All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
What are we to make of this campaign of Joe Biden for president? Let us step back from the regular questions like whether he is in a hospice and three other actors play his role at different times. That is perhaps true, but it is not our topic today.
The interesting question is who is running his campaign?
First, it does not seem to be the Democratic Party, if there is anything left of that institution. It seems as if the Biden campaign is run by a set of contractors working as PR agents. But who tells them what to do? After going through the website carefully, I came to the painful conclusion that they are getting their orders from lobbying and private intelligence contractors, like Booz Allen Hamilton, and probably from three or four so as to spread the money around and make it more difficult to trace the responsibility. But the question is then, who gives the orders to those contractors?
Granted the bizarre fusion between the Biden and Netanyahu administration, and the radical privatization of governance by both, my guess is that the orders come from private consulting firms in the US, in Israel, and perhaps elsewhere, and that those consulting firms take their orders from the usual suspects:
multinational investment banks and private equity, multinational corporations (increasingly corporations have banks telling them what to do), and the strategic teams of various billionaires and billionaire families.
The immediate consulting firms around Biden are Asia Group run by Kurt Campbell and others, WestExec run by current Secretary of State Tony Blinken and Michèle Flournoy of the Defense Policy Board and Albright-Stonebridge, and there are others like Pine Island Capital Partners where both Lloyd Austin (Secretary of Defense), Flournoy, and Blinken all have interests.
I have no idea who the big players are behind the consulting firms and investment banks.
There may be some subtle issues regarding nationality. Various Israeli, Chinese, Turkish, German and other billionaires like to hide themselves behind multiple trusts and funds so that they cannot be traced. That is because of the increasingly confrontational rhetoric used in international politics.
Let us take a look at the Biden for President website now.
It is no surprise that the opening page of the Biden website asks for money. After all, the only thing that politics is concerned about these days is money. But the message presented is so bland and empty, so devoid of any possible motivation to support this zombie campaign, that one must wonder whether there is an intentional effort to discourage voters. Or perhaps this website is designed to demoralize and repel.
Perhaps it has already been determined that Trump will be the next occupant and the consulting contract from Booz Allen Hamilton is to make Biden look as stupid and compromised as possible.
The line “what we raise now will determine the size and scope of the programs we’ll be able to run next year” is ambiguous, but seems to imply that for the citizen, Joe Biden holding up the ideals of the nation is dependent on your contribution. It is pay to play for everyone.
Then you have a chance to join the mailing list and give your data to them. Still nowhere on the website is there any indication of what Biden stands for, or how you can get your message to him, or how you can contribute in any other way than swallowing propaganda and giving your money.
What exactly “finish the job” means is so open-ended, so weak and bland as to suggest that this campaign lost from the start. Similarly, the flaccid and banal statement “America is back,” which implies that having some women and minorities in cabinet level positions more than makes up for outsourcing the entire government to Amazon, BlackRock, State Street, Oracle, and Google, is at best insulting.
I will not dwell on the sad video of a Biden, or Biden look-alike, delivering warmed-over bromides in a testtube. One gets the sense that decisions for this campaign are being made by a tiny handful of people at Booz Allen Hamilton, whose minds are on autopilot.
What is most striking about the Biden site is the complete absence of and description of what he stands for, or how one can, in a democratic sense, have input in his campaign. The order of the menu is revealing. At the top is the store for buying creepy souvenirs. Then it presents two ways to donate money. Then opportunities to distribute Biden materials (without any opportunities to participate in the campaign). Then comes the description of the legal immunity of the campaign. And that is it. If you are concerned with any serious issue, you should be looking at another website.
I seriously doubt any ordinary Americans are giving this campaign money.
Here are some of the options for you if you want to join the effort. They do not seem to involve setting up your own community group in your neighborhood to address real issues.
Finally, the creepy paraphernalia of a zombie campaign.
The most striking item is the face of Joe Biden that has eyes which shift from blue sunglasses to red flashing beams like a monster from a Godzilla movie. What in the world this terrifying image is meant to convey is far from clear.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on Fear No Evil.
Emanuel Pastreich served as the president of the Asia Institute, a think tank with offices in Washington DC, Seoul, Tokyo and Hanoi. Pastreich also serves as director general of the Institute for Future Urban Environments. Pastreich declared his candidacy for president of the United States as an independent in February, 2020.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
A United Nations humanitarian agency warned Thursday that over a dozen countries that have suspended their financial contributions are risking the “sheer survival” of most people in the Gaza Strip amid Israel’s war on the besieged Palestinian enclave.
The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) said in a statement that “the colossal humanitarian needs of over 2 million people in Gaza now face the risk of deepening” due to recent donor suspensions over Israeli allegations that a handful of agency staff members participated in the Hamas-led attacks on October 7.
The number of countries cutting off funding—including the United States—has grown over the past week even though the 30,000-employee agency swiftly fired nine workers and launched an investigation into the the Israeli government’s claims.
While cease-fire talks are ongoing, Israel’s nearly four-month assault on Gaza—condemned as genocide in a South African-led case at the International Court of Justice—continues, with the death toll topping 27,000 on Thursday and thousands more injured or missing in the bombed and burned homes, hospitals, schools, mosques, shelters, and refugee camps.
In response to Israeli orders early in the U.S.-backed war, many Palestinians have fled northern Gaza. Thomas White, director of UNRWA affairs in Gaza and U.N. deputy humanitarian coordinator for the occupied Palestinian territory, explained Thursday that the agency has had limited access to the people who remain in the north.
“UNRWA received reports that people in the area are grinding bird feed to make flour. We continue to coordinate with the Israeli army to be able to go to the north, but this has been largely denied,” he said. “When our convoys are finally permitted to go to the area, people rush to the trucks to get food and often eat it on the spot.”
Meanwhile, in southern Gaza, “Rafah has become a sea of people fleeing bombardments,” White added.
According to the UNRWA’s tally, donor nations have suspended at least $440 million in funding. Philippe Lazzarini, the agency’s commissioner-general, declared Thursday that “as the war in Gaza is being pursued unabated, and at the time the International Court of Justice calls for more humanitarian assistance, it is the time to reinforce and not to weaken UNRWA.”
“The agency remains the largest aid organization in one of the most severe and complex humanitarian crises in the world,” he said. “I echo the call of the U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres to resume funding to UNRWA. If the funding remains suspended, we will most likely be forced to shut down our operations by end of February not only in Gaza but also across the region.”
White warned that “it’s difficult to imagine that Gazans will survive this crisis without UNRWA.”
EU top diplomat @JosepBorrellF: "UNRWA is something that cant stop working—otherwise 100s of 1000s of ppl will perish. If you cut funding to UNRWA, you're punishing the whole Palestinian ppl. There's no alternative.. So no collective punishment.. no cutting [of funding] to UNRWA" pic.twitter.com/EJmNjVccoK
The comments from UNRWA leaders echoed remarks from other U.N. officials, humanitarians, global advocacy groups, and even some progressive U.S. politicians over the past week.
“UNRWA’s lifesaving services to over three-quarters of Gaza’s residents should not be jeopardized by the alleged actions of a few individuals,” Martin Griffiths, United Nations under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief coordinator, told the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday.
“To put very simply and bluntly: Our humanitarian response for the occupied Palestinian territory is completely dependent on UNRWA being adequately funded and operational,” he added. “Decisions to withhold funds from UNRWA must be revoked.”
Griffiths and 14 other U.N. leaders and humanitarian partners who argued in a Tuesday statement that while the allegations against UNRWA staff “are horrifying” and “any U.N. employee involved in acts of terror will be held accountable,” global donors must not prevent the agency from helping the “hundreds of thousands of people homeless and on the brink of famine.”
“Withdrawing funds from UNRWA is perilous and would result in the collapse of the humanitarian system in Gaza, with far-reaching humanitarian and human rights consequences in the occupied Palestinian territory and across the region,” the coalition said. “The world cannot abandon the people of Gaza.”
[From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.]
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Jessica Corbett is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams.
Featured image: Philippe Lazzarini, Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) holds press conference in Jerusalem on October 27, 2023 [Mostafa Alkharouf/Anadolu Agency]
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
“Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriorsgo to war first and then seek to win.”(Sun Tzu)[1]
Right from the outset of this analysis of the war on Gaza, I posited that this war is different from the others in many crucial respects and will have lasting and far-reaching consequences. It even has the potential to fundamentally remake the entire Middle East region. So far, the emphasis has been put on the highly important and necessary historicisation and geopolitical contextualisation of the century-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict that is today reaching its pinnacle.
From now on, we’ll shift our attention to what’s next for the Palestinians, for Israel, for the Middle East region and its impact on the global order. More specifically, and to start with, we’ll address Khaled Elgindy’s insightful observation according to which all parties concerned concur that there’s no going back to the October 6 untenable status quo, and try to answer his challenging question, “Where do we go from here?”[2]
On the Meaning of Victory in Ancient and Modern Warfare
More than 2,000 years ago, in his timeless treatise “The Art of War” (also known as “The Thirteen Chapters”), the great Chinese military strategist and general Sun Tzu asserted that war was an extension of politics and should be pursued in the interests of the greater good for all, the conqueror and the conquered. He believed that for warfare to be defined as anything other than a waste of life and resources, one needed to win. And for victory to be achieved, it is imperative to know yourself and your enemy:
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
For most historians the conventional view is that Sun Tzu has lived, fought, and composed his master work during the Spring and Autumn Period which preceded the Warring States Period (c. 481-221 BCE) during which the Zhou Dynasty (1046-256 BCE) was declining, and the states once bound to it fought each other for supremacy and control of China.[3]
Likewise, the no less famous 19th century Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz claimed in his magnum opus military strategy book “On War”[4] that
“War is simply a continuation of political intercourse, with the addition of other means. We deliberately use the phrase ‘addition of other means’ because we also want to make it clear that war in itself does not suspend political intercourse or change it into something entirely different. That intercourse continues, irrespective of the means it employs. The main lines along which military events progress, and to which they are restricted, are political lines that continue throughout the war into the subsequent peace.”
It follows that
“The political object – the original motive for war – will thus determine the military objective to be reached and the amount of effort it requires.”[5]
Clausewitz described military victory as a condition where the enemy’s ability to enter battle, resist or resume hostilities is destroyed. He stated that “The key to victory lies in the ability to deny the enemy their objective”, thus emphasising the importance of not only achieving one’s own objectives but also preventing the adversary from attaining theirs. By depriving the enemy of their goals, a military force can strategically weaken and ultimately defeat them. It is interesting to note that Clausewitz’s manuscripts were inspired by the stunning military successes during the Napoleonic Wars between 1803 and 1815, which nevertheless, as history has recorded, proved ephemeral. Conversely, Clausewitz’s Prussia was convincingly beaten in 1806 in the Jena campaign but came back militarily in the 1813 and 1814 campaigns and again at Waterloo in 1815.[6]
This paradigm encompassing both the linkages between war and politics and the notion of victory, has traditionally constituted the norm and the yardstick for assessment and judgement through much of history and up to the 21st century. However, in modern wars – wars which have occurred since the end of the Cold War – while the former component is still largely valid, contemporary strategists and military affairs analysts tend to diverge on the latter element, that is the notion, or more precisely the meaning of victory. This is particularly the case regarding asymmetric warfare – a form of war between belligerents whose relative military power, strategy, or tactics are significantly different, and often involving a wide variety of non-state actors, insurgents or resistance movement militias.
I dealt with this subject in an article[7] I wrote in 2018 in which I explained that numerous careful studies have shown that the United States and its allies are blindly following those insurgents’ worldview and game plan, which is to “perpetually engage and enervate the United states and the West in a series of prolonged overseas ventures” in which they will undermine their own societies, expend their resources, and increase the level of violence, thereby setting off a dynamic that William Roe Polk has reviewed in length in one of his books[8]. Indeed, Polk reveals a pattern that has been replicated over and over throughout recent history. That is, invaders are naturally disliked by the invaded population, who disobey them, at the start in small ways, eliciting a forceful response on the part of the invader, which in turn increases opposition and popular support for resistance. The ensuing cycle of violence then escalates until the invading forces are obliged either to withdraw, or to resort to methods and means that amount to genocide to gain their ends.
Recent examples of battlefield victors eventually losing the war, or the defeated coming out as winners have been provided by many prominent scholars. In 2006, the University of Stanford rightly pointed out that
“Many wars do not result in unambiguous victory for one side or the other. Fatigue, a recognition that the cost of total victory is too high, or the prospect of endless conflict, leads the players to agree on a cease-fire.”
It cited as examples the invasions of Iraq and Lebanon by the US and Israel, respectively, saying:
“Israel realised that the cost of its invasion of Lebanon was more than it had bargained for and agreed to a cessation of hostilities. Initially the Jewish state had announced its aim as freeing the two soldiers captured by Hezbollah, disarming that organisation, and removing it from a position in which it could threaten Israel. It achieved none of these aims but still declared victory. Following that lead, President George Bush could declare victory in Iraq. Whether one wishes to view Israel or the United States as a victor depends on whether the glass is half full or half empty.”[9]
In these examples as well as in the case of Afghanistan, the strategic success could not be achieved notwithstanding a superior military force and an immense mismatch between the opponents in terms of firepower and technology at their respective command. The main reason for that is that victory required not only the defeat of the opponents’ military capabilities but also the successful resolution of the deeper problems at the root of the conflict.[10]
In understanding victory, says William Martel[11], a clear distinction between the political aim (the end) and the military aim (one of the means to achieve the end) is essential. Victory can be looked at as an outcome (result), a descriptive statement of the post-war situation, or as an aspiration (ambition or goal) being the driver to accomplish specific objectives through use of force. That’s why most scholars and analysts seem to agree that military victories alone do not determine the outcome of modern wars. They consider victory to be the achievement of a predetermined end state.
The notion of a desired end state implies that victory occurs if the outcome of the war corresponds with previously articulated aims, that is, a relation between war aims and war outcomes.[12] It is then critical to define the end before the war begins, and to clearly follow it. War, says Michael Anderson, “is a fluid, complicated thing, and it isn’t beyond reason for war aims to morph during a conflict, but at each of those points there must be a clear and understood process for the changed goals to be achieved as there was leading into the war in the first place. A change in war aims can seem like a new war in itself.”[13] Indeed, if it’s unknown how a war is supposed to end, then how can it be known if, or when the endgame has been achieved?
Nowadays, as stated by de Landmeter, it is almost inconceivable to wage war without considering the post-war period. Ideally, the object of policy extends into the period after hostilities, and victory is closely linked to concepts of conflict termination and conflict resolution that seek to find lasting solutions.
In answering the big question of what constitutes victory in modern war, Gabriella Blum contends that
“With wars becoming about long-term change, requiring a mix of benevolence and aggression that is carefully tailored to individual targets, the political and civilian dimensions of victory have outgrown the military one. As the attempts to define what success looks like in Afghanistan or Iraq show, the formulation of victory now requires more long-term, abstract, and complex, less tangible and immediate terms. War, in other words, can no longer be reduced into a military campaign.”[14]
To put it another way, victory in the “true sense implies that the state of peace and of one’s people, is better after the war than before.”[15] Such a victory, however, requires considerable patience, because “while the military contest may have a finite ending, the political, social, and psychological issues may not be resolved even years after the formal end of hostilities.”[16]
So, how does this paradigm translate in the case of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? More precisely, has violence meted out on the Palestinians forcing them to do under duress what Israel wanted in the short term brought a settled, durable peace? It has obviously not. For Peter Layton, the Israelis are a perfect contemporary example of the validity of said paradigm:
“…they (the Israelis) have won many seemingly decisive battles but are still searching for victory. The Palestinians may be scattered and partly live in occupied lands, but Israel is unable to compel them to come to a peaceful resolution of their territorial disagreement. The two side’s political differences remain unresolved, so their political interaction – their human intercourse – continues, sometimes violently and occasionally at times through war.”[17]
Since October 7, this situation has worsened in an unprecedented manner, as it has set in motion a succession of tragic events of Dantesque proportions. What is unfolding right before our very eyes is no less than a fight for survival from the point of view of all the belligerents, namely Israel and the Palestinians, as well as the latter’s allies in the potent “axis of resistance” composed of Lebanese Hezbollah, Yemeni Houthis, Iraqi resistance factions, Syria and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Quite understandably, Wesley Clark’s shocking utterance “we’re going to take out seven countries in five years” has never ceased to loom over the region.
Collectively Trapped in an Existential Zero-Sum Game
On 21 January 2024, The Palestinian Resistance Movement Hamas issued a 16-page document entitled “Our Narrative…Operation Al-Aqsa Flood”[18] to clarify the background and dynamics of the surprise attack, which the Palestinian Resistance leaders decided to launch on 7 October, considering it “a necessary step and a normal response to confront all Israeli conspiracies against the Palestinian people”.
The report is mainly intended to the steadfast Palestinian people, the Arab and Islamic nations and the “free peoples worldwide and those who advocate for freedom, justice and human dignity”, in light of “the ongoing Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and as our people continue their battle for independence, dignity, and breaking free from the longest-ever occupation during which they have drawn the finest displays of bravery and heroism in confronting the Israeli murder machine and aggression.”
The document is structured around five sections. The first section deals with the reasons behind Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, explaining that the battle of the Palestinian people against occupation and colonialism did not start on 7 October 2023, but rather 105 years ago, including 30 years of British colonialism and 75 years of Zionist occupation. It recalls that in 1918, the Palestinian people owned 98.5% of the Palestine land and represented 92% of its overall population. And even after the mass Jewish immigration campaigns coordinated between the British colonial authorities and the Zionist Movement, the Jews controlled no more than 6% of the land of Palestine and represented only 31% of its total population prior to the creation of the “state of Israel” in 1948. Over these decades, the Palestinian people suffered all forms of oppression, injustice, expropriation of their fundamental rights and the apartheid policies, and “After 75 years of relentless occupation and suffering, and after failing all initiatives for liberation and return to our people, and also after the disastrous results of the so-called peace process, what did the world expect from the Palestinian people to do?” the document asks. Should they keep waiting and keep counting on the helpless UN? Or take the initiative in defending the Palestinian people, lands, rights and sanctities, knowing that the defence act is a right enshrined in international laws, norms and conventions?
The second section titled “The events of Operation Al-Aqsa Flood” describes the occurrences of that day and debunks some of the Israeli lies, highlighting the fact that
“the Palestinian resistance was fully disciplined and committed to the Islamic values during the operation and that the Palestinian fighters only targeted the occupation soldiers and those who carried weapons against our people”, and adding that “If there was any case of targeting civilians, it happened accidentally and in the course of the confrontation with the occupation forces”.
It also indicated that many Israelis were killed by the Israeli army and police, especially those who were in the Nova music festival, as reported by Israeli Yedioth Ahronoth and Haaretz newspapers.
In the third section titled “Towards a transparent international investigation”, the report recalls that being a member-state of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and its Rome Statute since 2015, Palestine asked for an investigation into Israeli war crimes committed on its territories, but was faced both with “Israeli intransigence and rejection, and threats to punish the Palestinians for the request to ICC” and Western powers completely siding with Israel’s narrative and standing against the Palestinian moves within the international justice system, thereby keeping Israel as a state above the law and ensuring it escapes liability and accountability.That is why, the document goes on,
“We urge these countries, especially the US administration, Germany, Canada and the UK, if they are meant for justice to prevail as they claim, they ought to announce their support to the course of the investigation in all crimes committed in occupied Palestine and to give full support for the international courts to effectively do their job.”
In the fourth section, titled “A reminder to the world, who is Hamas?”, the group describes itself as a “Palestinian Islamic national liberation and resistance movement” who “gets its legitimacy to resist the occupation from the Palestinian right to self-defence, liberation and self-determination.” It further insists that it “does not wage a struggle against the Jews because they are Jewish but wages a struggle against the Zionists who occupy Palestine.” In so doing, the report says,
“We stress that resisting the occupation with all means including the armed resistance, is a legitimised right by all norms, divine religions, the international laws including the Geneva Conventions and its first additional protocol and the related UN resolutions”, mainly UN General Assembly’s Resolution 3236, adopted on 22 November 1974, which affirmed “the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including the right to self-determination and the right to return to ‘their homes and property from where they were expelled, displaced and uprooted.”
The fifth and final section is related to “What is Needed”. The document says that “Occupation is occupation no matter how it describes or names itself, and remains a tool to break the will of the peoples and to keep oppressing them”. It also emphasises the fact that throughout history the experiences of the peoples/nations willing to break away from occupation and colonialism confirm that “resistance is the strategic approach and the only way to liberation and ending the occupation”; a process which requires “struggle, resistance or sacrifice”. Believing that humanitarian, ethical and legal imperatives should normally lead “all countries around the world to back the resistance of the Palestinian people and not collude against it”, Hamas calls for the immediate halt of the Israeli aggression on Gaza, a cessation of the crimes and ethnic cleansing committed against the entire Gaza population, the opening of the border crossings and the entry of the humanitarian aid into Gaza including the reconstruction tools. It also urges to hold the Israeli occupation legally accountable for the human suffering it caused to the Palestinian people, and to charge it for the crimes against civilians, infrastructure, hospitals, educational facilities, mosques and churches. Moreover, it calls upon the free peoples across the world, especially those nations who were colonised and recognise the suffering of the Palestinian people, to take serious and effective positions against the double standard policies adopted by powers/countries that back the Israeli occupation: “We call on these nations to initiate a global solidarity movement with the Palestinian people and to emphasise the values of justice and equality and the right of the peoples to live in freedom and dignity.”
Hamas’s report also addressed the issue of post-war Gaza, a day after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu doubled down on his opposition to Palestinian statehood. It states:
“We stress that the Palestinian people have the capacity to decide their future and to arrange their internal affairs” adding that “no party in the world” had the right to decide on their behalf.
It goes without saying that the October 7 sophisticated military operation must have been orchestrated after months, if not years of planning, training, and military and intelligence gathering. Liberation is the heart of Hamas’s strategic vision for Palestine, and during these last years, its leaders have assessed that “victory is nigh”.
Clear evidence for that line of reasoning was provided by the convening of a conference which passed almost unnoticed despite – or perhaps because of – its very conspicuous title and theme. In effect, a conference titled “Promise of the Hereafter[19] – Post-Liberation Palestine” was held at the Commodore Hotel in Gaza City on 30 September 2021, under the patronage of Hamas leader in Gaza Yahya Al-Sinwar, with other Palestinian factions in attendance. The conference discussed preparations for the future administration of the state of Palestine following its “liberation” from Israel.[20]
According to an English translation provided by The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), the conference’s concluding statement[21] says:
“the Promise of the Hereafter Institute held the first strategic vision conference of its kind: the Promise of the Hereafter Conference, which formulated ideas and methods of operation [to be implemented] during the liberation of Palestine in various areas that were discussed at the conference. This complements the strategies that have been formulated by the Promise of the Hereafter Institute since its establishment in 2014, with the aim of providing a clearer vision for those in charge of liberating Palestine.”
The following are some of the recommendations formulated at the conference:
The liberation of Palestine is the collective duty of the entire [Islamic] nation, first and foremost of the Palestinian people. It is [therefore] crucial to formulate a plan for utilising the nation’s resources and dividing the labour among its different components, each according to its abilities. That is the responsibility of the Council for the Liberation of Palestine.
The Council for the Liberation of Palestine will be headed by a general secretariat, led by a steering council, which, upon the liberation of Palestine, will become an executive council headed by an interim presidential council until the holding of presidential and parliamentary elections and the formation of a new government.
Immediately after the liberation, the liberation forces will issue a Palestinian independence document setting out the Palestinian principles, highlighting the Palestinian national identity and its Arab, Islamic, regional and international depth. The formulation of this document will be overseen by a team of experts in the spheres of politics, law and media, for this will be a historic document on the legal and humanitarian levels, a direct continuation of the Pact of ‘Umar Bin Al-Khattab[22] and of the announcement issued by Salah Al-Din upon his liberation of the Al-Aqsa Mosque [in 1187].[23]
The liberation forces will declare a series of interim laws, to be formulated in advance, including a land and real estate law granting [these forces] control over all state lands and assets, as well as laws [regulating the activity of] the civil service, the interim government, the Palestinian army, the judiciary and security [apparatuses], the return [of the refugees], the [state] comptroller and the municipal authorities.
An announcement will be addressed to the UN declaring that the state of Palestine has succeeded the occupation state and will enjoy the rights of the occupation state, based on the articles of the 1978 Vienna Convention on Succession of States.
The concluding statement ends with the affirmation that
“time has come to act. Preparations for the liberation of Palestine began with the spirit of liberation that emanated from this conference, and from the preparations of the fighters whose souls yearn to liberate the land of Palestine and its holy places. We are headed for the victory that Allah promised his servants: ‘O you who have believed, if you support Allah, He will support you and plant firmly your feet [Quran 47:7]’; “They will say: ‘When is that?’; Say, ‘Perhaps it will be soon.’ [Quran 17:51]”
In his statement before the conference, Yahya Al-Sinwar underlined that “the battle for the liberation and the return to Palestine has become closer now than ever before”. He emphasised the importance of preparing for what was to come, giving as an example the “Sword of Al-Qods” battle of May 2021, and noting that
“the conflict can end only with the implementation of the promise of victory and control that Allah gave us – that our people will live with dignity in its independent state with Jerusalem as its capital. To this end, we are working hard and making many efforts on the ground and in its depths, in the heart of the sea, and in the heights of the heavens… We [can already] see with our eyes the [imminent] liberation and therefore we are preparing for what will come after it.”
It is noteworthy to mention that Al-Sinwar used similar words in a speech he delivered only three months earlier before Palestinian academics in the Gaza Strip.[24] He notably boasted that Hamas had won the last round of fighting with Israel and praised the Palestinians in Jerusalem for resisting Israeli “schemes to Judaise Jerusalem, divide al-Aqsa Mosque and carry out ethnic cleansing.” The last round of fighting with Israel, he added, represented only a “small battle” and the next war will be more significant and “will change the shape of the Middle East.”
For his part, the representative of the Islamic Jihad Khader Habib declared that
“The Resistance is engaged in an existential conflict with the Israeli occupation, and it will emerge victorious, as promised by Allah.” He added: “The only conflict which the Qur’an discusses in detail is the conflict between us and the Zionist enterprise, which is the pinnacle of evil on the global level.” Calling on the Palestinians to be prepared for the ramifications of the divine victory, he noted that “the end of the Zionist entity is mentioned in the Quran, and is certain and credible.”[25]
All these goals and considerations expressed by Palestinian leaders are obviously not lost on the Israeli political leaders, strategists and think tanks in particular.
As Ramzy Baroud rightly suggested in a well-documented article[26], while it is true that Zionism is a modern political ideology that has exploited religion to achieve specific colonial objectives in Palestine, the subject of religious prophecies and their centrality to Israel’s political thought was once more highlighted following remarks by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, in an interview with the Hebrew-language newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth. Barak expressed fears that Israel will “disintegrate” before the 80th anniversary of its 1948 establishment. Throughout the Jewish history, he said,
“the Jews did not rule for more than eighty years, except in the two kingdoms of David and the Hasmonean dynasty and, in both periods, their disintegration began in the eighth decade.”[27]
Like Ehud Barak, Benjamin Netanyahu had expressed similar fears about looming existential threats at a Bible study session in his house in Jerusalem. He was quoted as saying that “Hasmonean state [also known as the Maccabees] lasted only 80 years, and we needed to exceed this.”[28] Although belonging to different political schools, both leaders share the belief that Israel’s survival is at stake and its demise is only a matter of time.
Moreover, this belief is far from confined to the Israeli political elites’ sphere, nor are they a new phenomenon. Indeed, for instance, Benny Morris, one of the leading Israeli “New Historians” – who considers himself as a Zionist[29] – is of the opinion that in a matter of a generation Israel will cease to exist in its current form, albeit for other reasons mainly related to demographics. He stated in an interview that he doesn’t see “how we get out of it. Already,today there are more Arabs than Jews between the (Mediterranean) Sea and the Jordan (River). The whole territory is unavoidably becoming one state with an Arab majority. Israel still calls itself a Jewish state, but a situation in which we rule an occupied people that has no rights cannot persist in the 21st century.”[30]
Avi Shlaim, Ilan Pappe and Ari Shavit are today reiterating what they have been saying, long before the ongoing war on Gaza, about the occupation of Palestinian lands and its adverse consequences on the future of Israel as a “Jewish state”. They all predict the demise of Israel “as we know it”. In effect, more than a decade ago, these left-wing historians and journalist wrote acclaimed books[31] in which they all agree on one thing:
“the current status quo between Israel and the Palestinians is unsustainable. [They] see the writing on the wall. The occupation, the relentless expansion of illegal settlements, the construction of the monstrous ‘security barrier’ on the West Bank, the demolition of Palestinian houses in East Jerusalem, the flagrant violations of international law, the systematic abuse of Palestinian human rights and the rampant racism – all are slowly but surely turning Israel into an international pariah. No sane Israeli relishes the prospect of living in a pariah state that maintains an apartheid regime.”[32]
Also, back in 2016, Ari Shavit wrote:
“It is not the United Nations and the European Union that will stop settlements. The only force in the world capable of saving Israel from itself is the Israelis themselves, by creating a new political language that recognises reality and that the Palestinians are rooted in this land. I urge you to look for the third way to survive here and not die.”[33]
Needless to say, in the reflection about the future of the state of Israel and the existential threats it’s facing, the think tank community is heavily involved. Maj. Gen. (ret.) Gershon Hacohen’s recent analysis stands out in this regard. Adopting a skilful approach, he wrote a very perspicacious article[34] divided into three parts on the right-leaning Bar-Ilan University’s Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies’ website. Hacohen says that the fractures and divisions within Israeli society over the past year were seen as a divine omen that this was the time when the gates of heaven would open to herald the redemption of the leadership of Hamas in Gaza. Referring mainly to the above-mentioned “Promise of the Hereafter Conference”, he reminds that Muslim religious leaders and military strategists predicted years ago that this period would mark the beginning of the end for Israel. He also strongly believes that as it defines the goals of the war,
“it is crucial that the Israeli leadership understand the religious logic guiding Israel’s enemies. On the physical level, Israel must strive to dismantle the regional system that has been constructed with the support and intent of Iran. On the spiritual-faith level, Israeli victory must be decisive in a way that neutralises the belief among the leadership of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran that the day of Israel’s destruction is at hand.”
One more example[35] in this same vein is provided by Seth Frantzman who – unlike many political leaders and analysts who are busy devising about what the “day after” will look like in Gaza – considers that “Gaza may not be where this is leading. In fact, the real ‘prize’ for Doha, Turkey, Iran, and others may be much closer to Jerusalem.”
The War to End All Gaza Wars and the Road Ahead
Based on the above-mentioned paradigm, how can we assess, thus far, the ongoing war aims and outcomes as per the belligerents? In other words, who’s winning this war and who’s losing it from the military, legal, moral and, more importantly, political standpoints? And what’s next therefore?
Like many other strategists and military analysts, Gershon Hacohen points out that Israel has continued to confront the threat of war according to the pattern of conflicts from the last century, from the “War of Independence” in 1948 to the Yom Kippur War in 1973. Thereafter, it has been struggling to grasp the implications of a new conception of warfare adopted by its enemies. This conception, he says, “has thrust Israel into a state of continuous warfare, like a chronic disease without a cure.”
When he initially crafted his country’s national security doctrine in the mid-twentieth century, the first Israeli Prime minister David Ben-Gurion acknowledged the fundamental weakness of the State of Israel in terms of its ability to withstand a prolonged war. Accordingly, he expected the IDF to decisively win wars fast, and developed an offensive striking force with the directive to transfer any conflict to the enemy’s territory as quickly as possible. General Israel Tal – who designed the Merkava tank and reached the position of deputy Chief of staff – explained this perspective in length in his book where he describes the history of the Israel-Arab wars from 1948 onward and presents a security theory specific to Israel from which the fighting doctrines of the Israeli military derive. Tal concludes that previous security theory proved valid because it was based upon a decision to allocate the great portion of available resources, both intellectual and material, to secure national defence. He considered that this theory was no longer valid due to political changes in the Middle East and the development of modern military technologies.
Over the decades, Israel’s security doctrine has been updated to encompass four fundamental pillars, namely deterrence, early warning, strong defensive capabilities, and decisive and quick victories.
Nevertheless, the Israeli need to end wars quickly was clearly understood and effectively integrated into the perception of warfare developed by Hezbollah and Hamas, with the backing of Iran. They formulated a concept of warfare that is aimed at swiftly negating Israel’s decisive capabilities.
As explained by Hacohen, over the last 40 years, Islamic organisations have formulated the idea of an ideological-religious war guided by the concept of “Al-Muqawama”, the Arabic word for “resistance.” This idea “represents a cultural perspective on the phenomenon of war that differs strikingly from that of Western observers. According to the Western cultural perspective, war is a deviation from the stable and peaceful order and is therefore conducted with the intention of restoring that order. The Al-Muqawama concept, by contrast, views warfare as a means of maintaining a constant momentum of conflict and struggle designed to ultimately bring about global Islamic religious conquest.”
It can thus be viewed as the inverse of Clausewitz’s description of war as “the continuation of politics by other means”. Politics therefore is seen as the continuation of war by other means, and negotiation is viewed not as a means to bring about the end of a war but simply as a pause that serves its continuation at a more opportune time under more favourable conditions.
According to the retired general, this concept of resistance has both a physical-military dimension and a cultural-spiritual dimension. The military dimension was described by the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Hossein Salami in 2022:
“The Palestinians are ready for ground combat. This is Israel’s vulnerability. Missiles are excellent for deterrence (…) but they don’t liberate land. Ground forces must be deployed, step by step, to liberate it (…) Hezbollah and Palestinian forces will move on the ground in a unified military structure.”[36]
In truth, the new resistance strategy was essentially the brainchild of Qassem Suleimani, the head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Al-Qods Force, who was assassinated in an American missile strike on 3 January 2020. Suleimani was keen on and fully invested in strengthening the coordination work between the different resistance groups around Israel; a strategy known as “Tightening the noose”, which links religious, political, civic and military ideology.
Also, less than two months prior to October 7, Saleh Al-Arouri, Deputy Head of the Political Bureau of Hamas, said in an exclusive interview with Lebanese Al Mayadeen TV that:
“the Resistance alliance is prepared and motivated by reason, will, and common interests to partake in a regional war, and the active parties are ready and prepared for it”, adding: “The all-out war will be a defeat for Israel, and we see that classical wars have changed, and this is evidenced by the conflict in Ukraine.”[37]
Later on, the very day of the October 7 attack, Al-Arouri[38] declared in an interview with Al Jazeera that the group is engaged in a battle for freedom:
“This is not a [hit-and-run] operation; we started an all-out battle. We expect fighting to continue and the fighting front to expand. We have one prime target: our freedom and the freedom of our holy sites.”[39]
Regarding the spiritual-cultural dimension, Hacohen says that Hamas’s leadership has taught us that its conduct is guided by a deep religious rationale, and
“Western cultural observers, who for centuries have separated religious motives from the political, diplomatic, and military considerations of state leaders, have no tools with which to understand the leadership of Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas, which are driven by religious conviction and carry out their daily work guided by faith.” He added that “It is from this perspective that we can understand the logic employed by Yahya Al-Sinwar in his decision to go to war on October 7. From his point of view, after Hamas fulfilled its duty to take the initiative and act, trends would develop later that would advance the divine intention. If, for example, the war results in a situation in which Israel is forced to submit to American demands for the establishment of a Palestinian state and withdrawal from the West Bank, Al-Sinwar will be perceived as victorious. Despite the massive destruction he has brought down upon Gaza, he will achieve a historical status no less than that of Saladin.”
In Hacohen’s words, “this insightmust be integrated into the foundations of the Israeli security perception because in terms of comprehensive existential considerations, this perception extends beyond the concept of deterrence, which has repeatedly revealed itself to be fragile”. What he was referring to is the failure of the ill-named “mowing the lawn” strategy, consisting for Israel to reestablish deterrence through a limited use of force each time a flare-up occurred in Gaza. As a matter of fact, this strategy allowed Hamas and the other Palestinian resistance groups to carry out a long-term buildup of arms and military infrastructure and to improve their operational capabilities, in particular through the construction of an amazingly extensive and highly sophisticated network of tunnels, even infiltrating Israeli territory.
In essence, Hacohen concludes, the war of 1967 was the last military clash to unfold along the lines of World War II, and since then, the world of warfare has changed completely. As a result, he believes that “to seek a victory along the lines of outdated patterns is like asking for the Red Sea to be split again.”
Image: The UN says nearly 1.9 million people have now been displaced in Gaza. [AbdelHakim Abu Riash/Al Jazeera]
Undoubtedly, the era of intermittent cycles of fighting and cease-fires in Gaza is Over. There will be no going back to the previous state of affairs. For both the Palestinian Resistance and Israel the only order of the day is the vital need to achieve a decisive military outcome. This idea has “sparked extensive debate among experts and senior IDF leaders for many years about how to define ‘decisive outcome’ and ‘victory’ and how to apply them to conflicts with non-state actors and terrorist groups. Israel now understands that although the jihadi ideology of Hamas may persist (as have those of the Islamic State, or ISIS, and Al-Qaeda), the IDF must dismantle the organisation’s military capabilities.”[40]
It’s a truism to say that because of its incomparable conventional military superiority to its adversaries, Israel knows full well that Hamas and the other Palestinian Resistance groups cannot go toe to toe with the IDF. How could a group of armed irregulars numbering in the low tens of thousands, besieged in a tiny territory and with little access to advanced weaponry, reasonably be a match to a nuclear state, ranked 17th most powerful military in the world[41], armed and backed by the world’s number one, that is the U.S.? Yet, as we said earlier when referring to insurgents’ worldview and game plan within the framework of modern asymmetric warfare, Israel in its turn will go down in the history books as another example of a mighty military power losing to a weaker opponent.
As Audrey Kurth Cronin says, “For Israel, perhaps the most galling outcome of this asymmetry is that its armed forces may have played squarely into Hamas’s hands by striking Gaza with tremendous force”[42] in response to the Al-Aqsa Flood military operation on October 7th. This operation, she claims, “was intended to provoke the Israeli military into an overreaction that would undermine international sympathy for Israel, stoke an uprising in the West Bank and Jerusalem, and rally support for Hamas (…) In many ways, the group has succeeded”.
Indeed, driven by a blind desire for vengeance, the IDF have called up over 350,000 reservists and launched ferocious attacks by air, land and sea in a collective punishment of the Palestinian civilians that has so far killed and injured close to 5% of the Gazan population, created a humanitarian catastrophe of Biblical proportions, and is increasingly raising the risk of a wider regional, if not world war.
With its savage military expedition entering its fourth month – making it the longest and deadliest it has ever experienced – Israel has yet to achieve any of its three stated strategic goals, which Netanyahu has just once again reiterated:
“We will not compromise on anything less than total victory (…) That means eliminating Hamas, returning all of our hostages and ensuring that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel.”[43]
Worse still, Netanyahu is facing a deeply divided war cabinet and knows his right-wing governmental coalition is in great danger of being brought down at any time. Further evidence of this was given when Defence Minister Yoav Gallant who promised to “wipe Hamas off the face of the earth” is now replacing the previously equally sacrosanct third objective with a revealing new one, that is “maintaining unity among the people of Israel.”[44]
After only two months of fierce fighting, and despite the cataclysmic violence unleashed on Palestinians, an increasing number of establishment strategic analysts started warning that Israel was failing to achieve its political goals and could lose this war. By shattering a status quo that Palestinians find intolerable, Tony Karon and Daniel Levy say, “Hamas has put politics back on the agenda. Israel has significant military power, but it is politically weak.”[45] They remind that “History also suggests a pattern in which representatives of movements dismissed as ‘terrorist’ by their adversaries – in South Africa, say, or Ireland – nonetheless appear at the negotiating table when the time comes to seek political solutions. It would be ahistorical to bet against Hamas, or at least some version of the political-ideological current it represents, doing the same if and when a political solution between Israel and the Palestinians is revisited with seriousness.” The authors conclude that “What comes after the horrific violence is far from clear, but Hamas’s October 7 attack has forced a reset of a political contest to which Israel appears unwilling to respond beyond devastating military force against Palestinian civilians. And as things stand eight weeks into the vengeance, Israel can’t be said to be winning”.
For former Prime minister Ehud Olmert, the odds of achieving the complete elimination of Hamas were nil from the moment that Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared it the chief goal of the war. Hamas, he wrote in an opinion,[46]
“Is not easily defeated. Of course Netanyahu knew from the get-go that his rhetoric was baseless and would ultimately collapse in the face of a military and humanitarian reality that would force Israel to reach an end point in the current campaign. That time has now arrived. The defeat of Hamas is a long way away. We haven’t even reached the point at which we are in control of the timetable of the war that began on October 7.”
To the question of what is to be done, he believes that “the time has come for Israel to express its readiness to end the fighting. Yes, end the fighting. Not a pause and not a temporary cessation of two, three or four days. An end of hostility – period.” This should be conditioned on the release of all the hostages and in exchange, Israel “will have no choice but to release all the Hamas prisoners it holds.”
