• The World of Arabs

    The world of Arabs (the WoA), as a distinctive part of the globe, is of extreme significance for both global politics and the global economy.

    On the other hand, this region is featured by slow democratic development, political instability, religious extremism (Islamic fundamentalism), and many reasons for long-time inter-ethnic conflicts especially on the Israeli-Arab relations and regional insecurity. It is quite obvious that the WoA needs comprehensive political, social, and economic reforms which the Arab Spring’s protesters clearly requested in 2010−2013. The crucial issues of reforms are about national development and governance, a succession of political authority, removal of political authoritarianism, and Arab relations with Israel and the USA.

    The WoA is composed politically of 22 member states of the Arab League Organization (officially, The League of Arab States) including those from the regions of the Middle East and North Africa (the MENA), and connected by numerous bilateral and multilateral conventions and agreements. On the one hand, those 22 member states are different in size, governmental form, and richness of natural resources, but on the other hand, all of them possess many common attributes that are culturally, confessionally, and ethnically unifying them: language, alphabet, religion, history, customs, values, and traditions.

    League of Arab States





    This league seeks to promote political, cultural, and economic cooperation between its 22 member states (including representatives of Palestine from the PLO) on two continents.

    It was founded in 1945 by six founding Arab states: Iraq, Egypt, Transjordan (today Jordan), Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Syria.

    One of the first and focal political acts by the league was an economic boycott of Zionist Israel from its proclamation in 1948 until the Oslo Accords in 1993. However, its attempt to present a united political (Arab) platform on some broader issues followed by harmonious economic cooperation is up to now limited usually due to American interference in Arab affairs. Nevertheless, such failure as well as is a result of the way of functioning of the Arab League Organization as its decisions are binding only for the member states that voted for them. Internal factors, in addition, like a form of state (monarchy or republic) have influenced Arab states’ disagreeing policies.

    External relations, as well, are historically and currently dividing Arab nations within the league. For instance, during the Cold War 1.0, they supported different sides either the USA or the USSR. Contemporarily, the nature of their relations with different external actors (Russia, China, USA) directly determined the political and economic actions by the member states of the Arab League Organization that were visible, for instance, in the cases of two Gulf Wars or the Arab Spring in 2010−2013. In 2011, the Arab League Organization condemned Libya’s leader Muammar Gadaffi’s [alleged] human rights abuses and called for the imposition of a no-fly zone over Libya in an unprecedented request for UNSC intervention.

    The Historical Context

    Most of the world of Arabs for some four centuries consisted of provinces under the Ottoman Empire (Sultanate). The first half of the 16th century experienced a great power advance of the three crucial Islamic empires at that time: the Ottoman Empire on three continents, the Safavid Empire in Persia, and the Mughal Empire in India. In the middle of the same century, these three Islamic states controlled a broad portion of territory and seas from Morocco, Austria, and Ethiopia to Central Asia, the Himalayas, and the Bay of Bengal. Much of Central Asia was in the possession of another Turkish dynasty – the Uzbek Shaybanids, whose capital was in Bukhara. Khanates with Muslim rulers existed in the Crimea and on the Volga River at Kazan and Astrakhan. All these states have been established by Turkish-speaking Muslim dynasties with an extreme military feature. All except the Safavid Empire in Persia were of Sunni Islam, but the Safavids, however, followed Shia Islam. This historical fact encouraged sharp antagonism, rivalry, and warfare in which the Middle Eastern Arabs have been involved. Up to 1639, a majority of the Arabs became governed by the Ottoman Sultans.

    By the death of the Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II the Conqueror in 1481, the Ottoman Turks conquered the Byzantine capital Constantinople, and the biggest portions of the Balkans. Thereafter, the sudden revival of Islamic Persia under the ruler Ismail I (1500−1524) pushed them back to the western part of the Middle East. However, Ismail of Persia was defeated in 1514, and Syria and Egypt have been conquered in 1516−1517 by the Ottomans. From that time onward, the Ottoman Empire was indisputably the greatest Muslim state of the time. In around 1530, the Ottoman subjects numbered around 14 million compared to England which had 2.5 million, or Spain 5 million. To the European observers of a different kind, the power of the Ottoman Turks followed by the strength and discipline of the Ottoman army were matters of admiration and respectful concern.

    The end of the Ottoman Empire after WWI should have resulted in the independence and self-governance of the Arab people. However, the provisions of the secret British-French Sykes-Picot Agreement (May 16th, 1916) between Foreign Ministers of the UK and France, divided and kept most of the WoA under their imperial rule. Two decades after WWII, some parts of the WoA are still fighting against colonial domination by the West. For instance, French colonialism finished in 1946 in Lebanon and Syria, in 1956 in Morocco and Tunisia, and in 1962 in Algeria. Differently to France, however, the Bretons at the same time after WWII sought, by all means, to extend their colonial power in the Middle East by signing treaties and making connections with loyal Arab local rulers.

    Ottoman Empire Map 1914 - Map Of The Usa With State Names

    Nevertheless, the impact of the Western colonial legacy on the new Arab countries is enduring at least for the next focal reasons:

    The Western colonial order established traditional systems of administration with absolute family rule in the majority of colonial-ruled Arab communities. Over time, the colonists offered their loyal Arab regimes financial, military, and technological support.
    The political authority and territorial-administrative border have been marked, recognized, and institutionalized in order to protect the present situation. Nevertheless, what was created and maintained as political entities by the French and the Bretons was not for the reason of coherence and economic functioning nor because of historical reasons but, primarily, to satisfy their colonial-imperial interests.
    The legacy of the British colonial rule of Palestine (the Mandate), from the 1917 Balfour Declaration to the British withdrawal in 1948, not only failed to integrate or harmonize the wishes of Judeo-Jewish and Arab Palestinian communities but, contrary intensified the differences to be one of the most bloody conflicts in the post-WWII history up to our days (The 2023−2024 Gazan War, Israeli aggression on South Lebanon in 2024).
    Political anti-colonial opposition groups started to be formed in the Arab Middle East and North Africa between two world wars and originally had the aims of resisting foreign colonial power and administration and gathering the Arabs to support their own political independence. The opposition movements later fought for the system’s reforms of Government and demanded benefits for the working class and those coming from the poor social strata.
    A social stratum has been created and grew increasingly large as the process of modernization followed by oil revenues gradually transformed the societies of the MENA. The new working class became directed against both foreign (Western) occupants and their capital of exploitation. It became a national struggle and attracted those Arabs who had been marginalized within their societies. Step by step, the opposition political groups, parties, and movements within the WoA attracted socialists, Islamists, communists, and nationalists for the realization of their political and national tasks.
    Therefore, the historical context of the Arab position in the contemporary Middle East is crucial for an objective understanding of current tensions and wars, but as well as for bridging a historical gap of values between the WoA and the West. Foreign (Western) involvement and occupation of Arab provinces in the Middle East, nevertheless, did not end with independence. The most troubling problem pondered by Arabs today is the burdensome, humiliating fact that the Arab region is the only part of the world where foreign armies today still invade and occupy the Arab lands. However, present Western claims of advocacy of democracy and freedom are deeply mixed with the images of historical Western colonial domination and occupation in the contemporary Arab collective memories.

    The second Gulf War in 2003, or the Western military invasion of Iraq, well illustrated how the problems of the region of the Arab Middle East very often are to be transformed into a state of greater regional complexity and broader international significance. However, instead of progress toward solutions to the current problems, the Arabs appeared to be involved in a situation of total insecurity and administrative-institutional incapacity.

    On one hand, while reforms are a common wish in the Arab countries, it is, on the other hand, unclear how to break out old undemocratic political models of governmental administration, and how to develop and encourage competent, ethical, and accountable systems of governance in the majority of the MENA countries as it was clearly put on agenda during the Arab Spring in 2010−2013. Besides, no less challenging for the Arabs is to be able to lead effectively within a new reality in global politics and international relations where „pre-emption“ with armed forces and „threatening diplomacy“ are increasingly becoming the methods of choice for conflict resolution.

