a four-page report that held the Saudi ruler responsible for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and placed several suspects on a list of sanctioned operatives. The crown prince himself was untouched by these superficial measures.

Loyal prince

Today, Biden and his advisers remain silent on the future of the Saudi crown prince. But American media and think tanks have been promoting his nemesis, former crown prince Mohammed bin Nayef, who has been placed under house arrest and allegedly suffered ill treatment. Ex-CIA officials want their partner in the war on terror back in the driving seat in Riyadh. 

How can Washington ignore its loyal prince, who allegedly helped save the lives of Americans as he shared intelligence with US security services, they ask. In this view, it’s an American betrayal of bin Nayef, who provided valuable information that helped to foil terrorist attacks on US soil.

Once the darling of the CIA, bin Nayef is now helpless without the US pushing for his release, let alone his rehabilitation, as its man in Riyadh. This sounds like a familiar story: use the man in Riyadh, then dump him when he faces his fate at the hands of his kinsmen.

Mohammed bin Nayef has been promoted by some as an alternative Saudi leader (AFP)
Mohammed bin Nayef has been promoted by some as an alternative Saudi leader (AFP)

In fact, Biden should resist calls to bring back the deposed prince, who never stopped using violence against peaceful activists and put them on trial in the terrorism courts that he established. Mohammed bin Nayef used the pretext of the war on terror to spread fear and torture. His most famous victims included founders of the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association – activists such as Abdullah al-Hamid, who died in prison, and Sulaiman al-Rashoudi. Activist Waleed Abu al-Khair remains in prison, alongside many others. 

Many of the men and women Mohammed bin Nayef put in prison have been subjected to solitary confinement. Perhaps the arrest of the former crown prince by the current crown prince fulfilled the hopes of those who suffered at his hands for years – but unfortunately, they had no power to arrest him, put him on trial or seek justice. 

Perverse revenge

In his own way, Mohammed bin Salman is punishing the deposed prince, but for different reasons. When the mafia fights its own battles within its own rank-and-file, the weakened society may achieve some perverse sense of revenge that is momentary and emotional. 

But both Mohammed bin Nayef and his empowered cousin, the crown prince, need to be put on trial for crimes against their own citizens. US intelligence services obviously want the devil they know, but many Saudis want justice for their lost sons and tortured relatives, who either linger in prison or have already been executed. Many of their corpses have yet to be returned to their relatives for proper burial. Biden must end Trump’s alliance with Mohammed bin Salman

Many of Mohammed bin Nayef’s old cronies and right-hand men are not only free, but have the gall to protest – among them Saad al-Jabri, who escaped to Canada and is now facing a court case for allegedly stealing billions of dollars when he was in charge of purchasing anti-terrorism and surveillance technology. The court case may shed new light on how the opaque and corrupt interior ministry conducted its affairs and plundered billions under the pretext of fighting terrorism. 

The day will come when the prosecutor, Mohammed bin Salman, will himself face a similar fate for his crimes against activists and dissidents. For now, the Biden administration remains silent on the crown prince’s present and future. It is unlikely that Biden will encourage his removal from office or openly challenge his abuse of human rights domestically. 

So far, Biden has a better record on pushing the crown prince to temper his adventurist foreign policies. It is easier for Biden to force him to seek reconciliation with Qatar, offer a peace treaty to Yemen’s Houthis, flirt with Iran via Iraq, and endear himself to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

But when it comes to political reforms, a muted US is neither willing nor able to see the merits of promoting a process that will eventually lead the kingdom on a path to democracy. At the moment, US national interests are allied with those of an authoritarian crown prince, so why rock the boat.  

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Madawi al-RasheedMadawi al-Rasheed is visiting professor at the Middle East Institute of the London School of Economics. She has written extensively on the Arabian Peninsula, Arab migration, globalisation, religious transnationalism and gender issues. You can follow her on Twitter: @MadawiDr

Recommended


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

The long and winding multipolar road

 July 01, 2021

The West’s ‘rules-based order’ invokes rulers’ authority; Russia-China say it’s time to return to law-based order

The long and winding multipolar road

By Pepe Escobar with permission and first posted at Asia Times

We do live in extraordinary times.

On the day of the 100th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), President Xi Jinping, in Tiananmen square, amid all the pomp and circumstance, delivered a stark geopolitical message:

The Chinese people will never allow foreign forces to intimidate, oppress or subjugate them. Anyone who tries to do this will find themselves on a collision course with a large steel wall forged by more than 1.4 billion Chinese.

I have offered a concise version of the modern Chinese miracle – which has nothing to do with divine intervention, but “searching truth from facts” (copyright Deng Xiaoping), inspired by a solid cultural and historical tradition.

The “large steel wall” evoked by Xi now permeates a dynamic “moderately prosperous society” – a goal achieved by the CCP on the eve of the centennial. Lifting over 800 million people out of poverty is a historical first – in every aspect.

As in all things China, the past informs the future. This is all about xiaokang – which may be loosely translated as “moderately prosperous society”.