Similarly, for Eyal Hulata, who was Israel’s national security adviser from 2021-2023,
“There is no way this will end when Israel can say we are victorious. Israel lost this war [on] the 7th of October. The only question now is if we are able to remove from Hamas the ability to do this again. And we might succeed, and we might not.”[47]
Leading Israeli columnist Nahum Barnea doesn’t think otherwise. In an op-ed he wrote in Yedioth Ahronoth, he called on Israel to adjust its objective of dismantling Hamas in Gaza and affirmed that:
“In the last three weeks, the war has not changed reality. It has cost the lives of soldiers, has increased the risk of a humanitarian disaster that Israel will be responsible for, has hurt Israel in the world and hasn’t brought us any closer to a victory which does not exist.”[48]
Also, former leader of the Shin Bet domestic security force, Ami Ayalon, said Israel will not have security until Palestinians have their own state, and Israeli authorities should release Marwan Barghouti, jailed leader of the second intifada, to direct negotiations to create one. He also shared the view that the nature of Hamas meant that its destruction was an impossible goal for a military. Hamas is not just a militia, he said, but “an ideology with an organisation, and the organisation has a military wing. You cannot destroy ideology by the use of military power. Sometimes it will be rooted deeper if you try. This is exactly what we see today. Today, 75% of Palestinians support Hamas. Before the war, it was less than 50%.”[49]
The same opinion was expressed by war cabinet Gadi Eisenkot, thus contradicting his own Prime minister. He said that “A strategic achievement was not reached … We did not demolish the Hamas organisation”.[50]
Last but not least, former Prime minister Ehud Barak stated in an opinion in Haaretz that Hamas has not been defeated, and the chances of recovering the hostages are declining.”[51] He added that those who believe that Palestinians in Gaza can be encouraged to migrate voluntarily are delving into dreams that have no basis in reality.
The textbook case of genocide that Israel is carrying out against the Palestinian people has inflamed public opinion across the whole world as shown by the millions of pro-Palestinian protesters marching almost daily in rallies on the street of major world cities. These multitudes are united in one overarching demand: ending the Israeli bombardment of Gaza and Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories.Even in the United States, the staunchest supporter of Israel no matter how gravely damaging this blind support has been to the United States’ national and global interests, growing numbers of protesters are taking to the streets of New York City, Washington DC, Los Angeles and Dallas, among others.
More significantly, after losing the war of worldwide public opinion, Israel has suffered another blow when, on 26 January, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rejected its petition to throw out a landmark legal case filed by South Africa concerning “alleged violations by Israel of its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in relation to Palestinians in the Gaza strip”. By an overwhelming majority of 15 votes to two, the ICJ’s panel of 17 judges issued an order[52], which has binding effect, indicating six provisional instructions to Israel to refrain from acts under the Genocide convention, prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to genocide, and take immediate and effective measures to ensure the provision of humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza. Crucially, the Court also ordered Israel to preserve evidence of genocide and to submit a report to the Court, within one month, of all measures taken in line with its order. This ruling, critically enough, raises the possibility that Israel’s backers in Washington, London, Berlin and other European capitals could face the prospect of being implicated in having aided and abetted genocide in some future date.[53]
As a result of all these momentous events, Washington is now openly and regularly calling for the implementation of the two-States solution. In the words of Maria Fantappie and Wali Nasr[54], Washington “Can no longer neglect the Palestinian issue. In fact, it will have to make resolving that conflict the centrepiece of its endeavour. It will simply be impossible for the United States to tackle other questions in the region, including the future of Arab-Israeli ties, until there is credible path to a viable future Palestinian state.”
Better still, Secretary of State Tony Blinken recently asked the State Department to conduct a review and present policy options on possible U.S. and international recognition of a Palestinian state after the war in Gaza[55]. The simple fact that the State Department is even considering such options signals a major policy shift within the Biden administration. This is all the more important news as for decades, U.S. policy has been to oppose the recognition of Palestine as a state both bilaterally and in UN institutions and to stress Palestinian statehood should only be achieved through direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.
And so, thanks to their steadfast resistance and indescribable sacrifices, Palestinians have at last, and against all odds, succeeded in having their just cause front and centre on the global stage. They have thus decidedly paved the way for a long-awaited independence and a dignified life on their stolen ancestral land.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Amir Nour is an Algerian researcher in international relations, author of the books “L’Orient et l’Occident à l’heure d’un nouveau Sykes-Picot” (The Orient and the Occident in Time of a New Sykes-Picot) Editions Alem El Afkar, Algiers, 2014 and “L’Islam et l’ordre du monde” (Islam and the Order of the World),Editions Alem El Afkar, Algiers, 2021.
Notes
[1] Sun Tzu, “The Art of War”, p.57, Shambhala Publications, 2005.
[3]Joshua J. Mark, “Sun-Tzu”, World History Encyclopedia, 9 July 2020.
[4]Carl von Clausewitz, “On War”, translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret, Princeton University Press, 1976. In fact, the book is an unfinished work: Clausewitz had set about revising his accumulated manuscripts in 1827 but did not live to finish the task. His wife Marie von Brühl posthumously published the book in 1832, and subsequently collected his works and published them between 1832 and 1835 (Source: Wikipedia).
[5]Bill Bently, “Clausewitz: War, Strategy and Victory – A Reflection on Brigadier-General Carignan’s Article”, Canadian Military Journal, Volume 17, Number 2, Summer 2017.
[6]Peter Layton, “Using a Clausewitzian Dictum to Rethink Achieving Victory”, The Bridge, 15 May 2018.
[7]Amir Nour, “The Twilight of the Empire Age: Whose World Will It Be?”, The Saker Blog, 29 March 2019.
[8]William R. Polk, “Violent politics: A history of Insurgency, Terrorism, and Guerilla War, From the American Revolution to Iraq”, Harper Perennial, 2008.
[9]University of Stanford, “What is Victory?”, 2006.
[10]Colonel E.A. de Landmeter, “What constitutes victory in modern war?”, Militaire Spectator, 20 March 2018.
[11]William C. Martel, “Victory in War: Foundations of Modern Strategy”, Cambridge University Press, 2011.
[12]Robert Mandel, “Reassessing Victory in Warfare”, in: Armed Forces & Society, Vol 33 Number 4, 2007.
[13]Michael Anderson, “On the Meaning of Victory”, The Association of the United States Army, 26 July 2018.
[14]Gabriella Blum, “The Fog of Victory”, in: The European Journal of International Law, Vol. 24 No. 1, 2013.
[15]B.H. Liddell Hart, “Strategy”, Penguin Group, New York, 1991.
[16]Robert Mandel, op cit.
[17]Peter Layton, “Using a Clausewitzian Dictum to Rethink Achieving Victory”, op cit.
[19]The name of the conference has a religious significance to it, originating from verse 7 of Surat Al-Isra’ (the nightly journey of Prophet Muhammad, PBUH) in the Qur’an, as it talks about the fate of the children of Israel during the end times after they return to Israel.
[21]See the report published by MEMRI, “Hamas-Sponsored ‘Promise of The Hereafter’ Conference for The Phase Following the Liberation of Palestine and Israel’s ‘Disappearance’”, 4 October 2021.
[22]According to Islamic tradition, the Pact of ‘Umar was signed between the Second Caliph ‘Umar Bin Al-Khattab and Sophronius, the Christian patriarch of Jerusalem, upon the Islamic conquest of the city in 638.
[23]A reference to Salah Al-Din’s decision upon his conquest of Jerusalem to allow Christians and Jews to reside in the city under Islamic rule.
[24]Khaled Abu Toameh, “Sinwar: Next war with Israel will change the Middle East”, The Jerusalem Post, 7 June 2021.
[25]Shehabnews.com, 30 September 2021.
[26]Ramzy Baroud, “Palestinians ‘Are Bound to Win’: Why Israelis Are Prophesying the End of Their State”, Common Dreams, 14 June 2022.
[27]Ehud Barak, “האיום האמיתי היחיד על קיומה של ישראל” (The Only Real Threat to Israel’s Existence), Ynet, 7 May 2022.
[28]Jonathan Lis, “Netanyahu: Israel Must Cope with Future Security Threats if It Wants to Reach 100”, Haaretz, 10 October 2017.
[29]He once regretted that Israel’s founder, David Ben Gurion, did not expel all of Palestine’s native population in 1947-48.
[30]Ofer Aderet, “‘Israel Will Decline, and Jews Will Be a Persecuted Minority. Those Who Can Will Flee to America’”, Haaretz, 22 January 2019
[31]Ilan Pappé, “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”, Oneworld Publications, 2007 and “The Idea of Israel: A History of Power and Knowledge”, Verso Books, 2016; Avi Shlaim, “Israel and Palestine: Reappraisals, Revisions, Refutations”, Verso Books, 2010; Ari Shavit, “My Promised Land: The Triumph and Tragedy of Israel”, Random House, 2013.
[32]Read: Avi Shlaim, “The Idea of Israel and My Promised Land – review”, The Guardian, 14 May 2014.
[33]Ari Shavit, “Haaretz’s Writers and Readers Are Obligated to Fight for Israel, Not to Spread Hatred and Leave”, Haaretz, 8 September 2016.
[34]Maj. Gen. (ret.) Gershon Hacohen, “A New Existential War”, 2,3 and 9 January 2024.
[35]Seth J. Frantzman, “Israel’s enemies may see the war in Gaza as a road to Jerusalem”, The Jerusalem Post, 6 November 2023.
[36]MEMRI, “IRGC Commander Salami In Interview For Supreme Leader Khamenei’s Website: ‘The Palestinians Are Ready Today For Ground Warfare”, 31 August 2022.
[37]Al Mayadeen English, “Exclusive – Al Arouri: Resistance Axis preparing for all-out war”, 25 August 2023. To watch the interview in Arabic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aoONr4zpdQ
[38]He was assassinated by an Israeli drone strike in Beirut’s southern suburbs of Dahiyeh, a Hezbollah stronghold, on 2 January 2024.
[39]Al Jazeera, “Hamas says it has enough Israeli captives to free all Palestinian prisoners”,7 October 2023.
[40]Amos Yadlin and Udi Evental, “Why Israel Slept: The War in Gaza and the Search for Security”, Foreign Affairs magazine, January/February 2024.
[41]Global Firepower, “2024 Military Strength Ranking”,
[43]Patrick Wintour, “Netanyahu rules out ceasefire deal that would mean Gaza withdrawal”, The Guardian, 30 Jan 2024.
[44]Akiva Van Koningsveld “Gallant: IDF to retain security control in Gaza after Hamas defeated”, The Jewish Chronicle, 30 January 2024.
[45]Tony Karon and Daniel Levy, “Israel is Losing This War”, 8 December 2023.
[46]Ehud Olmert, “Israel Must Cease Hostilities and Bring the Hostages Home”, Haaretz, 28 December 2023.
[47]Daniel Estrin, “Israelis are increasingly questioning what war in Gaza can achieve”, NPR, 11 January 2024.
[48]Nahum Barnea, “ איך יוצאים מהבור שאליו נפלנו” (How to get out of the hole into which we fell), Ynet, 9 January 2024.
[49]Emma Graham-Harrison and Quique, “Ex-Shin Bet head says Israel should negotiate with jailed intifada leader”, The Guardian, 14 January 2024.
[50]Nadeen Ebrahim and Vasco Cotovio, “Israeli government divisions deepen as cabinet minister says defeating Hamas is unrealistic”, CNN, 20 January 2024.
[51]Ehud Barak, “Israel Needs an Early Election-Before It’s Too Late”, Haaretz, 18 January 2024.
[53]Simon Speakman Cordall, “‘Israel’s supporters have been put on notice’, say experts on ICJ verdict”, Al Jazeera, 27 January 2024.
[54]Maria Fantappie and Wali Nasr, “The War That Remade the Middle East: How Washington Can Stabilise a Transformed Region”, Foreign Affairs, January/February 2024.
[55]Barak Ravid, “Scoop: State Department reviewing options for possible recognition of Palestinian state”, 31 January 2024.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The second anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is approaching and the Biden administration increasingly fears that its policy is failing. Although in public President Joe Biden remains confident about Ukraine’s future, the Pentagon reportedly is pushing new military plans for Kiev to go on the defensive. “Unnamed officials” in his administration increasingly talk of the need for a negotiated settlement. They justify further American aid as a way to increase Kiev’s negotiating leverage, not to defeat Moscow’s forces. Ukraine’s glory days last year in turning back Russian armored columns are long gone.
Money is also increasingly scarce. Political elites in the U.S. and Europe continue to support the Zelensky government, but popular opposition is rising, so they are looking for other sources of revenue—including hundreds of billions of dollars in frozen Russian assets.
It seems so simple. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. and European nations imposed economic sanctions on Moscow—the government and its people. The allies froze sundry assets of targeted individuals, mostly wealthy “oligarchs” viewed as regime supporters, and, in an unprecedented move, some $300 billion in financial reserves of the central government. Why not give it to Kiev? First the idea was to support Ukraine’s reconstruction after Russia was defeated and humiliated. Now the proposal is to aid the former’s faltering war effort.
Support for widespread confiscation is growing on both sides of the Atlantic. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky pushed the idea at the recent Davos gathering. Per Fortune, he called
for a “strong” decision this year for the frozen assets in Western banks to “be directed towards defense against the Russian war and for reconstruction” of Ukraine. “Putin loves money above all,” he said. “The more billions he and his oligarchs, friends and accomplices lose, the more likely he will regret starting this war.”
Belgium holds the largest amount of frozen Russian assets and suggested that the funds could “be used to buy military equipment, humanitarian aid and help with the rebuilding of the war-torn country.” Perhaps the most enthusiastic European proponent is the United Kingdom.
Some Western officials don’t want to stop with aid to Kiev. The Washington heavyweight Robert Zoellick suggested “setting aside some of the Russian reserves to assist developing countries that have been demonstrably hurt by higher food and energy prices. In addition, some amount could be allocated for claims by companies that suffered Russian retaliation.” Why not also use the money to solve the international debt crisis, reimburse governments for the cost of Covid, create universal global health care, and send a manned mission to Mars?
The Biden administration long was skeptical of grabbing Russian property, but has been moving to support the initiative with legislation. The New York Timesreported that the administration is “pressing Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan to come up with a strategy by Feb. 24, the second anniversary of the invasion.” At the Davos meeting, Penny Pritzker, a former commerce secretary who currently serves as Special Representative for Ukraine’s Economic Recovery, said that the U.S. and the G7 are working out the instruments for the seizures. Again in Fortune: “‘Get all the lawyers and all the various governments and all the parties really to come together to sort that through,’ she said. ‘It’s hard, it’s complicated, it’s difficult, and we need to work.’” As Ukraine’s battlefield prospects flag, support for grabbing whatever Russian wealth is at hand is likely to grow.
Nevertheless, doing so is a bad idea, despite the superficial appeal.
Western leaders talk often about the “rules-based international order;” of course, they write the rules but ignore them whenever inconvenient. Grabbing the assets of foreign nations and nationals without convincing justification would further expose their hypocrisy. European critics point out that “The U.S. and its allies aren’t at war with Russia, and Russia didn’t amass its wealth through illicit means but largely by selling oil and gas, much of which went to the West.”
Of course, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin wrongly loosed the dogs of war on Ukraine. For that his government bears responsibility. Nevertheless, if national governments were empowered to unilaterally grab assets, both state and private property when governments had engaged in illegal and immoral wars, then Americans would have been stripped bare after Iraq. Washington long has benefited from a global double standard because of America’s military power and political influence.
With the international power balance changing, the U.S. might not be immune in the future. Even the Europeans have tired of what they see as obstructionism involving their priorities, such as climate change, technology regulation, and more. If other governments remain chary about challenging the US government, they might become more willing to seize the property of Americans, both of individuals and companies. Future US officials might rue a precedent that governments can seize whatever they want from whoever they want without recompense.
The allied case for grabbing Russian assets is poor. The American and European governments present themselves as innocent bystanders in l’affaire Ukraine. However, they misled both Moscow and Kiev, violating multiple assurances of not expanding NATO while promising to induct Ukraine but failing to act on their commitment. Russia was angered and Ukraine was emboldened; both were betrayed. Invader and invaded alike have a claim to compensation from Washington and Brussels.
Although the emphasis has been on taking government property, some policymakers also would seize private assets. Indeed, last year the Justice Department confiscated $5.4 million from Russian businessman Konstantin Malofeyev and transferred the money to a State Department fund to rebuild Ukraine. No doubt, many such “oligarchs” are morally dubious characters, having manipulated the system and misused influence to gain their wealth. That is an issue for the Russian people, not Western governments. Nor are allied societies free of unjust state-created privileges, called “rent-seeking” by economists. Grabbing people’s assets because of their personal reputations makes a mockery of the rule of law and property rights.
More broadly, allowing politicians to seize sundry property and funds from politically unpopular owners would place all property and funds at risk. As Sergey Aleksashenko, a Russian dissident and former central bank official, observed:
“I do not believe that there is any way to confiscate assets of the Russian Central Bank without a court deciding on the matter. Because if there is no legal basis to confiscate Russian assets, and if it is done by the decision of the administration, that means that there is no rule of law in the U.S. and there is no protection of private property.”
Advocates for stealing Russian cash have floated various theories, such as treating property seizure as being a unique countermeasure to aggression. Nevertheless, “as a justification for confiscating Russian state assets, the reprisals argument has three problems: It lacks compellent effect, it is being invoked by the wrong parties, and it undermines the rules-based order western governments claim to defend.” The author Simon Hinrichsen argued that the circumstances are unique. Once the West sets such an exception, however, there is no logical limit. One could imagine taking someone else’s money as compensation for human rights violations, unfair trade practices, or climate mismanagement, all of which could be termed “unique.”
Dispensing with basic legal principles for a few billion dollars in booty brings to mind the famous Sir Thomas More quote in A Man for All Seasons:
Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!
Washington’s use of financial weapons already has caused many foreign governments, including in Europe, to look for means to insulate their economies from U.S. sanctions. Admittedly, alternatives are limited, and governments retain dollar-denominated investments. Yet the allied seizure of Russian assets would likely concentrate minds in governments at odds with Washington and Brussels and speed their searches for other financial storehouses. No country could feel safe in such circumstances.
Taking Moscow’s money also would be arbitrary. After all, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths in Yemen. Why not take the royals’ cash, effectively stolen from their populations? Israel has been hauled before the International Court of Justice for its promiscuous killing of civilians in Gaza amid much rhetoric promoting ethnic or religious cleansing. Shouldn’t overseas Israeli assets be seized? Then there is China. Consider its manifold human rights abuses and its military threats against Taiwan. Don’t they count? Why tag only Russian wealth for seizure?
In practice, Moscow undoubtedly would retaliate by seizing American and European assets. At the end of 2022, Western investments in Russia were valued at $288 billion. Moscow would probably confiscate them. The greatest burden would fall on private enterprises that could offer little defense. Although Russia would be worse off by the exit of Western firms, for many Russians cheap foreign assets would be a substantial windfall. Indeed, the Putin government might view the expulsion of foreign firms as a benefit, reducing subversive foreign influences and rewarding government loyalists.
As for Washington, its high-profile attempt to steal other nations’ assets would reinforce the impact of sanctions, which is spurring other nations to reduce their reliance on U.S. financial instruments and institutions. A $300 billion money grab almost certainly would accelerate this process.
Perhaps the most harmful impact of seizing Russian assets would be making it harder to end the war. So long as Moscow’s money is frozen, it could be restored as part of a peace settlement. Western governments could use the prospect to encourage negotiations between angry, distrustful antagonists. Indeed, with Russia increasingly believing that it has a military advantage, returning frozen assets, especially of the Russian state, and reopening markets to Russian firms might be necessary inducements for a peace agreement.
Confiscating financial reserves while retreating on the battlefield would encourage Russia to press forward to retrieve its losses and more. Despite outrage at Moscow’s unjustified (though not unprovoked) invasion, the issue of war and peace should be treated as one of prudence rather than morality. Ukraine is itself the battlefield and has paid most heavily for the conflict. It is essential to end the war, and to do so as soon as possible. Slowing that process to grab Russian monies would be counterproductive in the extreme.
The Putin government invited the Biden administration to negotiate before its February 2022 invasion. Washington refused, apparently assuming that Moscow’s threats were not serious. Now the allies, frustrated at the failure of their plans, are moving toward lawlessly seizing Russian property and reserves. Doing so would be ruble wise but dollar foolish. The so-called “rules-based order” means something only if its advocates obey the same standards they propound for everyone else.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is author of Foreign Follies: America’s New Global Empire.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
To be an American today is to collect a basket full of sadness.We have been at war forever for the profits of the military/security complex, for the hegemonic ideology of the neoconservatives, for Cold War hysteria, and for Israel.Huge sums of money have been wasted for no benefit to the American people.Just yesterday I was listening to a deputy sheriff tell me how frustrating it was that he cannot reach the criminal American elite and bring them home to their crimes, but has, instead, to focus on the minor crimes of their lower class victims.
I asked him why it is the lower class that most waves the flag, and he said that patriotism is all that they have that gives them meaning.I responded that this means that they cannot escape their victimhood, and he said “that is what is sad about it.”
Parents have not come home from Washington’s wars to their spouses, children, family, and friends.They died for the military/security complex’s profits, for Israel, or for some dumbshit ideology.They did not die for America, but for their deaths to have meaning, their families have to insist that they did.With the American people trapped in this way, Washington can pile up the deaths, thanking the dead not for defending the military/security complex’s profits, but for “defending America.” In this way Washington can continue its endless wars. Dying for America is a way the lower class can find meaning in their lives.
Now that Russia has shown that there is to be no American victory in Ukraine, Washington has renewed its war adventures in the Middle East, aligning solidly with Israel’s massacre of the Palestinians and against the Arab and Muslim countries that oppose what is an Israeli genocide of the Palestinians. Palestinian women, children, hospitals, schools, social infrastructure are being blown to tiny pieces with the American bombs and missiles that Biden is handing to Israel’s Nazi leader, Netanyahu, who is under indictment both in Israel and now in effect by the International Court of Justice.But this means nothing to Washington, which sees itself as the exceptional, indispensable country unaccountable to any law, domestic or international.
The alleged “moral democracies,” the US, UK, EU, Japan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Iceland, thumbed their noses at the International Court of Justice’s verdict against Israel by suspending their funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the major source of aid to the Palestinians in Gaza.
What does this tell us about the morality of the Western World?It tells us that it is worse than in Sodom and Gomorrah.
How can we be Proud Americans when the suspension of funding by Washington will impact life-saving assistance for over two million civilians, over half of whom are children, who rely on UNRWA aid in Gaza? The population faces starvation and an outbreak of disease under Israel’s bombardment and blockade of aid.
This is the way that Zionist Israel, together with its Biden Regime Democrat ally, intends to accomplish its genocidal elimination of the Palestinian people.
Israel has blockaded all water, food, electricity, and medical supplies to Gaza for the last 120 days. As a result, a half million Palestinians face starvation.
The massive and ongoing bombing of Gaza, courtesy of the continuous shipment of US munitions to Israel, has killed and wounded at least 90,000 Palestinians, 70% of them women and children. More than 1000 children have had to undergo amputations without anesthesia. There is no medicine, no blood for transfusions, no clean water to wash wounds. And no food. Only more bombs falling from the sky each day, thanks to America.
Chris Hedges reports that the West’s alleged humanitarian and medical institutions refuse to denounce Israel’s decimation of human life in Gaza.We are faced with the stark fact that even Western medical and humanitarian institutions are in the pocket of Israeli Zionists.Morality cannot be found on the scene.
How is it that a tiny county, the existence of which depends entirely on American support, can force the world to accept genocide at the risk of the war widening into Nuclear Armageddon?
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Paul Craig Roberts is a renowned author and academic, chairman of The Institute for Political Economy where this article was originally published. Dr. Roberts was previously associate editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal. He was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy during the Reagan Administration. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Israel’s voters reward Netanyahu’s government coalition with more votes.
Israelis want genocide – and their government not only delivers but promises more of it.
The West Wants Genocide
The US and Western governments not only support Israel’s genocide – they actively participate in it.
This is confirmed by scores of their own Western officials who don’t want to be guilty as part of their politicians’ crime against humanity:
“What’s really different here is we’re not failing to prevent something, we’re actively complicit. That is fundamentally different from any other situation I can recall,” added the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity:
More than 800 serving officials in the US and Europe have signed a statement warning that their own governments’ policies on the Israel-Gaza war could amount to “grave violations of international law”.
It says Israel has shown “no boundaries” in its military operations in Gaza, “which has resulted in tens of thousands of preventable civilian deaths; and… the deliberate blocking of aid… putting thousands of civilians at risk of starvation and slow death.”
“There is a plausible risk that our governments’ policies are contributing to grave violations of international law, war crimes and even ethnic cleansing or genocide,” it said. (Tom Bateman, BBC, February 2, 2024)
Israel’s coalition of Netanyahu and extremist elements are in safe hands – the Israeli people and US and Western governments actively support their genocide.
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Britain is set to rest fire a nuclear missile in just a few days in a major show of force towards Iran and Russia.
This will be the first time since 2016 that the UK will test fire a missile and it comes amid warnings that the world could be edging closer to World War III.
The HMS Vanguard submarine sailed into the Atlantic earlier this week and according to the Sun, it is expected to fire the missile off the coast of the US, near Florida.
It is expected to launch a single unarmed missile that will fly 3,500 miles and land in the Atlantic Ocean, off the coast of West Africa.
The US National Geospatial Intelligence Agency issued a warning to shipping to expect an impact in the area of the mid-Atlantic.
The warning also urges those closer to the launch site to be aware as debris is expected to fall as parts of the missile are burnt out and discarded.
The warning is in place from January 30 through February 4.
The tests are the final hurdle the £4billion sub has to overcome before re-entering service as part of the UK’s nuclear deterrent fleet.
The 30-year-old sub had spent the past seven years undergoing a refit in Plymouth and has been dubbed as a “colossus” by the Royal Navy.
The sub’s refit reportedly cost £500million and took three years longer than expected.
The 491ft beast can carry up to 16 Trident 2 D5 missiles, each armed with warheads 20 times more powerful than the weapons dropped on Japan in World War Two.
The last test which took place eight years ago with the HMS Vengeance, ended in failure.
The missile was due to 5,500 miles from near the coast of Florida to a target south east of Ascension Island.
It veered dangerously off course and self-destructed automatically.
That had been only the fifth time a Trident 2 missile had been fired this century, with the previous tests taking place in 2000, 2005, 2009 and 2012.
Trident missiles are designed to blast to the edge of space before re-entering the atmosphere and plummeting towards earth.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Gaza is experiencing mass starvation like no other in recent history. Before the outbreak of fighting in October, food security in Gaza was precarious, but very few children – less than 1% – suffered severe acute malnutrition, the most dangerous kind. Today, almost all Gazans, of any age, anywhere in the territory, are at risk.
There is no instance since the second world war in which an entire population has been reduced to extreme hunger and destitution with such speed. And there’s no case in which the international obligation to stop it has been so clear.
These facts underpinned South Africa’s recent case against Israel at the international court of justice. The international genocide convention, article 2c, prohibits “deliberately inflicting [on a group] conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”.
In ordering provisional measures to prevent potential genocide last Friday, the ICJ didn’t rule on whether Israel is actually committing genocide – that will take years of deliberation – but the judges made it clear that the people of Gaza face “conditions of life” in which their survival is in question. Even Justice Aharon Barak, appointed by Israel to sit on the panel, voted in favour of immediate humanitarian relief.
But a humanitarian disaster such as Gaza’s today is like a speeding freight train. Even if the driver puts on the brakes, its momentum will take it many miles before it stops. Palestinian children in Gaza will die, in the thousands, even if the barriers to aid are lifted today.
Starvation is a process. Famine can be its ultimate outcome, unless stopped in time. The methodology used to categorize food emergencies is called the integrated food security phase classification system, or IPC. It’s a five-point scale, running from normal (phase 1), stressed, crisis, and emergency, to catastrophe/famine (phase 5).
In categorizing food emergencies, the IPC draws on three measurements: families’ access to food; child malnutrition; and the numbers of people dying over and above normal rates. “Emergency” (phase 4) already sees children dying. For a famine declaration, all three measures need to pass a certain threshold; if only one is in that zone, it’s “catastrophe”.
The IPC’s famine review committee is an independent group of experts who assess evidence for the most extreme food crises, akin to a high court of the world humanitarian system. The committee has already assessed that the entirety of Gaza is under conditions of “emergency”. Many areas in the territory are already in “catastrophe”, it said, and might reach “famine” by early February.
Yet whether or not conditions are bad enough for an official declaration of “famine” is less important than the situation today, which is already killing children. Bear in mind that malnutrition makes humans’ immune systems more vulnerable to diseases sparked by lack of clean water and sanitation, and that those diseases are accelerated by overcrowding in unhealthy camps.
Since the IPC was adopted 20 years ago, there have been major food emergencies in Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia’s Tigray region, north-east Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan and Yemen. Compared to Gaza, these have unfolded slowly, over periods of a year or more. They have stricken larger populations spread over wider areas. Hundreds of thousands died, most of them in emergencies that didn’t cross the bar of famine.
And in the most notorious famines of the late 20th century – in China, Cambodia, Nigeria’s Biafra and Ethiopia – the numbers who died were far higher, but the starvation was also slower and more dispersed.
Never before Gaza have today’s humanitarian professionals seen such a high proportion of the population descend so rapidly towards catastrophe.
All modern famines are directly or indirectly man-made – sometimes by indifference to suffering or dysfunction, other times by war crimes, and in a few cases by genocide.
The Rome statute of the international criminal court, article 8(2)(b)(xxv), defines the war crime of starvation as “intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva conventions”.
The main element of the crime is destruction and deprivation, not just of food but of anything needed to sustain life, such as medicine, clean water and shelter. Legally speaking, starvation can constitute genocide or war crimes even if it doesn’t include outright famine. People don’t have to die of hunger; the act of deprivation is enough.
Many wars are starvation crime scenes. In Sudan and South Sudan, it’s widespread looting by marauding militia. In Ethiopia’s Tigray, farms, factories, schools and hospitals were vandalized and burned, far in excess of any military logic. In Yemen, most of the country was put under starvation blockade. In Syria, the regime besieged cities, demanding they “surrender or starve”.
The level of destruction of hospitals, water systems and housing in Gaza, as well as restrictions of trade, employment and aid, surpasses any of these cases.
It may be true, as Israel claims, that Hamas is using hospitals and residential neighbourhoods for its own war effort. But that doesn’t exonerate Israel. Much of Israel’s destruction of Gazan infrastructure appears to be away from zones of active combat and in excess of what is proportionate to military necessity.
The most extreme historical cases – such as Stalin’s Holodomor in Ukraine in the 1930s and the Nazi “hunger plan” on the eastern front during the second world war – were genocidal famines at immense scale. Gaza doesn’t approach these, but Israel will need to act decisively if it is to escape the charge of having used hunger to exterminate the Palestinians. Starvation is a massacre in slow motion. And unlike shooting or bombing, the dying continues for weeks even if killing is halted.
This is the challenge facing the UN security council when it will soon debate the ICJ’s provisional orders to Israel. Just allowing in aid and putting some restraints on Israel’s military action are not going to stop this thundering train of catastrophe quickly enough.
More than a month ago, the famine review committee wrote: “The cessation of hostilities and the restoration of humanitarian space to deliver this multi-sectoral assistance and restore services are essential first steps in eliminating any risk of famine.” In other words, an immediate end to fighting is essential to prevent a calamitous toll that may far exceed the numbers killed by violence.
That’s the operative line. For the survival of the people of Gaza today, it doesn’t matter whether Israel intends genocide or not. Unless Israel follows the famine relief committee recommendations, it will knowingly cause mass death by hunger and disease. That’s a starvation crime.
And if the US and UK fail to use every possible lever to stop the catastrophe, they will be complicit.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Alex de Waal is the executive director of the World Peace Foundation at Tufts University and the author of Mass Starvation: The History and Future of Famine.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dec. 2023 (Darren Cheng Han Teo et al) – The first reported case of new-onset mania and psychosis post heterologous bivalent mRNA COVID-19 booster vaccination (4th dose).
there are case reports describing associated neuropsychiatric manifestations following COVID-19 vaccination, but none reported post heterologous bivalent boosting yet
47 year old man with no history of psychiatric illness presented with 4 day history of manic and psychotic symptoms after 1st Moderna bivalent COVID-19 vaccine a week prior to admission.
Before this, he received 3 doses of Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine without significant side effects.
3 days after Moderna mRNA bivalent, he reported developing an elevated mood, increased irritability, psychomotor agitation, increased energy, decreased need for sleep, increased distractibility, grandiosity and paranoid delusions relating to work and family.
his ability to function at work was affected.
he had no family history of psychiatric disorders.
no history of substance or significant alcohol use, and he had been functioning well in his profession in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) discipline.
A contrast-enhanced MRI brain was unremarkable
His presentation was suggestive of an Other Specified Bipolar And Related Disorder With Manic And Mood-congruent Psychotic Features (DSM-V). Differential diagnosis (DSM-V) included Bipolar I Disorder and a Brief Psychotic Disorder
He was started on oral Olanzapine, titrated up to 7.5 mg once daily in view of his manic and psychotic symptoms. He was discharged after 8 days of inpatient treatment, where he demonstrated full resolution of his manic and psychotic symptoms. Subsequently, he opted to stop the oral Olanzapine approximately 12 days after his discharge. He remained well one-month post discharge with a full reported recovery of his functioning when he was reviewed in the outpatient setting with no recurrence of the manic and psychotic symptoms.
Psychosis and Mania with COVID-19 Vaccines
Let’s look at some other published cases.
3rd mRNA dose
2022 Sep (Kita et al): 37 yo Japanese man had psychosis & suicide attempt after Moderna mRNA booster jab
37 year old Japanese man with no psychiatric history had Moderna booster
He presented 4 days after Moderna jab with talkativeness and grandiose delusions, saying that he had won 2 billion yen in horse racing. Had emotional instability (crying), sleeplessness, excitement, hyperactivity and sexual deviance.
He was discharged. Nine days after Moderna booster he jumped from the 2nd floor of his house, and was brought back to hospital by ambulance.
He exhibited flight of ideas, hyperactivity, distraction, hyperthymia and religious delusions, such as saying “my child is God”. He displayed lack of insight and became enraged when his actions were restricted.
Diagnosis: acute mania with psychotic features, stayed 66 days in the hospital.
15 yo Taiwanese boy presented to ER with agitation, involuntary limb stretching and screaming 2 days after 2nd dose of Pfizer
After admission, he had bizarre behaviors, including sitting up and lying down frequently and taking up the mannerism of praying in bed.
had auditory hallucinations and delusions, persisted > 1 month after discharge
He was healthy without any specific medical history before the vaccination
2022 Nov (Alphonso et al) – 45 yo Asian-American married woman, had psychosis after 2nd Moderna mRNA
45 yo woman with no psychiatric history, presented to psychiatry after having psychosis for 3 months.
Her new-onset paranoia and auditory hallucinations began 1 month after receiving her second Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. She abruptly quit her job of 18 years and stopped eating—losing 56 lb in 4 months.
The patient would only get dressed in the dark, believing people could see her in her closet or bathroom behind a closed door. She would pace all day and stopped doing the household chores she had done for years.
She would wake her husband in the middle of the night trying to convince him that the neighbors were going to hurt her and were breaking into their home.
Due to this irrational fear, she would sleep only 2 to 3 hours per night and no longer slept in the bedroom, preferring to lock herself in the bathroom to sleep.
She heard whispers of people talking about her and would carry on full conversations with them. She would only do this in a room alone with the door closed.
2022 Sep (Guina et al) – 40 yo caucasian man had Bipolar I Disorder Exacerbation Following 2nd Moderna mRNA
40 year old white man had 2nd Moderna dose and his symptoms began immediately after
He reported depressed mood, suicidal ideation, and auditory hallucinations encouraging him to kill himself
he lost his job after a verbal altercation with his boss, prompting him to seek hospitalization
on admission he was hyperactive, impulsive, irritable, flight of ideas, pressured and hyperverbal speech, poor memory
His only previous hospitalization was five years prior to vaccination for mania and impulsivity
2022 Sep (Guina et al) – 60 yo African American woman post 2nd Pfizer mRNA dose had Bipolar Disorder exacerbation (psychosis)
A 60-year-old African American female patient with previously stable BD1 presented after three weeks of depressed mood, anxiety, and decreased need for sleep
She was observed to have increased energy, impulsivity, labile affect, verbose speech with repetitive phrases, tangential thinking and flight of ideas, paranoia, and ideas of reference, consistent with a mixed episode with psychotic features
She reported that her symptoms began within a week of receiving the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. She denied suicidal and homicidal ideations. Her symptoms were distressing and led her to call off work repeatedly, despite satisfaction with her job.
2022 May (Deng et al) – 45 yo man had psychosis & suicide attempt after 2 Pfizer doses
45 year old man had 2 Pfizer mRNA doses in May 2021.
In June 2021 he presented to ER with depression, paranoia, intermittent agitationand had preliminary diagnoses of bipolar disorder and delirium
reported to the psychiatrist that he was hearing voices and felt depressed, also had episodes of uncontrollable crying
he was discharged after 2 weeks
2 months after his 2 Pfizer doses he attempted to commit suicide by drowning himself in a toilet. He was feeling depressed and suicidal
also experienced auditory hallucinations, paranoia and persecutory delusions.
His speech was noticed to be repetitive, meaningless, and unintelligible. He was frequently hitting his head with his fists. Soft mitts were placed on his hands.
during admission to adult psychiatric unit, he was kicking both of his legs up in the air and banging his head and upper body onto the stretcher in a rhythmic fashion. His speech was largely unintelligible except stating, “God bless you” repeatedly, as well as repeating phrases that were said by staff. Upon being released from the restraints, Mr. A continued to be restless, screaming, hitting himself on the face, slamming his upper body, and kicking. He required a physical hold to apply 4-point restraints to prevent self-harm.
5 days later, had headaches, paranoid delusions and severe anxiety
in ER he had a depressed, irritable mood and olfactory hallucinations
he was discharged with ongoing psychotic symptoms and had to be re-admitted with changes to his anti-psychotic medications
2022 Feb (Aljeshi et al) – 20 year old woman in Saudi Arabia had psychosis after 2nd COVID-19 mRNA vaccine
20 year old College student had 2nd mRNA vaccine (Saudi Arabia gives Pfizer & Moderna mRNA vaccines).
she presented to ER with 4 weeks of anxiety, sleep disturbance, restlessness, reduced appetite that started 4 days after her 2nd mRNA jab.
in ER, she complained of “hearing terrifying voices and seeing random people stare at her”
in hospital she became agitated, aggressive, disoriented and complained of auditory and visual hallucinations. She had disjointed speech and grossly disorganized and disruptive behavior and was disoriented
she was diagnosed with acute psychosis and stayed in hospital 28 days
2022 (Renemane et al) – 45 yo Latvian man had psychosis & suicide attempt after 2nd mRNA
45 yo Latvian man had 2nd dose of mRNA vaccine
immediately developed insomnia, anxiety, tremors
2 weeks after jab “discovered white powder under the carpet in his apartment”
1 month after jab he was “receiving commands” including to commit suicide
he attached a rope, tried to hang himself but his father stopped him.
2021 Oct (Reinfeld et al.) – 31 yo man had psychosis after 2nd Moderna mRNA
A 31-year-old, single Hispanic man had two doses Moderna
symptoms began 1 month ago, after receiving 1st dose of mRNA vaccine, and markedly worsened 3 weeks after receiving 2nd dose.
brought to ER by police
was anxious, guarded, superficial and grandiose.
He reported becoming ‘clairvoyant’, being able to talk with dead people, hearing ‘people drumming outside his house’ and the constant voice of a co-worker he believed was his lover
57 year old man presented to ER with irritability, sleeplessness, talking to himself and suicidal attempt with thoughts of extinction 3 days after receiving 2nd dose of Pfizer.
had increased speech output, speed and psychomotor activity
had no history of psychiatric illness
*
1st mRNA dose
2023 Feb (Neves et al) – 38 yo Brazilian woman had refractory psychosis after 1st Pfizer mRNA
had 1st Pfizer dose, presented to ER within 24hr
She became delusional, aggressive, disheveled with poor hygiene, unfriendly face, lacking self-orientation and uncooperative with doctors & staff.
She believed staff were persecuting her, that several city mayors were her parents.Her mood was dysphoric and enraged.
She was put on psychiatric medications but didn’t improve.
After 6 months of hospitalization, she remained hostile, persecutory and refusing to talk to staff and her psychosis was defined as refractory.She never recovered.
42 yo man with no psychiatric history was admitted to psychiatric ER 5 days after 1st dose of Pfizer with complaints of irritability and sleeplessness.
The patient had delusions that his family was being followed by the deep state and that they were in danger.
Physical exam: anxious, dysphoric mood, persecutory and reference delusions
within 24hr he developed acute confusion, memory disturbances and auditory hallucinations
My Take…
There are now case reports of psychosis and mania after 4th, 3rd, 2nd and 1st doses of Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 Vaccines. Some of these cases result in suicide attempts.
This most recent case shows that the newer COVID-19 mRNA boosters, bivalent flavor, can also cause psychosis and mania, as did the original boosters and the original mRNA jabs.