    The Arab Spring (December 17th, 2010−October 26th, 2013)

    The Arab Spring started in mid-December 2010 in Tunisia and in the spring of next year, people’s demonstrations brought an end to the regime of Tunisian autocrat Zine El Abidine Ben Ali which lasted for 23 years. The Tunisian protests started because Mohamed Bouazizi set himself on fire when he could no longer pay police bribes. However, those political and pro-democratic events in Tunisia immediately inspired protests against similar authoritarian regimes in the MENA region like in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Iraq, Jordan, Bahrain, and Oman. Nevertheless, while on one hand Arab protests fastly spread out from one state to another in the region, on the other hand, general regime change across the Arab MENA did not come as quickly as it was in the case of Tunisia.

    During the Arab Spring and up to the present, there are thousands of protesters in the MENA region who are tortured, imprisoned, or sentenced to the death penalty. The Arab Spring continued in Syria, Yemen, and Libya up to now in the form of a prolonged civil war in which different groups of Islamic fundamentalists took participation. As the Arab Spring in some Arab countries became transformed into a long and devastating civil war, the initial optimism by the international community to the protests of 2010−2013 which have been understood as a democratic cross-regional movement, became gradually pessimistic.

    It has to be noticed that the Arab states that have been hit by the Arab Spring (revolution and counter-revolution) are sharing a lot of common features. Their unique politics of inner affairs and international relations shaped their contemporary histories. As a common feature of the Arab Spring was the fact that the street protesters had in common a rejection of dictatorial regimes and a desire for both constitutional and representative governmental administration. However, some crucial differences between Arab countries existed too. Therefore, there are three crucial themes to be particularly presented in order to properly understand the state of turmoil in which the MENA region found itself during the time of the Arab Spring: 1) Economic failure, 2) State repression, and 3) Geopolitical context.

    Some of the focal features of the Arab Spring can be summarized as follows:

    Poor long-term economic growth across the MENA region surely contributed a lot to people’s dissatisfaction with the economic situation. In general, the economic growth of the world of Arabs is during the last half of the century negative and, consequently, rates of unemployment, underemployment, and poverty were among the highest in the world in 2010 on the eve of the Arab Spring. Social inequalities increased followed by the corruption and the practices of clientelism of ruling classes. The incident in Tunisia in mid-December 2010 with Mohamed Bouazizi clearly stressed the Arab Spring’s economic and political dimensions.
    The Arabs who took the street had the aim to secure democratic freedoms and to crucially improve the accountability of their Governments and Presidents/Kings (the executive powers). However, at the same time, they required the recognition of their human and political rights as citizens followed by protection from repression at the hands of the state and its corrupted institutions.
    The international dimension of the Arab Spring is differently presented by different types of academic researchers and actors in international relations. On one hand, many regional orientalists claim that the (Arab) people of the MENA region (North Africa and the Middle East) are simply ungovernable and, therefore, they deserve autocratic rule, but the other experts emphasize that external actors share responsibility for ill-targeted economic policies and hard-line state repression. It is, for instance, well-known the negative influence of the IMF policies on Arab employment results or that the promotion of export economies by Western external actors (the EU) actively shaped the economic policies of the Arab nations.
    External factors in addition to having a strong impact on shaping the economy of the world of Arabs, they, as well as, supported the regional autocratic regimes from the Cold War 1.0 onward. However, the essence of the Arab Spring was that external factors continued to do so when demonstrations and uprisings started. Western external actors hesitated to express clear support for the protesters for the reason of their concerns for stability, prioritization of anti-terrorism and anti-Islamic radicalism policies, and consideration of their bilateral relations with a Zionist Israel. Even the Arab Governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, or regional Iran, had a strong influence on the outcomes of the Arab Spring by supporting existing political authorities or certain military-political organizations (ex., Hamas and Hezbollah).
    *

    Click the share button below 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.

    Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War

    Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović is a former university professor in Vilnius, Lithuania. He is a Research Fellow at the Center for Geostrategic Studies. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