The concept first appeared no less than 2,500 years ago, in the classic Shijing (“The Book of Poetry”). The Little Helmsman Deng, with his historical eagle eye, revived it in 1979, right at the start of the “opening up” economic reforms.

Now compare the breakthrough celebrated in Tiananmen – which will be interpreted all across the Global South as evidence of the success of a Chinese model for economic development – with footage being circulated of the Taliban riding captured T-55 tanks across impoverished villages in northern Afghanistan.

History Repeating: this is something I saw with my own eyes over twenty years ago.

The Taliban now control nearly the same amount of Afghan territory they did immediately before 9/11. They control the border with Tajikistan and are closing in on the border with Uzbekistan.

Exactly twenty years ago I was deep into yet another epic journey across Karachi, Peshawar, the Pakistan tribal areas, Tajikistan and finally the Panjshir valley, where I interviewed Commander Masoud – who told me the Taliban at the time were controlling 85% of Afghanistan.

Three weeks later Masoud was assassinated by an al-Qaeda-linked commando disguised as “journalists” – two days before 9/11. The empire – at the height of the unipolar moment – went into Forever Wars on overdrive, while China – and Russia – went deep into consolidating their emergence, geopolitically and geoeconomically.

We are now living the consequences of these opposed strategies.

That strategic partnership

President Putin has just spent three hours and fifty minutes answering non-pre-screened questions, live, from Russian citizens during his annual ‘Direct Line’ session. The notion that Western “leaders” of the Biden, BoJo, Merkel and Macron kind would be able to handle something even remotely similar, non-scripted, is laughable.

The key takeaway: Putin stressed US elites understand that the world is changing but still want to preserve their dominant position. He illustrated it with the recent British caper in Crimea straight out of a Monty Python fail, a “complex provocation” that was in fact Anglo-American: a NATO aircraft had previously conducted a reconnaissance flight. Putin: “It was obvious that the destroyer entered [Crimean waters] pursuing military goals.”

Earlier this week Putin and Xi held a videoconference. One of the key items was quite significant: the extension of the China-Russia Treaty of Good Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation, originally signed 20 years ago.

A key provision: “When a situation arises in which one of the contracting parties deems that…it is confronted with the threat of aggression, the contracting parties shall immediately hold contacts and consultations in order to eliminate such threats.”

This treaty is at the heart of what is now officially described – by Moscow and Beijing – as a “comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination for a new era”. Such a broad definition is warranted because this is a complex multi-level partnership, not an “alliance”, designed as a counterbalance and viable alternative to hegemony and unilateralism.

A graphic example is provided by the progressive interpolation of two trade/development strategies, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU), which Putin and Xi again discussed, in connection with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which was founded only three months before 9/11.

It’s no wonder that one of the highlights in Beijing this week were trade talks between the Chinese and four Central Asia “stans” – all of them SCO members.

“Law” and “rule”

The defining multipolarity road map has been sketched in an essay by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov that deserves careful examination.

Lavrov surveys the results of the recent G7, NATO and US-EU summits prior to Putin-Biden in Geneva:

These meetings were carefully prepared in a way that leaves no doubt that the West wanted to send a clear message: it stands united like never before and will do what it believes to be right in international affairs, while forcing others, primarily Russia and China, to follow its lead. The documents adopted at the Cornwall and Brussels summits cemented the rules-based world order concept as a counterweight to the universal principles of international law with the UN Charter as its primary source. In doing so, the West deliberately shies away from spelling out the rules it purports to follow, just as it refrains from explaining why they are needed.

As he dismisses how Russia and China have been labeled as “authoritarian powers” (or “illiberal”, according to the favorite New York-Paris-London mantra), Lavrov smashes Western hypocrisy:

While proclaiming the ‘right’ to interfere in the domestic affairs of other countries for the sake of promoting democracy as it understands it, the West instantly loses all interest when we raise the prospect of making international relations more democratic, including renouncing arrogant behavior and committing to abide by the universally recognized tenets of international law instead of ‘rules’.

That provides Lavrov with an opening for a linguistic analysis of “law” and “rule”:

In Russian, the words “law” and “rule” share a single root. To us, a rule that is genuine and just is inseparable from the law. This is not the case for Western languages. For instance, in English, the words “law” and “rule” do not share any resemblance. See the difference? “Rule” is not so much about the law, in the sense of generally accepted laws, as it is about the decisions taken by the one who rules or governs. It is also worth noting that “rule” shares a single root with “ruler,” with the latter’s meanings including the commonplace device for measuring and drawing straight lines. It can be inferred that through its concept of “rules” the West seeks to align everyone around its vision or apply the same yardstick to everybody, so that everyone falls into a single file.

In a nutshell: the road to multipolarity will not follow “ultimatums”. The G20, where the BRICS are represented, is a “natural platform” for “mutually accepted agreements”. Russia for its part is driving a Greater Eurasia Partnership. And a “polycentric world order” implies the necessary reform of the UN Security Council, “strengthening it with Asian, African and Latin American countries”.

Will the Unilateral Masters ply this road? Over their dead bodies: after all, Russia and China are “existential threats”. Hence our collective angst, spectators under the volcano.


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!