I note several observations:
The published cases only involve psychosis or mania that occurred within days or at most 2-3 weeks after the last mRNA dose. My guess is that the longer the time period after mRNA vaccination, the less likely a doctor is to link the psychosis to the jabs.
Most cases are being published outside of the US, as foreign doctors are less likely to be threatened by their medical boards, and are less likely to be stripped of their licenses for reporting these cases and getting them published.
Not all cases resolve with psychiatric drugs. Some result in permanent disability.
Teenagers can develop psychosis after mRNA jabs as well – mandating kids, whether to be able to play sports or go to University/College was medical malpractice – the risks clearly outweighed any possible benefit.
NO ONE is studying the long term effect of mRNA jabs on mental health.
Pfizer & Moderna COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines cause an increased risk of suicidal ideation, leading to suicide attempts. This is not controversial or a conspiracy theory. That risk alone should get these mRNA jabs pulled off the market.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
Reviews
This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon
In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia
In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig
Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac
A reading of Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late. You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The result of the presidential elections to be held this year in the US and Russia could mean the return to the Doctrine of Peaceful Coexistence between the US and Russia and the consequent end to the Cold War 2.0.
The Cold War 2.0
Joe Biden’s harsh statements about Russia (“Putin is a war criminal”) and the implementation of sanctions to achieve the economic suffocation and financial starvation of Russia following the Ukrainian crisis have staged the arrival of the Cold War 2.0 and the return of the geopolitical thesis of George Kennan who affirmed that “to say that the overthrow of regimes hostile to the US is the main objective of the US intelligence services, is an open secret”, which would come symbolized in the gazapo of Biden when stating affirm that “Putin does not deserve to be in power”.
Putin was aware of the new dynamic action-reaction in which Russian-American relations would be involved from this moment on and which resulted in the intensification of the US Kentian strategy to stifle the Russian economy. Such a strategy would draw from the sources of the theory expounded by Sherman Kent in his book “Strategic Intelligence for American World Politics” and published in 1949 where he anticipated that “War is not always conventional: in effect, a large part of the war, of the remote and the nearest, has always been carried out with unconventional weapons: […] weapons […] political and economic”, a strategy that proved unsuccessful and that meant a triumph for Putin.
The Ukrainian conflict would thus have meant a return to the Cold War between Russia and the United States and a return to the Doctrine of Containment, the foundations of which were laid out by George F. Kennan in his essay “The Sources of Soviet Behavior” published in the journal Foreign Affairs in 1947 and whose main ideas are summarized in the quote “Soviet power is impervious to the logic of reason but very sensitive to the logic of force.”
This would include the entry of Finland and Sweden into NATO military structures and the increase of military forces with 4 new battalions deployed on the European border with Russia and the Russian response to the installation of missiles in Belarus Iskander-M equipped with multi-purpose warheads as well as S-40 anti-aircraft missiles following the dynamics of the Cold War (action-reaction).
Putin seeks a Peace Agreement that establishes that Ukraine will not enter NATO and that the Ukrainian dispute is outlined with the division of Ukraine into two halves, leaving the East of the country, including Crimea, the Donbas, Zaporiyia and Kherson under Russian orbit and the Center and West of present-day Ukraine will sail under the tutelage of the West, while the imaginary line linking Kharkov, Zaporiyia, Bajmut and Rubizhne would become the new Berlin Wall of the Cold War 2.0.
Thus, Clito Zelensky would have already become a liability for the United States that should be removed with immediacy, not being disposable that if Trump wins in the November elections, Zelensky is accused of corruption and forced to exile to the United States, after which we will see the design of the new cartography of Ukraine and a new triumph of Putin.
The signs of Biden’s senility, the fentanyl crisis, the high cost of living and the increase in citizen insecurity would have plunged Biden’s popularity to historic lows of 38%, which would facilitate the triumphant return of Donald Trump in the November presidential elections, candidate who, according to a poll by CBS News and YouGov, would have the support of 65% of Republican voters.
A possible victory for Trump in November would represent the decline of the Atlantist strategy of Biden and Soros committed to defend Putin from power as well as the signing of a peace agreement in Ukraine and the return to the Doctrine of Peaceful Coexistence with Russia. This would mean the enthronement of the G-3 (US, Russia and China) as “primus inter pares” in world governance which would clash head-on with the obsessive dream of the Soros globalists and the Open Society Foundation (OSF) to achieve the subjugation of Russia, Russia would be for George Soros “the white whale that has been trying to hunt for decades”.
Thus, Donald Trump assured in his social networks that “we have never been so close to World War III” and that there must be a “total commitment to dismantle the globalist neoconservative power group responsible for dragging the world into endless wars”. Also, in a speech delivered at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), the future Republican candidate stated:
“I am the only candidate who can make this promise: I will avoid the Third World War”, while denouncing the “excessive amount of weapons currently circulating in the world”, which would be anticipating the return of the US Isolationist Doctrine.
However, Trumpian isolationism would be a missile on the waterline of the military-complex. In the next five years, the recovery of the role of the United States as a world gendarme has been outlined through an extraordinary increase in US military interventions abroad to recover Unipolarity on the global geopolitical board.Thus, after the invasion of Gaza by Israel, the US and Israel will attempt the destabilization of Lebanon and Iran by expedited methods, which would mean the beginning of a great regional conflict that will mark the future of the area in the coming years.
Such a conflict could involve the three superpowers (US, China and Russia) counting as necessary collaborations with regional powers (Israel, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Iran) and would cover the geographical space that extends from the Mediterranean arc (Israel, Syria and Lebanon) to Yemen and Somalia with the avowed aim of designing the cartography of the New Middle East favorable to the geopolitical interests of the USA, Britain and Israel. Consequently, in the event of the failure of the current judicial offensive against Trump, the gestation of an exogenous plot of the globalists to neutralize it by expedited methods and prevent the utopia of Peaceful Coexistence between the US and Russia would not be ruled out.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Germán Gorraiz López is a political analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image: Russian President Vladimir Putin By Harold Escalona/shutterstock And President Trump By Drop of Light/Shutterstock
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
“It’s not a coincidence that the attacks on UNRWA took place after the ICJ ruling. Israel is trying to discredit the International Court of Justice, and one way of doing that is by rubbishing UNRWA. But UNRWA has fulfilled the heroic role of providing health, education and all other services to the Palestinian refugees since 1948.
And it’s really heartbreaking that Israeli propaganda is now demonizing UNRWA and leading some countries to cut off aid. So, my sympathy and support is entirely on the side of UNRWA, and I hope it can long continue to play the vital role it has always played in supporting the Palestinian victims of Israeli aggression.” —Avi Shlaim, Israeli historian, You Tube
UNRWA provides food and flour distribution for the entire 2.2 million population of Gaza. Defunding UNRWA will lead to mass starvation and death.
Here’s your Zionist quiz for the day: Why did Israel launch a full-blown media blitz on a United Nations relief agency (UNRWA) on the same day that the International Criminal Court of Justice (ICJ) released its historic genocide ruling?
To divert attention from the fact that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza
To inform the public that new intelligence had serviced revealing Hamas involvement in the United Nations Relief and Works Agency
To assure people everywhere that Israel’s main concern is fighting terrorism
To activate the final phase of their ethnic cleansing operation
If you answered “4” then pat yourself on the back because that is the right answer. Of course, it’s also true that Israel wanted to divert attention from the ICJ’s announcement, but that pales in comparison to the launching of the final phase of its ethnic cleansing operation. This is the real coup de grâce, the final death blow to the two-state solution and a practical remedy to Israel’s nagging demographic problem. This is also the critical puzzle piece that makes sense of the last 100-plus days of relentless bombardment, airstrikes and other forms of state terror. It’s as if Israel is boldly laying down its cards so the entire world can see the strategy it plans to employ to eradicate the native population and fulfill the Zionist dream of a Jewish state from the river to the sea.
And what might that strategy be?
To disperse 2 million Palestinians to the four corners of the earth via mass immigration.
But, how will they do that, after all, haven’t a number of countries already refused to take the Palestinians?
Indeed, they have, but that is before the (soon to-be-published) photos of starving women and children flooded social media sites around the world generating an unprecedented outpouring of sympathy for the beleaguered population. And as public sympathy leads to widespread outrage, more and more people will demand that their governments take action to relieve the suffering through mass immigration. This is how Israel intends to rid itself of its native population and create Zionist Valhalla, a Jewish majority into perpetuity.
This is why Israel has launched its ferocious attack on UNWRA, because UNWRA—more than any other humanitarian organization operating in the Middle East—helps to keep the Palestinians fed and housed which is at-odds with Israeli explicit intentions. The last thing Israel wants is for the Palestinians to establish a massive refugee camp near Rafah that will balloon in size in years to come. That phenom has already taken place in both Jordan and Lebanon where nearly 3 million Palestinians still languish in refugee camps (75 years after the creation of the Israeli state) and are still determined to return home sometime in the future. That is not what Israel wants. Israel wants the Palestinians to ‘vanish into thin air’ which is why they want them dispersed around the world so even the thought of returning home, will never enter their minds.
So, while Israeli leaders do not relish the reputational damage they are experiencing due to their treatment of the Palestinians, they are willing to endure it in order to achieve their broader strategic objectives which are the complete eradication of the Arab population and the strengthening of a permanent Jewish majority.
Israel’s overall strategy was best summarized by Daniella Weiss, a former mayor of a West Bank settlement, who said the following in a short interview on Tik Tok:
“They will move. They will move. The Arabs will move….. So, we don’t give them food, we don’t give the Arabs anything, and they will have to leave. The world will accept them.” (Middle East Eye, Tik Tok)
That’s Israel’s plan in a nutshell.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on The Unz Review.
Michael Whitney is a renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.
He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Five days after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) announced various interim measures aimed at preventing theState of Israel from committing acts in Gaza which come within the scope of the Genocide Convention such as “killing members of the (targeted) group, deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part, and imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group,”the brutal, barbaric butchery of the largely unarmed and impoverished inhabitants of the small strip of land continues unabated.In the first two days after the 26th January ICJ Order was issued for instance 373 Palestinians were killed in Gaza, the majority of them children and women.
We should not be surprised that Israel has defied the ICJ. It has defied it before. Israel has nothing but contempt for international law. It sees itself as above the law. It has always acted as though the restraints and limits that law imposes upon states and individuals do not apply to it. Israel is special. It can do what it wants.
The main reason for this is the Nazi holocaust before and during the Second World War. As one of the principal victims of that terrible tragedy, many Jews have come to believe that the suffering that they have had to bear somehow absolves them from any wrongdoing. After all the Genocide Convention itself was a consequence of the holocaust. How could anyone now accuse the Jewish state of Israel of genocide? That the victims of a gross, wanton injustice sometimes become the most heinous perpetrators of inhuman crimes against fellow human beings once they gain power is a glaring truth that most Israelis have chosen to ignore.
If the Israeli elite is so determined to wipe out the Gazan population and tighten its suffocating grip over Gaza, it is because it is part of its ethnic cleansing agenda that began in 1948 with the expulsion of more than three-quarters of a million Palestinians from their homes to pave the way for the creation of the state of Israel. Ethnic cleansing of Palestine, it must never be forgotten, is a primary goal of Israel which has now reached a new phase with the current assault on Gaza.
What renders added significance to the current assault are the underlying economic and geopolitical motives behind the move. It is reported that a trillion cubic feet of gas discovered off the Gaza shoreline in the 1990s could bring massive wealth to Israel if it can eliminate the real owner of Gaza, namely Palestine. It would enable Israel to supply gas to Europe replacing Russia. Israel would also become a major player in the formulation of oil and gas policies and the ensuing politics in the region and beyond. This may be one of the reasons why the US, and to a great extent, Europe are prepared to provide cover to Israel’s drive to control Gaza.
Gas wealth and its geo-political promise must be read in conjunction with another plan associated with Israel and the US. The two countries, it is alleged, are set to build a new canal, the Ben Gurion Canal, from the northern tip of Gaza which will open a new naval route to the Mediterranean and beyond. It will not only reduce dependence upon the Suez Canal but also create a new route for global trade with the East and the West. For the US in particular, the Ben Gurion Canal may well emerge as its much needed buttress helping to perpetuate its power asa global hegemon.
This is why Gaza is so critical — for the aggressor who is hell-bent on annexing the strip and for the victim who realizes that the survival of its inhabitants as part of Palestine is fundamental to that nation which is now under Israeli occupation. The steadfastness of the Palestinian people, their willingness to sacrifice their lives for freedom and dignity would undoubtedly be a major factor in ensuring that Gaza survives. The massive support for the people of Gaza expressed by millions around the globe— the millions who are demanding both an immediate, unconditional ceasefire and the free flow of humanitarian assistance to the beleaguered citizens of the strip — will also help to reinforce their cause. The ICJ directives of 26th January could also have a salutary effect.
Since Israel is required to submit a report to the ICJ within one month of the announcement of the directives, the ICJ can do a thorough assessment of whether the former has complied with directives. If Israel is guilty of non-compliance, the ICJ can request the UN General Assembly to suspend Israel’s membership.
If suspension does not bring about a positive change in the behaviour of the State of Israel, the UNGA can after a reasonable period of time move on to the second stage. It should direct all member states to boycott Israel in every sphere of activity — from politics and economics to culture and sports. The boycott will last as long as Israel continues to kill people in Gaza or the West Bank or acts in any manner that contributes towards genocide as spelt out under the Genocide Convention.
A firm resolve on the part of the majority of UN members to act decisively against Israeli arrogance will surely produce the desired result.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr Chandra Muzaffar is the president of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST), Malaysia. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Over the past ten days there have been several interesting developments in the continuing ethnic cleansing of Gaza, as well as increasingly on the West Bank, by the Israeli military supplemented by armed settlers. In one particularly grotesque killing, Israeli commandos disguised as medical staff and Arab civilians burst into a hospital room in Jenin refugee camp on the West Bank and shot dead three Palestinians. The Israeli military said one of the victims belonged to Hamas and was planning an imminent attack “inspired by the events of October 7” but provided no evidence in support of the claim. Palestinian hospital staff reported afterwards how “They raided one of the patients’ rooms and killed him, and the people who were in the room with him, his brother and friend. He was a patient, paralyzed and using a wheelchair.” One might observe that Israel, like the White House, lies about everything.
To be sure, Israel and the United States deservedly continue to be subjected to legal challenges, both internationally and in the United States, over their carrying out of a policy in Gaza that many, including the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, might eventually consider to be a full scale and active genocide, the most notorious crime against humanity. The court’s Order last Friday to Israel “to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza and punish incitement for genocide accepts the possibility of Israel being a perpetrator of genocide” and not just a perpetual historical victim, as it chooses to depict itself. As the court continues to pursue the completely plausible claim of genocide submitted by South Africa and to come to a final ruling, which could easily take months to complete, it has “already made history.” But in the meanwhile, manipulation of both the judicial and constitutional processes by the United States to support Israel has enabled the Jewish state to keep bombing and killing an average of 300 Palestinians each day while also controlling and cutting off relief supplies desperately needed by the starving and dying two million nearly all civilians physically imprisoned by the barriers erected by Israel surrounding Gaza.
In the latest act of undoubted collusion staged to kill even more Palestinians, Israel claimed that 12 members of the United Nations Gaza Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) participated in the Hamas October 7th attack on Israel. The UN has fired some of those accused out of its 13,000 employees in the organization and it is investigating further but that did not prevent the US from immediately cutting its funding to UNRWA in spite of the fact that Israel had produced no evidence to back up its claim and there was no explanation provided why such a report was not issued until more than 100 days after the alleged incident. Timing is everything. Clearly the moves were preplanned by President Joe Biden and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to help counter the negative impact of the ICJ report, which was released several days before, and it will accomplish nothing except to increase the misery of the Palestinians.
The international focus on Israel and the United States regarding Gaza is because of the widely held and absolutely correct perception that Israel keeps getting away with murder, literally, and Washington is the accomplice in the crime, using its power and United Nations veto to avoid holding the Jewish state accountable for its misdeeds. Ironically, Israeli behavior often negatively impacts on the actual interests of the United States to include killing American citizens without there being and consequences for the perpetrators. This recklessness has recently been on display not only in Gaza but also on the occupied West Bank where just last week another Palestinian-American has been shot dead in what appears to be something like a vigilante killing.
According to witnesses, the completely unprovoked recent killing consisted of the fatal shooting of American-Palestinian teen Tawfic Abdel Jabbar, 17, a Louisiana native, who was driving a pickup truck near his village Al-Mazra’a Ash-Sharquiya on the Israeli occupied West Bank. Without any warning, a volley of Israeli gunfire struck the back of the truck, hitting Tawfik in the head and killing him, resulting in the out-of-control vehicle turning over several times on a dirt road. Family members who rushed to the scene were confronted by Israeli soldiers at gunpoint, who blocked their access to the truck. In an initial statement, Israeli police admitted that the shooting targeted Tawfic, but claimed the victim was “purportedly engaged in rock-throwing activities.” Police would not identify who fired the shots but did describe the incident as “ostensibly involving an off-duty law enforcement officer, a soldier and a civilian.” That suggests an armed settler was involved. The US Embassy has demanded an explanation but Israel never convicts Jews who kill Palestinians. That is what is expected in this case, which recalls the May 2022 killing by an army sniper of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh at a demonstration which she was covering at the Jenin refugee camp in the Israeli occupied West Bank. She was wearing a clearly identifiable journalist’s jacket. No one was ever held accountable and even the Zionist dominated US State Department eventually believed she had been targeted and deliberately executed. Indeed, there is currently a law pending in the Knesset that blocks prosecution of any Israeli soldier or policeman who kills an Arab.
Image: Rachel Corrie was an American member of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM). She was crushed to death in the Gaza Strip by an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) bulldozer when she was kneeling in front of a local Palestinian’s home. Photograph by Denny Sternstein. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)
And when it comes to other dead Americans, there is the still uninvestigated killing of 34 crewmen on the USS Liberty in June 1967 by Israeli warplanes and gunboats, the killing of activist Rachel Corrie by being run over by an Israeli army bulldozer in 2003, and the killing of Turkish-American boy Furkan Dogan and eight others in international waters on the Mavi Marmara ferry in 2010. If Israel decides to kill Americans it does not hesitate and the US never does anything but whine after the fact, if that. In that case of the Liberty the White House and Pentagon actually participated in the cover-up, such is the power of the Israel Lobby.
So once again the gloves are off in terms of the abuse that the United States has to take at the hands of “best friend” Israel, particularly now that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a group of fascist ultra-nationalists have formed a war cabinet that is intent on driving out or exterminating the Palestinians. Both in Gaza and on the West Bank any living Palestinian is little more than target practice for the Israel Defense Force half trained thugs in uniform.
And Netanyahu is not even trying to hide what he wants to do to Palestine, even though he is now running into concern from President Joe Biden who apparently is afraid that all the bloodshed in Gaza being endorsed and enabled by Washington will damage his re-election prospects. Netanyahu has not budged however and has made some significant comments over the past two weeks, one of which directly rejects a Biden call to look at options for reviving the so-called Two States plan that would give the Palestinians a mini-state that has actual sovereignty at some level, unlike the almost total military and police occupation by Israel that prevails currently.
Speaking at a press conference on January 22nd, Netanyahu insisted that “I will not compromise on full Israeli security control over all the territory west of the Jordan River”. His statement also prefigures an assault on the West Bank and the seizure of all Palestinian-held territory. War would “continue until the end, until the victory, until the elimination of Hamas” and “nothing will stop us.” Ending the war prematurely “would harm Israel’s security for generations,” he said, suggesting this could mean military action continuing until next year.
Netanyahu has said that there will be no Palestinian state with actual sovereignty and that Israel will control all of the former historic Palestine “From the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.” Yes, Netanyahu is using the very words that Israel’s friends have condemned as “antisemitic” when used by Palestinian demonstrators in the US objecting to the slaughter in Gaza.
Meanwhile, a number of Israeli cabinet and other senior officials have indicated clearly that achieving the goal of an Israeli state incorporating the whole area into what will legally be defined as a Jewish state will be achieved no matter what will have to be done to the Palestinians. This will all start with the ethnic cleansing and resettlement of Gaza by Jews, no matter how long it takes to accomplish, and then will proceed to the West Bank. The displacement of the Palestinians is being justified by claiming that that population is not redeemable as they are nothing but “terrorists,” to include incitement from government officials with comments like “We kill the children otherwise they will grow up to kill Jews.”
To be sure, there has been some pushback against the Netanyahu revelation, coming from many dissatisfied Israelis and even originating within the normally massively pro-Israel US Congress. Calls have come for a cease fire and 15 Jewish Democratic congressmen have supported a two-state solution with a Palestine state having true sovereignty. They issued a brief statement saying “We strongly disagree with prime minister [Netanyahu]. A two-state solution is the path forward.” And there also has been something of a rebellion from the civil service in Washington, where there was a walkout of employees rejecting the Biden Administration’s Gaza policy.
Senator Bernie Sanders and some others in Congress have repeated calls to stop funding what Israel is doing, particularly as the war is already spilling over to Yemen and Iraq and Syria where illegal US military bases are under attack producing most recently three deaths by drone fired from an Iraqi shi’ite militia, allegedly hitting a base in Jordan, and causing, more than thirty injuries. The incident will possibly lead to further escalation as Joe Biden has said there will be some retaliation against the militia group that staged the attack and its sponsors. Predictably, Joe and others in Washington are actually blaming the attack on Iran though there is no evidence supporting that claim. Several Congressmen and presidential candidate Nikki Haley have nevertheless already called for an attack on Iranian military and economic installations and CBS news is now reporting that preparations are underway for the US to hit “Iranian targets” in Syria and Iraq. The Iranian government has said it was not involved in the incident and has already announced that it would retaliate if attacked. A better policy would be a withdrawal from those illegal bases, reportedly under consideration by the Pentagon, but it has been denied by the inimitable Victoria Nuland at the State Department.
US President Joe Biden also followed up on the recent Netanyahu statements with what was reportedly his first phone call with Netanyahu for a month, after which he suggested that the Israeli leader might consider some “type” of two-state solution. But Netanyahu’s spokesman dismissed Biden’s claim on the following day, saying that
“In his conversation with President Biden, prime minister Netanyahu reiterated his policy that, after Hamas is destroyed, Israel must retain security control over Gaza to ensure that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel, a requirement that contradicts the demand for Palestinian sovereignty.”
Netanyahu then personally expanded on the message, saying how “I emphasized to President Biden our determination to achieve all the goals of the war, and to ensure that Gaza never again constitutes a threat to Israel.” Under his leadership, Netanyahu pledged that Israel would go beyond that to wage a far wider regional war “on all fronts and in all sectors. We are not giving immunity to any terrorist: not in Gaza, not in Lebanon, not in Syria, and not anywhere.”
Netanyahu and his generals have repeatedly stated that Israel is waging war not just on the Palestinians but also against Iran and its allies, with Defense Minister Yoav Gallant explaining that Israel is confronted by a war on seven fronts: Gaza, the West Bank, and Iran and its proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and the Houthis in Yemen. Replying to a question from a reporter asking why Israel is not attacking Iran directly, Netanyahu responded, “Who says we aren’t attacking Iran? We are attacking Iran.” Indeed, Israeli forces have repeatedly bombed Syria’s capital, Damascus, targeting Iranian forces allied to the Syrian government. In the most recent incident, Israeli missiles fired from the occupied Golan Heights killed the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) Syria intelligence chief and four more IRGC members.
As a final observation, Netanyahu and his supporters appear to be using the prospect of a Donald Trump victory in the US presidential elections in November to put more pressure on Biden to make him back off from supporting any concessions over Gaza and a Palestinian state. Bibi is also intent on extending the war until the end of 2024 to make his domestic opponents who are demanding his resignation appear unpatriotic, many of whom believe that the Israeli actions vis-à-vis Gaza have been motivated by Netanyahu’s own political and personal interests. As Netanyahu might well otherwise be in jail currently due to corruption charges, many critics now support the theory that Gaza may have been a false flag setup with the Prime Minister himself giving the green light to an operation that would open the door to keeping himself in power while also destroying Gaza and ridding Israel of the Palestinians forever. If Netanyahu plays his cards right with the clueless Biden he might also be able to convince the United States to attack Iran very soon, something that he has been seeking for more than twenty years. That may be what is coming next.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on The Unz Review.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected].
He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image: Israeli forces are dressed as patients, medics and civilians in the Ibn Sina Hospital (Screengrab/X)
Having hung onto the coat tails of the US neocons’ plan to destroy Russia through Ukraine, Britain now finds itself with Armed forces of 184,865 against Russia’s 1.3m and an army of 73,000 which would (at Ukraine’s rate of losses against Russia) be wiped out in 4 months!
Despite the fact that international students contribute CAD$22 billion to the Canadian economy, CAD$2.8 billion in tax revenue in 2016 and they pay five to six times (5-6) more in tuition fees than domestic students, they are not fully integrated or included in Canadian society because they are socially constructed and treated as “bodies out of place”.
A powerful Westminster lobby group took money from an organisation with close ties to the State of Israel, it has emerged. Around 80% of Tory MPs are members of Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) – which is the largest funder of foreign trips for British politicians.
The State Department wants you to know that the Biden administration made a record value of major arms sales last year – $80.9 billion under the U.S. government-administered Foreign Military Sales program and related “security cooperation activities” with U.S. allies.
Dressed in medical scrubs, Islamic thobes and hijabs, wearing face masks and pushing wheelchairs, a group of Israeli undercover agents descended upon Jenin‘s Ibn Sina Hospital on Tuesday. The agents are known in Arabic as mustaribeen, which means to “dress and act like an Arab”, and in Hebrew as mistaarivim, a derivative of the Arabic word.
The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of Northern California on November 13, 2023, on behalf of Palestinian human rights organizations Defense for Children International – Palestine (DCI-P) and Al-Haq, three Palestinian individuals who live in Gaza and five Palestinian Americans who have family in Gaza.
In countries associated with the civilisation of the West, and as noted by Weber in particular where the Protestant ethic prevailed, doing things right and efficiently used to be a fanatical cult, just as Amiel observed. The beneficial results, especially by comparison to the performance of civilisations and cultures rooted in different principles, were plainly visible and indisputable.
The process of introducing a new system of “currency backing” might take time, and could start in Asia, under the lead of China and Russia, extending to the ASEAN and BRICS countries, and eventually and hopefully be adopted also in the west, meaning a successful revision and overhaul of the IMF and World Bank.
In a Security Council meeting discussing the sabotage of the Nordstream Pipeline, Professor Jeffrey Sachs delivered a brilliant speech, supporting the report by Journalist Seymour Hersh, and demanding that the crime be investigated by the United Nations.
Aparentemente, a possibilidade de Donald Trump regressar à Casa Branca já está a causar desespero entre os falcões da OTAN. Numa declaração recente, o presidente checo, Petr Pavel, apelou a todos os líderes da aliança ocidental para se prepararem para as possíveis consequências de uma vitória republicana nos EUA. Segundo ele, a ascensão de Trump poderá levar a um “acordo com Putin”, frustrando definitivamente os planos ocidentais.
Durante uma entrevista à comunicação social, Pavel afirmou que Trump pensa “diferentemente” dos outros líderes ocidentais, razão pela qual a sua possível eleição deve ser vista com preocupação no momento atual. Embora a maioria dos responsáveis da OTAN acreditem que a melhor forma de lidar com o conflito na Ucrânia é através do apoio militar a Kiev, Trump tem uma visão mais pragmática que inclui a necessidade de negociar a paz diretamente com os russos.
Pavel deixa claro que a sua intenção ao dizer isto não é perturbar a aliança entre europeus e americanos ou interferir nos assuntos internos dos EUA, mas simplesmente avançar nas discussões sobre como a OTAN deve preparar-se para uma possível mudança na política da Casa Branca em relação à Ucrânia. Alerta que haverá consequências graves se Trump for eleito, razão pela qual exorta os outros líderes da aliança a estarem prontos para um futuro de desafios.
“Não se trata de perturbar o vínculo transatlântico, desafiando os Estados Unidos como aliado. Mas deveríamos admitir realisticamente que Donald Trump olha para uma série de coisas de forma diferente (…) Deveríamos estar preparados para isso, porque certamente haverá algumas consequências”, disse aos jornalistas.
Não só isso, Pavel também enfatizou os pontos que considera vitais para uma estratégia da OTAN na Ucrânia. Segundo ele, Kiev está em desvantagem no campo de batalha porque tem opções militares limitadas e as suas ações táticas são insuficientes para causar danos aos russos. Seguindo as orientações dos militantes pró-guerra mais radicais, propõe que a aliança atlantista aumente exponencialmente o envio de armas para a Ucrânia, tornando as tropas de Kiev suficientemente fortes para alcançar um “equilíbrio de forças” com os russos. Ele acredita que só com Kiev conseguindo tal capacidade será possível conduzir negociações de paz justas com Moscou.
“Só um equilíbrio de forças pode forçar ambos os lados a compreender que não alcançarão mais sucessos e que é hora de negociações”, acrescentou Pavel.
Na verdade, o medo de Pavel reflete a mentalidade dos principais fomentadores da guerra ocidentais. Trump fez promessas na sua campanha eleitoral que incluem “acabar com a guerra na Ucrânia num dia”. Obviamente, a única maneira de o fazer é através de uma negociação de paz direta com os russos, forçando a Ucrânia a reconhecer as suas perdas territoriais e garantindo a neutralidade de Kiev e o fim do intervencionismo da OTAN nas fronteiras russas.
Ainda não está claro se Trump irá realmente fazer os esforços necessários para alcançar a paz, mas há pelo menos uma possibilidade significativa de que isso aconteça, uma vez que o líder republicano defende a ideia de “America First” – propondo o isolacionismo nacionalista e a redução da presença global dos EUA.
Além disso, o filho de Trump, participante ativo na campanha eleitoral do pai, já afirmou publicamente que é necessário acabar com o conflito através de negociações, ignorando qualquer possibilidade de solução militar. Claramente, Trump não está interessado em continuar a seguir o objetivo de “desgastar” a Rússia ou alcançar uma “vitória ucraniana”, mas sim em focar no desenvolvimento interno.
Este tipo de política parece desastrosa para os apoiadores da guerra contra a Rússia, e é por isso que Pavel e todos os fomentadores da guerra estão preocupados. Anteriormente, o próprio presidente ucraniano, Vladimir Zelensky, já havia dito estar preocupado com a possível eleição de Trump. Segundo o líder neonazista, o plano de Trump para acabar com a guerra é “muito perigoso”, pois põe em risco as ambições irrealistas de Kiev de “recuperar” os territórios reintegrados na Federação Russa. Na prática, o regime ucraniano e os governos pró-guerra da OTAN já estão a estabelecer a sua posição nas eleições americanas, lançando apoio aberto aos Democratas.
Na verdade, Trump tem grandes chances de vencer se realmente concorrer às eleições. Houve várias tentativas de bloquear legalmente a sua candidatura, mas até agora não está claro se tais procedimentos legais serão suficientes para o impedir. Obviamente, se Trump pode ou não concorrer é um assunto interno das autoridades americanas. No entanto, é inegável que as tentativas de prender Trump ou torná-lo inelegível são abertamente apoiadas pelos setores mais pró-guerra da sociedade americana e internacional. Nesse sentido, é possível que existam não apenas tais métodos burocráticos para impedir que Trump concorra ao cargo, mas até mesmo manobras ilegais, como fraudes, para fazê-lo perder as eleições de alguma forma.
Cabe exclusivamente ao povo americano decidir sobre a melhor opção para governar o seu país, mas até agora Trump é o único candidato com uma proposta concreta para retomar as negociações de paz. Como esperado, isto está a gerar histeria entre aqueles que apoiam uma guerra prolongada.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
“The Canadian federal government is focusing on numbers and dollars without consideration of the infrastructure and regulation to effectively support student, migrant workers. With few options in labour market, many international students are pressured into accepting exploitative employment.” —
Excerpt from Howard Levitt and Lavan Narenthiran, (9 January 2024) in Dark Side of International Student push is exploitation in the Labour Market, Financial Post.
I would like to share my comments on the article entitled, “Dark Side of International Student push is exploitation in the Labour Market” written by Howard Levitt and Lavan Narenthiran in the Financial Post on January 9, 2024.
First, I commend the authors and editorial team for raising awareness to their reading audience about the disparities in international students’ perception of Canada before their arrival as well as upon their arrival, their lived experiences of the exploitation of their labour. Internationally, Canada has been well-renowned for its reputation to promote equity, diversity and inclusion in social institutions such as its universities and workplaces. In more recent years, Canadian immigration policy has targeted the recruitment of international students to foment social and economic development, as part of its objectives outlined in the International Education Strategy (2014-2018 and 2019-2024).
Canada launched its International Education Strategy in 2014 because it is heavily invested in building a highly competitive knowledge economy and thus, sees international students as drivers of change by filling critical gaps in the Canadian labour market. In its International Education Strategy, Canada promotes itself as a safe, multi-cultural country that offers high-quality education at an attractive price and a world leader in innovation, research and development. Consequently, there is an exponential growth in the number of international students (551, 405) in Canada from 184 countries since 2022.
Despite the fact that international students contribute CAD$22 billion to the Canadian economy, CAD$2.8 billion in tax revenue in 2016 and they pay five to six times (5-6) more in tuition fees than domestic students, they are not fully integrated or included in Canadian society because they are socially constructed and treated as “bodies out of place”.
Professor Sunera Thobani (2022) highlights that Canada has a racial, hierarchal citizenship structure that determines who fully belongs to the nation-state and who does not belong. The issues of exploitation of international students’ labour due to their temporary legal status and other intersecting factors should be interrogated in the longer trajectory of Canadian project of state formation and national identity. This will allow us to fully understand the implications of the underlying discriminatory mechanics of Canada’s immigration policy targeting the recruitment of international students. The 1976 Immigration Act laid the foundation for discriminatory treatment towards international students paying differential and higher tuition fees than domestic students.
As a former racialized, international student and post-graduate worker, I can attest to the fact that the contemporary predicament of international students’ lived experiences of subordination in work spaces or the Canadian labour market are not often discussed thoroughly in national discourses because international education is a multi-billion dollar enterprise. One of the issues that was not raised in the opinion article is that fact that Canadian universities and workplaces are not sites of benevolent inclusion, as proposed in several federal policy documents. These spaces are sites of border imperialism as there are ongoing, racial-colonial, capitalist and imperial encounters that permeates repressive, institutional structures, subjugation as well as indigenous land dispossession.
Border imperialism is embedded in the class structure of Canada’s immigration policy targeting international students with specific amount of savings or proof of financial independence as part of the study permit application requirements’ package.
It is also evident in the fact that the international students are typically employed in low-waged, service industries in the labour market where there is little or no enforcement of employment standards at the provincial or federal government levels. Therefore, precariousness is not only a matter of a labour market position or matter of a lack of Canadian citizenship status. It is also an existential phenomenon that is prevalent in international students’ every day interactions and lived experiences.
This article opens crucial avenues to re-imagine alternative considerations for Canadian policy makers to engage in fairer, more transformative approaches in international education. In order for international education to contribute to inclusive and sustainable development, Canadian policy makers need to ensure that their policy objectives, decisions and actions go beyond simply attracting an influx of international students to earn record-level profits.
This can be done by reducing the low income cut off (LICO) threshold requirement for potential international students to study in Canada, as most international students are from regions of the world that are affected by economic policies such as local currency depreciation. The Government of Canada should be commended for a significant stride for removing the limitation of working hours for international students through Immigration Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) but more needs to be done for this important group of migrant workers as the years, progress. The Government of Canada should deeply consider one of Just Peace Advocates’ recommendation, to adopt an international convention protecting migrant workers.
I recommend that financial aid in the form of partial and full scholarships should be increased for international students from different regions or countries. Finally, I recommend that there should be a stronger anti-colonial, anti-racist lens in the applicability of equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) capacity building for universities and workplaces. Additionally, there should be stronger oversight mechanisms to mitigate breaches in the labour and human rights of migrant student-workers. This will ensure that Canada’s truly fulfill its objective as being a global leader in inclusion rather than maintaining the status quo of enforcing geographic and social lines of demarcation through border imperialism.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Tina Renier is an independent researcher based in Jamaica. She is a volunteer at Just Peace Advocates and a regular research writer at the Centre for Research on Globalization. She has a Master of Arts in International Development Studies from Saint Mary’s University in Nova Scotia, Canada.
Sources
Levitt, H. and Narenthiran, L. (9 January 2024). Dark Side of International Student Push is Exploitation in the Labour Market. Financial Post.
Thobani, S. (2022). Coloniality and Racial (In) Justice in the University Counting for Nothing? Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
When the Kiev regime shot down a Russian Il-76MD transport aircraft packed with Ukrainian POWs (prisoners of war) on January 24, the United Nations said that they were still “waiting for evidence” who downed the plane. This was despite the fact that the Neo-Nazi junta forces immediately bragged about the shootdown, only to later retract the admission. Ukrainian POWs were on their way to a prisoner exchange, for which the Russian side already provided evidence, as the exchange was scheduled to take place. What’s more, on January 31, a large POW exchange took place, once again proving that Moscow is still dedicated to honoring international agreements, in stark contrast to the Kiev regime that killed over 70 innocent people, 65 of whom were Ukrainians, its own citizens.
The Kremlin showed evidence that the Neo-Nazi junta indeed downed the plane, with preliminary data suggesting that either a US-made “Patriot” or German-made IRIS-T SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems were used (possibly even operated by NATO personnel). Further investigation shows that the Il-76MD was most likely shot down by a kinetic warhead, indicating that the “Patriot” was the most likely culprit. On the other hand, the Russian military just destroyed an IRIS-T in the Kharkov oblast (region), so it still shouldn’t be entirely excluded as a possibility. Either way, it’s perfectly clear who downed the large transport aircraft. But, the UN refuses to acknowledge this and the “best” it can do is issue anemic statements about the supposed “responsibility of both sides”.
Obviously, the political West will do anything to conceal this fact. And yet, they’re not the only ones. The Kiev regime’s downing of the Il-76MD raises many questions, particularly as it repeatedly demonstrated readiness to target its own POWs. They’re almost certainly engaging in a cover-up, as the transport aircraft was also carrying a dozen “Azov Battalion” members. Once again, this isn’t the first time the Neo-Nazi junta is targeting its most loyal henchmen. Namely, on July 29, 2022, it destroyed a Russian POW camp housing precisely “Azov” members (approximately 150 of them) who surrendered in Azovstal. The unit was infamous for gruesome war crimes against the people of Donbass since the moment the US/NATO orchestrated the war in Ukraine back in 2014.
By killing them, the Kiev regime also eliminated the possibility of having these POWs reveal its direct involvement in the said war crimes. Of course, it’s almost certain they will never admit this, as it would be “too inconvenient” having to explain the death of other Ukrainian POWs, particularly to their families who were eager to see them after months or perhaps even years. On the other hand, the incident is clearly a part of the rapidly escalating internal power struggle in Kiev, particularly between civilian authorities and the military. Back in May 2022, when the Neo-Nazis surrendered in Azovstal, Zelensky was both furious and terrified of the consequences, particularly as there was speculation of NATO personnel being present there. He’s been holding a grudge against them ever since (or possibly even before).
Namely, although he publicly spoke about the priority of the exchange and the return of “Azov Battalion” POWs, his strained relationship with them was evident even before the special military operation (SMO). Running as the supposed “peace candidate” back in 2019, Zelensky was immediately seen as a “threat” and even had heated discussions with them. Ever since, he always harbored doubts and distrust toward both the Neo-Nazi battalions and the military as a whole. Their political power and connections to his rivalsalways made Zelensky feel uneasy around them. His biggest fear is that “Azov Battalion” members will engage in politics and possibly even organize a “new Maidan”. Such concerns aren’t entirely unfounded, as many of them hate him fiercely due to his Jewish background.
It can be argued that this serves him right, as Zelensky himself (as well as his NATO backers) has engaged in attempts to whitewash the “Azov Battalion’s” reputation. Still, prominent Neo-Nazis such as the “Azov” leader Denis Prokopenko (codename Radis) are planning to challenge his authority. Some sources claim that Prokopenko wanted to arrange a meeting with the exchanged “Azov Battalion” POWs, at which he intended to criticize Zelensky’s inept leadership, particularly his inability to secure Western financial “aid”and weapons, as well as condemn the cancelation of the presidential election. Prokopenko is also supported by other Neo-Nazi organizations such as the “Right Sector”, which is no less infamous for its own war crimes in the Donbass and elsewhere.
There are strong indicators that the military is also on Prokopenko’s side, which further suggests that even Zaluzhny could be involved. This is hardly surprising given their strained (if not already hostile) relationship. Some are even openly accusing Zelensky of not caring about the lives of the soldiers and the military as a whole, because of his tendency to circumvent Zaluzhny’s command and send them to certain death.