    Featured image: A globe map of the world, highlighting the Arab world in green, and disputed areas in light green. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/world-arabs/5871053
    The World of Arabs The world of Arabs (the WoA), as a distinctive part of the globe, is of extreme significance for both global politics and the global economy. On the other hand, this region is featured by slow democratic development, political instability, religious extremism (Islamic fundamentalism), and many reasons for long-time inter-ethnic conflicts especially on the Israeli-Arab relations and regional insecurity. It is quite obvious that the WoA needs comprehensive political, social, and economic reforms which the Arab Spring’s protesters clearly requested in 2010−2013. The crucial issues of reforms are about national development and governance, a succession of political authority, removal of political authoritarianism, and Arab relations with Israel and the USA. The WoA is composed politically of 22 member states of the Arab League Organization (officially, The League of Arab States) including those from the regions of the Middle East and North Africa (the MENA), and connected by numerous bilateral and multilateral conventions and agreements. On the one hand, those 22 member states are different in size, governmental form, and richness of natural resources, but on the other hand, all of them possess many common attributes that are culturally, confessionally, and ethnically unifying them: language, alphabet, religion, history, customs, values, and traditions. League of Arab States This league seeks to promote political, cultural, and economic cooperation between its 22 member states (including representatives of Palestine from the PLO) on two continents. It was founded in 1945 by six founding Arab states: Iraq, Egypt, Transjordan (today Jordan), Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. One of the first and focal political acts by the league was an economic boycott of Zionist Israel from its proclamation in 1948 until the Oslo Accords in 1993. However, its attempt to present a united political (Arab) platform on some broader issues followed by harmonious economic cooperation is up to now limited usually due to American interference in Arab affairs. Nevertheless, such failure as well as is a result of the way of functioning of the Arab League Organization as its decisions are binding only for the member states that voted for them. Internal factors, in addition, like a form of state (monarchy or republic) have influenced Arab states’ disagreeing policies. External relations, as well, are historically and currently dividing Arab nations within the league. For instance, during the Cold War 1.0, they supported different sides either the USA or the USSR. Contemporarily, the nature of their relations with different external actors (Russia, China, USA) directly determined the political and economic actions by the member states of the Arab League Organization that were visible, for instance, in the cases of two Gulf Wars or the Arab Spring in 2010−2013. In 2011, the Arab League Organization condemned Libya’s leader Muammar Gadaffi’s [alleged] human rights abuses and called for the imposition of a no-fly zone over Libya in an unprecedented request for UNSC intervention. The Historical Context Most of the world of Arabs for some four centuries consisted of provinces under the Ottoman Empire (Sultanate). The first half of the 16th century experienced a great power advance of the three crucial Islamic empires at that time: the Ottoman Empire on three continents, the Safavid Empire in Persia, and the Mughal Empire in India. In the middle of the same century, these three Islamic states controlled a broad portion of territory and seas from Morocco, Austria, and Ethiopia to Central Asia, the Himalayas, and the Bay of Bengal. Much of Central Asia was in the possession of another Turkish dynasty – the Uzbek Shaybanids, whose capital was in Bukhara. Khanates with Muslim rulers existed in the Crimea and on the Volga River at Kazan and Astrakhan. All these states have been established by Turkish-speaking Muslim dynasties with an extreme military feature. All except the Safavid Empire in Persia were of Sunni Islam, but the Safavids, however, followed Shia Islam. This historical fact encouraged sharp antagonism, rivalry, and warfare in which the Middle Eastern Arabs have been involved. Up to 1639, a majority of the Arabs became governed by the Ottoman Sultans. By the death of the Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II the Conqueror in 1481, the Ottoman Turks conquered the Byzantine capital Constantinople, and the biggest portions of the Balkans. Thereafter, the sudden revival of Islamic Persia under the ruler Ismail I (1500−1524) pushed them back to the western part of the Middle East. However, Ismail of Persia was defeated in 1514, and Syria and Egypt have been conquered in 1516−1517 by the Ottomans. From that time onward, the Ottoman Empire was indisputably the greatest Muslim state of the time. In around 1530, the Ottoman subjects numbered around 14 million compared to England which had 2.5 million, or Spain 5 million. To the European observers of a different kind, the power of the Ottoman Turks followed by the strength and discipline of the Ottoman army were matters of admiration and respectful concern. The end of the Ottoman Empire after WWI should have resulted in the independence and self-governance of the Arab people. However, the provisions of the secret British-French Sykes-Picot Agreement (May 16th, 1916) between Foreign Ministers of the UK and France, divided and kept most of the WoA under their imperial rule. Two decades after WWII, some parts of the WoA are still fighting against colonial domination by the West. For instance, French colonialism finished in 1946 in Lebanon and Syria, in 1956 in Morocco and Tunisia, and in 1962 in Algeria. Differently to France, however, the Bretons at the same time after WWII sought, by all means, to extend their colonial power in the Middle East by signing treaties and making connections with loyal Arab local rulers. Ottoman Empire Map 1914 - Map Of The Usa With State Names Nevertheless, the impact of the Western colonial legacy on the new Arab countries is enduring at least for the next focal reasons: The Western colonial order established traditional systems of administration with absolute family rule in the majority of colonial-ruled Arab communities. Over time, the colonists offered their loyal Arab regimes financial, military, and technological support. The political authority and territorial-administrative border have been marked, recognized, and institutionalized in order to protect the present situation. Nevertheless, what was created and maintained as political entities by the French and the Bretons was not for the reason of coherence and economic functioning nor because of historical reasons but, primarily, to satisfy their colonial-imperial interests. The legacy of the British colonial rule of Palestine (the Mandate), from the 1917 Balfour Declaration to the British withdrawal in 1948, not only failed to integrate or harmonize the wishes of Judeo-Jewish and Arab Palestinian communities but, contrary intensified the differences to be one of the most bloody conflicts in the post-WWII history up to our days (The 2023−2024 Gazan War, Israeli aggression on South Lebanon in 2024). Political anti-colonial opposition groups started to be formed in the Arab Middle East and North Africa between two world wars and originally had the aims of resisting foreign colonial power and administration and gathering the Arabs to support their own political independence. The opposition movements later fought for the system’s reforms of Government and demanded benefits for the working class and those coming from the poor social strata. A social stratum has been created and grew increasingly large as the process of modernization followed by oil revenues gradually transformed the societies of the MENA. The new working class became directed against both foreign (Western) occupants and their capital of exploitation. It became a national struggle and attracted those Arabs who had been marginalized within their societies. Step by step, the opposition political groups, parties, and movements within the WoA attracted socialists, Islamists, communists, and nationalists for the realization of their political and national tasks. Therefore, the historical context of the Arab position in the contemporary Middle East is crucial for an objective understanding of current tensions and wars, but as well as for bridging a historical gap of values between the WoA and the West. Foreign (Western) involvement and occupation of Arab provinces in the Middle East, nevertheless, did not end with independence. The most troubling problem pondered by Arabs today is the burdensome, humiliating fact that the Arab region is the only part of the world where foreign armies today still invade and occupy the Arab lands. However, present Western claims of advocacy of democracy and freedom are deeply mixed with the images of historical Western colonial domination and occupation in the contemporary Arab collective memories. The second Gulf War in 2003, or the Western military invasion of Iraq, well illustrated how the problems of the region of the Arab Middle East very often are to be transformed into a state of greater regional complexity and broader international significance. However, instead of progress toward solutions to the current problems, the Arabs appeared to be involved in a situation of total insecurity and administrative-institutional incapacity. On one hand, while reforms are a common wish in the Arab countries, it is, on the other hand, unclear how to break out old undemocratic political models of governmental administration, and how to develop and encourage competent, ethical, and accountable systems of governance in the majority of the MENA countries as it was clearly put on agenda during the Arab Spring in 2010−2013. Besides, no less challenging for the Arabs is to be able to lead effectively within a new reality in global politics and international relations where „pre-emption“ with armed forces and „threatening diplomacy“ are increasingly becoming the methods of choice for conflict resolution. The Arab Spring (December 17th, 2010−October 26th, 2013) The Arab Spring started in mid-December 2010 in Tunisia and in the spring of next year, people’s demonstrations brought an end to the regime of Tunisian autocrat Zine El Abidine Ben Ali which lasted for 23 years. The Tunisian protests started because Mohamed Bouazizi set himself on fire when he could no longer pay police bribes. However, those political and pro-democratic events in Tunisia immediately inspired protests against similar authoritarian regimes in the MENA region like in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Iraq, Jordan, Bahrain, and Oman. Nevertheless, while on one hand Arab protests fastly spread out from one state to another in the region, on the other hand, general regime change across the Arab MENA did not come as quickly as it was in the case of Tunisia. During the Arab Spring and up to the present, there are thousands of protesters in the MENA region who are tortured, imprisoned, or sentenced to the death penalty. The Arab Spring continued in Syria, Yemen, and Libya up to now in the form of a prolonged civil war in which different groups of Islamic fundamentalists took participation. As the Arab Spring in some Arab countries became transformed into a long and devastating civil war, the initial optimism by the international community to the protests of 2010−2013 which have been understood as a democratic cross-regional movement, became gradually pessimistic. It has to be noticed that the Arab states that have been hit by the Arab Spring (revolution and counter-revolution) are sharing a lot of common features. Their unique politics of inner affairs and international relations shaped their contemporary histories. As a common feature of the Arab Spring was the fact that the street protesters had in common a rejection of dictatorial regimes and a desire for both constitutional and representative governmental administration. However, some crucial differences between Arab countries existed too. Therefore, there are three crucial themes to be particularly presented in order to properly understand the state of turmoil in which the MENA region found itself during the time of the Arab Spring: 1) Economic failure, 2) State repression, and 3) Geopolitical context. Some of the focal features of the Arab Spring can be summarized as follows: Poor long-term economic growth across the MENA region surely contributed a lot to people’s dissatisfaction with the economic situation. In general, the economic growth of the world of Arabs is during the last half of the century negative and, consequently, rates of unemployment, underemployment, and poverty were among the highest in the world in 2010 on the eve of the Arab Spring. Social inequalities increased followed by the corruption and the practices of clientelism of ruling classes. The incident in Tunisia in mid-December 2010 with Mohamed Bouazizi clearly stressed the Arab Spring’s economic and political dimensions. The Arabs who took the street had the aim to secure democratic freedoms and to crucially improve the accountability of their Governments and Presidents/Kings (the executive powers). However, at the same time, they required the recognition of their human and political rights as citizens followed by protection from repression at the hands of the state and its corrupted institutions. The international dimension of the Arab Spring is differently presented by different types of academic researchers and actors in international relations. On one hand, many regional orientalists claim that the (Arab) people of the MENA region (North Africa and the Middle East) are simply ungovernable and, therefore, they deserve autocratic rule, but the other experts emphasize that external actors share responsibility for ill-targeted economic policies and hard-line state repression. It is, for instance, well-known the negative influence of the IMF policies on Arab employment results or that the promotion of export economies by Western external actors (the EU) actively shaped the economic policies of the Arab nations. External factors in addition to having a strong impact on shaping the economy of the world of Arabs, they, as well as, supported the regional autocratic regimes from the Cold War 1.0 onward. However, the essence of the Arab Spring was that external factors continued to do so when demonstrations and uprisings started. Western external actors hesitated to express clear support for the protesters for the reason of their concerns for stability, prioritization of anti-terrorism and anti-Islamic radicalism policies, and consideration of their bilateral relations with a Zionist Israel. Even the Arab Governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, or regional Iran, had a strong influence on the outcomes of the Arab Spring by supporting existing political authorities or certain military-political organizations (ex., Hamas and Hezbollah). * Click the share button below 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. Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović is a former university professor in Vilnius, Lithuania. He is a Research Fellow at the Center for Geostrategic Studies. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. Featured image: A globe map of the world, highlighting the Arab world in green, and disputed areas in light green. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0) https://www.globalresearch.ca/world-arabs/5871053
    WWW.GLOBALRESEARCH.CA
    The World of Arabs
    The world of Arabs (the WoA), as a distinctive part of the globe, is of extreme significance for both global politics and the global economy. On the other hand, this region is featured by slow democratic development, political instability, religious extremism (Islamic fundamentalism), and many reasons for long-time inter-ethnic conflicts especially on the Israeli-Arab relations …
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 2319 Views
  • New neocon manifesto: Keep US troops in the Middle East forever
    [email protected] January 29, 2025 deal of the century, Elliott Abrams, foreign policy, Iran US relations, neocon


    The ‘Vandenberg Coalition’ wants Trump to prioritize Israel and maintain Iran as enemy number one

    By Jim Lobe, Reposted from Responsible Statecraft

    A leading neoconservative for most of the last half-century has released a comprehensive series of recommendations on Middle East policy for the new Trump administration nearly all of which are ideas that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud Party would happily embrace.