Thus, Zelensky’s motivation to ensure “Azov Battalion” members never return is quite strong, as they could’ve undermined his grip on power. Sources indicate that it’s still unclear whether the SAM units were kept in the dark or whether they were given specific orders to target the Il-76MD. Either way, this was done despite the warning given in advance by the Russian side.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on InfoBrics.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Since January 29, reports about the removal of the Kiev regime’s top general Valery Zaluzhny have been spreading like wildfire. Although there hasn’t been any official confirmation, while some outlets of the mainstream propaganda machine even issued a rebuttal, new revelations by informed (albeit anonymous) sources show that the Neo-Nazi junta frontman Volodymyr Zelensky is still serious about removing Zaluzhny. On January 30, the Financial Times, an important part of that same mainstream propaganda machine, but still a somewhat more reputable source, reported that Zelensky is preparing to replace his top general. Even the FT admitted that the controversial move would be “the biggest shake-up of Ukraine’s military command” since Moscow was forced to launch its special military operation (SMO) almost two years ago.
Citing “four people familiar with the discussions”, FT claims that, on Monday, Zelensky offered Zaluzhny a new role as a defense adviser, a ceremonial position that would effectively remove all of his executive powers as the military’s top officer. The sources claim that Zaluzhny promptly refused the “offer”. It’s clear that Zelensky left him no actual options, which was also confirmed by two of the four anonymous sources. They also said that, while the decision on Zaluzhny’s removal is final, he will keep his position for the time being, almost certainly in order to prevent the Kiev regime’s destabilization. These developments are hardly surprising as there have been simmering tensions between the two for quite some time. Occasional reports about the Zelensky-Zaluzhny rivalry started approximately a year ago in various media.
This is a clear indicator that’s just when the spat became so obvious that it couldn’t be ignored anymore. The two men have diametrically opposing views on how the conflict with Russia should unfold. Zelensky, a politician who primarily cares about his own interests, wants PR victories that would enable a constant flow of Western funds, which he then uses for personal gain. In that regard, he has the full support of his henchmen, particularly as they’re also getting a “slice of the cake”. On the other hand, Zaluzhny, who is anything but a saint, still has to think about the fate of his soldiers, as his position depends entirely on the military’s actual performance. PR victories are completely inconsequential for him, as they change nothing on the battlefield. The very fact that Zaluzhny is being replaced serves as a rather convincing evidence of that.
Zelensky’s strained relationship with Zaluzhny reached a boiling point after the end of the Neo-Nazi junta’s much-touted summer/fall counteroffensive that failed miserably. The fact that Zelensky promised to not only defeat Russian forces in former Ukrainian regions, but also Crimea, was a bitter pill to swallow for Zaluzhny. He was certainly aware this was effectively impossible and frustrated that such a daunting task was given precisely to him. One strong possibility is that Zelensky was completely delusional (something he’s certainly prone to), but another is that he deliberately announced such unattainable goals just so he could then blame Zaluzhny for the (obviously imminent) failure later on. Possibly realizing Zelensky’s intentions, the general then tried to one-up him by shifting blame to the Kiev regime’s civilian authorities.
Zaluzhny is surely aware that his removal would cause an uproar in the country. However, most importantly, he might be counting on the possible armed mutiny, as he enjoys unrivaled support in the military. His popularity among civilians should also be taken into account. FT cited a Ukrainian poll released in December, which showed that Zaluzhny enjoys a massive support of 88%. Compared to the 62% that Zelensky got, that’s a huge advantage, even if the numbers for the latter aren’t grossly inflated (which they most likely are). FT also reported that Zaluzhny is yet to comment on the reports of his dismissal, but pointed out that he published an undated selfie with his chief of the general staff Serhiy Shaptala on Facebook in which both were wearing military sweatshirts. This can surely be interpreted as a message to Zelensky.
FT also mentioned the involvement of Petro Poroshenko, one of Zelensky’s top rivals. The political arena in Ukraine increasingly resembles a hyena brawl as that’s precisely how many of the participants have been behaving. The FT’s sources claim that it’s currently unclear who would replace Zaluzhny, but possible candidates are General Oleksandr Syrsky, commander of the ground forces, and Kyrylo Budanov, the GUR (military intelligence) chief. Political analyst Andrew Korybko recently argued that the latter is the more likely choice. And yet, either of the two would have a tough time commanding respect and authority in the military. Zelensky himself has been lacking in that department, as his attempts to circumvent Zaluzhny by communicating orders directly to his subordinates have only resulted in disastrous losses.
Both Syrsky and Budanov will surely have big shoes to fill. The former might have a somewhat easier task, as he has been in the military for decades, while the latter has boasted about supposed “convert operations in the Donbass”, which doesn’t seem very convincing to the rest of the military. It doesn’t help that Zaluzhny’s reputation hasn’t been tarnished by corruption. Namely, some Russian sources are claiming that Zelensky’s offer also included several million dollars in what is essentially a bribe for Zaluzhny to step down, which, as previously mentioned, he promptly refused. Still, it’s highly questionable that he’s simply that virtuous. The much more likely scenario is that Zaluzhny understands that he stands to gain much more from a possible power struggle that he’s very likely to win rather than accept a comparably puny payout.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on InfoBrics.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
In a letter to my MP (in answer to my question) the UK Department of Defence could not confirm that the UK was at war with Russia.
But in international law war is recognised as existing between two countries if there is a condition marked by armed conflict between or among states, whether or not war has been declared formally by any of the belligerents.
This is unquestionably the case between the UK and Russia with the British public slowly recognising the fact, having been jolted by the recent words of General Sir Patrick Sanders who said the UK should be prepared to “mobilise the nation” because the armed forces are too weak to resist Russia.
Even more devastating was the announcement that the United States plans to station nuclear weapons in Britain for the first time in 15 years according to Pentagon documents obtained by The Daily Telegraph. The US removed nuclear missiles from Britain in 2008. Contracts for a new facility at RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk confirmed the US intention.
Having hung onto the coat tails of the US neocons’ plan to destroy Russia through Ukraine, Britain now finds itself with Armed forces of 184,865 against Russia’s 1.3m and an army of 73,000 which would (at Ukraine’s rate of losses against Russia) be wiped out in 4 months!
Given the extremely dangerous 2020 change by Biden on the FIRST use of nuclear weapons (see this) against “competitors that could inflict strategic-level damage” it is worth recording that the UK has a mere 225 nuclear warheads as against Russia’s 5,900.
The Royal Airforce has 564 fixed wing aircraft while Russia has 3,864 and in Ukraine Russia has developed the most sophisticated Drone operations and electronic warfare in the world.
The UK Attacks on Russia Through Ukraine
During the longstanding civil war between Kiev and the Ukrainian Russians in the Donbas it was the British armed forces who led the training and arming off Kiev’s forces (including openly Nazi groups like Azov). The Ukrainian Major General Alexei Taran, responsible for the training programme declared that
Great Britain has become the “undisputed leader” in organizing the training of the Armed Forces of Ukraine – it has trained over 30,000 military personnel since the beginning of the Russian attack, and another 20 thousand from 2014 to 2022.
It is worth recording that according to Ukrainian sources their losses are now 30,000 PER MONTH.
UK Trained Saboteurs
British Armed Forces special forces were involved in the training of Ukrainian saboteurs who were planning to attack military and transportation facilities in Russia, including nuclear power plants.
The Director of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation, Alexander Bortnikov, reported that in August of 2023, his agency apprehended members of a Ukrainian sabotage and reconnaissance group who had received training, and their operations were planned with the involvement of British Armed Forces Special Forces.
The objectives of this group included conducting sabotage activities at military installations, in the oil sector, transportation, and critical infrastructure, as well as targeting nuclear energy facilities, specifically the Smolensk and Kursk nuclear power plants.
There is no doubt that the British government would classify such attacks as terrorism if inflicted on British soil.
UK Intelligence Organising Anti Russian Insurgency
The head of the Uzbek diaspora Vatandosh, Usman Baratov was arrested and confessed to collaborating with British military intelligence.
Baratov testified that he spoke at the British Embassy in Moscow with a military attaché, who offered him income and an easy path to British citizenship with subsequent emigration. Baratov met several times in Istanbul with people who introduced themselves to him as BRITISH military intelligence officers.
Baratov’s work was to promote the rights of the Uzbek diaspora in Russia by dividing it into “good” and “bad”. The spy was given the task of consolidating all the “good” ones and preparing them to defend their interests in Russia using soft and forceful methods.
First, everyone had to become citizens of Russia, and then be ready to come to the collection points at hour X at the end of March 2024. All other details are classified as “secret.” After his arrest, Baratov expressed his readiness to work with the FSB (The Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation) and give evidence exposing the hostile work of British diplomatic workers.
UK Weapons Fabrication in Ukraine
Britain has said it will open weapons factories and training centres in Ukraine. Russia said it saw BAE opening a local entity in Ukraine “negatively”, and any facilities producing weapons used against Russia would become legitimate military targets.
The UK has also considered escorting Ukrainian ships by the British Navy in the Black Sea according to The DailyTelegraph
UK Forces Totally Unprepared for War
Apart from extreme recruiting difficulties for the Army and the RAF turning down white men in order to fulfil its “diversification” programme there was the embarrassment of two British minesweepers colliding in a Bahrain port. Even more serious was the inability of the Royal Navy to deploy an aircraft carrier to the Red Sea because there are not enough crew to man Fort Victoria, the only Solid Support Ship capable of providing the Carrier Support Group with the amount of ammunition, aircraft, spare equipment and food required for such a deployment.
In the last year both carriers the Queen Elizabeth and the Prince of Wales (total cost £8bn) had to return to port unexpectedly for repairs.
The UK-Ukraine Security Agreement
As if the UK’s obligations to NATO were not already dangerously extensive (as previously neutral new members Finland and Sweden join) the British government has now signed a “Security Agreement” with a war ravaged Ukraine with 500,000 dead and wounded being driven back daily by Russian forces.
Ukrainian Prime Minister Denis Shmygal summarised UK obligations:
“Not only must the UK respond within 24 hours if there is an aggression against Ukraine, Ukraine will also defend its ally and partner by responding within 24 hours in one way or another to support the UK if Russia wants to attack our friend, partner and ally,” he said on a national telethon.
While Ukraine is in no position to aid the UK, the terms of this treaty could rapidly bring direct confrontation with Russia. Bellicose and hubristic rhetoric from British politicians like Johnson, Truss and Shapps and military personnel like General Sanders have real world consequences and not one in a million Britons understand the massive gap between the political ambition and the weak state of British defence capacity.
Not long ago Tobias Ellwood MP Chairman of the Defense Committee was seen as a hysterical extremist when he said:
“Britain should start a war directly against Russia, we are fighting in Europe, we need to introduce martial law.”
After recent extreme warmongering by Shapps and Sanders, Ellwood is no longer on the fringes of political sanity but just another part of the establishment Gaderene swine.[1]
Not for 60 years and the Cuban missile crisis have the British been in such danger. And yet as the General Election approaches there is no sign of any genuine peace party.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on Freenations.
Note
[1]The pigs into which Jesus cast the demons that had possessed a madman, and which as a result ran down a steep cliff into the sea and were killed; from this, Gadarene means involving or engaged in a headlong or potentially disastrous rush to do something.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
A powerful Westminster lobby group took money from an organisation with close ties to the State of Israel, it has emerged.
Around 80% of Tory MPs are members of Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) – which is the largest funder of foreign trips for British politicians.
Yet CFI’s own source of income has long been shrouded in secrecy, as it does not publicly disclose its donors.
Declassified can now reveal that those have included the Jewish Agency. That’s a parastatal body in Jerusalem, which is legally required to assist new migrants to Israel.
It has been encouraging Jews to move there from abroad for almost a century – offering considerable financial incentives – and actively supports those who wish to enlist in Israel’s army.
The Jewish Agency, now led by Major General Doron Almog, is one of Israel’s four “national institutions” that pre-date the State’s creation in 1948. When the country became independent, its first prime minister was David Ben-Gurion, the then head of the Jewish Agency.
Together with its twin, the World Zionist Organisation, as well as the Jewish National Fund and Keren Hayesod (The Foundation Fund), these groups were at the forefront of buying land and promoting (often illegal) migration to Palestine during British rule.
‘Likud Office in London’
The revelation that CFI was funded by the Jewish Agency is contained in minutes from a meeting held in 1990 between the lobby group’s then chairman, British MP Robert Rhodes-James, and UK foreign minister Douglas Hogg.
Rhodes-James is recorded as saying:
“CFI had been in poor shape when he took over two years ago. It had degenerated into a virtual ‘Likud office in London’, even taking money from the Jewish agency.”
The amount of money is not mentioned. Likud is the right-wing political party led by Israel’s current prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Likud’s original manifesto controversially pledged:
“Between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.”
Rhodes-James went on to say:
“CFI was now financially independent, and had earned respect as a group of spokesmen for HMG [the British government] sympathetic to Israel, rather than mere apologists for every Israeli action (even if some members remained uncritical Likud supporters).”
Whether CFI retained its financial independence after 1990 is unclear. The group has become a staunch defender of Netanyahu’s policies, even as the International Court of Justice warns Israel could be committing genocide in Gaza.
CFI and the Jewish Agency did not respond to requests for comment.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Phil Miller is Declassified UK’s chief reporter. He is the author of Keenie Meenie: The British Mercenaries Who Got Away With War Crimes. Follow him on Twitter at @pmillerinfo
Featured image: The Jewish Agency’s headquarters in Jerusalem. (Photo: Hagai Agmon-Snir / Wikimedia)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The State Department wants you to know that the Biden administration made a record value of major arms sales last year – $80.9 billion under the U.S. government-administered Foreign Military Sales program and related “security cooperation activities” with U.S. allies.
This is a 55% increase in this category of weapons transfers from the prior year, and, according to the State Department, “the highest annual total of sales and assistance provided to our allies and partners.”
There is some question as to whether major weapons transfers are actually at their highest levels ever. The Obama administration entered into $102 billion in Foreign Military Sales agreements in 2010, including $60 billion in deals with Saudi Arabia, many of them for weapons that were later used in Riyadh’s brutal war in Yemen.
But the fact that the State Department wants to brag about “record” sales is instructive. The rest of the fact sheet announcing the new figures makes it sound like recent U.S. arms sales will only have positive outcomes: no risks, no downsides. Boilerplate language on the benefits of runaway arms trading included the following:
“Each proposed transfer is carefully assessed on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with the Arms Export Control Act and related legislation . . . Major defense transfers are also subject to Congressional notification and review.” In other words, what could possibly go wrong?
Some transfers — like the tens of billions in arms supplied to Ukraine to defend itself from a Russian invasion — have a legitimate rationale, as long as they are not the only expression of U.S. policy, to the exclusion of exploring diplomatic approaches to ending the conflict on terms the Ukrainian government and people can agree to.
And a substantial portion of the rest of U.S. arms transfers in 2023 went to European allies concerned about possible future actions by Russia, which may be a distant prospect given Moscow’s mixed record in fighting a far less populous nation in Ukraine. It’s not clear that the Russian military is in any shape to take on the 31-member NATO alliance. Nonetheless, sales made with Russia in mind included over $30 billion in deals with Poland, $8 billion worth of military helicopters to Germany, and $5.6 billion in F-35 combat aircraft to the Czech Republic.
The legitimacy surrounding the provision of arms to Ukraine and European allies is decidedly not present with respect to recent arms aid to Israel, which has used U.S. weapons in an assault on Gaza in which the International Court of Justice has indicated that it is “plausible” that Israel is engaged in genocide. Leaving aside the dispute about whether Israel is committing genocide or “just” widespread war crimes, its military activities have killed over 26,000 Gazans, displaced 1.9 million people, and hindered the delivery of medical and food aid. This could not be, and is not, in line with U.S. law or the Biden administration’s stated policies.
Israel has been routinely exempted from U.S. human rights strictures with respect to its use of U.S.-supplied weapons. And to make matters worse, the Biden administration has made it harder for Congress and the public to know what weapons it is supplying to the Israeli military by circumventing Congressional notification requirements and providing weapons from stockpiles without reporting on what is being taken and transferred.
Needless to say, the State Department has been silent on this counterexample to its happy talk about how all U.S. arms sales are good U.S. arms sales. Nor did it emphasize the revival of U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia, to the tune of over $2 billion in 2023, with more likely to come this year. This is a far cry from the days when candidate Biden called Saudi Arabia a “pariah” and President Biden pledged to curb weapons transfers to that nation.
In short, instead of bragging about the enormous value of U.S. arms transfers and providing a sanitized view of their impacts, the Biden administration should take a hard, cold look at the risks of unrestrained arm exports on the reputation and security of the United States, as well as the human consequences of their use by U.S. allies. A good start would be to withhold further transfers to Israel as leverage to force a ceasefire in Gaza.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
William D. Hartung is a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. His work focuses on the arms industry and U.S. military budget.
Featured image: Golan Heights, Israel – An Israeli soldier prepares 155m shells for firing (Gal Rotem/Shutterstock)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dressed in medical scrubs, Islamic thobes and hijabs, wearing face masks and pushing wheelchairs, a group of Israeli undercover agents descended upon Jenin‘s Ibn Sina Hospital on Tuesday.
The agents are known in Arabic as mustaribeen, which means to “dress and act like an Arab”, and in Hebrew as mistaarivim, a derivative of the Arabic word.
The operatives – disguised as Palestinian medics, patients and civilians – raided the facility in the occupied West Bank, killing three people. One of the Israeli officers reportedly spoke in Arabic during the operation.
The raid took place at 5:30am, and took around 10 minutes, according to Israeli media.
The special forces involved were the latest in a long history of undercover Israeli agents pretending to be Palestinian.
Their existence goes as far back as the British Mandate of Palestine in the first half of the 20th century, during which British authorities worked with Zionist militias to infiltrate Arab populations in the region.
“Mistaarivim started as an undercover unit in the Palmach division, which was part of the terrorist militia of Haganah, the core of the Israeli army,” Emad Moussa, a researcher specialising in political psychology in Israel and Palestine, told Middle East Eye.
Israeli special forces disguised as Palestinian civilians and medical workers, raided the Ibn Sina Hospital in Jenin, reportedly killing three Palestinians.
The raid took place early on Tuesday inside the Ibn Sina hospital in Jenin in the occupied West Bank pic.twitter.com/pAzJVrIeTE
“They were made up of mainly Mizrahi Jews, coming from Arabic-speaking countries, and were tasked to infiltrate Palestinians (and other Arabs in neighbouring countries) to collect information for the Zionist movement and the British.”
That unit was eventually disbanded, particularly after tensions arose between British authorities and the Zionist militias they had once propped up.
At the end of the Mandate and following the creation of Israel, the undercover unit was revived as a means of espionage, and to sow seeds of chaos and confusion in Palestinian communities.
‘Agent Provocateurs’
One of the most well-known units, the Duvdevan, was formed in the 1980s by former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak. The unit is still operational today, and one of several undercover Israeli units.
“Their use during the first intifada was particularly prominent. They were often either Druze, or Arabic-speaking Jewish operatives of Shin Bet,” Laleh Khalili, an academic and researcher at the University of Exeter, told MEE.
“[They] collected intelligence, acted as agent provocateurs, or managed to push themselves into protests or gatherings in order to arrest or injure or assassinate Palestinians from inside.”
Today, the undercover agents are found in the West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem – but not in Gaza.
“In Gaza, the mistaarivim units lost much of their operational capabilities after Hamas had taken control of the Strip in 2007,” said Moussa.
“For mistaarivim to operate in Gaza is to risk being captured and then hidden away well beyond the reach of the Israeli army.”
In the West Bank, the units are most often seen infiltrating protests against Israeli occupation, attempting to create fear and paranoia among Palestinians.
They also get directly involved in carrying out arrests, including during mass protests in December 2017 when then-US president Donald Trump’s administration unilaterally decided to recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
Violence and Brutality
The agents can be found in Israel too. Palestinian activists have reported being confronted by the mustaribeen in cities like Haifa, where they have earned a reputation of violence and brutality.
In recent years, Palestinians have employed several tactics to identify and fight back against the mustaribeen.
That includes wearing light colours and tucking their tops into their trousers: the undercover officers tend to wear darker colours and looser clothing to hide weapons.
Moussa said that protesters also organise themselves in smaller groups to avoid being captured by agents, and also share information on social media about suspicious individuals.
“I was told, those undercover units are sometimes recognised because they try to look and act ‘too Palestinian’,” he said.
Khalili added:
“More often than not, Palestinians can with a bit of attention spot them. But often they are intervening in incredibly heated moments of protest where Palestinians’ attention is elsewhere.”
West Bank Raids
The mustaribeen don’t just carry out arrests; they have been known to shoot and kill Palestinians, too.
In May 2021, they shot and killed Ahmed Fahd, 24, a civilian who lived in al-Amari refugee camp in Ramallah.
Israeli intelligence officials later called his family to apologise, stating they had meant to kill his brother and uncle accused of being involved in “terror activities”.
Increasingly, Israeli military raids on West Bank towns and cities – which now almost occur on a daily basis – involve mustaribeen elements.
Earlier this month, the Israeli army carried out a two-day raid on the city of Tulkarm, killing eight Palestinians, which it said involved “forces from the army, border guards, mustaribeen, and the general security service”.
These undercover units, backed by regular armed forces, operate differently to agents at protests.
“What happened in Jenin today is an operation of a different calibre. It combines military superiority and infiltration. The thing is, even if those units are recognised, they’re heavily armed and supported by Israeli military units,” said Moussa.
“Therefore, most people don’t stand a chance of confronting them.”
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image: Israeli forces are dressed as patients, medics and civilians in the Ibn Sina Hospital (Screengrab/X)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Mere hours after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) found a plausible case that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, a historic hearing took place in a federal courtroom in Oakland, California. Several Palestinians who are suing President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin for failure to prevent genocide and complicity in genocide testified before district court Judge Jeffrey White in a live-streamed session.
“I have lost everything in this war,” plaintiff Omar Al-Najjar testified from a hospital in Gaza. “I have nothing but my grief. This is what Israel and its supporters have done to us.” Al-Najjar reported that conditions are so bad there is “widespread childbirth in the street.”
The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of Northern California on November 13, 2023, on behalf of Palestinian human rights organizations Defense for Children International – Palestine (DCI-P) and Al-Haq, three Palestinian individuals who live in Gaza and five Palestinian Americans who have family in Gaza. The complaint in Defense for Children International – Palestine v. Biden alleges violations of the Genocide Convention and customary international law which forbids genocide.
On November 16, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction to immediately force Biden, Blinken and Austin to stop providing additional money, weapons, and military and diplomatic support to Israel for its genocide in Gaza.
The January 26, 2024, hearing featured testimony by Palestinian plaintiffs and a renowned expert on genocide and the Holocaust. Plaintiffs testified from Gaza, Ramallah and in the courtroom. They described the death, devastation and displacement their families have suffered since Israel began its military assault on Gaza after the October 7 Hamas attacks.
Attorneys representing the Department of Justice (DOJ) did not challenge the fact that Israel is committing genocide or contest plaintiffs’ allegations that U.S. support has furthered the genocide. They argued instead that the court doesn’t have jurisdiction to hear the case because it involves a “political question” regarding foreign policy that is reserved to Congress or the president.
Judge White appeared very sympathetic to the Palestinian plaintiffs. But he signaled that he may find that the issues in dispute raise a political question which would prevent his court from hearing the case.
It is rare that a federal judge allows a hearing to be broadcast. It attests to the public interest in charging the president and two cabinet members with complicity in genocide and failure to prevent genocide. The judge approved licenses for 1,000 people to watch the proceedings via Zoom and even that didn’t cover all of those who wanted to tune in.
“The Gaza That We Knew No Longer Exists”
The witnesses included Ahmed Abofoul, a Palestinian lawyer and legal researcher at Al-Haq, one of the organizational plaintiffs, who testified that more than 60 relatives on his father’s side had been killed, 15 of them in a single airstrike; many of their bodies remain buried under the rubble. For the first time in its 45-year history, Al-Haq is unable to document human rights violations throughout Gaza. “The Gaza that we knew no longer exists,” he said.
Plaintiff Laila El-Haddad, a Palestinian American writer, testified that her neighborhood in Gaza was reduced to “a large pile of sand.” Dozens of her relatives have been killed in Israel’s assaults and some were buried in mass graves. She described a “profound feeling of not just sorrow and sadness, but injustice and helplessness,” adding, “Biden could with one phone call put an end to this. He’s decided to aid and abet.”
Plaintiff Waeil Elbhassi is Palestinian American with extended family in Gaza. More than 100 of his relatives have been killed or injured since October 7. “Israel is making Gaza unlivable so there will be nothing for them to come back to. People don’t want to leave. If they stay, they might die. If they leave, they won’t be able to come back.”
Plaintiff Basim Elkarra, who is Palestinian American, testified that after the temporary humanitarian pause between Israel and Hamas in November, 65 members of his family were murdered by Israeli forces. Dozens are missing. “How can children or anyone deal with the relentless bombing that shakes you to the core?” he asked.
Khaled Quzmar, general director of Defense for Children International – Palestine, an organizational plaintiff, testified that DCI-P provides legal services and psychosocial support to children. It monitors and documents human rights violations against Palestinian children. Now, he said, DCI-P is “completely unable to work.”
DOJ attorneys objected to the testimony of Barry Trachtenberg, a professor of Jewish history and expert in genocide and the Holocaust, saying he was not qualified to opine on matters of law, but the judge allowed it. Trachtenberg said, “Israel’s assault on Gaza has been funded by the American people, fought with U.S.-supplied weapons, and encouraged by a complicit White House. Unlike past genocides, which were adjudicated long after they had concluded, we have an opportunity to halt this one in its tracks. Palestinians have suffered far too much and for far too long.”
The Lawsuit Charges Biden, Blinken and Austin with Arming Israel’s Genocide
The lawsuit alleges that Biden, Blinken and Austin transferred weapons and military equipment to Israel during its unfolding genocide. The defendants have asked Congress to appropriate $14.1 billion in military assistance to Israel — in addition to the $3.8 billion the U.S. already provides to Israel each year. Blinken authorized a $320 million transfer of military equipment to an Israeli manufacturer of precision bomb kits.
“As Israel’s closest ally and strongest supporter, being its biggest provider of military assistance by a large margin and with Israel being the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II, the United States has the means available to have a deterrent effect on Israeli officials now pursuing genocidal acts against the Palestinian people in Gaza,” the legal complaint states.
The Palestinian plaintiffs are asking the court to declare that defendants Biden, Blinken and Austin violated their duty under customary international law, as part of federal common law, to take all measures within their power to prevent Israel from committing genocidal acts against the Palestinian people in Gaza.
Plaintiffs also seek an injunction ordering the defendants to take all measures within their power to prevent Israel from committing genocidal acts against the Palestinians in Gaza. This includes ordering defendants to exert influence over Israel to: 1) end its bombing of the Palestinian people in Gaza which has caused mass killing and serious injury; 2) lift the siege on Gaza and allow all fuel, food, electricity, water and humanitarian aid into Gaza; and 3) prevent the “evacuation” or forcible transfer and expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza and guarantee their freedom of movement.
Finally, plaintiffs are asking the court to issue an injunction to prohibit defendants from: 1) providing, coordinating or facilitating military assistance and money to Israel, including the sales, transfer and delivery of weapons to Israel, and the provision of military personnel and equipment that advance Israel’s commission of genocidal acts and 2) obstructing attempts by the international community, including the UN, to implement a ceasefire and lift the siege on Gaza.
Will the Judge Find the Case Raises a “Political Question” and Dismiss It?
Judge White began the hearing by noting the “brutal attacks by Hamas” and that Israel’s “defensive” campaign was “similarly brutal.” He noted that Israel had killed “tens of thousands of Palestinians, children” and the “destruction was widespread.” Israel, the judge said, “destroyed critical civilian infrastructure, schools, refugee camps and safe houses.” He described the U.S.’s “substantial military, financial and diplomatic support” and said it continues to “fund and proffer weapons” to Israel.
The judge then asked counsel for the plaintiffs and defendants whether the court — judicial branch — had jurisdiction to hear the case, or whether it involved foreign policy decisions that were “quintessential political questions” reserved to the executive and legislative (political) branches.
CCR attorney Katherine Gallagher, representing the plaintiffs, told Judge White this is not a political question; it is a legal question. “These are not questions of policy,” she said. “These are questions of law.” The courts serve as a check on the political branches, she said. The executive has “no discretion to violate the law” and the United States has a “clear, unambiguous duty to punish and prevent genocide.” The U.S., she added, is making policy determinations that are contrary to international law.
Attorney Jean Lin argued for the DOJ that it is “not the role of the courts to indict Israel for violation of international law.” She said the plaintiffs were “directly challenging U.S. policy.”
Judge White cited a 2017 case in which his own decision to dismiss was affirmed by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The Marshall Islands had sued the U.S. to fulfill its legal obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and customary international law to negotiate in good faith to end the nuclear arms race at an early date and for total nuclear disarmament. Judge White said the case involved nonjusticiable political questions.
Gallagher distinguished that case from the present case. In the Marshall Islands case, the plaintiffs were seeking to compel negotiations, but here, she said, there is a legal question: whether the defendants failed to prevent genocide. “It’s fundamentally different than weighing into negotiations.” She cited the ICJ’s new decision that makes clear there is an obligation to prevent and punish genocide.
Judge White also asked plaintiffs’ counsel what an injunction would look like if he issued one. Gallagher responded: “There can’t be more military support to the ongoing genocide in Gaza.” She clarified that the plaintiffs aren’t seeking to end all military support. For example, Israel’s Iron Dome anti-missile system would not be implicated. She proposed a hearing with the U.S. government and discovery to examine which weapons Israel is using in Gaza.
Lin said the court has “no jurisdiction to enjoin the president in his official duties” as commander in chief.
The judge cited the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution that says treaties are the supreme law of the land. That includes the Genocide Convention.
Lin retorted that even if the Genocide Convention is the supreme law of the land, that doesn’t mean it may be enforced by U.S. courts.
Gallagher noted that genocide also violates customary international law — which arises from the general and consistent practice of states. Customary international law is part of federal common law and must be enforced in U.S. courts, whether or not its provisions are enshrined in a ratified treaty.
Judge White characterized the testimony as “truly horrific, gut wrenching, no words to describe it.” He noted that the government doesn’t dispute the uncontradicted evidence of a “genocide in progress.”
“The Palestinian people are living in fear and without food, medical care, clean water or sufficient humanitarian aid. Defendants — the president of the United States and his secretaries of state and defense — have provided substantial military, financial and diplomatic support to Israel,” Judge White said.
“However, the primary concern for this court is the limitation of its own jurisdictional reach.” He said this case was one of the “the most difficult” of his career. He told the plaintiffs, “You have been seen, you have been heard by this court. I’m going to take it extremely seriously.”
Judge White may decide to play both ends against the middle. His decision could begin with a detailed recitation of the horrific facts on the ground in Gaza, the weaponry that the U.S. provides to Israel to kill large numbers of Palestinians, and his sympathy for the suffering of the plaintiffs. He will say what a difficult decision this is for him.
But my hands are tied, he might say, because this case raises “nonjusticiable political questions” reserved only to the executive and legislative branches of government, so he must dismiss the case.
Or he may take the high road and allow these Palestinian plaintiffs redress for the unspeakable violence perpetrated against their families and organizations by Israel, and allow them a judicial remedy.
Gallagher reported that a massive crowd of supporters convened outside Judge White’s courtroom as a huge sign reading, “Stop the Genocide Biden” hung from the federal courthouse.
Activists around the country are also demonstrating in support of the genocide lawsuits against Israel. On January 26, the day of the hearing in the Oakland case and the issuance of the ICJ’s order on provisional measures, hundreds of Palestinians, Jews, and other local community members gathered in downtown Portland for a march and rally calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and an end to U.S. military aid to Israel. The action was endorsed by several civil society groups, including Jewish Voice for Peace PDX and Healthcare Workers for Palestine Portland.
Cities throughout the United States have passed resolutions calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.
Regardless of how Judge White rules in the Palestinians’ case, it represents a milestone in the struggle to stop Israel’s genocide in Gaza and will inspire people in the U.S. and around the world to demand an end to Israel’s oppression of the Palestinian people.
UPDATE: On January 31, Judge White reluctantly dismissed the Palestinian plaintiffs’ lawsuit against Biden, Blinken and Austin. Relying on the political question doctrine, the judge found he had no jurisdiction to hear the case. He wrote that “the ongoing military siege in Gaza is intended to eradicate a whole people and therefore plausibly falls within the international prohibition against genocide.” But he concluded this case was a “rare” instance where “the preferred outcome is inaccessible to the court.” He also wrote that the “Court implores Defendants to examine the results of their unflagging support of the military siege against the Palestinians in Gaza.”
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild, and a member of the national advisory boards of Assange Defense and Veterans For Peace, and the bureau of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers. She is founding dean of the People’s Academy of International Law and the U.S. representative to the continental advisory council of the Association of American Jurists. Her books include Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral and Geopolitical Issues. She is co-host of “Law and Disorder” Radio.
Featured image: I Scream, You Scream, We All Scream- by Mr. Fish
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has described the UN Palestinian refugee agency (UNRWA) as “the backbone of all humanitarian response in Gaza” and appealed to all countries to “guarantee the continuity of UNRWA’s lifesaving work”.
Several countries including the United States, UNRWA’s biggest donor, paused funding after Israel accused some agency staff of taking part in the October 7 attack by Hamas.
Speaking to the UN Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP) on Wednesday, Guterres said he was “personally horrified” by the accusations waged against UNRWA staff but stressed the need to overcome the termination.
“Yesterday, I met with donors to listen to their concerns and to outline the steps we are taking to address them,” he said.
“I am extremely concerned by the inhumane conditions faced by Gaza’s 2.2 million people, as they struggle to survive without any of the basics.”
Describing conditions inside the besieged enclave, the UN chief said heavy rains were flooding makeshift tent camps, forcing children, parents and the elderly to sleep in the mud. Clean water has become almost completely inaccessible and preventable diseases are rife, while the health system has collapsed.
The World Health Organization (WHO) on Wednesday warned of a “massive catastrophe” unfolding in Gaza.
“This is a population that is starving to death, this is a population that is being pushed to the brink,” WHO’s emergencies director Michael Ryan told a news conference.
“The civilians of Gaza are not parties to this conflict and they should be protected, as should be their health facilities.
UN officials have warned that UNRWA will have to halt operations by the end of February if funding is not restored.
The heads of WHO, the World Food Program (WFP), UNICEF, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and other agencies and partners said the allegations were “horrifying.”
“However, we must not prevent an entire organisation from delivering on its mandate to serve people in desperate need,” they said in a joint statement. “No other entity has the capacity to deliver the scale and breadth of assistance that 2.2 million people in Gaza urgently need.”
‘Completely Dependent’ on UNRWA
At a meeting of the UN Security Council on Gaza on Wednesday, UN aid chief Martin Griffiths said that UNRWA plays a fundamental role in the humanitarian response in Gaza.
“To put it very simply and bluntly: Our humanitarian response for the occupied Palestinian territory is dependent, completely dependent, on UNRWA being adequately funded and operational,” Griffiths told the 15-member council.
“UNRWA’s lifesaving services … to over three-quarters of Gaza’s residents should not be jeopardised by the alleged actions of a few individuals. It is a matter of extraordinary disproportion,” he said.
Griffiths added that the ability of the humanitarian community to reach the people of Gaza with aid remained “grossly inadequate”.
“We continue to face the issue of the rejection for entry of much-needed items into Gaza by Israel for reasons which, at least for us, are unclear and inconsistent,” he said.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) last week ordered Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent its troops from committing genocide and take steps to improve the humanitarian situation of Palestinians in Gaza, in a case brought by South Africa.
In its highly anticipated interim ruling on Friday, the ICJ did not call for an immediate ceasefire but said Israel must promptly implement “immediate and effective” measures to guarantee the delivery of urgently required humanitarian aid and basic services to Gaza.
South Africa’s Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor on Wednesday said all states have an obligation to stop funding and facilitating Israel’s military actions in Gaza after the World Court made clear those actions have the potential to amount to genocide.
Israel must report to the court within a month on what it is doing to uphold the order to take all measures within its power to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza.
Accusations Against UNRWA
The accusations against UNRWA staff members became public on Friday, when the agency announced it had fired some staff after Israel provided information. Guterres said on Sunday that of 12 people implicated nine were fired, one is dead, and the identity of the remaining two was being clarified.
A six-page Israeli dossier said 12 UNRWA staff members took part in the October 7 attacks that killed 1,139 people. It also suggests Israel has wider evidence that UNRWA has employed 190 Hamas and Islamic Jihad fighters.
Later on Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said UNRWA had been “totally infiltrated” by Hamas and called for its termination.
“It’s time for the international community and the U.N. itself to understand that UNRWA’s mission must be terminated,” Netanyahu told visiting UN delegates, according to a statement from his office.
The Palestinians have claimed Israel falsified information to tarnish UNRWA.
Donors, including the European Union and several European nations, the United Kingdom, Japan and Canada, have suspended funding to the agency.
Riyad Mansour, the permanent observer to the UN for the Palestinian territories, told the UN Security Council on Wednesday there was no reason to “take measures that effectively amount to the collective punishment of 30,000 UNRWA staff and millions of refugees” who benefit from UNRWA’s services.
US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield said the US is working to facilitate the delivery of more aid into Gaza, sidestepping reports that Israel has consistently blocked UN aid delivery efforts.
Thomas-Greenfield also said that the ICJ ruling was consistent with the US approach to Gaza, and that conditions for a ceasefire “do not exist”.
South Africa’s Pandor said Pretoria has done everything it can and now it is up to the global community to play its part by holding Israel accountable.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The United States has long called itself the “indispensable nation” to justify its claim to global leadership. Through its inane policies and destructive actions, the US has lost both international regard and support from world leaders who expected better of the world’s hyperpower. The latest outrage is the Biden administration’s decision to cut existential funding to the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) because a dozen of its 13,000 employees in Gaza were allegedly involved in the December 7th Hamas surprise attack on Israel.
The Israel-blinded Biden administration does not comprehend that UNRWA is the “indispensable organisation” which provides food, shelter, health care, education and 30,000 jobs for the 5.7 million UNRWA-registered Palestinian refugees in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. UNRWA is and always was a quasi state-within-a-state serving a stateless people. What would happen to these survivors of Israel’s 1948 and 1967 wars and their descendants if there was no UNRWA?
The agency was created in 1949 to care for the 750,000 Palestinians driven from their homes in villages and towns during that war. If Israel had heeded and implemented UN General Assembly resolution 194, paragraph 11, and allowed the Palestinians to return home and paid them compensation for their losses, there would have been no UNRWA and no permanent stateless Palestinian refugee population living in limbo for 75 years until the world decides what to do with them.
Israel’s main objection to UNRWA is its registration as refugees the descendants of Palestinans driven from their homes in 1948. This has perpetuated “refugeedom” in the Palestinian camps in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza and in host countries. Many live in camps among fellow villagers and townspeople from Palestine. This fosters a sense of community and solidarity which Israel seeks to erase.
In response to statelessness, young Palestinians have formed resistance groups which since the 1950s have mounted attacks on Israel and in the 1960s hijacked civilian aircraft. Resistance put Palestine back on the world map and reclaimed the stolen Palestinian identity.
The powers-that-be have promised a “two state solution” to the Palestinian predicament by founding a Palestinian state alongside Israel but have never made a serious effort to deliver on this promise which has been revived in recent months. It is too late. Israel says there can be no Palestinian state between the Mediterranean and Jordan River.
The two-state solution has become a mirage which has faded. Without serious US and international opposition and sanctions, Israel has illegally planted 750,000 colonists in occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank, the areas which would make up 98-99 per cent of a Palestinian state while Gaza would contribute only one or two per cent.
In the absence of a two-state solution, UNRWA has become all-the-more indispensable for stateless Palestinians. Paradoxically, Israel has always been critical of UNRWA and eager to see its relief and works infrastructure dismantled and its 30,000 employees out of jobs. I say, paradoxically, for without UNRWA, Israel would have to assume responsibility for the lives and welfare of Palestinian refugees in all the areas it occupied in 1967 although Israel, as occupying power, has refused to provide for Palestinians who dwell there but are not refugees.
Over the decades, Israel has accused UNRWA of inciting young Palestinians through the textbooks in agency schools. This can be achieved only by leaving out the history of Palestine during the 20th and 21st centuries, which has been 123 years of colonisation, displacement and warfare. In East Jerusalem, Israel has tried and failed to impose Israeli approved textbooks and the Israeli curriculum.
While the European Union and various countries have joined Israel in mounting the textbook charge, UNRWA’s accusers do not investigate the incitement of Palestinian children by Israeli soldiers and settlers who harass them as the walk to school or play football in neighbourhood streets. The situation became so ugly in Khalil (Hebron) in the West Bank that the Temporary International Presence in Hebron was deployed to protect Palestinian children in that city between 1994 and 2019. No UNRWA detractors mention the actions of Israeli troops who in the West bank and East Jerusalem — as testified by Israeli soldiers in Breaking the Silence — crash into Palestinian homes at the middle of the night, beat and arrest males, or confine families in single rooms while taking over entire floors as observation posts.
UNRWA schools have also been accused by Israel of hiding weapons used to resist Israeli incursions into Gaza and, since it took control of Gaza, collaborating with Hamas. On the latter charge, UNRWA has had no choice but to have and maintain contacts with the Hamas-run administration in Gaza.
Although Hamas is Israel’s current enemy, since the First Intifada (1987-1993), successive Israeli governments had fostered the growth of Hamas with the objective of undermining Fatah which led the resistance during the initial uprising and the Second Intifada (2000-2005). Israel relished the rift between Fatah and Hamas which drove Fatah’s security agents from Gaza in 2007 and assumed control of the narrow coastal strip. Israel switched to the Fateh-dominated Palestinian Authority in 1993 following the signing of the Oslo accords and discouraged Palestinian reunification, splitting Gaza from the West Bank. Today, Israel is reaping the harvest of its wrong-headed policies. Destroying UNRWA would be disastrous and destabilising for the entire region.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image: Philippe Lazzarini, Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) holds press conference in Jerusalem on October 27, 2023 [Mostafa Alkharouf/Anadolu Agency]
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Delegates at an Israeli conference calling for the re-settlement of Israelis in Gaza were handed a board game that seemingly allowed players to map out where they would establish homes in the enclave after it was conquered.
The game, titled, “Come Build Your House in Gaza!” shows a layout of Gaza separated into different neighbourhoods with Hebrew names and explanations of the meaning behind each of them.
It was seen at the Victory Of Israel conference, an event hosted in Jerusalem on Sunday by right-wing Israeli politicians, campaigners and religious figures calling for the building of Israeli settlements in Gaza after the end of the war.
The conference was attended by 11 cabinet ministers and 15 coalition members of parliament.
Players of the game are invited to place wooden house-shaped blocks, with their names written on stickers, on the neighbourhoods they want to settle in.
Among them is the “Heroes of Gaza Neighbourhood”, which it says will be established on top of the Shujaiya neighbourhood. An estimated 300 people were killed in a single Israeli strike on a residential block in Shujaiya in December of last year.
“The translation to Hebrew is ‘Neighbourhood of the Brave,'” reads the caption, referring to its current name.
“The name comes from the Muslims who fought the Crusaders in the Gaza area. The name can also be attributed to the [Israeli army] fighters who fought in the city,” it says.
Another is listed as the “Gavish neighbourhood”, currently al-Nasser, which the game says is named after Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, who fought with Israel repeatedly, including in the 1967 war that saw the capture of Gaza.
“Its name will be changed to honour chief commander of the Southern Command in the 6-day war, Yeshayahu Gavish,” reads the caption, using another name for the 1967 war.
Israel has occupied Gaza since 1967, and during that time built numerous settlements across the territory in which Israeli Jews settled.
In 2005, however, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered the destruction and evacuation of the Gaza settlements, a move which many right-wing Israelis opposed and continue to regard as a mistake to be rectified.
‘Control Territory’
The conference came just days after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling on South Africa’s genocide case against Israel, for which it heard evidence earlier this month.
The court gave Israel six orders regarding the siege and bombardment of Gaza. One of those was that Israel “must take measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to the members of the Palestinian groups in the Gaza Strip”.
The court also cited a series of statements made by Israeli leaders as evidence of incitement and dehumanising language against Palestinians, including comments made by Israeli President Isaac Herzog.
During the conference, Israel’s far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvircalled for Palestinians to be “voluntarily encouraged to leave” Gaza.
In response to calls from the audience for Palestinians to be displaced from Gaza, Ben Gvir responded by saying: “You are right, voluntary encouragement, let them go from here.
“We must return to Gush Katif and northern Samaria… if you don’t want it to happen again for the seventh or tenth time, we must return home and control the territory, encouraging immigration, and the death penalty for terrorists,” he added.
Gush Katif was a bloc of 17 Israeli settlements in southern Gaza. At the conference, Ben Gvir, along with other ministers, signed a petition for “victory and renewal of the settlement in Gaza” during the event.
The document said that signatories pledged that they would “grow Jewish settlements full of life in Gaza”.
Afterwards, attendees were filmed celebrating the move by waving the Israeli flag and cheering. Following Ben Gvir’s speech, people could be heard chanting “death to Arabs”.
Some of the statements made at the conference have led to backlash, with some pointing out that they could violate the ICJ’s orders.
Itay Epshtain, an Israel-based special advisor for the Norwegian Refugee Council, shared a video in which Ben Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrichcould be seen arm-in-arm, dancing together at the conference.
The human rights lawyer said that the image “would form part of the compelling evidence of noncompliance” with the ICJ’s recent order to take all measures within its power to prevent acts of genocide and to punish acts of incitement.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image: “Come Build Your House in Gaza!” on display at the Victory of Israel conference in Jerusalem, on 28 January 2024 (Oren Ziv/MEE)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Swiss philosopher Henri-Frédéric Amiel’s famous description of the spirit of what we call today the Collective West, “le culte de la chose bien faite,” sounds sadly hollow nowadays.
Once upon a time, Amiel’s words referred to a palpable, vibrant, reality. In countries associated with the civilisation of the West, and as noted by Weber in particular where the Protestant ethic prevailed, doing things right and efficiently used to be a fanatical cult, just as Amiel observed. The beneficial results, especially by comparison to the performance of civilisations and cultures rooted in different principles, were plainly visible and indisputable.
Amiel lived in the nineteenth century. There is a contemporary French philosopher, Emmanuel Todd, who has noted processes that are markedly different. He has the reputation of a prescient analyst and uncanny forecaster. His recently published book, “The Defeat of the West,” will unsettle many. Its tenor is in sharp contrast to Amiel’s self-confident and optimistic view that the West has got the winning combination with its defining characteristic of “doing things right.” According to Emmanuel Todd, the West no longer retains its perfectionist edge. Its fundamental task now is merely to avert the impending downfall, if it still can. As Todd cogently argues, the West has not only passed its “active stage,” which is reflected in Henri-Frédéric Amiel’s cited remark, but also the ensuing civilisation-on-auto-pilot “zombie stage”. It now finds itself in the terminal “stage zero,” the religious mainsprings whence its civilisation drew its vitality being completely sapped. In the West, there is no longer a cult of efficiency and perfection capable of nurturing and sustaining a corresponding cultural articulation.
Todd has an enviable track record. In the mid-1970s he published a remarkable and at the time incredible volume, “The Final Fall,” where he predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union. This writer’s reaction to Todd’s arguments when they were put forward 40 years ago was deeply sceptical; they were enticing, yet also seemed unrealistic. To most contemporaries, the Soviet Union appeared to be an unshakable, enduring reality. Todd’s meticulous analysis of Soviet demographic data in support of his thesis was impressive, but seemed unconvincing as a cause capable of producing an effect of such magnitude. Few could imagine then that barely a decade later processes would commence that eventually led to precisely the outcome that Todd had predicted.
It would be unforgivably simplistic to attribute the implosion of the Soviet Union mainly to unfavourable demographics. That was a complex operation in which a multitude of factors played a role. But the virtue of the diagnostic investigation conducted 40 years ago by Emmanuel Todd was that he demonstrated how seemingly minor yet tell-tale signs could point to undercurrents and important processes that unjustifiably may have been overlooked.
And indeed, it is in the West now that tell-tale indications of disarray are increasingly emerging, to the consternation of those who have eyes to see and historical perspective to make comparisons. These signs point to a variety of breakdowns, only some of which are purely mechanical. They appear mostly to be cultural in essence, and therein lies the danger. A few recent random examples will serve to make the point.
Exhibit A: Political corruption.
Arizona Republican Senate candidate Kari Lake, who many suspect was cheated out of victory in the race for governor in 2022, is again the subject of political controversy in her state. A few weeks ago, she published the tape recording of a disgraceful bribe offer made to her by the state chairman of her own party. After requesting a confidential tête à tête conversation, that individual visited Lake in her home to inform her that wealthy and powerful “people back East” (in America that is a universally understood metaphor for deep state power centres) were prepared to satisfy Ms. Lake’s financial requirements if she would withdraw from the Senate race, presumably to make way for a controllable Establishment candidate. She only had to name her figure. To her credit, she flatly refused.
Readers from “third world” countries will be nonplussed by these revelations. But the matter should be viewed in context. In America political corruption is not unknown, but the brazenness of this particular proposition made in Arizona is a quantum leap into moral turpitude by comparison to previously recorded outrages of a similar nature.
Exhibit B: Academic corruption.
Harvard University President Claudine Gay was compelled to resign because of multiple plagiarisms discovered in her thin scholarly opus. Harvard was the flagship of the dozen leading Ivy League academic institutions in America. Its reputation for integrity is unimpeachable and sacrosanct. The appointment of the scarcely qualified Ms. Gay, apparently selected for her politically correct external characteristics rather than serious scholarship, was sufficiently problematic. But now her fall from grace, triggered by the embarrassing charge of plagiarism, gravely compromises not just Harvard but inescapably the American academe as a whole.
And if that were not enough, also at Harvard another academic scandal is brewing. Credible allegations have been put forward, and are being investigated, that researchers at the Dana-Farber cancer institute affiliated with Harvard Medical School had manipulated images and research data. One of the papers under review was authored by Dana-Farber CEO Laurie Glimcher. Molecular biologist Sholto David suggested Adobe Photoshop was used to copy and paste images in some of the papers. If correct, it is quite an adolescent way of cobbling together an academic research study.
“We are committed to a culture of accountability and integrity. Therefore, every inquiry is examined fully to ensure the soundness of the scientific literature,” and so on and so forth without missing a single platitude, responded Dana-Farber’s research integrity officer Barrett Rollins in a statement issued after the embarrassing allegations were made public. But big words cannot hide the damage that had been inflicted nor suppress questions about the implications. Merely alleging such academically unbecoming trickery would have been unimaginable a very short time ago.
Exhibit C: Mechanical breakdown.
Aviation does not seem to be fairing much better either. Boeing is an iconic American corporation. It is to industrial manufacturing roughly what Harvard is to higher education. That is a very important fact to remember when assessing the implications of several unprecedented Delta and Alaska Airlines incidents which occurred recently, involving Boeing commercial airplanes on which inadequately secured exit doors had been blown off in-flight. To make matters worse and disturbingly indicative of the quality of workmanship in the new normal, when these incidents occurred the airplanes (minus the critical plug bolts) were in mint condition, having come off the Boeing assembly lines just weeks before. Providentially, no one was sucked out into the surrounding stratosphere, but there is no guarantee that next time the passengers and crew will be as lucky.
Granted, in some parts of the world such examples of sloppiness and misconduct would be commonplace. Most likely they would not be noticed nor would portentous significance be attributed to them. The matter under consideration however is different in an essential respect, and cultural context is the key to understanding why. The trends we have surveyed are emerging in a society, a civilizational realm to be more precise, where within living memory the banner of professional integrity still stood exceptionally high and where laxity in the performance of duty until recently was neither common nor casually tolerated.
The suspicion that a sea change may be under way is therefore neither unwarranted nor is it at all extravagant.
It may be premature based on these random examples, to which many more could of course be added, to draw bold conclusions about an imminent chute finale. But a compelling prima facie case for decadence can certainly be made. The cultural matrix is severely damaged, whether or not irreversibly we shall soon see. Previously inconceivable departures from long established cultural canons, in this case of efficiency and professional integrity, are now becoming increasingly common. Their impact is felt from Ivy League academy to manufacturing plants, and presumably encompasses much that lies in between.
Emmanuel Todd said that his latest book would be his last. He should perhaps reconsider. It seems that there still are plenty of interesting topics to cover, and we are rightfully entitled to expect from him a worthy sequel.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Stephen Karganovic is president of “Srebrenica Historical Project,” an NGO registered in the Netherlands to investigate the factual matrix and background of events that took place in Srebrenica in July of 1995. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Rethinking Srebrenica examines the forensic evidence of the alleged Srebrenica “massacre” possessed by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague. Even though the ICTY created more than 3,500 autopsy reports, many of these autopsy reports were based on bone fragments, which do not represent complete bodies. An examination of the matching femur bones found reveals that there were only about 1,900 complete bodies that were exhumed. Of these, some 1,500 autopsy reports indicated a cause of death consistent with battlefield casualties. Only about 400 autopsy reports indicated execution as a cause of death, as revealed by ligatures and blindfolds. This forensic evidence does not warrant the conclusion of a genocide having taken place.
Karganovic examines the events that took place in Srebrenica in July 1995 in a wholistic manner instead of restricting it to a three-day event. The ten chapters cover:
1) Srebrenica: A Critical Overview;
2) Demilitarization of the UN Safe Zone of Srebrenica;
3) Genocide or Blowback?;
4) General Presentation and Interpretation of Srebrenica Forensic Data (Pattern of Injury Breakdown);
5) An Analysis of the Srebrenica Forensic Reports Prepared by the ICTY Prosecution Experts;
6) An Analysis of Muslim Column Losses Attributable to Minefields, Combat Activity, and Other Causes;
7) The Genocide Issue: Was there a Demonstrable Intent to Exterminate All Muslims?;
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This relatively lengthy introduction is deemed necessary to understand how we got to where we are today; to grasp the long-term western (US) plan to dominate the world economy with their currency, the US dollar, to which some 23 years ago the US-dollar’s cousin, the Euro, was added, with the same “zero-backing” base.
*
The current western (US) made International Monetary System (IMS) has been plagued by unfairness since the beginning, when it was created through the so-called Federal Reserve Act (FRA), signed by US President Woodrow Wilson on December 23, 1913.
Image is from the public domain
The FRA supposedly provided the US Government with the means to control inflation, and most importantly, it brought about the internationalization of the US-dollar as a global currency. Meaning, the US dollar could be used internationally as a trading currency, which de facto, made it into an international reserve currency. As such, it was increasingly used by countries around the world as a major reserve currency, allowing, or “necessitating” Washington to increase their money supply.
In 1834, the United States fixed the price of gold at $20.67 per ounce, where it remained until 1933. Other major countries joined the gold standard in the 1870s. The period from 1880 to 1914 is known as the classical gold standard. During that time, most countries adhered (to varying degrees) to gold.
The law required the Federal Reserve to hold gold equal to 40 percent of the value of the currency it issued, i.e. the US dollar, and to convert those dollars into gold at a fixed price of $20.67 per ounce of pure gold.
The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 effectively created the Federal Reserve Bank called “The Fed”.
For purposes of (US) “financial stability” and adjustment to “varying international economic situations” the FRA also allowed The Fed to issue interest rates as guiding instruments for the US banking system, and de facto ever more for the international banking system, as The FED also internationalized the US dollar, especially for trade, so that gradually countries trading in US dollars were dollarized, to differing degrees. Trading in US dollars, no matter between what countries, became an unwritten rule.
This meant on average and over time, more than 90% of international reserves were held in gold and US dollars, thereby ever-more increasing their economies’ dependence on the US – or the US currency.
This also meant that the US could print dollars ever more indiscriminately – without backing – as the world depended ever-more on the US dollar for trade and national reserves.
When in July 1944 the Bretton Woods (BW) Conference not only created the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, but also a new Gold Standard, the US, organizer and effective “owner” of the BW Conference and its results, in a clever move, “convinced” the participating delegates of 44 nations to accept that the new Gold Standard – 1 troy ounce (about 31.1 grams) would be pegged to the US dollar.
Instead of fixing the value of gold according to the weighed average of the 5 or 6 key currencies emerging after WWII – applying the SDR principle – the gold rate was fixed at US$ 35 / per troy ounce (t-oz); the gold value used for backing the currencies of the BW-participating nations was expressed in US dollars.
This meant that de facto gold was replaceable by the US dollar.
The US also were and still are in full control of the IMF and the World Bank with a veto power. The US being the largest shareholder with a 16.5% share, effectively giving it veto power, since major decisions need 85% for approval.
This total control over the IMF and the World Bank is also the reason why China is vastly underrepresented in both the IMF and the World Bank. China is the second largest economy in absolute GDP terms, and the world’s largest economy in Purchasing Power Parity, or PPP-terms – see below.
The US administration needs congressional approval for any IMF quota reform. It took the government years to get Congress to put its stamp on the 2010 reform that increased China’s voting at the expense of European countries, but NOT at the expense of the US.
Similarly, only in October 2016, was the Chinese Yuan (RMB) accepted to join the IMF’s basket of Special Drawing Rights (SDR). In May 2022 was the currency weight in the SDR “adjusted” for the US-dollar to currently 43.38% from 41.73% and the yuan to 12.28% from 10.92%. The euro’s weighting declined to 29.31% from 30.93%, the yen’s fell to 7.59% from 8.33% and the British pound fell to 7.44% from 8.09%.
There is no doubt, comparing the Chinese economy with that of the US and Europe, that the Yuan is way undervalued. A more just valuation / weighing of the Yuan in the SDR currency basket (US$, Euro, Chinese Yuan, UK pound, Japanese yen) – is of high priority.
U.S. Abandons the Gold Standard
When in 1971 President Nixon abandoned the gold standard, via the US controlled IMF, meaning that the US would no longer adhere to backing her currency (US dollar) with gold, the price of gold skyrocketed and the US dollar took de facto over the role of gold.
This presented an unquestioned reason for the US to print indiscriminately US dollars, as the world needed them for their international trade and national reserve coffers.
The second blow came when in 1974, after the artificially created oil crisis of 1973-1974, the U.S. “negotiated” with Saudi Arabia, the head of OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) that hydrocarbons, predominantly oil and gas, would only be traded in US dollars, thus, prompting Petrodollars flooding the world.
In exchange, the U.S. would provide Saudi Arabia with military protection and assist with weapons deals and infrastructure investment.
As of this day, oil continues to be the most valuable asset on the planet. More than 85% of all energy used to fuel the world’s economy originates from hydrocarbons.
The OPEC-dollar transaction deal allowed the US again to print indiscriminately more US dollars, as every country in the world needed US dollars to buy its (hydrocarbon) energy, thereby strengthening the US’s currency dominance over the world.
Today, about 60% of the world’s most used currencies (formerly called “convertible currencies”) are US dollars. While the world is flooded with the totally non-backed US dollar, the Chinese Yuan, the currency of the second largest or arguably the largest economy (in PPP-terms), accounts only for about 5%.
This disequilibrium must be corrected.
Indications for de-dollarization are increasing. In the early 1990s more than 90% of all monetary reserves were held in US dollar-denominated securities. Equally, about 90% of all international trade took place in US dollars. Today these proportions have been reduced to about 50% and 65%, respectively.
It is worth mentioning that many of the OPEC countries have fully or partially abandoned the unwritten rule of trading hydrocarbons in US dollars, replacing the dollar by local currencies, or by Yuan.
But much more is needed.
Back to President Wilson, the signatory of the Federal Reserve Act.
Shortly before his death in February 1924, President Wilson apparently came to regret signing the bill (Federal Reserve Act), saying:
“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”
If indeed this is a true quote by President Woodrow Wilson, his foresight had repercussion up to this date – the world is ruled by a small elite and an unequal system, today still largely dominated by a single currency, the US dollar, which is backed by nothing, not gold, not commodities, not even by the United States’s own economy.
If GDP and debt are any indication for the value of a currency, consider this: Today’s US GDP in absolute terms is about US$ 27 trillion (followed by China US$ equivalent of 19.4 trillion), compared to a current US debt of 33.2 trillion – about 123% of GDP (China’s current debt of US-dollar equivalent 12.6 trillion – about a 65% debt-GDP ratio).
However, the real US debt, also called “unfunded liabilities” is currently about US$ 290 trillion (almost 11 times the current US GDP). Approximately 40% of unfunded liabilities consist of accrued interest on debt never intended to be paid, and another 20% of unmet medical liabilities, mostly related to war veterans’ injuries and psychic traumas; and about 12% relate to unfunded social security liabilities.
A little used economic indicator is Purchasing Power Parity (PPP). It equalizes the value of a basket of goods a currency can purchase, by eliminating the differences in price levels between countries. The GDP-PPP factor in the US is US$ 23.6 trillion, compared to China’s of US$-equivalent 33.5 trillion (2023 est.).
Converted into per capita, per year (pc/yr.) PPP: US = US$ 69,500; and China = US$ equivalent 24,000. Meaning – in China you may purchase for US$ 24,000 /pc/yr, what in the US would costs US$ 69,500 pc/yr.
In real economic terms GDP-PPP is more meaningful than the unadjusted GDP.
Towards a New International Monetary System
Any monetary reform must be seen and carried out considering the current international order – which is heavily marked by ever increasing conflicts between West and East.
Western powers are seeking to preserve their status, by rivaling the autonomous and sovereign development of independent nations, or nations that strive to become and stay independent from the western fangs.
To enhance their control over global events – and de facto, attempting to establish a “Global One World Government” — western powers have set up so-called “rules-based orders” attempting to erase established international and national laws. As a result, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Hague has become inoperable, defunct.
China’s and Russia’s philosophy of life and cooperation with the world and particularly within Asia is promoting a space for stability and joint development.
The year 2023 has shown that Greater Eurasia and Asia have so far been resistant to the negative external influences that are having the most dramatic consequences in Europe and the Middle East.
In summary, Asia and Eurasia remain a space of cooperation, not competition. The leading regional powers are able to reach terms that are fair to their smaller partners.
The new geographically widely dispersed BRICS-11 (5+6) add a new dimension to international cooperation – and to a constructive detachment from the western (US) sanctions regime and US dollar-dominated world-dictate.
*
A New or Revised International Monetary System: Might Consider.
General
Assign a greater role of PPP – in economic valuation as well as in the weighted average of IMF’s SDRs;
A massive reduction of US-dollars flooding the globe.
IMF / World Bank
Chinese Yuan to be revalued in the SDR, according to China’s economic strength
Chinese contribution in both IMF and World Bank to be reassessed, according to the weighted average of member-countries’ economies
Veto-power within these organizations to be reassessed; either abandoned altogether, i.e. one participant – one vote, or assigned according to newly assessed voting powers.
Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank (AIIB)
AIIB to become an ever-stronger player in international economic development, not as a competitor to the World Bank and IMF, but rather as a cooperator and leader or co-leader in specific sectors, where AIIB might have a comparative advantage.
AIIB might take a lead in multi-currency (economic development) investments, promoting local currencies, under the premises that local currencies are enhancing a nation’s sovereignty and economic strength.
Virtual / Trading Currencies
With the objective of de-dollarization – i.e., brining an equilibrium of currencies in world circulation – and effective banning / blocking of (economic) sanctioning, which has proven detrimental to smaller and weaker economies:
Promote trading in local currencies – SWAP agreements
Abandoning SWIFT transfer system – replacing it with not one, but different transfer systems, not linked to the US-dollar;
Developing SDR-type (weighted average of specific economic indicators) virtual trading currency or currencies; SDR-type – means an International Trading Currency (ITC) based on the principles applied to the IMF’s SDR;
AIIB could be at the forefront of developing an ITC
BRICS-plus could be an initial trial for a common SDR-type ITC;
Digital Currencies – including Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC)
To be used specifically for international trading;
If used for day-to-day people’s and commercial transactions, digital currencies, incl. CBDCs should not replace cash transactions, leaving people free to choose between cash and digital currencies
Backing of Currencies
A country’s own economy should be determining a country’s monetary flow, considering international reserves and internal economic growth- and contraction fluctuations
Instead of gold or other precious metals, currencies might be backed by a package or packages of, say 20 -25 internationally used commodities, of which approx. a third could be country-specific. Such commodity packages might also include gold and other precious metals, but foremost commonly used and essential food products and different types of raw materials, including hydrocarbons (notably petrol and gas) – and possibly other (maybe 10%-15%?), of less tangible social indicators; like public health; level of education; peaceful international cooperation; capacity of conflict resolution….
It is understood that these indicators, the commodity packages, and possibly social indicators, would have to be periodically reviewed and reassessed by an international body, designated by the Community of Nations.
The Community of Nations is not necessarily represented by the United Nations. The UN, as its stands and functions today, is no longer the UN established in October 1945 in San Francisco, to replace the League of Nations (set up after WWI), with the specific goal to help resolve international conflicts and to foster peace and harmony among nations, as today it is dominated by the US and a few US allies.
While a revision of the UN is necessary, it is beyond the task of designing a revised or new international monetary system.
Conclusion
The process of introducing a new system of “currency backing” might take time, and could start in Asia, under the lead of China and Russia, extending to the ASEAN and BRICS countries, and eventually and hopefully be adopted also in the west, meaning a successful revision and overhaul of the IMF and World Bank.
The AIIB and Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), as well as China’s International Monetary Institute (IMI), might take a leading role in designing currency backing packages.
The above are a few ideas for consideration and discussion possibly during the seminar on a “New International Monetary System” on 23 January 2024 in Beijing.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).
Peter is a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing. He is also a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
During his January 24 press conference, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov exposed the imperialistic attitudes that characterize the Western powers. The US is in gross violation of Article I of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which states:
“Each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly, and not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear-weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices.”
In shocking violation of Article I, the United States has nuclear weapons transferred to Kleine Brogel in Belgium, Buchel Air Base in Germany, Aviano and Ghedi Air Bases in Italy, Volkel Air Base in the Netherlands, and Incirlik in Turkey.
It was, therefore preposterous when Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov was accused of Russian misbehavior in transferring nuclear weapons to Belarus, at that country’s request.
The absurdity was increased when Minister Lavrov was asked whether Russia intended to use these weapons against Ukraine. Minister Lavrov legitimately ridiculed the double standard by which the Western powers accept the United States’ gross violation of the Nuclear NPT, but attempt to prohibit Russia from likewise transferring nuclear weapons to its neighbor, Belarus.
As Foreign Minister Lavrov stated: the attitude of the West is that they can do whatever they want, in violation of international law, but Russia is not permitted such freedom. “By what right does the West dictate to Russia what it may, or may not do?”
Obviously, since Britain has transferred depleted Uranium weapons to Ukraine, for use against Russia, the UK is also guilty of gross violation of the NPT. In fact, NATO used depleted uranium weapons in its genocidal attack against Yugoslavia, and the widespread cancers that have befallen Yugoslav civilians as a result demonstrates that the use of these weapons is a war crime. The same situation prevails in Iraq, where the “coalition” powers are guilty of causing widespread cancers, as a result of these weapons.
Depleted uranium is used for tank armor, armor-piercing bullets, and as weights to help balance aircrafts.
Depleted uranium is both a toxic chemical and radiation health hazard when inside the body.
As it is obvious that carcinogenic weapons are being given to Ukraine for use against Russia, it is a ludicrous question as to whether Russia or Byelorussia intends to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine.
Neither country has ever used nuclear weapons against any country.
Both countries are the adults in the room, with irrevocable acknowledgement that use of nuclear weapons would lead to the extermination of humanity.
However, the ugly process has already been started by the West, specifically the UK, and it is impossible to predict how far this odious beginning will go. However, only the paranoid would suggest the possibility that Russia would initiate use of their nukes against Ukraine or any other country.
The only country that has ever used the nuclear bomb is the United States. Minister Lavrov exposed the pathological narcissism that characterizes Western, and specifically Anglo-American attitudes: “Do as I say, not as I do!” The Western powers evidently consider it is their imperial right to act with impunity, but no one else may claim such license.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Carla Stea is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and Global Research’s Correspondent at UN headquarters, New York.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Statement from Antonio Porto, Secretary-General of the Italian Police Union:
“Here we have young colleagues, 29, 34, 40 years old But people who were well. In the last month, from December 15th until today, I became aware of seven police officers who died suddenly. In the last year, we are almost at 50. If not more.”
Statement from Aldo Di Giacomo, Secretary-General of the Penitentiary Police Union:
“In the last 13 months, we had 41 penitentiary police officers who died of sudden deaths. With a 200% increase compared to previous years. But these data on these sudden deaths worry us, and not a little.”
As explained by Antonio Porto, to join the police, specific and rigorous medical exams must be passed. Therefore, the presence of sudden deaths among the police is even more alarming and requires investigations. To join the police, you must have robust health and physical constitution. It is a basic requirement to enter the police force. So, if someone joins, it means they are healthy and should not die after two years. We have our dear Rafaela De Luca, who entered and died after three years of service. So, what caused this death?
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
Reviews
This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon
In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia
In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig
Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac
A reading of Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late. You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
In a Security Council meeting discussing the sabotage of the Nordstream Pipeline, Professor Jeffrey Sachs delivered a brilliant speech, supporting the report by Journalist Seymour Hersh, and demanding that the crime be investigated by the United Nations.
Former CIA analyst Ray MacGovern attested to the impeccable journalist credentials of Seymour Hersh, and also demanded an investigation into the perpetrator of the crime. Needless to say, such an investigation has not, to date, been held, no doubt because revelation of the identity of the perpetrator would shatter its claim to virtue. Sweden coyly stated that it knew the identity of the perpetrator, but would not reveal it for “security reasons.” One must ask: Whose security?
On January 24 Ukraine euphorically celebrated its downing of the Russian IL-76 aircraft. When it was soon revealed that the Russian plane was carrying 65 Ukrainian Prisoners of War for a prisoner “swap,” and that the euphoric Ukrainians were celebrating the murder of their own citizens, as well as the deaths of the 6 Russians piloting the plane, the celebration ceased, and Ukraine swiftly attempted to backpedal, denying culpability for the murders, going so far as to suggest that it was a Russian “false flag operation.” At the opening of his 11AM press conference that day, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announced the tragedy, and demanded an emergency meeting be held that afternoon at 3PM. Needless to say, the French presidency of the Security Council refused to hold such an emergency meeting, though the event was horrific. No investigation has followed. Foreign Minister Lavrov enumerated a long list of crimes, for which Russia was blamed, with no evidence whatsoever. Lavrov mentioned the Bucha incident, which the mainstream media trumpeted, without evidence, blaming Russia, whose forces had left Bucha three days before corpses were “discovered.” The identities of the corpses had still not been established, and Russia’s insistence on learning the names of the victims “discovered” in Bucha, three days after the departure of the Russians, was ignored. No credible investigation into the truth of the perpetrators of that event has ever been undertaken.
Image: The Skripals (Source: RTE)
Foreign Minister Lavrov also mentioned the case of the Skripals, dead in London, and for which they were also, without evidence, held responsible. Russia had repeatedly demanded an impartial investigation into that case, and needless to say, such an investigation was not undertaken.
The promiscuity with which blame is attributed to one State, and impunity granted to others leaves no doubt that justice is violated, facts and history distorted, and the very credibility of the United Nations is shredded, as its weight is thrown in support of nations guilty of war crimes, the innocent are convicted, and the criminals are exonerated.
The case of Yugoslavia is one of the most egregious examples of this violation of truth. Organ harvesting by the KLA is ignored, as Milosovic is convicted, and NATO’s use of depleted uranium in its bombing of Belgrade, which has led to widespread cancers among civilians, has the blessing of the Security Council. As the accusation was finally hurled at US Senator Joseph McCarthy many decades ago: “Have they no decency?” This betrayal of the hopes of the founder of the United Nations, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt is unconscionable.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Carla Stea is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and Global Research’s Correspondent at UN headquarters, New York.
Featured image: Gas emanating from the Nord Stream 2 pipeline in the Baltic Sea, September 28, 2022. / Swedish Coast Guard.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Former Pakistani Prime Minister and chairman of the opposition Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party, Imran Khan, and former Foreign Affairs Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi were sentenced to ten years in prison for allegedly violating the Official Secrets Act, Pakistani TV channel GEO reported on January 30.
Imprisoned since August 2023 after being convicted and sentenced to three years on corruption charges, 71-year-old Khan pleaded not guilty to charges of leaking state secrets that dealt a new blow to his chances of contesting Pakistan’s general elections in February.
According to Al Jazeera, the charges relate to a confidential cable called a cipher sent to Islamabad by Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington last year, which Khan is accused of making public. Khan’s defence disputed the accusation, stating that the former prime minister had already claimed that the cable’s contents appeared in the media from other sources.
For Khan, the cable is proof of a conspiracy by the Pakistani military and the US government to overthrow his government in 2022 after he visited Moscow shortly before the start of the Russian special military operation in Ukraine. Washington and Pakistan’s military deny the accusations.
The verdict was announced by special court judge Abdul Hasnat Zulqarnain during the hearing at Adiala Jail in the Pakistani city of Rawalpindi, in the presence of leaders of both parties.
Syed Zulfiqar Bukhari, a spokesperson for Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party, told the media outside the courts that PTI will challenge the court’s decision.
“This was pretty much a writing on the wall,” he said, adding that the trial against Khan was held in an “unlawful manner.”
This is the second time that Khan has been indicted on the same charges, after a higher court quashed an earlier indictment on technical grounds, saying the correct procedure was not followed. A new trial, conducted in prison for security reasons, is expected to begin on February 1, in the presence of his lawyers, family and some selected journalists.
Khan has already had dozens of lawsuits filed against him, denounced by his defence as an attempt to banish him from politics. Although a higher court suspended the corruption sentence, he remains in prison on other cases, including a charge of instigating violence following one of his arrests.
Elections in Pakistan are to be held on February 8, and this decision against the PTI leader can prove to be decisive in the upcoming elections. However, a 10-year sentence is unlikely to be carried out and will likely be rejected – if not cleared – in Pakistan’s High Court or Supreme Court.
Pakistan’s pro-US establishment expects this, but the verdict was important to try to demoralise Khan and his supporters ahead of the highly contentious elections. It is telling that the court conducted the trial without allowing any media or public access and reportedly rejected the defence’s request to cross-examine the prosecution’s witnesses and experts, making it obvious that the proceedings were a sham.
Khan’s sister, Begum Khanum, told the media outside the courthouse that it was a “very painful day for Pakistan.”
“We only got five minutes for cross-examination in the court. This is such an important case and this is how it was handled? If they cannot give us justice, we will get justice ourselves,” she added.
Although Khan has remained jailed for many months, he remains highly popular and still managed to engage with his supporters through ingenious means, such as communicating via audio clips generated by artificial intelligence (AI).
It is recalled that a 4-minute video was posted on Khan’s X account on January 21, in which the AI-generated voice of the former prime minister speaks about civilian deaths in Gaza and the war in Ukraine, sending a warning to the international community that “the world is heading towards a grave international crisis.”
The AI video also mentioned how Pakistan is struggling with internal conflict, especially since “the entire state machinery” is violating laws to keep him and the PTI out of the electoral process. Little would he have predicted that just over a week after the AI video, he would be sentenced to a decade in prison.
AI is proving to be a useful political tool for the PTI as Khan remains imprisoned, a media ban on PTI is enforced, and its leaders are stopped from holding public rallies. As the PTI is finding ingenious methods to overcome the difficulties, the pro-US establishment of Pakistan has taken drastic measures to imprison him for ten years. However, as said, the sentence will unlikely be carried out as the deep and evident corruption will be one step too far for Pakistan’s High and Supreme courts.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The Trump administration dusted off the 19th century Monroe Doctrine that subjugates the nations of the region to U.S. interests. The Biden administration, instead of reversing course, followed suit, with disastrous results for the region and a migration crisis that threatens Biden’s re-election.
It has left most of Trump’s sanctions against Venezuela and Cuba intact and has tightened those against Nicaragua.
Image: The US government continues to view Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido (left) as the rightful leader of Venezuela, not Nicolas Maduro (right). (Alexandros Michailidis/StringerAl/Shutterstock)
U.S. policy towards Venezuela has been a fiasco. Try as it might, both Trump and Biden were unable to depose President Maduro and found themselves stuck with a self-proclaimed president, Juan Guaidó. U.S. support for Guaidó backfired as he was held responsibility for massive corruption involving Venezuelan assets abroad that were turned over to him. Now Washington is openly siding with presidential hopeful María Corina Machado, who has a long history of engagement in violent disruptions and has called on the U.S. to invade her country. The Venezuelan people have paid a heavy price for the debacle, which has included crippling economic sanctions and coup attempts. The U.S. has also paid a price in terms of its prestige internationally.
This is only one example of a string of disastrous policies toward Latin America.
Instead of continuing down this imperial path of endless confrontation, U.S. policymakers need to stop, recalibrate, and design an entirely new approach to inter-American relations. This is particularly urgent as the continent is in the throes of an economic recession that is compounded by low commodity prices, a belly-up tourist industry and the drying up of remittances from outside.
A good reference point for a policy makeover is Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “Good Neighbor Policy” in the 1930s, which represented an abrupt break with the interventionism of that time. FDR abandoned “gunboat diplomacy” in which Marines were sent throughout the region to impose U.S. will. Though his policies were criticized for not going far enough, he did bring back U.S. Marines from Nicaragua, Haiti and the Dominican Republic, and scrapped the Platt Amendment that allowed the U.S. to intervene unilaterally in Cuban affairs.
So what would a Good Neighbor Policy for the 21st Century look like? Here are some key planks:
An end to military intervention.
The illegal use of military force has been a hallmark of U.S. policy in the region, as we see from the deployment of Marines in the Dominican Republic in 1965, Grenada in 1983, Panama in 1989; involvement in military actions leading to the Guatemalan coup in 1954 and destabilization in Nicaragua in the 1980s; support for coups in Brazil in 1964, Chile in 1973 and elsewhere. A Good Neighbor Policy would not only renounce the use of military force, but even the threat of such force (as in “all options are on the table”), particularly because such threats are illegal under international law.
U.S. military intimidation also comes in the form of U.S. bases that dot the continent from Cuba to Colombia to further south. These installations are often resisted by local communities, as was the case of the Manta Base in Ecuador that was shut down in 2008 and the ongoing opposition against the Guantanamo Base in Cuba. U.S. bases in Latin America are a violation of local sovereignty and should be closed, with the lands cleaned up and returned to their rightful owners.
Another form of military intervention is the financing and training of local military and police forces. Most of the U.S. assistance sent to Latin America, particularly Central America, goes towards funding security forces, resulting in the militarization of police and borders, and leading to greater police brutality, extrajudicial killings and repression of migrants.
The training school in Ft. Benning, Georgia, formerly called the “School of the Americas,” graduated some of the continent’s worst human rights abusers. Even today, U.S.-trained forces are involved in egregious abuses, including the assassination of activists like Berta Cáceres in Honduras. U.S. programs to confront drugs, from the Merida Initiative in Mexico to Plan Colombia, have not stopped the flow of drugs but have poured massive amounts of weapons into the region and led to more killings, torture and gang violence. Latin American governments need to clean up their own national police forces and link them to communities, a more effective way to combat drug trafficking than the militarization that Washington has promoted. The greatest contribution the U.S. can make to putting an end to the narcotics scourge in Latin America is to control the U.S. market for those drugs through responsible reforms and to prevent the sale of U.S.-made weapons to drug cartels.
No more political meddling.
While the U.S. public has been shocked by charges of Russian interference in its elections, this kind of meddling is par for the course in Latin America. USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), created in 1983 as a neutral sounding alternative to the CIA, spend millions of tax-payer dollars to undermine progressive movements. Following the election of Hugo Chávez in 1998, for instance, NED ramped up its assistance to conservative groups in Venezuela (which became the foundation’s number one Latin American recipient) as a leadup to regime change attempts.
An end to the use of economic blackmail.
The U.S. government uses economic pressure to impose its will. The Trump administration threatened to halt remittances to Mexico to extract concessions from the government of Andrés Manuel López Obrador on immigration issues. A similar threat persuaded many voters in El Salvador’s 2004 presidential elections to refrain from voting for the candidate of the left-leaning Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN).
The U.S. also uses economic coercion. For the past 60 years, U.S. administrations have sanctioned Cuba—a policy that has not successfully led to regime change but has made living conditions harder for the Cuban people. The same is true in Venezuela, where one study says that in just 2017-2018, over 40,000 Venezuelans died as a result of sanctions. With coronavirus, these sanctions have become even more deadly. A Good Neighbor Policy would lift the economic sanctions against Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua and help them recover economically.
Support trade policies that lift people out of poverty and protect the environment.
U.S. free trade agreements with Latin America have been good for the elites and U.S. corporations, but have increased economic inequality, eroded labor rights, destroyed the livelihoods of small farmers, furthered the privatization of public services, and compromised national sovereignty. When indebted nations seek loans from international financial institutions, the loans have been conditioned on the imposition of neoliberal policies that exacerbate all ofthese trends.
In terms of the environment, too often the U.S. government has sided with global oil and mining interests when local communities in Latin America and the Caribbean have challenged resource-extracting projects that threaten their environment and endanger public health. We must launch a new era of energy and natural resource cooperation that prioritizes renewable sources of energy, green jobs, and good environmental stewardship.
Massive protests against neoliberal policies erupted throughout Latin America shortly prior to the pandemic and will return with a vengeance unless countries are free to explore alternatives to neoliberal policies. A New Good Neighbor Policy would cease imposing economic conditions on Latin American governments and would call on the International Monetary Fund to do the same. An example of international cooperation is China’s “Belt and Road Initiative,” which, even with some downsides, has generated goodwill in the Global South by prioritizing investments in much-needed infrastructure projects without conditioning its funding on any aspect of government policy.
Humane immigration policy.
Throughout history, U.S. administrations have refused to take responsibility for the ways the U.S. has spurred mass migration north, including unfair trade agreements, support for dictators, climate change, drug consumption and the export of gangs. Instead, immigrants have been used and abused as a source of cheap labor, and vilified according to the political winds. President Obama was the deporter-in-chief; President Trump has been caging children, building walls, and shutting off avenues for people to seek asylum; President Biden is better than his predecessor when it comes to rhetoric, but not so much action-wise. A Good Neighbor policy would dismantle ICE and the cruel deportation centers; it would provide the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States a path to citizenship; and it would respect the international right of people to seek asylum.
Recognition of Latin America’s cultural contributions.