    The 16-page report, entitled “Deals of the Century: Solving the Middle East,” is published by the Vandenberg Coalition, which was founded and chaired by Elliott Abrams, who has held senior foreign policy posts in every Republican administration since Ronald Reagan (except George H.W. Bush’s), including as Special Envoy for Venezuela and later for Iran during Trump’s first term.

    Created shortly after former President Biden took office, the Coalition has acted as a latter-day Project for the New American Century, a letterhead organization that acted as a hub and platform for pro-Likud neoconservatives, aggressive nationalists, and the Christian Right in mobilizing public support for the “Global War on Terror,” the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and the move away from a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict, particularly under the George W. Bush administration in which Abrams served as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Near East and North African Affairs, surviving a number of purges of leading neoconservatives in that administration after the Iraq occupation went south.

    The new report predictably calls for the new administration to “use all elements of [U.S.] national power” to prevent Iran, “the greatest threat to American interests in the Middle East and the cause of most of the region’s security problems,” from acquiring a nuclear bomb. It describes Israel as “our cornerstone ally in the region” to which Washington should provide all “the weapons it needs [to] help it win the war and prevent wider escalation.”

    The recommendations also call for Washington to maintain its military presence in both Iraq and Syria, to suspend all aid to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) “until it demonstrates a willingness to oppose Hezbollah, accelerate U.S. arms sales, and broaden intelligence cooperation with the UAE,” and enhance military and security cooperation with Saudi Arabia provided it “pivot[s] away from China and Russia.”

    It also calls for the Saudis to “increase [its] foreign direct investment commitments in U.S industries,” and “cease public statements” critical of Israel and supportive of Iran. “…[En]hanced cooperation with Saudi Arabia,” the report insists, “should be contingent on their being unequivocal about what side they are on.”

    Washington should also designate Iraq’s Iran-backed Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) and related militias as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) and stop engaging with them politically, and work with Yemen’s Saudi-backed Presidential Leadership Council against the Houthis whose designation as an FTO by the Trump administration last week was applauded in the report. On the new government in Syria, the report says that ongoing sanctions, which helped cripple the country’s economy, should not be lifted “unless the new government proves to be a responsible actor,” although it does not describe what that would mean in any detail.

    Aside from Iran’s status as Enemy Number One in the report, special scorn was reserved for Qatar, which has played a central role in mediating between Israel and Hamas regarding the fate of Israelis held in Gaza and Palestinians detained in Israel. Similar contempt is reserved for the Palestinian Authority headed by Mahmoud Abbas, for various U.N. agencies, notably “the nefariousness [sic] UNRWA,” which has worked with Palestinian refugees and their families across the Middle East for more than 70 years, and for senior UN human rights officials who deal with the Israel-Palestine conflict in particular. Washington “should immediately cease all funding to UNRWA” and also to UNIFIL, the U.N. peacekeeping force deployed along the Lebanese-Israeli border unless its troops are given the authority and demonstrate the will to confront Hezbollah forces in the area.

    As for Qatar, it “has worked to undermine U.S. interests by cooperating with Iran and sheltering terrorist groups like Hamas,” according to the report. “With much better friends like the Saudis, Washington no longer needs to tolerate destabilizing Qatari behavior,” and thus should move U.S. Central Command’s forward headquarters out of Qatar’s Al Udeid Air Base and revoke Doha’s “Major Non-Nato Ally status unless its behavior changes.” That status should be conferred on the UAE instead, according to the report, provided that it “reduces [its] reliance on Russian and Chinese vendors” of military equipment.

    The report, which describes the politics of the Biden administration in the Middle East on more than one occasion as “appeasement,” mainly of Iran, reminds the reader that Trump declared only last month that “the Middle East is going to get solved,” a phrase that undoubtedly inspired the report’s title: “Deals of the Century: Solving the Middle East.” While the report says it was the product of a “working group of Middle East experts,” no names other than Abrams, Gabriel Scheinemann, and Daniel Samet, the latter two neoconservatives from the Alexander Hamilton Society, appear in the report. Normally, reports by letterhead organizations list their contributors.

    In presenting what it calls “key American interests in the Middle East,” the report puts “preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons at the top of the list” but also expresses alarm at Chinese Communist Party inroads in the region, noting that CCP is Washington’s “key global adversary.” In an echo of the Global War on Terror, Washington, it says, should also “deny jihadi terrorists a safe haven,” a reference in part to the necessity its authors feel to retain U.S. forces in Syria and Iraq.

    But “America’s alliance with Israel is central to U.S. interests in the region, given that it promotes American values within the Middle East and provides the first line of defense against Iranian aggression.” Moreover, Washington should try to expand the Abraham Accords, and “the Palestinian question must not impede Israel’s normalization with Arab and Muslim countries or otherwise compromise its security.” Washington must “ensure Israel has the tools to defend itself.”

    Yet another interest is to expand access of our allies and partners in Europe and elsewhere to the region’s energy supplies, according to the report.

    To increase pressure on Iran, Washington should not only reinstate Trump’s “ maximum pressure” campaign, but include within it convincing Britain, France, and Germany to “snapback sanctions” against Tehran at the U.N. Remarkably perhaps, it offers the possibility of a new nuclear agreement that would “forbid Iranian uranium enrichment beyond the small amounts need for a civilian nuclear program,” something that the 2015 JCPOA, which Trump withdrew from in 2018, actually accomplished before Trump, under the influence of neoconservatives like Abrams, withdrew from in 2018. If a deal can be reached, according to the report, it should be dealt with as a treaty; that is, made subject to a 2/3 majority vote in the Senate.

    With respect to the Palestinians in the wake of the last 15 months of war in Gaza, “American policy toward the Palestinians must prioritize the security of Israel and our Arab partners.” Washington “must impose standards for good governance. The U.S. should “allow an Arab trusteeship to control Gaza after the war.” In words that must warm Netanyahu’s heart, the report notes “the weakness and incompetence of the PA mean it cannot govern Gaza,” and “Israel will need to maintain security control to prevent Hamas from rebuilding but should not and does not wish to govern Gaza itself.”

    Abrams has a long history with both Palestine and Gaza, notably during the Bush administration. After Hamas was an unexpected election victor over its rival Fatah in the 2006 elections – which were hailed as the freest and fairest elections in the Arab world at the time – Abrams and other senior officials encouraged the mounting of an armed coup against Hamas led by Fatah’s local leader and Abrams’ favorite Muhammad Dahlan which, in turn, sparked a brief civil war in the enclave in which Hamas emerged victorious and stronger than ever. After the fiasco, Dahlan moved to the UAE, and there has been much speculation that he stands to play a key role on behalf of the Emirates if the kind of “Arab trusteeship” alongside Israeli security forces is established as recommended by the report.

    Perhaps the most novel recommendation is based on the report’s contention that Iran’s non-state allies in the region typically use non-combatants as human shields — an apparent endorsement of Israel’s defense of its bombing of apartment houses, schools, and other buildings in Gaza and Lebanon during the past 15 months that have killed well over 46,000 people, most of them women and children. “The United States should propose a Security Council resolution that states the use of human shields is a crime under international law and that those who use human shields are responsible for the civilian deaths in which they result,” the report advised.

    Jim Lobe is a Contributing Editor of Responsible Statecraft. He formerly served as chief of the Washington bureau of Inter Press Service from 1980 to 1985 and again from 1989 to 2015.

    RELATED:

    WATCH: How Pro-Israel Neocons Pushed for War in Iraq (Alison Weir)
    (2021) Israel loyalists embedded in U.S. government pushed U.S. into Iraq War
    Clean Break II: Iran Hawks Decide to Burn it All Down
    War on Iran?
    Lobe: The role of the Weekly Standard, devoted to Israel, in promoting war
    Every accusation a confession: Israel and the double lie of ‘human shields’
    Gaza has turned into Biden’s most perplexing moral and foreign policy failure

    https://israelpalestinenews.org/elliot-abrams-neocon/
    New neocon manifesto: Keep US troops in the Middle East forever [email protected] January 29, 2025 deal of the century, Elliott Abrams, foreign policy, Iran US relations, neocon The ‘Vandenberg Coalition’ wants Trump to prioritize Israel and maintain Iran as enemy number one By Jim Lobe, Reposted from Responsible Statecraft A leading neoconservative for most of the last half-century has released a comprehensive series of recommendations on Middle East policy for the new Trump administration nearly all of which are ideas that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud Party would happily embrace. The 16-page report, entitled “Deals of the Century: Solving the Middle East,” is published by the Vandenberg Coalition, which was founded and chaired by Elliott Abrams, who has held senior foreign policy posts in every Republican administration since Ronald Reagan (except George H.W. Bush’s), including as Special Envoy for Venezuela and later for Iran during Trump’s first term. Created shortly after former President Biden took office, the Coalition has acted as a latter-day Project for the New American Century, a letterhead organization that acted as a hub and platform for pro-Likud neoconservatives, aggressive nationalists, and the Christian Right in mobilizing public support for the “Global War on Terror,” the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and the move away from a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict, particularly under the George W. Bush administration in which Abrams served as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Near East and North African Affairs, surviving a number of purges of leading neoconservatives in that administration after the Iraq occupation went south. The new report predictably calls for the new administration to “use all elements of [U.S.] national power” to prevent Iran, “the greatest threat to American interests in the Middle East and the cause of most of the region’s security problems,” from acquiring a nuclear bomb. It describes Israel as “our cornerstone ally in the region” to which Washington should provide all “the weapons it needs [to] help it win the war and prevent wider escalation.” The recommendations also call for Washington to maintain its military presence in both Iraq and Syria, to suspend all aid to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) “until it demonstrates a willingness to oppose Hezbollah, accelerate U.S. arms sales, and broaden intelligence cooperation with the UAE,” and enhance military and security cooperation with Saudi Arabia provided it “pivot[s] away from China and Russia.” It also calls for the Saudis to “increase [its] foreign direct investment commitments in U.S industries,” and “cease public statements” critical of Israel and supportive of Iran. “…[En]hanced cooperation with Saudi Arabia,” the report insists, “should be contingent on their being unequivocal about what side they are on.” Washington should also designate Iraq’s Iran-backed Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) and related militias as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) and stop engaging with them politically, and work with Yemen’s Saudi-backed Presidential Leadership Council against the Houthis whose designation as an FTO by the Trump administration last week was applauded in the report. On the new government in Syria, the report says that ongoing sanctions, which helped cripple the country’s economy, should not be lifted “unless the new government proves to be a responsible actor,” although it does not describe what that would mean in any detail. Aside from Iran’s status as Enemy Number One in the report, special scorn was reserved for Qatar, which has played a central role in mediating between Israel and Hamas regarding the fate of Israelis held in Gaza and Palestinians detained in Israel. Similar contempt is reserved for the Palestinian Authority headed by Mahmoud Abbas, for various U.N. agencies, notably “the nefariousness [sic] UNRWA,” which has worked with Palestinian refugees and their families across the Middle East for more than 70 years, and for senior UN human rights officials who deal with the Israel-Palestine conflict in particular. Washington “should immediately cease all funding to UNRWA” and also to UNIFIL, the U.N. peacekeeping force deployed along the Lebanese-Israeli border unless its troops are given the authority and demonstrate the will to confront Hezbollah forces in the area. As for Qatar, it “has worked to undermine U.S. interests by cooperating with Iran and sheltering terrorist groups like Hamas,” according to the report. “With much better friends like the Saudis, Washington no longer needs to tolerate destabilizing Qatari behavior,” and thus should move U.S. Central Command’s forward headquarters out of Qatar’s Al Udeid Air Base and revoke Doha’s “Major Non-Nato Ally status unless its behavior changes.” That status should be conferred on the UAE instead, according to the report, provided that it “reduces [its] reliance on Russian and Chinese vendors” of military equipment. The report, which describes the politics of the Biden administration in the Middle East on more than one occasion as “appeasement,” mainly of Iran, reminds the reader that Trump declared only last month that “the Middle East is going to get solved,” a phrase that undoubtedly inspired the report’s title: “Deals of the Century: Solving the Middle East.” While the report says it was the product of a “working group of Middle East experts,” no names other than Abrams, Gabriel Scheinemann, and Daniel Samet, the latter two neoconservatives from the Alexander Hamilton Society, appear in the report. Normally, reports by letterhead organizations list their contributors. In presenting what it calls “key American interests in the Middle East,” the report puts “preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons at the top of the list” but also expresses alarm at Chinese Communist Party inroads in the region, noting that CCP is Washington’s “key global adversary.” In an echo of the Global War on Terror, Washington, it says, should also “deny jihadi terrorists a safe haven,” a reference in part to the necessity its authors feel to retain U.S. forces in Syria and Iraq. But “America’s alliance with Israel is central to U.S. interests in the region, given that it promotes American values within the Middle East and provides the first line of defense against Iranian aggression.” Moreover, Washington should try to expand the Abraham Accords, and “the Palestinian question must not impede Israel’s normalization with Arab and Muslim countries or otherwise compromise its security.” Washington must “ensure Israel has the tools to defend itself.” Yet another interest is to expand access of our allies and partners in Europe and elsewhere to the region’s energy supplies, according to the report. To increase pressure on Iran, Washington should not only reinstate Trump’s “ maximum pressure” campaign, but include within it convincing Britain, France, and Germany to “snapback sanctions” against Tehran at the U.N. Remarkably perhaps, it offers the possibility of a new nuclear agreement that would “forbid Iranian uranium enrichment beyond the small amounts need for a civilian nuclear program,” something that the 2015 JCPOA, which Trump withdrew from in 2018, actually accomplished before Trump, under the influence of neoconservatives like Abrams, withdrew from in 2018. If a deal can be reached, according to the report, it should be dealt with as a treaty; that is, made subject to a 2/3 majority vote in the Senate. With respect to the Palestinians in the wake of the last 15 months of war in Gaza, “American policy toward the Palestinians must prioritize the security of Israel and our Arab partners.” Washington “must impose standards for good governance. The U.S. should “allow an Arab trusteeship to control Gaza after the war.” In words that must warm Netanyahu’s heart, the report notes “the weakness and incompetence of the PA mean it cannot govern Gaza,” and “Israel will need to maintain security control to prevent Hamas from rebuilding but should not and does not wish to govern Gaza itself.” Abrams has a long history with both Palestine and Gaza, notably during the Bush administration. After Hamas was an unexpected election victor over its rival Fatah in the 2006 elections – which were hailed as the freest and fairest elections in the Arab world at the time – Abrams and other senior officials encouraged the mounting of an armed coup against Hamas led by Fatah’s local leader and Abrams’ favorite Muhammad Dahlan which, in turn, sparked a brief civil war in the enclave in which Hamas emerged victorious and stronger than ever. After the fiasco, Dahlan moved to the UAE, and there has been much speculation that he stands to play a key role on behalf of the Emirates if the kind of “Arab trusteeship” alongside Israeli security forces is established as recommended by the report. Perhaps the most novel recommendation is based on the report’s contention that Iran’s non-state allies in the region typically use non-combatants as human shields — an apparent endorsement of Israel’s defense of its bombing of apartment houses, schools, and other buildings in Gaza and Lebanon during the past 15 months that have killed well over 46,000 people, most of them women and children. “The United States should propose a Security Council resolution that states the use of human shields is a crime under international law and that those who use human shields are responsible for the civilian deaths in which they result,” the report advised. Jim Lobe is a Contributing Editor of Responsible Statecraft. He formerly served as chief of the Washington bureau of Inter Press Service from 1980 to 1985 and again from 1989 to 2015. RELATED: WATCH: How Pro-Israel Neocons Pushed for War in Iraq (Alison Weir) (2021) Israel loyalists embedded in U.S. government pushed U.S. into Iraq War Clean Break II: Iran Hawks Decide to Burn it All Down War on Iran? Lobe: The role of the Weekly Standard, devoted to Israel, in promoting war Every accusation a confession: Israel and the double lie of ‘human shields’ Gaza has turned into Biden’s most perplexing moral and foreign policy failure https://israelpalestinenews.org/elliot-abrams-neocon/
    ISRAELPALESTINENEWS.ORG
    New neocon manifesto: Keep US troops in the Middle East forever
    Elliott Abrams, a leading neoconservative for most of the last half-century, wants Trump to prioritize Israel and maintain Iran as enemy number one
    0 Comments 0 Shares 7331 Views
  • Trump signals he may defy hardliners and talk to Iran (bad for Israel?)
    A different approach? This is clearly not what the hawks in the US and Israel want, and even conservatives in Tehran are wary.