President Trump’s blatant disrespect towards Latin Americans and immigrants, including his call for building a wall “paid for by Mexico,” intensified racist attitudes among his base which has continued ever since. A new Latin America policy would not only counter racism but would uplift the region’s exceptional cultural richness. The controversy surrounding the extensive commercial promotion of the novel “American Dirt,” written by a U.S. author about the Mexican immigration experience, is an example of the underestimation of talent south of the border. The contributions of the continent’s indigenous population should also be appreciated and justly compensated, such as the centuries-old medicinal cures that are often exploited by U.S.-based pharmaceutical companies.
An all-encompassing expression of goodwill in the form of a New Good Neighbor Policy will meet resistance from vested economic and military interests, as well as those persuaded by racist arguments. But the vast majority of people in the United States have nothing to lose by it and, in fact, have much to gain. Universal threats, such as coronavirus and the climate crisis, have taught us the limits of borders and should act as incentives to construct a Good Neighbor Policy for the 21st Century based on those principles of non-intervention and mutual respect.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Steve Ellner has taught economic history at the Universidad de Oriente in Venezuela since 1977. His recent books include his edited Latin America’s Pink Tide: Breakthroughs and Shortcomings (2020) and his co-edited Latin American Social Movements and Progressive Governments (2022), both published by Rowman & Littlefield. Follow him on Twitter: @sellner74
Featured image: Brazilian President Getúlio Vargas (left) and US President Franklin D. Roosevelt (right) in 1936 (From the Public Domain)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The following text is Chapter XII of Michel Chossudovsky’s book.
***
The Worldwide Corona Crisis,
Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
Global Debt and Neoliberal “Shock Treatment”
by
Michel Chossudovsky
Introduction
The March 11, 2020 (simultaneous) closing down of the national economies of approximately 190 member states of the UN is diabolical and unprecedented. Millions of people have lost their jobs and their lifelong savings. In developing countries, poverty, famine and despair prevail. The closure of national economies has led to a spiraling global debt. Increasingly, national governments are controlled by the creditors, which are currently financing the social safety nets, corporate bailouts and handouts.
While this model of “global intervention” is unprecedented, it has certain features reminiscent of the country-level macro-economic reforms including the imposition of strong “economic medicine” by the IMF. To address this issue, let us examine the history of so-called “economic shock treatment” (a term first used in the 1970s).1
Flashback to Chile, September 11, 1973
As a visiting professor at the Catholic University of Chile, I lived through the military coup directed against the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende. It was a CIA operation led by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger coupled with devastating macro-economic reforms.
In the month following the coup d’etat, the price of bread increased from 11 to 40 escudos overnight.2 This engineered collapse of both real wages and employment under the Pinochet dictatorship was conducive to a nationwide process of impoverishment.
Chilean leader Augusto Pinochet shaking hands with U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in 1976 (By Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Chile. – Archivo General Histórico del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, licensed under CC BY 2.0 cl)
While food prices had skyrocketed, wages had been frozen to ensure “economic stability and stave off inflationary pressures.” From one day to the next, an entire country had been precipitated into abysmal poverty; in less than a year, the price of bread in Chile increased 36 times and 85 percent of the Chilean population had been driven below the poverty line. That was Chile’s 1973 “Reset”.
Two and a half years later in 1976, I returned to Latin America as a visiting professor at the National University of Cordoba in the northern industrial heartland of Argentina. My stay coincided with another military coup d’état in March 1976.
Behind the massacres and human rights violations, “free market” macro-economic reforms had also been prescribed – this time under the supervision of Argentina’s New York creditors, including David Rockefeller who was a friend of the Junta’s Minister of Economy José Alfredo Martinez de Hoz.3
Image: David Rockefeller meets Dictator Jorge Videla (right) and Minister of Finance Martinez de Hoz, 1978? (Source: Plaza de Mayo)
Chile and Argentina were “dress rehearsals” for things to come. The imposition of the IMF-World Bank Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) was imposed on more than 100 countries starting in the early 1980s (see Michel Chossudovsky, The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order, Global Research, 2003).4
A notorious example of the “free market”: Peru in August 1990 was punished for not conforming to IMF diktats; the price of fuel was hiked up 31 times and the price of bread increased more than 12 times in a single day.5 These reforms – carried out in the name of “democracy” – were far more devastating than those applied in Chile and Argentina under the fist of military rule.
The March 2020 Lockdown. “Economic Warfare”
And now on March 11, 2020, we enter a new phase of macro-economic destabilization, which is more devastating and destructive than 40 years of “shock treatment” and austerity measures imposed by the IMF on behalf of dominant financial interests.
There is rupture, a historical break as well as continuity. It’s “neoliberalism to the nth degree”.
Closure of the Global Economy: Economic and Social Impacts at the Level of the Entire Planet
Compare what is happening to the global economy today with the country by country “negotiated” macro-economic measures imposed by creditors under the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP). The March 11, 2020 “Global Adjustment” was not negotiated with national governments. It was imposed by a “public-private partnership”, sustained by fake science, supported by media propaganda and accepted by co-opted and corrupt politicians.
“Engineered” Social Inequality and Impoverishment. The Globalization of Poverty
Compare the March 11, 2020 “Global Adjustment” “guidelines” affecting the entire planet to Chile on September 11, 1973.
In a bitter irony, the same Big Money interests behind the 2020 “Global Adjustment” were actively involved in Chile (1973) and Argentina (1976). Remember “Operation Condor” and the “Dirty War” (Guerra Sucia).
There is continuity. The same powerful financial interests including the IMF and the World Bank bureaucracies in liaison with the Federal Reserve, Wall Street, The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) and the World Economic Forum (WEF) are currently involved in preparing and managing the post-pandemic “new normal” debt operations (on behalf of the creditors) under the Great Reset.
Henry Kissinger was involved in coordinating Chile’s 9/11, 1973 “Reset”.
The Thrust of “Depopulation” Under the Great Reset?
Illustration by Global Research/image of Henry Kissinger is from White House Photographic Office/PD-USGOV, licensed under the Public Domain
Today, Henry Kissinger is a firm supporter alongside the Gates Foundation (which is also firmly committed to depopulation) of the Great Reset under the auspices of the World Economic Forum (WEF) (see Chapter XIII).
No need to negotiate with national governments nor carry out “regime change”. The March 11, 2020 lockdown project constitutes a “Global Adjustment” which triggers bankruptcies, unemployment and privatization on a much larger scale affecting in one fell swoop the national economies of more than 150 countries.
And this whole process is presented to public opinion as a means to combating the “killer virus” which, according to the CDC and the WHO is similar to seasonal influenza (see Chapter III).
The Hegemonic Power Structure of Global Capitalism
Big Money including the billionaire foundations are the driving force. It’s a complex alliance of Wall Street and the banking establishment, the Big Oil and Energy Conglomerates, the so-called “Defense Contractors”, Big Pharma, the Biotech Conglomerates, the Corporate Media, the Telecom, Communications and Digital Technology Giants, together with a network of think tanks, lobby groups, research labs, etc. The ownership of intellectual property also plays a central role.
This powerful digital-financial decision-making network also involves major creditor and banking institutions: the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank (ECB), the IMF, the World Bank, the regional development banks, and the Basel-based Bank for International Settlements (BIS), which plays a key strategic role.
“… a combined 20 trillion dollars in managed assets…. Conservatively counting, a four to five-fold leverage power (i.e. some US$ 80 to 100 trillion)”. These powerful financial conglomerates have a leverage in excess of the the world’s GDP which is of the order of about 82 trillion dollars.”7
In turn, the upper echelons of the US state apparatus (and Washington’s Western allies) are directly or indirectly involved, including the Pentagon, US Intelligence (and its research labs), the health authorities, Homeland Security and the US State Department (including US embassies in over 150 countries).
The “Real Economy” and “Big Money”
Why are these COVID lockdown policies spearheading bankruptcy, poverty and unemployment?
Global capitalism is not monolithic. There is indeed “a class conflict” “between the super rich and the vast majority of the world population”.
But there is also intense rivalry within the capitalist system; namely a conflict between “Big Money Capital” and what might be described as “Real Capitalism” which consists of corporations in different areas of productive activity at the national and regional levels. It also includes small and medium-sized enterprises.
What is ongoing is a process of concentration of wealth (and control of advanced technologies) unprecedented in world history, whereby the financial establishment (i.e. the multi-billion dollar creditors) are slated to appropriate the real assets of both bankrupt companies as well as state assets.
The “real economy” constitutes “the economic landscape” of real economic activity: productive assets, agriculture, industry, services, economic and social infrastructure, investment, employment, etc. The real economy at the global and national levels is being targeted by the lockdown and closure of economic activity. The Global Money financial institutions are the “creditors” of the real economy.
The individuals and organizations involved in the October 18, 2019 201 Simulation are now involved in the actual management of the crisis once it went live on January 30, 2020 under the WHO’s Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), which in turn set the stage for the February 2020 financial crisis and the March lockdown (see Chapter I).
The lockdown and closure of national economies has triggered several waves of mass unemployment coupled with the engineered bankruptcy (applied worldwide) of small and medium-sized enterprises (see Chapter IV).
All of which is spearheaded by the installation of a global totalitarian state which is intent upon breaking all forms of protest and resistance.
The COVID vaccination program (including the embedded digital passport and the QR Code) is an integral part of a global totalitarian regime (see Chapter VIII and Chapter XIII).
What is the infamous ID2020? It is an alliance of public-private partners, including UN agencies and civil society. It’s an electronic ID program that uses generalized vaccination as a platform for digital identity. The program harnesses existing birth registration and vaccination operations to provide newborns with a portable and persistent biometrically-linked digital identity.red zones, face masks, social distancing, lockdown. (Peter Koenig, March 12, 2020)8
“The Great Reset”
The same powerful creditors which triggered the COVID global debt crisis are now establishing a “new normal” which essentially consists in imposing what the World Economic Forum describes as the “Great Reset”.
Using COVID-19 lockdowns and restrictions to push through this transformation, the Great Reset is being rolled out under the guise of a ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ in which older enterprises are to be driven to bankruptcy or absorbed into monopolies, effectively shutting down huge sections of the pre-COVID economy. Economies are being ‘restructured’ and many jobs will be carried out by AI-driven machines.
The jobless (and there will be many) would be placed on some kind of universal basic income and have their debts (indebtedness and bankruptcy on a massive scale is the deliberate result of lockdowns and restrictions) written off in return for handing their assets to the state or more precisely to the financial institutions helping to drive this Great Reset. The WEF says the public will ‘rent’ everything they require: stripping the right of ownership under the guise of ‘sustainable consumption’ and ‘saving the planet’. Of course, the tiny elite who rolled out this great reset will own everything. (Colin Todhunter,Dystopian Great Reset, November 9, 2020)9
Push the Reset Button
The World Economic Forum’s Great Reset has been long in the making. “Push the reset button” with a view to saving the world economy was announced by WEF Chairman Klaus Schwab in January 2014, six years prior to the onslaught of the COVID-19 pandemic.
“What we want to do in Davos this year [2014] is to Push the Reset Button, the world is too much caught in a crisis mode.”
Two years later in a 2016 interview with the Swiss French language TV network (RTS), Klaus Schwab talked about implanting microchips in human bodies, which in essence is the basis of the “experimental” COVID mRNA vaccine.
“What we see is a kind of fusion of the physical, digital and biological world,” said Klaus Schwab.
Schwab explained that human beings will soon receive a chip which will be implanted in their bodies in order to merge with the digital world.
RTS: “When will that happen?
KS: “Certainly in the next ten years.
“We could imagine that we will implant them in our brain or in our skin.”
“And then we can imagine that there is direct communication between the brain and the digital World.”
Screenshot from the video / Copyright Global Research
June 2020. The WEF Officially Announces the Great Reset
“The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.” -Klaus Schwab, WEF (June 2020)
What is envisaged under “the Great Reset” is a scenario whereby the global creditors will have appropriated by 2030 the world’s wealth while impoverishing large sectors of the world population.
The United Nations: An Instrument of Global Governance on Behalf of an Unelected Public-Private Partnership
The UN system is also complicit. It has endorsed “Global Governance” and the Great Reset. And so has the Vatican.
Image: Antonio Guterres (By U.S. Mission Photo by Eric Bridiers/Flickr, licensed under the Public Domain)
While UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres rightfully acknowledges that the pandemic is “more than a health crisis”, no meaningful analysis or debate under UN auspices as to the real causes of this crisis has been undertaken.
According to a September 2020 UN Report:
“Hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost.The lives of billions of people have been disrupted. In addition to the health impacts, COVID-19 has exposed and exacerbated deep inequalities … It has affected us as individuals, as families, communities and societies. It has had an impact on every generation, including on those not yet born. The crisis has highlighted fragilities within and among nations, as well as in our systems for mounting a coordinated global response to shared threats. (UN Report)10
The far-reaching decisions which triggered social and economic destruction worldwide are not mentioned. No debate in the UN Security Council. Consensus among all five permanent members of the UNSC.
V the Virus is casually held responsible for the process of economic destruction.
The World Economic Forum’s “public-private partnership” project entitled “Reimagine and Reset Our World” has been endorsed by the United Nations.
Flashback to George Kennan and the Truman Doctrine in the late 1940s. Kennan believed that the UN provided a useful way to “connect power with morality,” using morality as a means to rubber-stamp America’s “humanitarian wars”.
The COVID crisis, the lockdown measures and the mRNA vaccine are the culmination of a historical process.
The lockdown and closure of the global economy are “weapons of mass destruction” which in the real sense of the word“destroy people’s lives”. Amply documented, the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is best described as a “killer vaccine”.
What we are dealing with are extensive “crimes against humanity”.
President Joe Biden and the “Great Reset”
Joe Biden is a groomed politician, a trusted proxy, serving the interests of the financial establishment.
Let’s not forget that Joe Biden was a firm supporter of the invasion of Iraq on the grounds that Saddam Hussein “had weapons of mass destruction”. “The American people were deceived into this war”, said Senator Dick Durbin. Do not let yourself be deceived again by Joe Biden.11
Evolving acronyms: 9/11, GWOT, WMD and now COVID. Biden was rewarded for having supported the invasion of Iraq.
During the election campaign, Fox News described Biden as a “socialist” who threatens capitalism; “Joe Biden’s disturbing connection to the socialist ‘Great Reset’ movement”.
While this is absolute nonsense, many “progressives” and anti-war activists have endorsed Joe Biden without analyzing the broader consequences of the Biden presidency.
“The Great Reset” is socially divisive, it’s racist. It is a diabolical project of global capitalism. It constitutes a threat to the large majority of American workers as well as to small and medium-sized enterprises. It also undermines several important sectors of the capitalist economy.
The Biden Presidency and the Lockdown
With regard to COVID, Biden is firmly committed to maintaining the partial closing down of both the US economy and the global economy as a means to “combating the killer virus”.
President Biden is a firm supporter of the corona lockdown. He not only endorses the adoption of staunch COVID-19 lockdown policies, his administration is committed to the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” and the “vaccine passport” as an integral part of US foreign policy, to be implemented or more correctly “imposed” worldwide.
In turn, the Biden-Harris administration will attempt to override all forms of popular resistance to the coronavirus lockdown.
What is unfolding is a new and destructive phase of US imperialism. It’s a totalitarian project of economic and social engineering, which ultimately destroys people’s lives worldwide. This “novel” neoliberal agenda using the corona lockdown as an instrument of social oppression has been endorsed by President Biden and the leadership of the Democratic Party.
The Biden White House is committed to the instatement of what David Rockefeller called “Global Governance”.
The Protest Movement
It should be noted that the protest movement in the US against the lockdown is weak. In fact there is no coherent grassroots national protest movement. Why? Because “progressive forces” including leftist intellectuals, NGO leaders, trade union and labor leaders — most of whom are aligned with the Democratic Party — have from the outset been supportive of the lockdown. And they are also supportive of Joe Biden.
In a bitter irony, anti-war activists as well as the critics of neoliberalism have endorsed Joe Biden.
Unless there is significant protest and organized resistance, nationally and internationally, the Great Reset will be embedded in both domestic and US foreign policy agendas of the Joe Biden-Kamala Harris administration.
It’s what you call imperialism with a “human face”.
Where Is the Protest Movement Against This Unelected Corona “Public-Private Partnership”?
The same philanthropic foundations (Rockefeller, Ford, Soros, et al.) which are the unspoken architects of the “Great Reset” and “Global Governance” are also involved in (generously) financing climate change activism, the Extinction Rebellion, the World Social Forum, Black Lives Matter, LGBT, et al.
What this means is that the grassroots of these social movements are often misled and betrayed by their leaders who are routinely co-opted and generously rewarded by a handful of corporate foundations.
The World Social Forum (WSF), which is commemorating its 21st anniversary, brings together committed anti-globalization activists from all over the world. But who controls the WSF? From the outset in January 2001, it was (initially) funded by the Ford Foundation.
It’s what you call “manufactured dissent” (far more insidious than Herman-Chomsky’s “manufactured consent”).
The objective of the financial elites “has been to fragment the people’s movement into a vast “do it yourself” mosaic. Activism tends to be piecemeal. There is no integrated anti-globalization anti-war movement.” (Michel Chossudovsky, Manufacturing Dissent, Global Research, 2010)12
In the words of McGeorge Bundy, President of the Ford Foundation (1966-1979):
“Everything the [Ford] Foundation did could be regarded as “making the world safe for capitalism”, reducing social tensions by helping to comfort the afflicted, provide safety valves for the angry, and improve the functioning of government.13
The protest movement against the Great Reset which constitutes a “global coup d’état” requires a process of worldwide mobilization:
“There can be no meaningful mass movement when dissent is generously funded by those same corporate interests [WEF, Gates, Ford, et al.] which are the target of the protest movement”.14
*
Notes
1 Michel Chossudovsky, April-June 1975. Hacia El Nuevo Modelo Económico Chileno Inflación Y Redistribución Del Ingreso. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20856482?refreqid=excelsior%3A9228243fa26a81bb3c2b0c2d58094922&seq=1
2 Ibid.
3 Michel Chossudovsky, April 16, 1977. Legitimised Violence and Economic Policy in Argentina. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4365500?seq=1
6 National Security Council, December 10, 1974. Implications of Worldwide Population Growth For U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (THE KISSINGER REPORT). https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PCAAB500.pdf
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
A few weeks ago, newly elected Slovakia Prime Minister Robert Fico clearly outlined his governing party’s position on rejecting the WHO Pandemic Treaty. This time, Slovakia leads the way again and provides the “template” on how to approach the crimes and fraud committed during the COVID-19 pandemic by the politicians who were in power at the time.
The US Marine Corps (USMC) is set to deploy its advanced Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) to the Pacific despite questions about its readiness, maintenance and operation amid recent restrictions on surf-based use of the platform.
The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) is the advocacy agent of Jewish Federations of Canada-UIA, representing Jewish Federations across Canada. CIJA is a national, non-partisan, non-profit organization whose mission is to preserve and protect Jewish life in Canada through advocacy and to advance the public policy interests of Canada’s organized Jewish community.
Thousands of Israeli ministers, rabbis, public figures and parliament members attended a conference on Sunday in Jerusalem, calling for the resettlement of Gaza and making statements widely deemed to be genocidal.
Pentagon procurement contracts show that the US is planning to station B61-12 nuclear warheads at RAF Lakenheath, a base in Suffolk, England. The US pulled its nuclear weapons out of the UK in 2008, and its decision to redeploy them demonstrates the low state of US-Russia relations.
After the consummation of the Brexit, the hypothetical exit of Germany from the Euro would provoke the liquidation of the Eurozone and the gestation of a new European economic cartography that will involve the return to the hermetic economic compartments.
Israel’s closest allies have cut funding and are now doing their level-best to prevent the relief agency from operating in Gaza. This is a very serious situation that could have dire consequences for Palestinians who currently have no access to food, medicine or clean water. As unbelievable as it sounds, Israel appears to be implementing a strategy aimed at deliberately starving millions of civilians to death.
The US military school at West Point participates in Israel’s genocide in Gaza. This is done by West Point lying away Israel’s genocide – and pretending to be “experts” claiming that Israel “protects” civilians.
Mexico is furious and demands an investigation into how belt-fed machine guns, rocket launchers, and grenades are ending up in the hands of cartel members, the country’s top diplomat said.
Coming on top of reports of American soldiers going down like nine-pins on a drone strike against the super secret CIA station for intelligence and covert operations on the Syrian-Jordanian border, ’nyet’ is the word from Beijing to the Biden administration’s entreaties seeking intervention with Tehran to rein in the Houthis of Yemen, against the foreboding backdrop of the Axis of Resistance expanding its operations against American and Israeli interests.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Positive responses in Canada to the ICJ ruling indicating it is plausible that Israeli is directing genocidal actions at Palestinians in Gaza
This one-hour video is a lively and thoughtful discussion of many of the implications for Canada of the International Court of Justices’ ruling. All participants in the video generally accept the merits of the South African case. More importantly, a large portion of decent people throughout the planet also agree. The vote of the 17 ICJ Judges was almost unanimous on many points.
The participants are Host, Azeerah Kanji, KarenRodman, HcShaik, Farida Dief, Bianca, Mugyeny, and Michael Lynk. The HostingOrganizations are Just Peace Advocates and the Canadian Foreign Policy Institute.
Shimon Koffler Fogel
Fogel hates everything about the ICJ Ruling. Shimon Koffler Fogel is one of the harshest Zionist critics in Canada of the ICJ Ruling. Fogel has great influence with the Liberal and Conservative parties of Canada. Fogel and the network of registered Jewish charities (lobbies) he represents support the continuation of the Israeli military assault on Gaza. Fogel condemn the provisional measures the ICJ has ordered in light of the plausible genocide underway in Gaza.
As one can readily see with the poster below, that Fogel wants all Canadians to denounce ICJ.
The CIJA makes it look like Mélanie Joly and Justin Trudeau just got married? Why portray them as a couple?
Shimon Koffler Fogel figures prominently in the Facebook hoax and the Israel Lobby’s infiltration of the University of Lethbridge I describe in this essay.
In response, the leaders of the J7, the Large Jewish Communities’ Task Force Against Antisemitism, issued the following joint statement:
“We take note of the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) appropriate rejection of South Africa’s extreme demand for an Israeli ceasefire, which tacitly recognizes Israel’s right to self-defense against Hamas and others in Gaza, as well as the ICJ’s call for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages. We are, however, deeply disappointed by today’s decision by the ICJ to issue a series of provisional measures against Israel as they give weight to South Africa’s preposterous claims.
“Opponents of Israel are shamelessly politicizing the Genocide Convention, making a mockery of actual genocides, past, present, and future. It is part of a broader, morally obscene anti-Israel campaign, led by South Africa, with the backing of the Iranian regime and other governments hostile to the Jewish state. Their goal is to weaken Israel’s international standing, while bolstering the image of Hamas and other terrorist organizations committed to Israel’s violent destruction. It is unfortunate the ICJ, which is meant to serve as the ultimate standard-bearer for the international rule of law, has fallen victim, even if partially, to South Africa’s sinister ploy.
“It is important to note that the court’s provisional ruling – as repeatedly stated – is not a judgment on the merits of whether Israel’s actions amount to genocide, but rather aimed at “preserving” the state of affairs in preparation for a final ruling from the court, which could take months or years. We are confident that the evidence will show that Israel is indeed fully compliant with the Genocide Convention and that the charges brought by South Africa will be deemed baseless by the court.
“The Court’s provisional measures will now likely be misconstrued by some who will argue falsely that Israel is in fact committing acts of genocide in Gaza. This would be a lie. The legal definition, as laid out in the 1948 Genocide Convention, states that genocide constitutes “… acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group…” The fact remains there is no objective evidence that Israel is targeting the Palestinian people as a whole – in Gaza or elsewhere. As Israel has repeatedly stated, its conflict is with Hamas terrorists – who, on October 7, launched an unprovoked attack on Israel, torturing, raping, mutilating, and butchering 1,200 people, and kidnapping 240 others. It is not with the millions of Palestinian civilians living in Gaza.
“Indeed, during its military operations, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have gone to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties. These include giving advance warnings for civilians to evacuate targeted areas, creating humanitarian corridors for civilian safe passage, facilitating the delivery of truckloads of humanitarian aid into Gaza, and working with the United States and others to develop best practices for avoiding civilian casualties.
“Rather than recognizing Israeli efforts to minimize civilian casualties – as per its obligations under international humanitarian law, by which it fully abides – the ICJ has sent a confusing and convoluted message that grants legitimacy to Hamas, an actual genocidal group, whose founding charter calls for anti-Jewish violence and other forms of antisemitism and extremism. More urgently, the ruling will be used by anti-Israel activists to further malign Israel and its supporters and by antisemitic actors as “justification” for assaulting those advocating for the safety of the Jewish state and its citizens.
“We are grateful to Israel’s allies, including the US, Germany, the UK, France, Italy, Guatemala, Austria, and others, who have stood against South Africa’s false accusations and clearly rejected the genocide claim against Israel. We hope those governments and other like-minded states will similarly reject the ICJ’s interim ruling and continue to stand with Israel in defending itself against terrorism.”
About the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs
The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) is the advocacy agent of Jewish Federations of Canada-UIA, representing Jewish Federations across Canada. CIJA is a national, non-partisan, non-profit organization whose mission is to preserve and protect Jewish life in Canada through advocacy and to advance the public policy interests of Canada’s organized Jewish community.
About the J7, The Large Communities’ Task Force Against Antisemitism
The J7, The Large Communities’ Task Force Against Antisemitism was formed by major Jewish organizations representing the world’s largest diaspora communities – the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Argentina, and Australia – in July 2023 in response to increasing rates of antisemitism around the world.
Modeled after similarly structured informal groupings to discuss coordinated responses to global crises, the J7 global task force aligns efforts to combat antisemitism and protect the quality of Jewish life around the world.
Israel Seeks Desperately to Change the Issue Away from the Fact That World’s Top Court Has Imposed Strict Provisional Measures to Stop the Plausible Genocide Underway
Along with Australia, USA, Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Finland, Canada immediately stopped funding the United Nations Refugee and Works, Agency. UNRWA. All these governments adhered to Israel’s directive to block funding to UNRWA because 12 of 13,000 UNRWA workers in Gaza are said to have had some role in the events of October 7. The 12 individuals were immediately fired by the UN.
October 7, 10/7, is a mirky event like 9/11. Like 9/11, war was declared immediately before any formal investigation took place. Benjamin Netanyahu is one of the main suspects who may have done much to create the conditions conducive to this war time ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. For many years Netanyahu has had a very close working relationship with Hamas. This topic is the subject of many stories in Haaretz. It is perfectly possible that this close relationship between Netanyahu and Hamas was integral to what transpired on 10/7.
The Netanyahu government of Israel wants to see UNRWA destroyed altogether, perhaps because for many decades UNRWA has been a primary life line for the Palestinians of Gaza that the IDF are presently trying to starve, dehydrate, bomb and depopulate. UNRWA is disliked in Israel because in competes with the singular jurisdiction of Israel who keep more than two million Palestinian locked up in the small urban enclave of Gaza. Another mark against the UN agency is that much of the data provided in the South African accusations against Israel, came from reports by UNRWA.
Part of Israel’s genocidal strategy has been to kill Palestinians by bombing hospitals and killing medical workers. There has also been an onerous plan to kill humanitarian aid workers and to target many dozens of journalist to veil the full story of what the IDF has been up to in Gaza.
The diversion of putting a spotlight on UNRWA was a very transparent and provocative attempt to steal attention from the very serious immediate and long term implications of the ICJ ruling on genocide and Israel. George Galloway has pointed out that Canada is among the countries that is involved in making the genocide in Gaza worse by starving UNRWA of finances just at the peak of a humanitarian crisis that stems 100% the results of Israel’s intention to mass murder Palestinians.
So Canada, Britain, Germany and many other countries are digging themselves deeper into trouble by assisting and aiding Israel in a plausible genocide the ICJ has now identified and is monitoring. All the evidence is that the people and government of Canada are puzzled by what to make of the World Court’s decision of plausible Israeli genocide in Gaza.
The Liberal Party seems completely confused and noncommittal as some of its members, including the Prime Minister, think they can somehow split the difference and come down on both sides of the issue. Once again the gamer, Justin Trudeau, is totally out of his depth like he was when his government was giving standing ovations in Parliament to a Waffen SS soldier who joined in the Hitlerian assault on Russia and on its allies including Canada in WWII.
Some lawyers in Canada who represent clients in Gaza are pushing for an investigation of the alleged role of Joint Task Force-2 in assisting the IDF to commit plausible genocide.
All kinds of issues are arising, like whether it is appropriate for Canada to remain in the free trade agreement with Israel. Israel is a country that is now charged in the ICJ with violating the Genocide Convention and has already become the subject of provisional measures to correct the deaths and injuries inflicted from plausible genocide. In order to avoid the charge of “complicity in genocide” many countries will have to make significant alterations of their relations with Israel.
The leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, Pierre Poilievre, has shown himself to be a servile stooge to the Israel Lobby and its Christian Zionist offshoots by trying to win the favour of the CIJA and the likes of Shimon Koffler Fogel. Poilievre tried to outdo Trudeau government in serving CIJA’s agenda of criminalizing UNRWA at the very moment when that organization is in the best position to lessen the famine as well as other aspects of the overwhelming humanitarian disaster underway now. So Poilievre is joining the group augmenting the ongoing genocide.
Canada’s formal position on Gaza, Israel and the position of the World Court is mushy minded. This mushiness is demonstrated below in the evasive position put forward by Global Affairs Minister, Melanie Joly. Canada is continuing Pro-Israel biases by continuing to view the world from the perspective of a fellow settler colony.
Trudeau’s Crisis concerning the ruling of the ICJ is merging into the fact that he is facing one of the most serious charges from a court ever pointed against a sitting Canadian Prime Minister. Federal Court Justice Richard Mosely decided in a ruling that the Emergency Act lacked legal justification, force and credibility. In spite of all the Trudeau-appointed judges, the Charter of Rights has always been protecting us except when Canadian judges illegally declare it to be “moot.”
Emotions are running high as truckers and their allies remember the police violence they were subjected to after the Emergency Act. Now Trudeau seems to be moving towards the position where he is complicit in genocide even as he has become in the eyes of the many Canadians, an Emergency Act convict.
* Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.This article was originally published on the author’s Substack, Looking out at the World from Canada.
Dr. Anthony Hallis currently Professor of Globalization Studies at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta Canada. He has been a teacher in the Canadian university system since 1982. Dr. Hall, has recently finished a big two-volume publishing project at McGill-Queen’s University Press entitled “The Bowl with One Spoon”.
He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Remember, a commentator at the WEF Davos24 some ten days ago, asked something to the extent, “How to avoid an undesired person being elected President?”
No names were named, but it was obvious, the undesired person for the globalist crowd was the non-globalist, nationalist, “Make America Great Again” (MAGA), former President Donald Trump.
Everybody knows, he is the anti-globalist elephant in a room of a globalist cabal. Perhaps the answer to the question was prepared in a closed-door session – and is unfolding rather fast, as we follow the happenings at the Texas-Mexican border.
Is there a false flag in the making?
If we believe the mainstream media, “Republican” Governor Greg Abbott from Texas sent the State National Guard to defend the Texan 2,000 km (1,200 miles) border with Mexico. Did he really?
Unlikely. He sent his National Guard only to defend the official border entry at Eagle Pass and maybe one or two others along the 2,000 km long border.
The influx of illegal Mexicans into Texas is not new. Abbott could have started with border protection already in 2021 – a record year of illegal Central American immigrants (not just Mexicans) into the US via Texas. That record was exceeded in 2023 with as many as 2.5 million illegal immigrants (official stats) into Texas. See this.
Unofficial figures are quoted as high as 6 million.
In January 2024, “Democrat” President Biden contradicts “Republican” Governor Abbott and requests border control agents to access a river front park, near Eagle Pass, a crucial border crossing point, now supposedly being guarded by razor wires built by Texas National Guards, and by the Texan guards themselves. Biden wants this “crucial border crossing park” being controlled by federal Border Control Agents. Biden is known to be lax with immigration.
“Illegal immigrants” love President Biden, as can be seen in the “shadow crossing” 40-min. video below.
Is this a real clash between Texas and the US National Government? Or a fake clash?
Ms. Linda, from WGON TV News, says there are “strange things” going on at the Texan border. She asked, “Are we being played about the Texas border?”
To make her point, she shows a brief video clip, depicting just about half a mile (800 m) of fenced border (called the Trump-fence), showing three unprotected border-crossings. The entire 2000 km Texas-Mexico border has 28 official (protected) crossings – and what it looks like maybe up to hundred gateless openings in the wall. See video below.
Another video by two investigative journalists following the migration route all the way to Colombia, where mafias are organizing mass-migration from South and Central America being funded apparently by the UN system, to Mexico and through the Texan border, where the news cameras are focusing only on the official border crossings, but not on the unprotected open doors in the wall. See this 40-min video.
The video commentator at about 00:37:00 says that
“The United States is in a state of undeclared war. The United Nations and associated organizations are actively working to dissolve the American Republic by an industrial scale weaponized migration program”…. “Cartels control the southern border. And every day thousands of military age young men enter the Southern border.”
The video portrays a picture of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) with the symbol of UN Agenda 2030. You may recall that the WEF’s Great Reset and UN Agenda 2030 go hand in hand, and that in 2019, Klaus Schwab, WEF Chairman and CEO signed an illegal contract with Antonio Guterres, UN Secretary General, on a Cooperation Agreement.
The video is accompanied by a text box giving more details on UN and associated organizations that provided help for the flood of destabilizing immigration to the US.
Does Governor Abbott not know about what is going on at the Texan border?
Mr. Abbott is a WEFer. He is closely linked to Klaus Schwab and the WEF. It is, therefore, likely that rather than being in a clash, Abbott and Biden work together to destabilize the US, bringing about a crisis that could well incite a civil war.
This would be reason enough for the Biden Administration to declare Martial Law – and under Martial Law, the US Constitution allows suspension of Presidential elections.
It is also telling that this happens just a few days after closing of WEF Davos24, where such matters were likely discussed behind closed-doors.
Suspension of elections – wouldn’t that be the perfect answer to the question asked during one of the more than 100 WEF meetings, “What can we do to avoid that the wrong person is elected President?”
While the border clash, the migration crisis is real for the American people, the apparent confrontation between Governor Abbott and President Biden smells more like a “false flag”.
The Texas Government under agreements with other governors is quietly transporting illegals to other US States.
The WEF and its globalist elite cohorts cannot allow a nationalist President to take over, as would be Donald Trump, interrupting Agenda 2030 and the Great Reset. They need a Globalist government – à la Biden, or maybe a come-back Barack Obama, or even Michelle Obama – to carry the diabolical globalist agenda through. And that much faster than 2030.
The Reset’s / UN Agenda 2030 principal goal, population reduction, is going on – through the experimental” covid vaxxes, slowly over years, sudden deaths, turbo cancers, reducing auto-immune systems, drastically lowering fertility and more.
But what still needs to be put in place for total control of the survivors – the transhumans, cyborgs and robots – is the perfect slave-yard through full digitization, AI, programmable Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC); in brief, the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
A civil war in the US would have devastating consequences not only for the people of the United States, but it would also have disruptive and destructive consequences throughout the western world.
And as if the ruling elite would know about the plot that could result in civil war, the US insurance companies have changed their terms as of 1 January 2024, no longer covering damages caused by “War, Riot, or Insurrection, declared or non-declared”. See video below.
This may well be the plan behind the WEF’s theme “Rebuilding Trust”.
It may also be the WEF’s last effort to rebuild trust, since before such planned unrest occurs, people in the United States may wake up to “being played about the Texas border”, as so adroitly expressed by Linda, the commentator of WGON TV News. And it may also be the end of the WEF – and 8 billion people around the world would be cheering.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).
Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Thousands of Israeli ministers, rabbis, public figures and parliament members attended a conference on Sunday in Jerusalem, calling for the resettlement of Gaza and making statements widely deemed to be genocidal.
The event, entitled “Conference for the Victory of Israel – Settlement Brings Security: Returning to the Gaza Strip and Northern Samaria,” was centred around rebuilding Israeli settlements in Gaza, and calling for Palestinians to be expelled from the besieged enclave.
Participants presented details of proposed future settlements, maps, stages of preparation, and called for decision-makers to back resettlement plans.
The conference came just days after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling on South Africa’s genocide case against Israel, for which it heard evidence earlier this month.
The court gave Israel six orders regarding the siege and bombardment of Gaza. One of those was that Israel “must take measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to the members of the Palestinian groups in the Gaza Strip”.
The court also cited a series of statements made by Israeli leaders as evidence of incitement and dehumanising language against Palestinians, including comments made by Israeli President Isaac Herzog.
The “victory of Israel” event was attended by 11 cabinet ministers and 15 coalition members of parliament. Below are some of the statements made at the conference, which could violate the ICJ’s orders.
‘Encourage’ Palestinians to Leave, Says Ben Gvir
Israel’s far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir called for Palestinians to be “voluntarily encouraged to leave” the Gaza Strip.
In response to calls from the audience for Palestinians to be transferred from Gaza, Ben Gvir responded by saying:
“You are right, voluntary encouragement, let them go from here.
“We must return to Gush Katif and northern Samaria… if you don’t want it to happen again for the seventh or tenth time, we must return home and control the territory, encouraging immigration, and the death penalty for terrorists,” he added.
Gush Katif was a bloc of 17 Israeli settlements in southern Gaza. At the conference, Ben Gvir, along with other ministers, signed a petition for “victory and renewal of the settlement in Gaza” during the event.
The document said that signatories pledged that they would “grow Jewish settlements full of life in Gaza”.
Afterwards, attendees were filmed celebrating the move by waving the Israeli flag and cheering. Following Ben Gvir’s speech, people could be heard chanting “death to Arabs”.
Some of the statements made at the conference have led to a backlash, with some pointing out that they could violate the ICJ’s orders.
Itay Epshtain, an Israel-based special advisor for the Norwegian Refugee Council, shared a video in which Ben Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich could be seen arm-in-arm, dancing together at the conference.
The human rights lawyer said that the image “would form part of the compelling evidence of noncompliance” with the ICJ’s recent order to take all measures within its power to prevent acts of genocide and to punish acts of incitement.
Smotrich Calls for Return of Settlers
Smotrich echoed Ben Gvir’s statements, calling for Israeli settlers to go to Gaza.
“Many of our children who were evicted from Gaza must return as fighters, we need to make sure we return as settlers,” he said.
Israeli politician and tourism minister, Haim Katz, made similar statements at the conference.
“Today, after 18 years, we have the opportunity to stand up and build and expand the land of Israel,” he said.
Support from Housing Minister
Yitzhak Goldknopf, the minister of housing and construction, called the return of Jewish settlements in Gaza a “correction of historical injustice”.
“I will support this as minister of housing if the government decides,” he said. “The land of Israel belongs entirely to the people of Israel. Giving up the land of the State of Israel not only does not bring security, but leads to the bloodshed of Jews.”
‘Don’t Give Them Food’
Daniella Weiss, the far-right former mayor of the settlement Kedumim in the occupied West Bank, also called for Palestinians to be starved in order to force them into leaving Gaza.
“The Arabs will move… we don’t give them food, we don’t give the Arabs anything, they will have to leave. The world will accept them,” she told a reporter at the conference.
Ben Gvir Says ‘We Will Initiate Conflict’
During the conference, Ben Gvir called for a dual approach when it comes to Gaza, which includes promoting the departure of the current inhabitants, as well as simultaneously facilitating and encouraging the influx of Israeli settlers into the area.
“We will initiate conflict to prevent further uncertainty and aimlessness,” he said.
“It is essential to reclaim and assert control over the territory in the south. We must also devise a solution for the populace that is moral, rationally coherent and advantageous,” he added.
He ended by saying that “encouraging emigration from Gaza is a necessity”.
Israel’s communications minister, Shlomo Karai, reiterated Ben Gvir’s comments saying that Israelis have an “obligation to act for our own sake…even if this war turns voluntary migration into a situation where it is forced, we must settle Gaza with security forces and settlers.”
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
I’ve been traveling in America, that poor beleaguered superpower, for the last week or so. This is a postcard for you from the war.
I left Brooklyn, New York, a week ago. On January 10, 2024, James Madison High School, up the road from where we are staying, had been commandeered by New York City’s Mayor Eric Adams. The kids who were supposed to have been learning math and English and science, were forced to stay home — once again — for “remote learning”, as their classrooms were occupied by people who had come into our nation unlawfully. The school, the kids were told the day before it happened, was to be used as a “temporary overnight respite center.”
‘“To ensure a smooth transition for families temporarily sheltering overnight in the building, our school building will be closed on Wednesday, January 10 and school will be in session remotely for all students,” Principal Jodie Cohen said in a statement to families.” ‘
Irate parents held a rally at the school. A mom called the closure and takeover “unacceptable.” The woman, who did not use — feared to use? — her real name, said that she was “very angry.” She made the case that the city “put our children last” and were instead “prioritizing the migrants.” State Assemblyman Michael Novakhov, whose district this is, told NBC that the decision to move kids out, and illegal migrants in, was “just really wrong. The school is not a right place for migrants, for anyone except the kids.”