    Jonas E. Alexis, Senior EditorJanuary 28, 2025

    Become a VT Supporting Member Today

    Please keep VT Radio and VT Foreign Policy alive! Donate today to make sure VT stays on the internet free and clear of Big Tech control! Donate today:
    Please Donate - Click Here

    Defying speculations about a re-instated “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran, the U.S. President Donald Trump has messaged his preference for a diplomatic solution to the tensions with Tehran.

    On Fox News’ “Hannity” show on January 23, Trump said that the “only thing” he insisted on was that Iran “can’t have a nuclear weapon.” Significantly, he didn’t mention anything about Iran’s regional policies or its conflict with Israel, nor did he express any inclination to bomb Iran or change the regime in that country.

    Given that Iran’s leaders themselves have repeatedly emphasized that they do not seek nuclear weapons, an agreement between Washington and Tehran should look eminently possible.

    Indeed, after the election of the reformist president Massoud Pezeshkian, Tehran has likewise consistently telegraphed its readiness to re-engage in diplomacy. The Vice-President for Strategic Affairs Javad Zarif, whom some in Tehran refer to as the “kingmaker” behind Pezeshkian, expounded on Iran’s new, more collaborative vision in recent essays for Foreign Affairs and The Economist, and further articulated it at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland last week.

    Despite the apparent political will on both sides, however, the path to the deal is anything but straightforward. The context differs significantly from 2015 when the nuclear agreement known as JCPOA was concluded between Iran and the world powers that effectively curbed Iran’s nuclear program.

    After Trump withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018 and Biden failed to restore it, Iran has steadily advanced its program. That includes, among other steps, uranium enrichment to 60%, a level creating an option of swiftly enriching to 90% (weapon-grade level), and installation of more advanced centrifuges. According to the nuclear expert Kelsey Davenport, Iran can now produce enough weapons-grade material for five to six bombs in about two weeks.

    Concerns over these developments are exacerbated by the limited access the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has had to Iran since 2021, increasing the risk of unmonitored dispersion of nuclear material to covert sites.

    What complicates matters further is shifts in the Iranian nuclear discourse. The official line remains that Tehran is not seeking weaponization — the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s fatwa (a religious edict) prohibiting nuclear weapons is still in force. However, a number of regional setbacks, such as Israel’s battering of Iran’s Lebanese ally, the Shiite militia Hezbollah, and the downfall of the Assad regime in Syria, another key cog in the Iran-aligned “axis of resistance,” has created powerful incentives for Iran to obtain a nuclear deterrent.

    Officials and policymakers now openly hint at a possibility of rethinking Iran’s nuclear doctrine towards threshold weaponization. Israeli Prime-Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s bellicosity pushing to seize the moment of Iran’s perceived weakness to attack the Islamic Republic directly (with American help, as Israel has no such capability on its own), only further incentivizes Tehran to go down that road.

    This set of considerations only underscores the magnitude of the task of dealing with Iran. The technical negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program are going to be long and protracted given the advanced state of Iran’s nuclear program. They would also need to be embedded in a broader regional strategy that addresses Iran’s security concerns — alongside other players in the Middle East — reducing the incentives to obtain a nuclear deterrent in the first place.

    Khamenei decided to greenlight diplomacy with the U.S.: Iran’s ailing economy necessitates some form of sanctions relief, and that won’t be forthcoming without some sort of a deal with the U.S. The dividing line is not about whether to engage with the U.S., but how to do it.

    The more forward-looking elements, mostly represented by the Pezeshkian’s reformist administration, favor reaching out to Washington pro-actively in order to shape the future negotiations. But their more conservative opponents insist that since the U.S. was the party that abandoned the JCPOA, it must take the first step to regain Tehran’s trust.

    Besides, these hardliners see little strategic incentive in trading away Iran’s nuclear leverage in exchange for a highly uncertain sanctions relief. Meanwhile, the conservatives are also confident that a recently signed strategic partnership with Russia, especially its clauses related to military and security cooperation, can provide Iran a measure of deterrence against future attacks from Israel and/or U.S.



    The proponents of waiting for a U.S. move seem to be having, for now, an upper hand in the internal debates in Tehran. The reformists, however, believe that simply waiting for a U.S. proposal is a mistake and a waste of time. They assess, likely correctly, that Trump is keen on a quick deal to burnish his peace-making credentials — now that a swift end to the war in Ukraine seems highly implausible, Iran could prove to be a low hanging fruit.



    A limited, framework deal modeled on the one Trump signed with North Korea in his first term could serve as a blueprint, and as Iranian diplomatic sources reckon, could be prepared in a couple of weeks if a political decision is there.



    There are legitimate concerns, even among those who would consider such a course of action, about the feasibility of a more substantive follow-up to such a deal. However, even a limited deal, ideally followed by a highly symbolic step, such as a handshake between Trump and Pezeshkian, would already be massively de-escalatory, discourage the spoilers from the pro-Netanyahu lobby, and gain time and political space to negotiate a sustainable, substantive deal addressing the Iranian nuclear program, sanctions relief, and even broader regional situation.



    While diplomacy with the U.S. is still in an exploratory stage, Iranians have already engaged with the EU and E3 (Britain, France, Germany). Tehran doesn’t entertain any hope that the EU/E3 will be either willing or able to restore the JCPOA on their own, without the U.S. The purpose of meetings is to prevent them from playing spoilers, such as snapping back the UN Security Council sanctions against Iran before the deadline in October 2025. UK and France, as both members of the UN Security Council and signatures of the JCPOA, can invoke that snapback, and it is not subject to a veto.



    These negotiations are also, however, meant to signal to Washington that Tehran is, this time, serious about a deal. The road to the original JCPOA was also paved initially by Iran’s negotiations with the European trio, which the U.S. joined at a later stage. The U.S. has a clear incentive to join the substantive talks in a multilateral format as otherwise, if it engages solely in a bilateral track with Iran, there is a risk that E3, fearful of being left out of a potential agreement between Washington and Tehran, will play a spoiler by activating the snapback — all the more so as relations between the U.S. and EU themselves are drifting into uncharted waters.

    A limited bilateral deal that could de-escalate tensions between the U.S. and Iran, followed by deeper multilateral talks involving the original JCPOA signatures would seem like the most realistic way forward. With the political will seemingly present among all the players concerned, it is time to move on.