New York City has taken in 170,000 illegal immigrants — or what NBC inaccurately calls “asylum-seekers” — in the last two years. 70,000 are still in the care of the city, and New York expects to spend $4.7 billion to provide shelter, food and services to “asylum-seekers” in fiscal year 2024. (The reason “asylum-seekers” is an inaccurate term for the migrant influx is that there are narrow legal grounds for seeking asylum or refugee status — you must prove that you are fleeing torture or will be imprisoned for political reasons if you return to your home country, for instance. Requesting asylum status is a legal process that takes years. The people who are here now, overwhelmingly, having walked across the border and been shipped via bus and plane to US cities, are here without the legal recognition of seeking asylum.)
Who are the families whose kids have been displaced, and who are dealing with the disorienting and unsafe-feeling realization that their home rooms, their science labs, their bathrooms and playgrounds, were inhabited by thousands of strange adults, displacing the students and deprioritizing their education? The ‘asylum-seekers’ have not replaced the teens at Dalton, the famous private school on the Upper East Side. No, the American kids whose education was disrupted, because of people who chose to break the law to enter our country, are exactly the kids whose education receives so much lip service: brown and black kids, from one of the poorer neighborhoods in Brooklyn.
I see some of these children in the morning when I walk Loki to the corner, and step into the nearest bodega to buy my coffee. They are quiet. They stand patiently in line, wearing their heavy backpacks, waiting to pay for inexpensive drinks and processed snacks.
I worry about them. I worry that for some, perhaps, the food they will get at school for lunch won’t be nutritious enough to sustain them throughout the school day. For many low-income kids, the hot meal at school is the main nutrition they receive daily. Those kids who depend on daily hot lunch at school, are the kids who likely went hungry when unlawful migrants’ needs commandeered their educations.
These are the American kids who are trying to get an education — at the mercy of psychologizing and diagnosing and prescribing third parties trying to medicate them, at the mercy of grooming NGO’s putting unbelievably pornographic materials in their health classes, at the mercy of erasures of history and civics altogether, and in the face of the dumbing-down of English literature classes, and the fragmenting of math and science, confronting the stripping away of art and theatre and music education; these innocent American children, who are doing, with their families, their best.
These are the American kids who got kicked out of their school and were given the message by their own city, that as scholars they were interruptible, their working moms and dads’ time and energy were equally disposable, and that as citizens (the parents) and as future leaders (the kids), they were all — equally — less than unimportant.
*
In Florida — West Palm Beach — I stayed in a chic, renovated airbnb, lush with tropical landscaping, in an historic district, built up of bungalows from the 1910s and 1920s. To my right, a major new luxury shopping, office and apartments development was rising quickly; Starbuck’s and LA Fitness; and Pura Vida — chic expensive green drinks, taken in white-paneled interiors, with cascading plants and raw wood shelving everywhere.
To my left, though, not half a mile away from the elegant shopping, a food pantry was open, in what looked like an industrial building in a field. Hundreds of immigrants stood in line to receive food.
The houses in the bungalow district, that had once been working people’s cottages, now sold for a million dollars each, or more.
When I took Ubers, the drivers told me about the collapses of their home countries — the ruination of the rule of law, the rise of crime, with criminals facing impunity from judges and from the incarceration system; the corruption of elites via bribes. They described the established power now of gangs and cartels, and the strip-mining of natural resources by multinational conglomerates. They said that the employment rate in their home countries was now only ten per cent, that no one can open a small business, that everyone who could get out and come to the US, was doing so. “Who can blame them?” said my driver. From his perspective, he had a point.
I realized sadly that our open borders so close by to so many troubled countries, created conditions that were ruining those countries along with our own, as there was now no incentive to make conditions there better; and a resources drain was underway, leaving shells of nations in its wake, even as our own nation was being destabilized. I also realized that the conditions of lawlessness and the easy rise of gangs and cartels, in the vacuum of policing and criminal justice systems, in the Caribbean and Latin America, foreshadowed what was happening to our own nation. “Defund the Police!” The craziest slogan ever, unless you want exactly this: chaos and crisis, which is also a rich condition for subverting and hollowing out a nation, as other countries have learned so well to their sorrow.
Ten years ago when I travelled in America, we had problems, of course. But I saw a middle class and a working class, having productive lives, replete with pride and even prosperity at times; lives beyond suffering and mere survival. I saw kids being educated in public schools.
Now I could not see any of that any more. I saw in America, a nation so much more like the banana republics I had visited, in which working and poor people scarcely survive, and their kids have no hope of upward mobility; and the rich hide in gated communities. And the gangs rule all.
*
I arrived yesterday in Charlottesville, Virginia, disoriented from a long flight. At once, I felt hopeful, as the Blue Mountains, visible from the plane in all their brooding, dreamy splendor, sheltered us, and the city itself, built on small hills, harboring its Georgian architecture, with the fanlights and brick, and white pillars, reminded me of the beauty of our history; of our Founders’ best hopes. This is the city where Thomas Jefferson created a great university in what was a near-pristine wilderness. His own home, with its memorialization of the best of the Enlightenment, is close by.
I was taken to an inn downtown, with gracious 12 foot ceilings, and four-poster beds, and cozy fires in original fireplaces. Beautiful American domestic architecture; unruined history.
But I was also told about the erasure of history here, and in Richmond. Incredibly, “woke” forces, many newly arrived in the area, had insisted on dismantling a statue of Lewis and Clark and Sacagawea, a beautiful work of art, depicting an indigenous teenager who had accomplished one of the greatest tasks in our nation’s history. The reason for the removal, per the critics? Sacagawea was depicted as kneeling. (She could have been pointing the way ahead and tracking, but critics saw her as “cowering”and subservient.) The City Council devoted a million dollars to the removal of that statue, along with two confederate generals’ statues: Robert E Lee and “Stonewall” Jackson. These were not rehoused in a museum somewhere, with full explanation to schoolchildren of the future, of the bitter and divisive history that they represented. No, they were simply melted down.
So children will never learn about Sacagawea, and Lewis and Clark, and General Robert E Lee, from asking questions about monuments, or visiting museums. And history is easier to erase entirely and revise, when it is only digital.
On the downtown pedestrian mall, I saw a statue that depicted a workman, in silhouette, carrying high above him a head — a statue bust? — a beheading? that looked as if it belonged to Thomas Jefferson.
I was due to speak at a fundraising event for RFK Jr, in a private home.
My hosts drove me up a hill outside the city, to a magnificent private home from the 1930s. The event was hosted by Barbara Sieg, Libby Whitley and Gray Delany, my publisher at All Seasons Press. In the elegant, welcoming interior, a range of people from the city had convened to hear the candidate. Among the attendees was a local doctor who had refused to go along with unlawful mandates; he couldn’t visit his patients at UVA hospital because he was unvaccinated; his grateful patients had arranged for him and his wife to be at the event. There were teachers and nurses and Navy veterans. There was a famous organic farmer from the Shenandoah Valley, Joel Salatin, who has been heroic in educating the public on the dangerous concentration of power in the food supply chain. There was a nutritionist, and a dentist. And there were traditional MAGA loyalists. In sum, there were people from all walks of life — I could not place or stereotype anyone politically. They were Americans, concerned about America.
RFK Jr spoke. It is difficult to summarize his replies to questions put to him, as they were so wide-ranging. But the essence of his argument was a return to the American values that are the philosophical core of our freedoms and equality of opportunity. For instance, when asked about DEI — “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion”, he talked about how the current program of promotions and demotions on the basis of race, would have been very disappointing to Dr Martin Luther King. He spoke about the urgent importance of our remaining a meritocracy. For program solutions to racial disparities, he spoke about model public schools and about bringing investment capital to banks in communities of color, so mortgage seekers and business owners could get access to capital. When asked by Delany about the fact that people of his (younger) generation had trouble affording housing, let alone having the quality of life of their parents, Kennedy described a program to block BlackRock and Vanguard from scooping up homes, so that young Americans could buy in an even playing field; and about offering 3 per cent mortgages. He described decentralizing the Fed and ending the policy of quantitative easing.
RFK Jr spoke about reforming agencies, including the CIA.
He spoke, shockingly, about the fact that the Biden White House had refused him Secret Service protection, though his security team had submitted to the Secret Service 200 plus pages of credible threats, including dangerous home intrusions. The Secret Service, highly concerned, had assured him that assistance was on the way; but then there was silence from the White House. So now, half of his fundraising dollars have to go to the flotilla of security experts that surround him, in this dangerous environment. He was the only candidate, historically, refused protection at that point in the campaign.
I thought of how strange and sad it was that in every event, people ask him about the violent history suffered by his own family – a history that includes the murder of his own father when he was 14 — and that the candidate calmly engages with the question about his own mortality, his own risk, as if observing it from a distance. That is beyond courage — but knowing the stresses and terrors of a normal campaign, in which any candidate is surrounded by lunatics, I felt deeply the double burden on this particular candidate, and no doubt on his family, of his having to deal with his unique security risk profile, even as his own President leaves him to fend for himself in a vulnerable security situation.
When RFK Jr was done speaking, receiving enthusiastic applause, I stepped forward and said what I had to say about our historical moment, and about what I saw as his possible role in it. Again, I am not endorsing anyone — I can’t. DailyClout is nonpartisan, and I feel that I myself can be most useful to the country in a nonpartisan role, worrying only about the Constitution.
But I left the event feeling hopeful for our country. Something is changing; something is in the air. As I said in my remarks, people are waking up to the fact that the battle is not between left and right, but between those of us who remember and care about America — and the handful of oligarchs and globalist monsters, who wish to do away with our nation and our values — and our population — altogether.
*
This brings me to a wish.
I am in touch with, and respect, very senior people on both “sides.”
I’ve said before that the only hope for this country right now, is for the independent movement led by RFK Jr — many of them disaffected former liberals — and the MAGA grassroots — and even the MAGA candidates and leaders and influencers — to align and work together.
There is a battle raging at our Southern border. Twenty-five governors have added their affirmation — and some are sending National Guardsmen — in support of Texas’ Governor Abbot, who is defying as a matter of states’ rights, the Federal direction to open the border as millions, including hundreds of terrorists, flood our nation. JJ Carrell, a former border agent and my husband Brian O’Shea’s cohost for their podcast “Unrestricted Invasion,” has been sounding the alarm about thousands of “special interest aliens” — terrorists or men aligned with terrorists — who are not being arrested and deported, but who are rather, unprecedentedly, being sent on into the heart of our nation. Recently the role of the UN and the WEF has been revealed, in organizing the mass invasion at our southern border.
Indeed, the UN devoted hundreds of millions to funding and organizing this inflow across our border:
“In a nutshell, the UN and its advocacy partners are planning to spread $372 million in “Cash and Voucher Assistance (CVA)”, and “Multipurpose Cash Assistance (MCA)” to some 624,000 immigrants in-transit to the United States during 2024. That money is most often handed out, other UN documents show, as pre-paid, rechargeable debit cards, but also hard “cash in envelopes”, bank transfers, and mobile transfers the U.S. border-bound travelers can use for whatever they want.”
Europe too is in a populist uprising that could turn dangerous, with farmers from at least seven nations, blocking motorways, lined up on beaches, spraying manure on government buildings, and engaged in other dramatic actions, to protest EU policy around “green” restrictions on farming. The EU flag is going up in flames, in some of these protests. Paris has, reportedly, three days left of food.
Radio host (and DailyClout commentator) Shannon Joy asked, on Twitter, in relation to the faceoff of states and the Federal government at the Southern border, something like: “Is this a war or a trap?” My answer: “Could be both.”
The point is, we are a nation upon whom war is being waged. The instability at our Southern border could be the pretext for violence, then conflict, then escalated conflict, then it could provide the excuse for the Federal crackdown of emergency law (again). This is the case too in terms of the uprising of farmers in Europe. It could all be an organic shift in the Zeitgeist — a populist resistance to globalist tyranny and UN plans for our serfdom and loss of sovereignty. AND it could all provide a pretext for the UN’s and the WEF’s dissolution of America, breakup of Europe, and imposition of the surveillance dystopia and overall loss of rights that they have so eloquently presented as their endgame.
My point is, we need in my view to stop thinking that this will be a normal election.
My worry is that if President Biden and President Trump are facing off as “usual” — (or if it is Michelle Obama against President Trump, as recently reported may be the case) — the margin of victory for President Trump may be too narrow to beat the certain cheating and electoral violations, to come. And the elections may be held in “emergency” conditions, such as are now narratively escalating, in which we are all forced to stay home and send in absentee ballots — a recipe for corruption.
Point is, we need to understand that President Biden is a traitor and that treasonous forces have hold of our nation. We need to think outside the box.
The only force that can defeat the globalist plans, is a combination in some shape, of the followers of RFK Jr — who takes more votes from President Biden than from President Trump — and the followers of the MAGA movement. The only force that can preserve our Republic is what will emerge (and I don’t claim to have the solution as to what this might look like, though I have some ideas) — when RFK’s and President Trump’s movements align and mutually reinforce one another.
This means taking a deep breath, on the disaffected-liberal side. The objections that RFK Jr voters (and friends and maybe even family members) may have to President Trump, are merely stylistic and cosmetic compared to the cost of losing the nation. And it means creating tolerance for differences, on the MAGA side. Even ‘red-hot’ issues such as abortion or green energy, important in peacetime, are trivial differences in times of war; compared to an eternity of servitude for oneself and one’s children.
More than our sense of self politically, is the importance of reflecting on how we can be of service to our country. The same is true for these candidates as well. They both have something to offer this country; so let us utilize them both. And I hope they both look within themselves as well, to remove any sense of a personal ideal that may stand in the way of a unique opportunity to serve all Americans; I hope that the ‘perfect’ won’t stand in the way of ‘the good’ of actually saving our nation.
If Americans — Americans — from both perspectives and both walks of life, realize that if they do not find a way to align, there will be no America left — and that in very short order —
And then if they unite accordingly, creating an unstoppable force –
Then it can really be 1774. And we can really prevail.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Nov. 15, 2023 – Actress Margot Muraszkiewicz died after a one year battle with a rapidly progressive form of ALS.
Oct. 2022 – She had been diagnosed in October 2022 and was given a prognosis of 2-3 years but died only 1 year later.
Other recent cases:
Dec. 9, 2023 – Andover, CT – 64 year old Margaret Faasen died after a battle with ALS. She was COVID-19 Vaccinated.
Nov. 6, 2023 – NY – Kevin Grimmer, SUNY Basketball Coach, died after recent diagnosis of ALS (credit: Resilient333 on X).
Nov. 6, 2023 – 72 year old Carl Torbuch, college football coach, died a week after diagnosed with ALS.
Oct. 25, 2023 – 47 year old Abdel Kharrazi, Moroccan professional soccer player, died from ALS on Oct. 25, 2023.
Oct. 7, 2023 – Cincinnati, OH – 59 year old teacher Tracy Ann Glick died suddenly after a “short battle with ALS.”
Oct. 6, 2023 – Atlanta, GA – 57 year old Jim Poole, former MLB Baseball Pitcher died on October 6, 2023 from “complications of ALS” diagnosed 2 years earlier.
Sep. 30, 2023 -Calgary, AB – 42 year old Calgary Flames Vice President of Data & analytics suffered a “catastrophic” brain injury after going into cardiac arrest and died suddenly on Sep. 30, 2023. He was battling ALS since 2019.
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
Reviews
This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon
In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia
In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig
Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac
A reading of Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late. You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
On December 9, 2023, the European Parliament published a press release, where it stated that it reached a political deal with the Council of the European Union “on a bill to ensure AI in Europe is safe, respects fundamental rights and democracy“. The future bill is supposed to ban “AI systems that manipulate human behaviour to circumvent their free will“.
According to the press release the deputies also “agreed“ on “clear obligations“ with respect to “AI systems used to influence the outcome of elections and voter behavior“ (see this). No one and no place elaborated on those issues. In a reply to the petition of several representatives and members of the world human rights organizations, the chair of the Committee on Petitions of the European Parliament, Dolors Montserrat, quoted the preparatory document of the EP, which stated:
“The placing on the market, putting into service or use of certain AI systems with the objective to or the effect of materially distorting human behavior, whereby physical or psychological harms are likely to occur, should be forbidden. This limitation should be understood to include neuro-technologies assisted by AI systems that are used to monitor, use or influence neural data gathered through brain-computer interfaces insofar as they are materially distorting the behavior of a natural person in a manner that causes or is likely to cause that person or another person significant harm.“
Those statements both address and hide the feasibility of mass manipulation of the human nervous system (thoughts, emotions, perceptions, functioning of internal organs or even causing death of people) at a distance. It is evident that only when masses of people’s brains are controlled at distance, the AI systems can be “used to influence the outcome of elections and voter behavior“ by forming political opinions of voters and imposing their decision to vote for certain parties or persons.
For that matter, 11 human rights organizations replied to Dolors Montserrat:
“We are deeply concerned with your reply to the petition number 0716/2023.
After studying the information on the agreement between European Parliament and member states of the EU on artificial intelligence legislation (see this and this), we do not see their sincere intention to prevent the manipulation of human thinking emotions etc. by governments agencies with the use of pulsed microwaves, extra long electromagnetic waves or other as yet unpublished energies. This means that so far there are no measures taken to prevent the development of the European union member states into the totalitarian regimes where thinking of citizens will be controlled by the governments using those radiations and artificial intelligence. To prevent such situation, the governments would have to declassify the technologies of remote control of the human nervous systems and create agencies objectively capable and legally obliged to disclose the abuse of human rights and democracy by AI technologies. When the governments keep them classified, they keep for themselves open the option to manipulate the minds of their citizens, whenever they see fit. Possession of those tools will relieve them of responsibility in the face of their citizens in cases where catastrophes may happen due to the fact that they neglected dangers, connected with further development of civilization.
The scientific evidence proving that at least pulsed microwaves (including transmissions of cell phone systems) and extra long electromagnetic waves can be used to control human thoughts, emotions, perceptions, cause pains etc. at distance can be found here.
The proposal of legislation, which would satisfy requirements on the political system respecting human rights and freedoms of citizens in the electronic era, can be found here.
In summary, we believe the EU AI Act should include legislation that explicitly prohibits EU governments, including law enforcement, intelligence agencies and the military, from using artificial intelligence to manipulate at distance human thoughts, emotions, etc. using published or other as-yet unpublished energies. The legislation should also include the obligation of EU governments to protect their citizens from such manipulation by non-EU governments or other entities.
It is worth very serious consideration, whether in the not distant future, where majority of state’s citizens could be unemployed or underemployed due to the use of artificial intelligence, they will be allowed to have a freedom to vote according to their opinions or whether the state power will decide that they are not responsible enough to make the right choice in the elections and will produce their decisions in their minds instead.
In this way they would not even have the right to vote against the use of artificial intelligence, which deprived them of their jobs and dignity. According to the analysis of the International Monetary Fund, the introduction of the Artificial Intelligence “is set to affect nearly 40% of all jobs“ worldwide and about 60% in advanced economies and in this way “AI will likely, worsen overall inequality“ (see this).
Commander Cornelis van der Klaauw from Royal Netherlands Navy and Expert from Strategic Communications and Information Operations NATO Joint Warfare Centre wrote in an article in 2023:
“The reason why cognitive attacks go unnoticed by their targets is that cognitive activities bypass the conscious mind and directly target the subconscious of a person… most of our decisions are made by our subconscious… Cognitive attacks are aimed at exploiting emotions rooted in our subconscious, bypassing our rational conscious mind“.
You can sign the petition to the European Parliament demanding the deputies to produce the legislation which will secure the democracy and respect for human rights in the European union in the transparent and unequivocal way by clicking here. The text of the Petition is in the Appendix Below.
We, the undersigned, ask the European Parliament to include in the legislation on Artificial Intelligence the following:
1. Prohibit the use of Artificial Intelligence to remotely control and/or decode the activity of the human nervous system with electromagnetic waves, directed energies, potential waves, non-local photon or electron connections or any other energies, without explicit consent.
2. Prohibit all EU government organizations, including law enforcement, intelligence agencies, military, and their contractors, to use Artificial Intelligence to remotely control and/or decode the activity of the human nervous system of civilians using the above-mentioned means. The legislation should also include the obligation of EU governments to protect their citizens from such manipulation by non-EU governments or other entities.
3. Provide for the establishment of EU agencies that are objectively capable and legally obliged to investigate and disclose the abuse of human rights and democracy by Artificial Intelligence used to remotely control and/or decode the activity of the human nervous system using the above-mentioned means. Mentioned EU agencies should operate independently of EU member states and the EU should set itself the goal to engage the United Nations Organization as the last arbiter in deciding the cases where people from around the world will complain against abuse of their human rights by those neurotechnologies and artificial intelligence.
As well commander Cornelis van der Klaauw from Royal Netherlands Navy and Expert from Strategic Communications and Information Operations NATO Joint Warfare Centre wrote in an article in 2023:
“The reason why cognitive attacks go unnoticed by their targets is that cognitive activities bypass the conscious mind and directly target the subconscious of a person… most of our decisions are made by our subconscious… cognitive attacks are not science fiction anymore.
They are taking place already now… neural nanotechnology can be used to bring nano-sized robots close to a neuron via the bloodstream and make it possible to link the human brain directly (i.e. not intercepted by our senses) to a computer, making use of artificial intelligence in the process… Warfare is no longer a purely military concept; it has become much broader and more complex. In the future, there will only be one rule in warfare:
International Coalition Against Electronic Torture and Robotization of Living Beings (ICATOR) Avenue Paul Hymans 120/47, B – 1200 Brussels https://icator.be
(Belgium)
ACOFOINMENEF (Association against all forms of mental and neurophysiological interference and control)
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Mojmir Babacek was born in 1947 in Prague, Czech Republic. Graduated in 1972 at Charles University in Prague in philosophy and political economy. In 1978 signed the document defending human rights in communist Czechoslovakia „Charter 77“. Since 1981 until 1988 lived in emigration in the USA. Since 1996 he has published articles on different subjects mostly in the Czech and international alternative media.
In 2010, he published a book on the 9/11 attacks in the Czech language. Since the 1990‘s he has been striving to help to achieve the international ban of remote control of the activity of the human nervous system and human minds with the use of neurotechnology.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The US will deploy nuclear weapons to the UK for the first time in 15 years in a move Russia will view as a provocation, The Telegraph reported, citing Pentagon documents.
Pentagon procurement contracts show that the US is planning to station B61-12 nuclear warheads at RAF Lakenheath, a base in Suffolk, England. The US pulled its nuclear weapons out of the UK in 2008, and its decision to redeploy them demonstrates the low state of US-Russia relations.
According to The Telegraph, Russia said a US deployment of nukes to the UK would be an “escalation” that would require “compensating counter-measures.”
The US already has nukes stationed in Germany, Belgium, Italy, Turkey, and the Netherlands as part of NATO’s nuclear sharing program. Last year, Russia announced it was deploying nuclear weapons to Belarus amid tensions over the proxy war in Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin pointed to NATO’s nuclear sharing program to justify his decision.
The B61 is the US’s primary nuclear gravity bomb, and the B61-12 is its newest iteration. It’s considered a tactical nuclear weapon, which have a lower yield than strategic warheads. But the B61-12 has a maximum yield of 50 kilotons, more than three times as powerful as the bomb the US dropped on Hiroshima, Japan.
The UK has a nuclear arsenal of its own and announced in 2021 that it was expanding, raising questions about Britain’s commitment to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The UK said it was raising the ceiling of its nuclear warhead stockpile from 180 to 240 and that it would no longer publish information about the number of warheads it maintains in an operational status.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dave DeCamp is the news editor of Antiwar.com, follow him on Twitter @decampdave.
Featured image is from ICAN (International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Twenty-four Israeli soldiers were killed in two separate incidents in Gaza on 22 January. Mainstream media outlets around the world reacted in unison: that this was the “deadliest day” for Israel since 7 October.
This exact phrase was used in headlines on 23 January carried by news agencies such as Reuters and AFP, and major broadcasters including the BBC, CBS, NBC, CNN, ABC and ITV News.
The exact same phrase was also used by leading news titles including the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Time magazine, Daily Telegraph, the Sun, Jerusalem Post, Guardian, London’s Evening Standard, Financial Times, Independent and Yahoo News.
On the same day, Israeli forces killed almost 200 Palestinians in Gaza including at least 65 people in Khan Younis alone.
These deaths received no headlines in the above outlets. Where they were reported, they were listed as part of the regular daily round-up of events in an unfolding genocide that has now seen more than 26,000 people killed in Gaza.
How is it possible that the world’s media could embrace exactly the same phrase in relation to Israeli victims but largely ignore the identities of the much higher number of Palestinians killed?
Why would 22 January be described as “deadly” for one group of people but not for another?
Unequal Value
You might expect that editors took the “deadliest day” phrase from press statements from the Israeli government or military.
Yet Israel Defense Forces (IDF) spokesperson Daniel Hagari did not use this phrase in his statement and neither did the IDF Chief of the General Staff, Herzi Halevi, who instead simply called it a “difficult day”.
Prime minister Benjamin Netanhayu also described it as “one of the most difficult days” while Israel’s President, Isaac Herzog, spoke of “an unbearably difficult morning”.
He used the same language as both Knesset speaker Amir Ohana and minister Benny Gantz, both of whom referred to a “painful morning”.
Of course, it is possible the phrase was used in private and informal briefings to the press on the morning of 23 January. It is, however, equally conceivable that this was a trope that came “naturally” from a deep-rooted idea in the western media that the lives of Israelis and Palestinians are not of equal value.
And, therefore, that measuring the “deadliness” of a particular day should only be done for Israelis (where every life matters) and not for Palestinians (whose individual lives clearly appear to count for less).
‘Deadliest Day’
Indeed, a search of the Nexis database of UK national and local news (including BBC broadcast bulletins) reveals that there were 856 uses of the phrase “deadliest day” from 7 October 2023 until 25 January 2024, none of which directly referred to evidence of Palestinian deaths in Gaza.
The only exception to this were some BBC bulletins on 25 October which mentioned “Palestinians reporting the deadliest day in Gaza” (emphasis added).
Otherwise, there was not a single reference during this period across the British media to “the deadliest day for Palestinians” or “for the people of Gaza”.
The other approximately 850 references directly related only to Israeli casualties. Some 28 per cent of them focused on the killing of IDF soldiers on 22 January.
The vast majority referred to the events of 7 October, described either as “the deadliest day for Jews” or “the deadliest day for the Jewish people” which accounted for some 25% of all references.
Many of these stories were focused on the words of US president Joe Biden who, in a much publicised speech to Jewish leaders at the White House, described the Hamas attack on 7 October as the “deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust”.
Biden’s words alone make up 20% of all references to the “deadliest day” trope.
Perhaps Biden’s words were on the minds of editors across the world as they listened to Israeli spokespeople on the morning of 23 January and that the deaths of 24 IDF soldiers merited such a phrase when talking about Israeli lives.
Framing the War
But why has the phrase not been used in relation to Palestinians and, indeed, why is there so little preoccupation with days when particularly large number of Gazans are killed?
Precisely because the war is not framed in a way which recognises the equal worth of all those affected – in other words, a situation where every instance of significant Palestinian casualties would deserve a headline – it’s hard to be certain of which have been the very deadliest days for the residents of Gaza.
However, it’s clear that the period immediately after the temporary ceasefire in the last week of November saw particularly intense airstrikes and there were, according to Al Jazeera, at least 700 Palestinians killed on 2 December alone.
Yet there was no mention in the UK media about this being the “deadliest day” for Palestinians. Instead, the Guardian simply ran with a headline of “‘Israel says its ground forces are operating across ‘all of Gaza’” while the Sunday Times wrote that “Fears for hostages as Gazans say bombardment is worse than ever”.
According to the Mail Online, “Israel says it is expanding its ground operations against Hamas’ strongholds across the whole of the Gaza Strip as IDF continues to bomb territory after terrorists broke fragile truce”.
The BBC’s TV news bulletins on 3 December carried distressing footage of casualties but also featured a quote from an adviser to Netanyahu saying that “Israel was making the ‘maximum effort’ to avoid killing civilians” without carrying an immediate rebuttal of this outrageous claim.
In other words, despite the fact that 30 times more Palestinians were killed on 2 December than when the 24 IDF soldiers were killed, there was no recognition of the “deadliness” of that day.
Instead, the framing was all about the strategic plans of the Israeli military rather than the mass slaughter of Palestinians.
‘Intensive Strike’
On 26 December, a further 241 people were killed by Israeli bombs. Britain’s “newspaper of record”, The Times, responded with the headline: “Israel-Gaza war: Palestinians hit by ‘most savage bombing’” with a sub heading that “Israel launches most intensive strike since Hamas attack on October 7”.
You could be forgiven for thinking that there was nothing deadly about this episode because, after all, Palestinians were only being “struck” as opposed to brutally killed.
But this was hardly an exceptional day given that Oxfam reported earlier this year that Israel’s military was killing Palestinians at an average rate of 250 people a day, a figure it said exceeded the daily death toll of any other major conflict of recent years.
There is clearly a brutal politics to counting the dead. The New York Times ran an article on 22 January headlined “The Decline of Deaths in Gaza” arguing that average daily deaths across a 30-day period have now fallen below 150.
For the NYT, it is “plausible that a lower percentage of deaths are among civilians now that Israel’s attacks have become more targeted and the [average] daily toll has declined”.
Not only, however, is there little evidence that the IDF is in any way opposed to killing civilians but the idea that casualties are declining at a time when we are soon likely to see a total of 30,000 Palestinian deaths is profoundly shocking.
Any slowdown in the rate of killing is hardly a consolation to the millions who still live in fear of IDF raids and rockets.
Media Consensus
The media consensus that only Israelis are the victims of the “deadliest days” in the region and not Palestinians, despite the latter accounting for 95% of deaths since 7 October, is one of the many illustrations of the unequal and profoundly distorted coverage of this war.
Until the South African government submitted its partially successful claim to the International Court of Justice, news organisations were unwilling even to investigate the genocidal language of Israeli political and military leaders.
The media also routinely uses dehumanising and differential language where Israelis are “massacred” while Palestinians simply “die”. This illustrates the awful role of the mainstream media in paving the way for the ethnic cleansing we are currently seeing.
The real reason you don’t see or hear the media talk about a “deadly day” for Palestinians is that every day is deadly when you live in Gaza.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Des Freedman is a Professor of Media & Communications at Goldsmiths, University of London and a founding member of the Media Reform Coalition.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dozens of Palestinians were found dead at a school in the northern Gaza Strip on Wednesday in black body bags tied with plastic cables bearing Hebrew writing.
Al Jazeera Arabic and local media reported that the bodies of the 30 Palestinians were discovered at the grounds of the Khalifa bin Zayed elementary school in Beit Lahia after Israeli forces withdrew from the area.
The bodies were reportedly discovered under a mound of rubble with videos showing several of the body bags tied with white plastic zip ties, normally used for tying cables together.
It was unclear when the Palestinians were killed but the school had served as a shelter for thousands of displaced Palestinians before it was bombed and besieged by Israeli forces in early December. The school had been supported by United Nations Relief and Works Agency, also known as Unrwa, since 2010.
Middle East Eye reached out the Israeli army for comment but did not receive a response by time of publication.
The grizzly discovery comes a day after more than 100 Palestinian bodies that were exhumed and taken by Israeli forces from various areas in the Gaza Strip were returned for a mass burial in the southern city of Rafah.
Some of the bodies were unidentified when they were reburied while others had heavily decomposed, the Palestinian news agency Wafa reported.
Later on Tuesday, the head of Hamas’s political bureau, Ismail Haniyeh, said his group was studying a proposal that would offer Palestinians in Gaza six weeks of respite from fighting in exchange for the release of Israelis held captive in Gaza as well as the release of Palestinian prisoners held in Israel.
Haniyeh, who is based in Qatar, said Hamas was open to any “serious” initiatives provided they led to a “comprehensive cessation” of hostilities and the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza.
His comments came after officials from Qatar, Egypt and the US met Israeli intelligence chiefs in Paris this weekend to discuss the release of some 136 Israelis held captive in Gaza.
The New York Times reported on Sunday that Hamas would release elderly captives, along with women and children, in exchange for Palestinian prisoners during an initial period of six weeks.
If that was successful, there could be another two phases of swaps, with male Israeli soldiers eventually included.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Monday that he could not confirm the details of the proposal, but referred to it as “a strong one and a compelling one”.
Ben Gvir Lashes Out at Proposal
The Israeli prime minister’s office called the talks “constructive”, but noted that there were “significant gaps which the parties will continue to discuss”.
For weeks, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right government have vowed to remain in Gaza until Hamas is eliminated.
Speaking from an illegal Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank on Friday, Netanyahu said:
“We will not compromise on anything less than total victory.
“That means eliminating Hamas, returning all of our hostages and ensuring that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel,” he added.
However, Hamas political bureau member Mohammad Nazzal told Al Jazeera on Tuesday that an agreement to release the Israeli captives could only be possible with a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.
“We told the mediators a permanent ceasefire is our goal, but we can do it in the second or third stages of an agreement. Without an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, we can’t accept this new proposal,” Nazzal said.
Israel’s far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir threatened on Tuesday to bring down the government if a “reckless” deal was reached with Hamas.
“A reckless deal = the dismantlement of the government,” the far-right minister said on X, formerly known as Twitter.
Israel’s relentless military offensive on the besieged Gaza Strip, which was launched after the 7 October attacks, has killed at least 26,637 Palestinians, most of them women and children.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image: The bodies of 30 Palestinians were were discovered under a mound of rubble at the grounds of the Khalifa bin Zayed elementary school in Beit Lahia in the northern Gaza Strip on 31 January 2024 (Supplied to MEE)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Finding the risk of genocide plausible, the court ordered Israel to refrain from genocidal activities, prevent their commission, and punish those inciting genocide.
Crucially, the court also ordered Israel to take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
Just two days later, while everyone was still grappling with the implications of this ruling, nine major donor countries of Unrwa, the UN agency mandated to provide assistance and essential services to Palestinian refugees, announced the suspension of their funding to the organisation.
The countries include the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Finland, Australia, and Canada.
While there has been some confusion regarding the provisional measures, especially since the court did not order an immediate suspension of military operations by Israel in Gaza, the clearest measure by the court – ensuring access to adequate humanitarian assistance – has been rendered ineffective by the decision of these countries, based on the claims that 12 out of the 13,000 Unrwa staff were involved in the 7 October attacks against Israel.
While the world expected western governments to reconsider their carte blanche support for Israel after the ICJ ruling, it seems that they decided to take their stance against Palestinian people under the risk of genocide to another level.
This blatant decision, putting hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza at risk, is particularly shocking after the ICJ’s order to ameliorate the humanitarian situation on the ground.
Risk of Famine
Unrwa is the lifeline for Gaza, a tiny strip densely populated by refugees and their descendants. Out of the total population of 2.3 million, 1.7 million people are refugees or internally displaced. These people heavily depend on Unrwa assistance and services.
Almost all people of Gaza are now at risk of famine and plague as the food and healthcare system has been extensively destroyed by Israel.
The Israeli response to the 7 October attacks had already caused a large-scale forced displacement in Gaza, further overwhelming the operation of Unrwa. Moreover, at least 152 Unrwa personnel have been killed by Israel, not to mention those wounded.
In December, in a letter to the president of the UN General Assembly, Unrwa’s commissioner-general, Philippe Lazzarini warned that the agency is on the edge of collapsing.
He stated:
“In my 35 years of work in complex emergencies, I would never have expected to write such a letter, predicting the killing of my staff and the collapse of the mandate I am expected to fulfil.”
The 1948 Genocide Convention not only prohibits genocide but also obligates all state parties to prevent genocide to their capacity.
Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories, warned this weekend:
“The day after the ICJ concluded that Israel is plausibly committing genocide in Gaza, some states decided to defund UNRWA, collectively punishing millions of Palestinians at the most critical time, and most likely violating their obligations under the Genocide Convention.”
Defunding the most crucial organisation in the strip, where the ICJ found a plausible risk of genocide not only through Israel’s military operations but also due to the severe humanitarian situation it has created, only exacerbates the deterioration of living conditions of the Palestinian people. This, along with continuous support for Israel, including military assistance, potentially enables genocide in Gaza, and does nothing to prevent it.
Destructive Conditions
On the other hand, these western governments must be reminded that genocide, as defined by the convention, involves not only killing members of a particular group or causing them serious bodily or mental harm, but also deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction, either in whole or in part.
Israel’s actions are likely already creating these destructive conditions.
Knowingly contributing to the genocidal conditions in Gaza runs the risk of these states being complicit in genocide. These governments are now on the path to obtaining accomplice status.
There is a plausible risk of genocide for two million people on one side, a fact established by the World Court, vis-a-vis an “alleged” involvement of 12 out of 13,000 staff members in the 7 October attacks.
Despite Unrwa taking immediate and serious measures to investigate these allegations, these governments did not hesitate to put the lives of two million people at risk, while what needs to be done is precisely the opposite: to increase cooperation with Unrwa.
Such actions may be subject to scrutiny before national and international tribunals in the days to come.
The Refugees Problem
Israel has persistently targeted Unrwa, asserting the unfounded argument that the agency is the UN arm of Hamas. Unrwa is crucial not only for providing humanitarian assistance but also for supporting the claims of Palestinian refugees to the right of return to their homeland, a right Israel has obstructed for decades.
Since refugee status is passed through generations due to registration with Unrwa, Israel is never relieved of the burden of the refugee problem.
These western governments are seemingly unaware of the fact that defunding Unrwa and letting it collapse ironically brings the Palestinian refugee problem closer to home. Article 1d of the Refugee Convention states:
“This Convention shall not apply to persons who are at present receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance. When such protection or assistance has ceased for any reason, without the position of such persons being definitively settled in accordance with the relevant resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, these persons shall ipso facto be entitled to the benefits of this Convention”.
This article was specifically crafted for Palestinian refugees. If Unrwa becomes unable to fulfill its mandate, Palestinian refugees may automatically claim recognition of their refugee status in third states, including those defunding the agency.
But apparently, this would be applicable only if they survive Israel’s war on Gaza.
ICJ’s provisional orders to prevent genocide in Gaza will only take effect when the letter and spirit of the ruling are respected not only by the parties to the proceedings, but also by the larger international community. Forcing Unrwa to cease its operations at this crucial time serves no purpose but to contribute to the further devastation of the Palestinian people in this context.
Western governments must immediately cease their genocidal support to Israel.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
In the wake of the drone attack in northern Jordan that killed three American soldiers and wounded dozens more, President Biden affirmed to reporters yesterday that he had decided on the US retaliatory action. Having blamed “radical Iran-backed militant groups” for the deaths, the retaliation could include strikes on such militias anywhere in the Middle East and targets within Iran itself.
Asked by reporters if he blamed Iran for the deaths of the US soldiers, Biden declared that he held Tehran responsible “in the sense that they’re supplying the weapons to the people who did it.” Pressed to say if Iran was directly responsible, he refused to respond, simply declaring “we’ll have that discussion.” Iran has denied any responsibility for the attack.
Well aware that the US-backed Israeli genocide of Palestinians in Gaza has transformed the Middle East into a powder keg, Biden played down the potential for regional conflict.
“I don’t think we need a wider war in the Middle East. That’s not what I’m looking for,” he said.
Yet that is exactly what the Biden administration is doing, not only through its political, economic and military support for Israel but its expanding war against Houthi militia in Yemen and strikes in Iraq and Syria. US imperialism is rapidly and recklessly plunging the Middle East into a region-wide war that together with the US-NATO war against Russia in Ukraine threatens to engulf the world.
While Biden gave no indication of the nature of US retaliation, National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby told reporters aboard Air Force One that the US intended to strike the militia groups and degrade their capacity to attack US troops while sending a “strong signal to their backers” in Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Ominously, he declared that Biden’s order would be a “tiered approach” encompassing “potentially multiple actions.”
Current and former US officials told the Financial Times that the Biden administration would target militia leaders, Iranian personnel in Syria or Iraq and assets outside of Iran.
“This won’t be a single attack, so there will probably be several rounds. I think it has to be a very robust attack action,” a former senior US military commander in the Middle East said.
Right-wing Republicans, including leading presidential contender Trump, are braying for blood, denouncing Biden’s “weakness” and calling for strikes against Iran, knowing full well that such action would dramatically escalate the simmering war across the Middle East.
The Biden administration has not ruled out a direct attack on Iran or on senior Iranian officials in the Middle East. Indeed, the White House undoubtedly gave the go-ahead for the highly provocative Israeli air raid in December outside Damascus that killed Iranian Brigadier General Sayyed Razi Mousavi—the top adviser inside Syria of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). That was followed by a further Israeli air attack on Damascus earlier this month that killed the IRGC intelligence chief for Syria and his deputy as well as two other IRGC officials.
Israel, again unquestionably with the full support of Washington, is also preparing to expand its war from Gaza and the West Bank into southern Lebanon. Speaking to Israeli reservists on the border with Gaza on Monday, Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said that Israeli troops will “very soon go into action” on the country’s northern border with Lebanon. The forces close to you, he said, “are leaving the field and moving towards the north, and preparing for what comes next.”