    https://vtforeignpolicy.com/2025/01/trump-signals-he-may-defy-hardliners-and-talk-to-iran-bad-for-israel/
    Trump signals he may defy hardliners and talk to Iran (bad for Israel?) A different approach? This is clearly not what the hawks in the US and Israel want, and even conservatives in Tehran are wary. Jonas E. Alexis, Senior EditorJanuary 28, 2025 Become a VT Supporting Member Today Please keep VT Radio and VT Foreign Policy alive! Donate today to make sure VT stays on the internet free and clear of Big Tech control! Donate today: Please Donate - Click Here Defying speculations about a re-instated “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran, the U.S. President Donald Trump has messaged his preference for a diplomatic solution to the tensions with Tehran. On Fox News’ “Hannity” show on January 23, Trump said that the “only thing” he insisted on was that Iran “can’t have a nuclear weapon.” Significantly, he didn’t mention anything about Iran’s regional policies or its conflict with Israel, nor did he express any inclination to bomb Iran or change the regime in that country. Given that Iran’s leaders themselves have repeatedly emphasized that they do not seek nuclear weapons, an agreement between Washington and Tehran should look eminently possible. Indeed, after the election of the reformist president Massoud Pezeshkian, Tehran has likewise consistently telegraphed its readiness to re-engage in diplomacy. The Vice-President for Strategic Affairs Javad Zarif, whom some in Tehran refer to as the “kingmaker” behind Pezeshkian, expounded on Iran’s new, more collaborative vision in recent essays for Foreign Affairs and The Economist, and further articulated it at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland last week. Despite the apparent political will on both sides, however, the path to the deal is anything but straightforward. The context differs significantly from 2015 when the nuclear agreement known as JCPOA was concluded between Iran and the world powers that effectively curbed Iran’s nuclear program. After Trump withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018 and Biden failed to restore it, Iran has steadily advanced its program. That includes, among other steps, uranium enrichment to 60%, a level creating an option of swiftly enriching to 90% (weapon-grade level), and installation of more advanced centrifuges. According to the nuclear expert Kelsey Davenport, Iran can now produce enough weapons-grade material for five to six bombs in about two weeks. Concerns over these developments are exacerbated by the limited access the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has had to Iran since 2021, increasing the risk of unmonitored dispersion of nuclear material to covert sites. What complicates matters further is shifts in the Iranian nuclear discourse. The official line remains that Tehran is not seeking weaponization — the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s fatwa (a religious edict) prohibiting nuclear weapons is still in force. However, a number of regional setbacks, such as Israel’s battering of Iran’s Lebanese ally, the Shiite militia Hezbollah, and the downfall of the Assad regime in Syria, another key cog in the Iran-aligned “axis of resistance,” has created powerful incentives for Iran to obtain a nuclear deterrent. Officials and policymakers now openly hint at a possibility of rethinking Iran’s nuclear doctrine towards threshold weaponization. Israeli Prime-Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s bellicosity pushing to seize the moment of Iran’s perceived weakness to attack the Islamic Republic directly (with American help, as Israel has no such capability on its own), only further incentivizes Tehran to go down that road. This set of considerations only underscores the magnitude of the task of dealing with Iran. The technical negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program are going to be long and protracted given the advanced state of Iran’s nuclear program. They would also need to be embedded in a broader regional strategy that addresses Iran’s security concerns — alongside other players in the Middle East — reducing the incentives to obtain a nuclear deterrent in the first place. Khamenei decided to greenlight diplomacy with the U.S.: Iran’s ailing economy necessitates some form of sanctions relief, and that won’t be forthcoming without some sort of a deal with the U.S. The dividing line is not about whether to engage with the U.S., but how to do it. The more forward-looking elements, mostly represented by the Pezeshkian’s reformist administration, favor reaching out to Washington pro-actively in order to shape the future negotiations. But their more conservative opponents insist that since the U.S. was the party that abandoned the JCPOA, it must take the first step to regain Tehran’s trust. Besides, these hardliners see little strategic incentive in trading away Iran’s nuclear leverage in exchange for a highly uncertain sanctions relief. Meanwhile, the conservatives are also confident that a recently signed strategic partnership with Russia, especially its clauses related to military and security cooperation, can provide Iran a measure of deterrence against future attacks from Israel and/or U.S. The proponents of waiting for a U.S. move seem to be having, for now, an upper hand in the internal debates in Tehran. The reformists, however, believe that simply waiting for a U.S. proposal is a mistake and a waste of time. They assess, likely correctly, that Trump is keen on a quick deal to burnish his peace-making credentials — now that a swift end to the war in Ukraine seems highly implausible, Iran could prove to be a low hanging fruit. A limited, framework deal modeled on the one Trump signed with North Korea in his first term could serve as a blueprint, and as Iranian diplomatic sources reckon, could be prepared in a couple of weeks if a political decision is there. There are legitimate concerns, even among those who would consider such a course of action, about the feasibility of a more substantive follow-up to such a deal. However, even a limited deal, ideally followed by a highly symbolic step, such as a handshake between Trump and Pezeshkian, would already be massively de-escalatory, discourage the spoilers from the pro-Netanyahu lobby, and gain time and political space to negotiate a sustainable, substantive deal addressing the Iranian nuclear program, sanctions relief, and even broader regional situation. While diplomacy with the U.S. is still in an exploratory stage, Iranians have already engaged with the EU and E3 (Britain, France, Germany). Tehran doesn’t entertain any hope that the EU/E3 will be either willing or able to restore the JCPOA on their own, without the U.S. The purpose of meetings is to prevent them from playing spoilers, such as snapping back the UN Security Council sanctions against Iran before the deadline in October 2025. UK and France, as both members of the UN Security Council and signatures of the JCPOA, can invoke that snapback, and it is not subject to a veto. These negotiations are also, however, meant to signal to Washington that Tehran is, this time, serious about a deal. The road to the original JCPOA was also paved initially by Iran’s negotiations with the European trio, which the U.S. joined at a later stage. The U.S. has a clear incentive to join the substantive talks in a multilateral format as otherwise, if it engages solely in a bilateral track with Iran, there is a risk that E3, fearful of being left out of a potential agreement between Washington and Tehran, will play a spoiler by activating the snapback — all the more so as relations between the U.S. and EU themselves are drifting into uncharted waters. A limited bilateral deal that could de-escalate tensions between the U.S. and Iran, followed by deeper multilateral talks involving the original JCPOA signatures would seem like the most realistic way forward. With the political will seemingly present among all the players concerned, it is time to move on. https://vtforeignpolicy.com/2025/01/trump-signals-he-may-defy-hardliners-and-talk-to-iran-bad-for-israel/
    VTFOREIGNPOLICY.COM
    Trump signals he may defy hardliners and talk to Iran (bad for Israel?)
    A different approach? This is clearly not what the hawks in the US and Israel want, and even conservatives in Tehran are wary.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3148 Views
  • FREEMASONRY and ZIONISM – 2. Toward Diabolical Apocalypse. Guardian Forecast Hundreds of Casualties in Israel. Then Thousands in West for Nuke Winds
    6 Ottobre 2024
    FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailLinkedInTelegramCondividi
    118.682 Views

    By Carlo Domenico Cristofori

    VERSIONE IN ITALIANO

    Unlike other investigations, this one will be shorter.

    Especially because too many American and European idiots have not yet understood the tremendous danger to which Biden-NATO’s wars in Ukraine and the Middle East are exposing us. If you can wake them up, you will give a great beneficial gift to humanity before it’s too late!!!

    Iran’s Nuclear Test or Natural Earthquake?

    But above all, they have not even remotely grasped that some of the world’s leaders, more servants of the New World Order than responsible for the fate of their nations, are leading us towards an abyss well prefigured by the Book of the Apocalypse of St. John to which we have dedicated an exhaustive geopolitical-theological investigation.

    Even the British newspaper The Guardian, out of respect for the truth that has been completely hidden in the Italian mainstream for many years and in particular after the massacres caused by the adverse reactions of the Covid vaccines, had to publish an article analyzing the geopolitical situation in the Middle East in which it points out enormous problems that contrast with the easy Zionist-Masonic policy of US and UE…

    The Guardian: “ESCALATION with IRAN coul be RISKY: Israel is more Vulnerable than it seems”

    “The core fact remains that Iran has proven it can hit Israel hard if it so chose,” writes Decker Eveleth, an analyst with the research and analysis group CNA, who analysed the satellite images for a blogpost.

    “Airbases are hard targets, and the sort of target that likely won’t produce many casualties. Iran could choose a different target – say, a densely packed IDF ground forces base, or a target within a civilian area – anda missile strike there would produce a large number of [casualties].”

    FREEMASONRY & ZIONISM – 1. Apocalyptic “Cataclysms” by Synagogue of Satan: Genocides in Palestine & Plotted Pandemic for Lethal Vaccines.

    In the longer term, Israel may target Iranian ballistic missile production lines and infrastructure in order to prevent attacks. Benjamin Netanyahu has long argued that the Iranian ballistic missile programme is as dangerous to Israel as its nuclear programme is.

    «In the longer term, Israel may target Iranian ballistic missile production lines and infrastructure in order to prevent attacks. Benjamin Netanyahu has long argued that the Iranian ballistic missile programme is as dangerous to Israel as its nuclear programme is» adds Andrew Roth in his analysis on The Guardian that prefigures an apocalyptic scenario already announced by Russia.

    A Diabolical Project that goes beyond the Military

    The explanation of these potentially suicidal maneuvers is complex from a geopolitical and military perspective but extremely simple from a spiritual one…

    US OK TO ISRAELI INVASION IN LEBANON. BIDEN forces MIDDLE EAST toward HUGE WAR. To Engage Moscow and Weaken the Russian Army in Ukraine

    Since this entire project of genocide and devastation is animated by diabolical Zionism, Netanyahu does not care how many victims (also Israeli) he will be able to cause because they are all prey that his satanic vision and exaltation leads towards the Hell to which he is devoted (if they are not ready to die in the Grace of God as the Queen of Peace of Medjugorje teaches).