Gallant’s comments are a warning that Israel is planning a dramatic escalation of a conflict with Hezbollah militia in Lebanon that has been underway since its war on Gaza began. Northern Israel already has tens of thousands of regular troops and some 60,000 reservists, an Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) official told ABC News last week.
Israeli air raids and artillery barrage attacks inside Lebanon and Hezbollah attacks on Israeli forces in northern Israel have taken place virtually on a daily basis. An estimated 100,000 Israelis have evacuated the country’s northern towns while around 76,000 Lebanese living near the border have fled. Hezbollah has reported that 171 of its members have been killed since October 8, while Israel has said that nine soldiers and six civilians have been killed.
Even as the Biden administration uses the deaths of three American soldiers as the pretext for new military aggression in the Middle East, the death toll in Gaza continues to climb in the barbaric Israeli war waged on the Palestinians with the full backing of Washington. According to the Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza yesterday, the number of dead since October 7 rose to 26,751 with another 65,636 others wounded. The Israeli army killed 114 and wounded 249 others in the previous 24 hours.
The ministry’s spokesperson Ashraf Al-Qedra reported that Israel was increasing its siege on the Nasser Medical Complex in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip for the second week, placing “150 medical personnel, 450 wounded, and 3,000 displaced people under targeting.” With only enough fuel to keep the hospital’s generators running for two days, Al-Qedra warned that the situation would become even more dire.
Based on reports from the Palestinian news agency Wafa, Al Jazeera yesterday detailed Israeli operations inside the West Bank over the previous 24 hours. These included the killing of three Palestinians inside the Ibn Sina Hospital in Jenin by Israeli special forces; the bombing of the Al-Farouq Mosque in Khan Younis refugee camp; ongoing raids inside the Nur Shams and Tulkarem refugee camps, where Israeli forces bulldozed roads, water, telecommunication and electricity lines.
The horrors of the Israeli war inside Gaza and the West Bank are a harbinger of the barbarity that Israel, the US and its allies are preparing to inflict on a far wider scale throughout the Middle East. The US targeting of Iran is not the response to the deaths of three American soldiers but is flows from long-held ambitions for American domination of the energy-rich region and the failure of its previous criminal wars in the Middle East to achieve that end.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
After the consummation of the Brexit, the hypothetical exit of Germany from the Euro would provoke the liquidation of the Eurozone and the gestation of a new European economic cartography that will involve the return to the hermetic economic compartments.
Doctrine of the “Debt Brake”
As Joel Kotkin points out in Forbes magazine, for decades “the countries of the North (Germany, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Finland and the United Kingdom) have compensated for very low fertility rates and declining domestic demand with the arrival of immigrants and the creation of highly productive export-oriented economies”. Thus, following the doctrine of the Schuldenbremse (debt brake) that Germany introduced in its Constitution in 2009 with the inescapable objective that “every generation pays its expenses and does not consume the taxes that their children will pay in the form of debt”.
Germany would have achieved successive economic surpluses in the last five years because the zero or negative interest rates implemented by the ECB required less money to pay public debt and allowed it to accumulate reserves to deal with the social crisis COVID-19 with a massive investment boost estimated at €20 billion to kick-start the economy.
The Traffic Jam of the German Locomotive
However, according to an analysis by the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW), at present Germany would be burdened by the war in Ukraine and the total cut in Russian gas supply that would have already caused a contraction of about €100 billion (2.5% of GDP). This contraction will have as collateral effects the entry of the economy into recession and the increase in the unemployment rate combined with a runaway inflation and the settlement of trade surpluses.
Thus, according to euronews.com, the German locomotive would have fallen in the fourth quarter of 2023 (negative growth of 0.3% of GDP) due to the increase in energy prices, the reduction in industrial production due to weak European demand, the stagnation of domestic consumption and the loss of competitiveness vis-à-vis the rest of the world, which has resulted in a severe decline of 1.2% of exports in 2023.
On the other hand, the rise in ECB interest rates to 4.5% combined with the rampant inflation of 5.9% in 2023, have caused real wages to stagnate in Germany, fiscal adjustments and cuts in agricultural subsidies that would have put the German countryside and the other trade unions on the warpath.
Charles Dumas (Lombard Street Research London), argues that “Returning to a cherished German mark would squeeze profits, increase productivity and raise consumers’ real incomes, because instead of lending savings surpluses to peripheral countries, Germans could enjoy better living standards in their country”.
Increase in Social Fracture
According to a recent EU report, 7.5 million Germans would work in the low-income employment sector (minijobs) and according to the NGO Paritätischer Gesamtverband, the proportion of people at risk of poverty in Germany would be 14% (16.6% of the population).
This, together with the high rate of immigrants in Germany (almost 20%), will lead to the sharpening of xenophobic feelings in German society (especially among East Germans), due to the reduction in the labour supply , consequent fierce competition for jobs and the conversion of many outlying neighbourhoods into genuine ghettos of immigrants, so it is foreseeable a spectacular rise of ultra-right groups in the next elections 2025.
To the Dexit?
According to a survey conducted by TNS-Emnid for the weekly magazine Focus, 26% of Germans would consider supporting a party that wants to take Germany out of the euro, so the rising star of the German political firmament, “Alternative for Germany” (AfD) which was initially formed by academics and businessmen but which would have been radicalised and adopted clearly xenophobic postulates, such as the possible expulsion of millions of foreign citizens, would be considering proposing a referendum on Germany’s exit from the Euro (Dexit).
The hypothetical exit of Germany from the Euro would mean the beginning of the termination of the Eurozone and the gestation of a new European economic cartography that will mean the return to the stagnant economic compartments and the triumph of the US in achieving the balkanization of Europe.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
German Gorraiz Lopez is a political analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
There is an old proverb that when misfortunes come, they come in battalions. Coming on top of reports of American soldiers going down like nine-pins on a drone strike against the super secret CIA station for intelligence and covert operations on the Syrian-Jordanian border, ’nyet’ is the word from Beijing to the Biden administration’s entreaties seeking intervention with Tehran to rein in the Houthis of Yemen, against the foreboding backdrop of the Axis of Resistance expanding its operations against American and Israeli interests.
President Biden deputed his National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan to handle this highly delicate mission with Beijing, instead of the US’s top diplomat Antony Blinken. Sullivan is uniquely placed to switch roles between the US’ domestic and foreign policies. He is a trusted hatchet man of the president and is actively involved in Biden’s re-election campaign.
Sullivan stayed overnight in Thailand On Friday/Saturday to launch his charm offensive vis-a-vis Foreign Minister Wang Yi. But he came away with no sign that China is willing to use its influence with Tehran.
Later, an unattributable media briefing by a senior NSC official via teleconference was hastily arranged by the White House to cover Sullivan’s back side. It brought home that reading the Chinese tea leaves is an art in itself. As the NSC official put it,
“Beijing says they are raising this with the Iranians … but we’re certainly going to wait before we comment further on how effectively we think they’re actually raising it.”
Sullivan seems to have hit a brick wall. This is curious because the Biden Administration should have learnt from previous experience with Beijing in trying to prod China to convince close ally North Korea to scale back its nuclear weapons programme or roll back its “no limits” friendship with Russia over Ukraine.
Actually, South Korea’s military said on Sunday that North Korea fired several cruise missiles, extending a streak in weapons tests that are worsening tensions with the US and reflecting Pyongyang’s efforts to expand its arsenal of weapons designed to overwhelm remote US targets in the Pacific, including Guam!
Evidently, the Biden administration failed to comprehend that Beijing was under no obligation to use its influence on Pyongyang for serving American interests. It is sheer naïveté to expect Beijing to fall for selective engagement on issues that aim to buy time for the president to give his best shot in the upcoming November elections.
What does China get in return? The question doesn’t occur to the Biden Administration. The assumption in DC is that China is on an ego trip and begging for selective engagement with the No 1 military and economic power on the planet. On the contrary, China too has some legitimate demands to make — such as, for instance, the US not inciting Taiwan surreptitiously to travel on the path of independence, or allowing China a level playing field for setting new technology standards at the global level as an innovative country.
“The two sides conducted frank, substantive and fruitful strategic communications around the implementation of the consensus of the San Francisco meeting between the heads of state of the two countries and the proper handling of important and sensitive issues in Sino-US relations.
“Wang Yi said that this year marks the 45th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States.The two sides should take this as an opportunity to summarise their experiences and learn lessons, treat each other equally rather than condescendingly, seek common ground while preserving differences rather than highlighting differences, effectively respect rather than harm each other’s core interests, and work together to mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation to build a correct way for China and the United States to get along.
“Wang Yi emphasised that the Taiwan issue is China’s internal affairs, and Taiwan’s regional elections cannot change the basic fact that Taiwan is a part of China.The biggest risk to peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait is “Taiwan independence”, and the biggest challenge to Sino-US relations is also “Taiwan independence”.The United States must abide by the one-China principle and the three joint communiqués between China and the United States, implement the commitment not to support “Taiwan independence” into actions, and support China’s peaceful reunification.
“ Wang Yi pointed out that all countries have national security concerns, but they must be justified and reasonable. They cannot engage in pan-politicisation and pan-security, let alone curb and suppress the development of other countries.The two sides agreed to further discuss the boundary between national security and economic activities…
“The two sides also discussed international and regional issues such as the Middle East, Ukraine, the Korean Peninsula, and the South China Sea.”
The Chinese readout did not even make any specific mention of the Houthis or Tehran! Instead, it underscored the perceived threat of Taiwan independence as “the biggest challenge to China—US relations.” And, furthermore, it reiterated Beijing’s concerns that the US is using export restrictions “to contain and suppress the development of other countries” and said that the two countries will discuss “the boundary between national security and economic activities” in future meetings.
What do we make out of this? Simply put, China’s reluctance to use its diplomatic and economic heft to support US moves to address the Red Sea disruptions by reining in the Axis of Resistance (or restrain North Korea’s behaviour) underscores the limitations of the Biden administration’s diplomatic outreach efforts or charm offensive to win over Beijing and get it committed to a selective engagement over Washington’s priorities on flash points that might otherwise become raging controversies in electoral politics till November.
By the way, the Chinese readout also acknowledged that there are areas where Beijing is indeed interested in an engagement with the US at this transformative point in time — viz., the joint implementation of the so-called “San Francisco Vision,” which translates as:
regular contacts between the two presidents so as to “give strategic guidance to bilateral relations”;
promotion of bilateral exchanges;
making good use of the current strategic communication channels and a series of dialogue and consultation mechanisms” in various fields ranging from diplomacy, mil-to-mil ties, economy, finance, commerce, climate change, etc.;
continuing the discussion over the “guiding principles” of Sino-US relations;
How come the US and its western allies get it all horribly wrong? For an answer, the final word must go to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov who said in New York while on a brief visit to the UN hqs last weekend:
“They believe that for 500 years they have ruled the world as they wish, living at the expense of others, and they think this should continue. This logic completely ignores the objective reality, in particular the fact that the vast majority of former colonies have gained independence, become aware of their national interests, want to strengthen their national, cultural and religious identity and are growing so fast that they have left the West behind – at least the BRICS members are.”
The bottom line is, Beijing will not fall for US attempts to create misperceptions in China’s relations with Iran or North Korea. China has no intentions to help the US to pull its chestnuts out of the fire in West Asia or the Far East. The international environment is rather fraught and Beijing has set its compass to be on the right side of history.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image: Wang Yi, Member of Politbureau of Chinese Communist Party Central Committee and director of Central Foreign Affairs Office (3rd from left) met with Jake Sullivan, assistant to US President for National Security (3rd from Right), Bangkok, Jan. 26-27, 2024
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Mexico is furious and demands an investigation into how belt-fed machine guns, rocket launchers, and grenades are ending up in the hands of cartel members, the country’s top diplomat said.
“The (Mexican) Defense Department has warned the United States about weapons entering Mexico that are for the exclusive use of the US army,” Foreign Relations Secretary Alicia Bárcena said, who was quoted by AP News.
Bárcena said, “It is very urgent that an investigation into this be carried out.”
In June, the Mexican Army announced it had seized a dozen rocket launchers, 56 grenade launchers, and 221 fully automatic machine guns since 2018.
#Mexico 🇲🇽: A noteable video allegedly shows members of Cártel de Jalisco Nueva Generación (#CJNG Cartel) in #Jalisco.
A member of the cartel seemingly fires a noteable RPG-7 Launcher with 85mm PG-7V projectile —quite interesting to see. pic.twitter.com/IvhMN9GWF4
The influx of military-grade US weaponry entering Mexico comes as the Biden administration fails to secure the southern border as millions of illegals flood into the US. But what’s rarely discussed, in what seems like an Obama-era Operation Fast and Furious scandal, are weapons flooding Mexico from the US.
Last week, at the SHOT Show in Las Vegas, a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) agent from a field office in southern Texas revealed to us that the agency is very concerned about a flood of 50 cal rifles and belt-fed machine guns that are illegally entering Mexico from the US.
The cross-border firearms trafficking of military-grade US weaponry on the southern border is very concerning. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill should investigate this worrisome development to ensure the Biden administration does not repeat the Obama-era Fast and Furious program.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Five peace activists were arrested today as CODEPINK and other organizations disrupted the House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing titled “UNRWA Exposed: Examining the Agency’s Mission and Failures.” The protest aimed to draw attention to the urgent need for humanitarian aid in Gaza.
The disruption comes in the wake of the International Court of Justice’s recent ruling, which found South Africa’s charge of genocide against Israel to be credible. The court issued provisional measures demanding that Israel cease the killing of Palestinians and restore the flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza. Despite these urgent calls, Israel has retaliated by accusing UNRWA members of aiding and abetting Hamas’s attack on October 7th. In response, the United States made the drastic decision to completely cut off funding to UNRWA, jeopardizing vital aid to the people of Gaza who are facing dire circumstances.
“UNRWA is the lifeline for people who are starving; cutting its funding is just inhumane,” stated Medea Benjamin, co-founder of CODEPINK.
United States citizens are voicing their outrage at their country’s complicity in what they see as the intentional ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Many believe that decision-makers are influenced by lobbying efforts from groups like AIPAC, which is perceived as a de facto lobbying firm for the State of Israel.
Jay Waxse from 7 Circles Alliance expressed concern, stating,
“To so casually take away humanitarian aid from an entire people based on one criterion that is not withheld within our military or police in this country is severely troubling.”
Retired Colonel and former State Department member Ann Wright emphasized the critical importance of UNRWA funding for the health and security of the people of Gaza, calling the suspension of funding by the US “criminal” and “outrageous.”
CODEPINK and its supporters demand the immediate reinstatement of funding to UNRWA to ensure the well-being of the people of Gaza.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The US military school at West Point participates in Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
This is done by West Point lying away Israel’s genocide – and pretending to be “experts” claiming that Israel “protects” civilians.
Israel has done more to prevent civilian casualties in Gaza than any other army in the world, chair of urban warfare studies at West Point, John Spencer said in an extensive thread posted on x (formerly Twitter) on Tuesday. See this.
One of the “measures” which West Point claims Israel has taken, is Israel’s false alerts to warn Palestinians to go to “safe” places – places, which Israel then deliberately bombs once the Palestinian civilians have fled to those locations. The West Point is of course fully aware that their leader of urban combat education is lying on behalf of Israel – he knows that what Israel really does, is the exact opposite of protecting civilians – it is criminal deceit for targeting civilians, incl. children.
Also, the West Point military school in the US knows that Israel creates famine and hinders life-saving aid from going into Gaza.
The US, its government, and US military institutions like West Point are complicit in Israel’s genocide.
The lies from West Point about the nature of Israel’s genocide against the Palestinians is especially criminal, as it will undoubtedly be used as “evidence” to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that Israel is “innocent” of genocide.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
“Ladies and gentlemen of Progressive Slovakia and the Opposition parties, have you seen the statistics onhow our deaths have risen from various cardiovascular events due to vaccination?
But you reject it, of course you reject it, while you claim that (COVID-19) Vaccination was the best thing in the world.
What do you know abouthow many vaccines we have left over that expired and how much money was thrown away into the air? What do you know about purchases of medical equipment and tests? You know that we demonstrated very clearly the connection of one company from Trnava (Slovakia) to the chairman of one of the opposition political parties.
Hundreds of thousands, millions worth of purchases, completely useless. What do you know about management? What do you know about what was going on in terms of taking various measures which, in our view,significantly increased the morbidity than was perhaps the case in other countries?
And you all laughed at the other states, other countries. You laughed at Russia, where they stood on the principle of individual visits of patients by doctors, and they managed it significantly better than we managed it here in Slovakia.
We have 21,000 deaths, which we connect with the fact that the governments that were here since 2020 were not capable of managing (the pandemic) and cared only about economic gains and of course made sure they were bowing to pharmaceutical companies from which they bought huge quantities of useless medical equipment and often also vaccines.
I don’t even want to talk about the European level, you know that I have been very open and I said it to Madam President of the European Commission (Ursula von der Leyen) openly that the suspicions that are connected with her and to the purchase, the largest purchase in the history of the European Commission, of vaccines, when she literally exchanged secret SMS text messages with CEO of Pfizer (Albert Bourla), and when, to the ridicule of Members of the European Parliament a report was issued that was completely blacked out, we will simply never be able to find out the truth of what role pharmaceutical companies played and who actually organized this whole circus around COVID-19.
Under these conditions, ladies and gentlemen, the government of Slovak Republic has decided that it will include into the Government’s Program Statement, a commitment that it will settle this issue. The Slovak public simply needs an answer, needs an answer in regards to vaccination, what it actually was. Why were people vaccinated with various experimental Vaccines without any trials? Why were all sorts of drugs forced into people? Why was there state wide testing? Who was buying? Why were they buying? What quantities were being bought? How much money did it cost?
And we’ll end up at billions, at billions, you can grin all you want because you don’t even know anything other than showing disrespect for another opinion. You know democracy is about sometimes respecting another opinion. When you are here discussing for the third week talking about the Criminal Code, nobody is swearing at you, we are listening to you, you are talking, so please be kind enough if we have a different opinion, then please respect it even if you disagree with it.
Under these conditions, we have decided that we will create an Office of the Government Plenipotentiary which will be dealing with these questions. Today, we have not only appointed the Director of Plenipotentiary, but we’ve also empowered him when it comes to obtaining information from various Institutions, in particular we will be obtaining information from the Chief Hygienist, we will be asking questions at the National Health Information Center. We still want to know, based on what we currently have available to us, what actually happened.
I think that Dr.Kotlar, Member of the National Assembly, is sufficiently equipped in terms of information. I see that he is also prepared in terms of assembling a team. I have requested from him that before we make any public statements, that we have first gone through everything at the government, and I am absolutely convinced that his work will lead to results that we will make public and we will tell the Slovak public what in God’s name happened during COVID.
We know today one thing for sure: previous governments completely failed to manage COVID properly and have around their necks 21,000 dead people and apparently they made a huge amount of money on the unnecessary purchases of various medical equipment and vaccines.
Thank you very much.”
***
My Take…
A few weeks ago, newly elected Slovakia Prime Minister Robert Fico clearly outlined his governing party’s position on rejecting the WHO Pandemic Treaty. I translated his speechhere.
This time, Slovakia leads the way again and provides the “template” on how to approach the crimes and fraud committed during the COVID-19 pandemic by the politicians who were in power at the time.
Publicly address current excess deaths
Publicly expose the cardiovascular (and other) deaths caused by COVID-19 Vaccination
Call out the corruption involving the contracts that were awarded for masks and other personal protective equipment (and the politicians involved)
Call out the corruption in the procurement of COVID-19 Vaccines
Call out the experimental nature of COVID-19 Vaccines and the inappropriate use of various drugs that were forced on people during the pandemic
Launch a government investigation into the handling of the entire COVID-19 pandemic, including the rollout of COVID-19 Vaccines and the purchases of various medical equipment and vaccines (and who benefited financially).
Make a commitment to the public, to make all the findings of such a government investigation public.
Notice that even though he is a politician, he is not dancing around the issue or sugar coating it. He is simply telling it like it is.
This is a great template to follow, by other politicians who want to do the right thing at this time.
For example, in Canada, Alberta’s Premier Danielle Smith could launch such an investigation into corruption and crimes committed during the COVID-19 pandemic (especially by Alberta Health Services and the Colleges of Physicians, Nurses, Pharmacists, Dentists, etc) and if she did, she would have overwhelming support from the public.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
Reviews
This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon
In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia
In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig
Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac
A reading of Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late. You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
“In a normal world, it is Israel that should be punished for killing so many members of a humanitarian organization. (150 UNRWA staffers killed so far) But nope, it’s the humanitarian organization that’s getting punished, alongside the very vulnerable population it’s committed to helping.” —Arnaud Bertrand
Israeli leaders have settled on a plan that will increase the number of Palestinian deaths while diverting attention from the ICJ’s claims of genocide.
On Friday, western news agencies reported that the UN’s humanitarian agency, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency or UNRWA, may have employed militants who were involved in the October 7 attacks on Israel. The claims—which remain sketchy and unverified—were made on the same day that the International Court of Justice delivered its historic genocide ruling against the Jewish state. While it is possible that Israeli investigators uncovered new intelligence on Hamas’ attack, it’s more likely that the announcement was perfectly-timed to divert attention from the ICJ’s ruling.
Not surprisingly, the United States and its allies—including Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Finland and the Netherlands—have all accepted Israel’s dubious allegations and announced that they will temporarily suspend funding for the UN agency. The speed at which these countries joined Israel in condemning the UNRWA, strongly suggests that they were tipped-off (and told what to do) prior to the announcement. All of this suggests that Israel is trying to minimize the reputational damage from the genocide indictment by creating a smokescreen that will leave the public confused and unable to assign blame. According to the Times of Israel:
A senior Israeli official told the Axios news site that the Shin Bet and the IDF provided information that pointed to the active participation of UNRWA staffers along with the use of the agency’s vehicles and facilities in the October 7 terror onslaught.
Whenever the media bases its coverage on information from an unidentified intelligence source, you must assume they ‘have nothing’, which supports our basic belief that the Hamas fable is largely a diversion. Surprisingly, an article at CNN helps to reinforce our thesis. Take a look:
Details remain scant. Neither Israel nor UNRWA have specified the nature of the alleged involvement of UNRWA employees in the events of October 7.
An Israeli official told CNN on Friday that Israel shared information about 12 staffers allegedly involved in the October 7 attacks both with UNRWA and the US…
In addition to the staffers’ alleged October 7 involvement, the Israel Defense Forces on Saturday also alleged that UNRWA facilities were used for “terrorist purposes”, in a statement to CNN on Saturday.
Asked about the claim about UNRWA facilities, the agency told CNN, “We don’t have more information on this at this stage.” (CNN)
Okay, let’s review:
“Details remain scant.” (They have nothing.)
“Neither Israel nor UNRWA have specified the nature of the alleged involvement of UNRWA employees in the events of October 7.” (They have nothing.)
An Israeli official … shared information about 12 staffers allegedly involved in the October 7 attacks both with UNRWA and the US.” (“allegedly”. They have nothing.)
The IDF “also alleged that UNRWA facilities were used for “terrorist purposes”. (“alleged”. Again, no evidence.)
“The agency told CNN, “We don’t have more information on this at this stage.” (Finally, an clear admission that they have nothing.)
None of Israel’s claims have been corroborated, verified or proven. It’s all speculative pronouncements packaged as credible intelligence. (It’s embarrassing that they even publish this nonsense.)
All the same, Israel’s closest allies have cut funding and are now doing their level-best to prevent the relief agency from operating in Gaza. This is a very serious situation that could have dire consequences for Palestinians who currently have no access to food, medicine or clean water. As unbelievable as it sounds, Israel appears to be implementing a strategy aimed at deliberately starving millions of civilians to death. If someone has a better explanation for Israel’s behavior, I would be very interested in hearing it. This is from an editorial at the Global Times:
Since the start of this conflict, 1.7 million people have sought refuge or received services in over 150 UNRWA shelters and distribution sites. Food, water, education, and healthcare in Gaza largely depend on UNRWA. It is not an exaggeration to say that it is the last lifeline for 2.2 million people. The funding of this agency is almost entirely provided by donors, and it has been in a financially tight or even crisis state for many years. The countries that have currently announced the suspension of funding are important donor countries, with their donations accounting for a significant proportion of the organization’s funds. …
Israel has previously stated that the Israeli government will implement a policy to prevent UNRWA from operating in the Gaza Strip after the current round of Israel-Palestine conflict ends. Considering UNRWA’s pivotal position in local organizations within the UN, this will restrain the UN’s role in Gaza and the Middle East, and deal a major blow to the increasingly dire humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip….
there is currently no alternative to UNRWA, and it remains the only hope for Palestinian refugees. The international community has broad consensus that “collective punishment” against the Gaza population for condemning and combating terrorism is unacceptable and humanitarian needs should be guaranteed…
In the slow progress of the “two-state solution,” UNRWA has played an indispensable role in providing much-needed assistance to Palestinian refugees. It is a shared responsibility of all parties to continue supporting and maintaining the authority and status of the UN. Global Times
The article underscores what we said earlier, that currently there is no substitute for the UNRWA. If they are prevented from assisting Gaza’s nearly 2 million internal refugees, they will starve; it’s that simple. So, as you can see, Israel’s attack on the agency is not merely designed to obfuscate the genocide ruling, but to increase the probability of mass starvation. This type of barbarous behavior, is hard to process.
Check out this excerpt from the official statement from Philippe Lazzarini, UNRWA Commissioner General:
“Nine countries have as of today temporarily suspended their funding to UNRWA. These decisions threaten our ongoing humanitarian work across the region including and especially in the Gaza Strip.
“It is shocking to see a suspension of funds to the Agency in reaction to allegations against a small group of staff, especially given the immediate action that UNRWA took by terminating their contracts and asking for a transparent independent investigation….
“UNRWA is the primary humanitarian agency in Gaza, with over 2 million people depending on it for their sheer survival. Many are hungry as the clock is ticking towards a looming famine. The Agency runs shelters for over 1 million people and provides food and primary healthcare even at the height of the hostilities.
“In its ruling yesterday, the International Court of Justice ordered that “Israel must take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip”. These measures are aimed at preventing irreparable damage to the rights of Palestinians.
“It would be immensely irresponsible to sanction an Agency and an entire community it serves because of allegations of criminal acts against some individuals, especially at a time of war, displacement and political crises in the region…
“I urge countries who have suspended their funding to re-consider their decisions before UNRWA is forced to suspend its humanitarian response. The lives of people in Gaza depend on this support and so does regional stability”. UNRWA’s lifesaving aid may end due to funding suspension, unrwa.org
Is it fair to describe Israel’s effort to block basic humanitarian aid to the Palestinians as “diabolical” or is too critical?
The best summary of this issue was written by Arnaud Bertrand and posted on his Twitter account on Sunday. I hope you will take the time and read it:
Whatever your position is, just take a moment to reflect on just how dark this is.
Just hours after the ICJ concluded that Israel was plausibly committing genocide and ordered it to dramatically step up humanitarian efforts, 7 Western countries sanctioned… not Israel but the Palestinians and the UN (!!!).
They cut funding for UNRWA, which is THE UN agency tasked with humanitarian assistance to Palestinians (and therefore their main lifeline).
Even if you were the world’s worst cynic, you’d still have a hard time expecting such sheer level of cruelty and depravation. This is absolutely unfathomable.
They did so with the cheapest possible excuse, effectively using Israel’s narrative that “UNWRA is Hamas” and allegations by Israel that some UNWRA staff were involved in the 7th Oct attack but 1) Israel has been making these accusations for months (so the timing of cutting funding right after the ICJ ruling is obviously not a coincidence) and 2) UNWRA has announced it’s terminated the contracts of the staff members accused (12 people out of its 30,000 strong workforce) and launched an investigation, so it obviously doesn’t condone this. Even if the allegations were to be proven correct, how can an organization of 30,000 staff be held collectively accountable for the individual actions of 0.04% of its workforce? Especially in the current context when its work is a life or death matter for millions of people.
To add to the cynicism here, UNWRA staff are actually a major victim of the war with at least 152 UNRWA staffers killed by Israel in Gaza to date. In a normal world, it is Israel that should be punished for killing so many members of a humanitarian organization. But nope, it’s the humanitarian organization that’s getting punished, alongside with the very vulnerable population it’s committed to helping.”
Whatever your position is, just take a moment to reflect on just how dark this is.
Just hours after the ICJ concluded that Israel was plausibly committing genocide and ordered it to dramatically step up humanitarian efforts, 7 Western countries sanctioned… not Israel but the… https://t.co/6DYT3v7EK1
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on The Unz Review.
Michael Whitney is a renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.
He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
US Army General Christopher Cavoli, Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, announced that the largest NATO exercise in decades, Steadfast Defender 2024, will occur in Europe from the end of January to the end of May. 90,000 soldiers from the 31 NATO countries will participate and are about to join NATO Sweden.
US media reported that Washington is creating a new strategy for Ukraine that will deemphasise retaking territory it lost to Russian forces, a silent acknowledgment that the Ukrainian military does not have the capabilities to launch attacks, let alone reach Crimea, as Kiev regime figures boasted before the failure of last year’s counteroffensive.
In a world so deeply distressed by alarming incidence of gender violence, domestic violence, workplace violence, street violence, etc., better understanding and appreciation of the importance ofnon-violence implies a reduction not just in actual acts of violence but also conscious efforts to reduce anger, jealousy, greed, aggressive competitiveness and other tendencies which are associated with violence in daily life.
Political science as practiced in the academy and those tank manufacturer-funded institutions who collude in the articulation of public policy cannot call attention to the obvious. This is especially true of the so-called “realists”. What makes them so offensive is their obfuscation combined with moralizing verbosity. Yet the “realist” scholar or school is admired by all young and old (we have not yet heard of “trans-aged”).
Governments should endorse a global moratorium on mRNA vaccines until all questions about their safety have been thoroughly investigated, according to the authors of a new, peer-reviewed article on the COVID-19 vaccine trials and the global vaccination campaign published last week in Cureus, Journal of Medical Science.
The suspension of funding by donor states will impact life-saving assistance for over two million civilians, over half of whom are children, who rely on UNRWA aid in Gaza. The population faces starvation, looming famine and an outbreak of disease under Israel’s continued indiscriminate bombardment and deliberate deprivation of aid in Gaza.
It is already abundantly clear that Israel is adamant to ignore the demands of the ICJ and carry through with its genocide until its horrific end. Instead of reversing course, key forces in Israel celebrate their drive for genocide against the Palestinians and their objective of an Israeli colonization of Gaza.
Mohamed Hassan is a former Ethiopian diplomat who was involved in protests in the early 1990s with future Ethiopian President Meles Zenawi to secure greater rights for Ethiopia’s Muslim population. Hassan told an international tribunal on U.S. imperialism that the U.S. government is responsible for the destruction of Tigray, an Ethiopian province, after the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) launched an insurgency in November 2020 against the Ethiopian government.
The world is experiencing a micronutrient food and health crisis. Micronutrient deficiency now affects billions of people. Micronutrients are key vitamins and minerals and deficiencies can cause severe health conditions. They are important for various functions, including blood clotting, brain development, the immune system, energy production and bone health, and play a critical role in disease prevention.
Within hours, nine states had added their names to the list suspending allocated aid. Australia, along with the United States and Canada, rushed to the podium to condemn UNRWA and freeze funding. The United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Finland followed.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Amnesty International on Monday joined the growing global chorus denouncing Israel’s allies for suspending aid to the United Nations’ Palestinian refugee agency even as they continue to support the Israeli military’s war on the Gaza Strip, risking complicity in genocide.
Agnès Callamard, Amnesty’s secretary-general and the former U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings, said that while Israel’s claim that a dozen staffers at the refugee agency played a role Hamas’ October 7 attack is “serious and must be independently investigated,” the “alleged actions of a few individuals must not be used as a pretext for cutting off lifesaving assistance in what could amount to collective punishment.”
“Some of the very governments that announced they will cut off funds to UNRWA over these allegations have, in the meantime, continued to arm Israeli forces despite overwhelming evidence that these arms are used to commit war crimes and serious human rights violations,” said Callamard. “Rushing to freeze funds for humanitarian aid, based on allegations that are still being investigated, while refusing to even consider suspending support for the Israeli military is a stark example of double standards.”
“Instead of suspending vital funding to those in need,” Callamard added, “states should be working to halt arms transfers to Israel and Palestinian armed groups and pushing for an immediate and sustained cease-fire and full humanitarian access to help alleviate devastating suffering.”
The United States announced last week that it would temporarily cut off UNRWA funding as it reviews Israel’s allegations against the low-level agency employees—a decision that came just hours after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel must ensure the provision of humanitarian aid to Gazans, tens of thousands of whom have been killed or wounded by Israeli bombs and shells in less than four months.
Francesca Albanese, the U.N. special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories, said that “defunding UNRWA at this critical time overtly defies” the ICJ’s ruling.
Médecins Sans Frontières, also known as Doctors Without Borders, similarly warned Monday that “the consequences these cuts in funding will have on the ground contradict the provisional measures issued by the International Court of Justice.”
“The humanitarian crisis has reached catastrophic levels,” the group added, “and any additional limitations on aid will result in more deaths and suffering.”
Just over a week before the Biden administration decided to suspend its UNRWA contributions, a spokesperson for the U.S. State Department described the agency’s work as “invaluable” and “lifesaving.”
Jan 17—9 days before ICJ trial:
State Dept. Spox Matt Miller: "UNRWA has done and continues to do invaluable work to address the humanitarian situation in Gaza at great personal risk to UNRWA members…over 100 UNRWA staff members have been killed doing this lifesaving work." pic.twitter.com/ckTHFhU2zc
On Monday, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinkenacknowledged that the UNRWA “has played and continues to play an absolutely indispensable role in trying to make sure that men, women, and children who so desperately need assistance in Gaza actually get it.”
“And no one else can play the role that UNRWA’s been playing, certainly not in the near term,” he added. “So that only underscores the importance of UNRWA tackling this as quickly, as effectively, and as thoroughly as possible, and that’s what we’re looking for.”
At least a dozen countries—including the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands—have joined the U.S. in suspending aid to the UNRWA, the most critical humanitarian aid organization in the famine-stricken Gaza Strip.
The moves have put the UNRWA’s operations in jeopardy, with the U.N. chief warning that the agency’s current funding levels won’t be enough to meet all of its requirements in February. The agency has no strategic financial reserves.
Amnesty said the countries that have suspended aid to the UNRWA thus far provided more than half of the agency’s budget in 2022.
Several major nations, including Norway and Spain, have refused to join the U.S.-led freeze of aid to the UNRWA, which the Israeli government has been targeting for years and is hoping to push out of Gaza entirely. The UNRWA quickly fired nine of the 12 workers that Israel accused of taking part in the October 7 attack and has launched an investigation.
On Monday, Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares said his country will not suspend UNRWA funding, which he said helps “alleviate the terrible humanitarian situation in Gaza.”
Albares also pledged to continue pushing for an end to Israel’s assault on Gaza, the release of hostages, and a lasting diplomatic solution.
“We will not resign ourselves to watching more innocent women, men, and children killed in Gaza and more suffering of Palestinian families,” he said. “We will not resign ourselves to keep watching the suffering of the families of hostages. The violence must stop.”
[From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.]
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Jake Johnson is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams.
Featured image: Families have been forced to moved repeatedly in Gaza. UN United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
US media reported that Washington is creating a new strategy for Ukraine that will deemphasise retaking territory it lost to Russian forces, a silent acknowledgment that the Ukrainian military does not have the capabilities to launch attacks, let alone reach Crimea, as Kiev regime figures boasted before the failure of last year’s counteroffensive. At the same time, Berlin is also realising that Ukraine cannot win the war.
The Biden administration’s new strategy in 2024 will “de-emphasise” the recapture of “lost territories” and will instead focus on supporting the Kiev regime to survive amid Russia’s special military operation, The Washington Post reported, citing anonymous sources.
The sources claimed that the Biden administration is “still smarting” from Kiev’s failed counteroffensive and is “putting together the new strategy,” which includes helping Ukraine strengthen its military and economy in the face of the state’s financing impasse in the US Congress.
“Still smarting from last year’s failed counteroffensive in Ukraine, the Biden administration is putting together a new strategy that will de-emphasise winning back territory and focus instead on helping Ukraine fend off new Russian advances while moving toward a long-term goal of strengthening its fighting force and economy,” the newspaper wrote.
According to the Washington Post,
“the emerging plan is a sharp change from last year, when the US and allied militaries rushed training and sophisticated equipment to Kiev in hopes that it could quickly push back Russian forces.”
“It’s pretty clear that it will be difficult for them to try to mount the same kind of major push on all fronts that they tried to do last year,” a senior administration official told the newspaper, adding that “The idea now is to position Ukraine to hold its position on the battlefield for now,” and “put them on a different trajectory to be much stronger by the end of 2024 … and get them on a more sustainable path.”
It is noteworthy that in early January, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu said that Russia would achieve the objectives of the special military operation, adding that in 2023, the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ losses exceeded 215,000 personnel and 28,000 pieces of weaponry. This catastrophic number demonstrates how Zelensky is throwing Ukrainians into the Russian meatgrinder with little regard.
Shoigu’s announcement comes as Ukrainian politicians are asking Zelensky to reveal the number of soldiers killed. According to the leader of the Ukrainian Servant of the People party, Davyd Arakhamia, Zelensky must reassure the public with data, but the Ukrainian Armed Forces argue that publishing this would help Russia.
“When you go out and ask people about the losses, I’ve never heard of less than 100,000,” Arakhamia said during a panel discussion. “[But] our losses are much smaller.”
He said he had suggested that the Ukrainian president declassify the number to reassure the public, but the latter had not yet decided.
“The disclosure of Ukraine’s real losses in the war will show that they are not as great as they themselves imagine,” Arakhamia predicted, who is either in denial about the true number or is peddling misinformation.
Rather, it is more telling that the Ukrainian military claim that revealing the true number of fatalities in the conflict would allow Russia to “draw many conclusions from this data and use this information for analysis and planning,” meaning it would reveal the catastrophic losses.
Although the Washington Post reveals that the US, as the largest donor and most important ally of Ukraine, silently acknowledges that lost territories cannot be captured from Russia, the Kiev regime remains insistent on continuing the futile war effort. Alarmingly for Kiev, Berlin, the most important European ally, is arriving at the same conclusion as their American counterparts.
The leftist German party Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht, led by Sahra Wagenknecht, asked Olaf Scholz’s government to stop supplying weapons to Ukraine because it considered that this strategy does not benefit any party, not even Zelensky’s own troops, and to restore relations with Moscow.
“We are delivering weapons to Ukraine for a victory that, unfortunately, even the Ukrainian generals no longer believe in. This war must be put to an end, and very quickly, through negotiations,” the politician said during her party’s first congress in Berlin.
Although Wagenknecht’s party is only a few weeks old, she is one of Germany’s most recognised and popular politicians, and her voice holds weight. Given the fact that the right-wing AfD share Wagenknecht’s opinion and is now Germany’s most popular party, pressure is mounting against Scholz’s reckless policies towards Ukraine and Russia, especially since, as she highlighted, not even the Ukrainian military leaders believe in victory anymore.
Although there are strong opposition voices to end support for Ukraine in the US and Germany, the leaders of both countries want the war to continue, but with a begrudging acknowledgement that territory cannot be recaptured. Rather, they hope they can support Ukraine enough to create a stalemate situation, but this scenario is unlikely, especially once Russia launches its offensive.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
Video: “Wiping Gaza Off The Map”: Big Money Agenda. Confiscating Palestine’s Maritime Natural Gas Reserves
Evidence Relating to NASA Moon Landings, Unexplained Flaws: What Is Reality? What Is Illusion?
Video: Archbishop Carlo Vigano. A False Pandemic and The Imposition of A False Vaccine. A Criminal Plan of World Depopulation
Excess Deaths and Depopulation: Shall We Sit Around in Our Insouciance and Permit This to Happen?
WEF – Davos 2024. The World Is Falling Apart But the Show Must Go On…
Hypothetical “Disease X”: The WHO Pandemic Treaty is A Fraud. Demands Compliance for “Next Pandemic”
The Next Crisis “Bigger than Covid”: Paralysis of Power Supply, Communications, Transportation. The WEF “Cyber Attack” Scenario, “Usher In the Great Reset”
Will Disease X be Leaked in 2025?
Breaking: Florida Will be the First Jurisdiction to Halt COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines
Silencing the Lambs. How Propaganda Works. John Pilger, His Legacy Will Live
British Airways Leads the World in Flight Attendant Sudden Collapses and Deaths in 2023
Expanding Middle East War. Planned US-Israeli Attack on Iran, The War on Energy, Strategic Waterways
Tucker Carlson Surveys the Ruins of Canada After Eight Years of Trudeau
The Criminalization of International Justice, Putting an End to the Genocide against the People of Palestine. Nuremberg Principle IV
5G Danger: 13 Reasons 5G Wireless Technology Will Be a Catastrophe for Humanity
The West’s Lunatic Woke Agenda
The WEF and WHO – Are They Running a Death Cult? A WHO / Pharma controlled Worldwide Tyrannical “health system”
Preparing for Hypothetical “Disease X”: COVID Having Failed to Do the Job, Bill Gates Is Making a Second Run at “Culling the World Population”
Rethinking Srebrenica