    “I’ve told the Americans, I’ve told my colleagues in the White House and the US Department of State that you are pushing [the world] towards a nuclear catastrophe,” Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov said.

    “TOWARDS A NUCLEAR CATASTROPHE”. Russia Warning on US Policies in Middle East and Ukraine. Arrest’s Risk for NATO Chief

    Despite this, both the American Democratic President Joseph Biden, the great director of the plot that unleashed the war in Ukraine, and the Republican challenger for the White House (of the Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris) Donald Trump insist on wanting to face a war against Iran that could become nuclear due to the atomic warheads developed by Tehran especially after the treacherous assassination of the Iranian general Qadeem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Forces of the Pasdaran who helped Syria defeat the Islamic State created by the Caliph Al Baghdadi with the complicity of the American counter-espionage CIA and Israeli MOSSAD who were responsible for the latest escalations in the Middle East.

    NASRALLAH KILLED by American-Made Bombs! Iran: “US complicit with the Zionists in Terror Attack vs the Hezbollah chief”

    But the third most terrible danger for Italy, Europe and the entire West comes from the fact that any nuclear explosion in Iran, Israel, Lebanon or Palestine will produce winds of highly harmful waste – and potentially lethal in the short and medium term – like the toxic cloud that was produced by the explosion in a depleted uranium-based ammunition depot in Ukraine in May 2023 and hidden by all the mainstream media to minimize the direct consequences in Europe of the conflict between Moscow and Kiev.

    This “flood” of radioactivity could cause not only hundreds but thousands and thousands of deaths in a few months or years… One of the greatest Italian scholars explained it in a previous article on Gospa News.

    RELATED TOPICS

    US OK TO ISRAELI INVASION IN LEBANON. BIDEN forces MIDDLE EAST toward HUGE WAR. To Engage Moscow and Weaken the Russian Army in Ukraine

    Nasrallah: “New Blasts Declaration of WAR”! ISRAELI MOSSAD MASSACRE IN LEBANON, SYRIA. UN and Russia Condemn Civilians’ Carnage

    Depleted Uranium Cloud toward Europe: Expert’s Proofs! High Radioactivity Recorded by Monitors in Poland after Ammo Depot Destroyed in Ukraine

    Bombshell! 9/11, PLANDEMIC & MOSCOW MASSACRE. Black Man of CIA Intrigues alongside Biden jr in Ukrainian Company Accused of Financing Crocus’ Terrorists

    NUCLEAR NIGHTMARE. Israeli Attacks in Lebanon despite Iran is Close to have Atomic Warheads

    Iran’s revenge starts from Qom. Thanks to Fordow’s nuclear bunker plant

    AL BAGHDADI: ISIS CALIPH AND MOSSAD-CIA AGENT HIDDEN BY US

    L’INCUBO DI UNA GUERRA NUCLEARE. Dettaglio delle Devastanti Conseguenze anche per la Popolazione dell’eventuale Paese Vincente

    Vatican Cardinal who Bless Gays discredits Medjugorje Visionaries and Queen of Peace Messages

    (Visited 1.132 times, 2 visits today)

    FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailLinkedInTelegramCondividi

    https://www.gospanews.net/en/2024/10/06/freemasonry-and-zionism-2-toward-diabolical-apocalypse-guardian-forecast-hundreds-of-casualties-in-israel-then-thousands-in-west-for-nuke-winds/
    FREEMASONRY and ZIONISM – 2. Toward Diabolical Apocalypse. Guardian Forecast Hundreds of Casualties in Israel. Then Thousands in West for Nuke Winds 6 Ottobre 2024 FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailLinkedInTelegramCondividi 118.682 Views By Carlo Domenico Cristofori VERSIONE IN ITALIANO Unlike other investigations, this one will be shorter. Especially because too many American and European idiots have not yet understood the tremendous danger to which Biden-NATO’s wars in Ukraine and the Middle East are exposing us. If you can wake them up, you will give a great beneficial gift to humanity before it’s too late!!! Iran’s Nuclear Test or Natural Earthquake? But above all, they have not even remotely grasped that some of the world’s leaders, more servants of the New World Order than responsible for the fate of their nations, are leading us towards an abyss well prefigured by the Book of the Apocalypse of St. John to which we have dedicated an exhaustive geopolitical-theological investigation. Even the British newspaper The Guardian, out of respect for the truth that has been completely hidden in the Italian mainstream for many years and in particular after the massacres caused by the adverse reactions of the Covid vaccines, had to publish an article analyzing the geopolitical situation in the Middle East in which it points out enormous problems that contrast with the easy Zionist-Masonic policy of US and UE… The Guardian: “ESCALATION with IRAN coul be RISKY: Israel is more Vulnerable than it seems” “The core fact remains that Iran has proven it can hit Israel hard if it so chose,” writes Decker Eveleth, an analyst with the research and analysis group CNA, who analysed the satellite images for a blogpost. “Airbases are hard targets, and the sort of target that likely won’t produce many casualties. Iran could choose a different target – say, a densely packed IDF ground forces base, or a target within a civilian area – anda missile strike there would produce a large number of [casualties].” FREEMASONRY & ZIONISM – 1. Apocalyptic “Cataclysms” by Synagogue of Satan: Genocides in Palestine & Plotted Pandemic for Lethal Vaccines. In the longer term, Israel may target Iranian ballistic missile production lines and infrastructure in order to prevent attacks. Benjamin Netanyahu has long argued that the Iranian ballistic missile programme is as dangerous to Israel as its nuclear programme is. «In the longer term, Israel may target Iranian ballistic missile production lines and infrastructure in order to prevent attacks. Benjamin Netanyahu has long argued that the Iranian ballistic missile programme is as dangerous to Israel as its nuclear programme is» adds Andrew Roth in his analysis on The Guardian that prefigures an apocalyptic scenario already announced by Russia. A Diabolical Project that goes beyond the Military The explanation of these potentially suicidal maneuvers is complex from a geopolitical and military perspective but extremely simple from a spiritual one… US OK TO ISRAELI INVASION IN LEBANON. BIDEN forces MIDDLE EAST toward HUGE WAR. To Engage Moscow and Weaken the Russian Army in Ukraine Since this entire project of genocide and devastation is animated by diabolical Zionism, Netanyahu does not care how many victims (also Israeli) he will be able to cause because they are all prey that his satanic vision and exaltation leads towards the Hell to which he is devoted (if they are not ready to die in the Grace of God as the Queen of Peace of Medjugorje teaches). “I’ve told the Americans, I’ve told my colleagues in the White House and the US Department of State that you are pushing [the world] towards a nuclear catastrophe,” Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov said. “TOWARDS A NUCLEAR CATASTROPHE”. Russia Warning on US Policies in Middle East and Ukraine. Arrest’s Risk for NATO Chief Despite this, both the American Democratic President Joseph Biden, the great director of the plot that unleashed the war in Ukraine, and the Republican challenger for the White House (of the Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris) Donald Trump insist on wanting to face a war against Iran that could become nuclear due to the atomic warheads developed by Tehran especially after the treacherous assassination of the Iranian general Qadeem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Forces of the Pasdaran who helped Syria defeat the Islamic State created by the Caliph Al Baghdadi with the complicity of the American counter-espionage CIA and Israeli MOSSAD who were responsible for the latest escalations in the Middle East. NASRALLAH KILLED by American-Made Bombs! Iran: “US complicit with the Zionists in Terror Attack vs the Hezbollah chief” But the third most terrible danger for Italy, Europe and the entire West comes from the fact that any nuclear explosion in Iran, Israel, Lebanon or Palestine will produce winds of highly harmful waste – and potentially lethal in the short and medium term – like the toxic cloud that was produced by the explosion in a depleted uranium-based ammunition depot in Ukraine in May 2023 and hidden by all the mainstream media to minimize the direct consequences in Europe of the conflict between Moscow and Kiev. This “flood” of radioactivity could cause not only hundreds but thousands and thousands of deaths in a few months or years… One of the greatest Italian scholars explained it in a previous article on Gospa News. RELATED TOPICS US OK TO ISRAELI INVASION IN LEBANON. BIDEN forces MIDDLE EAST toward HUGE WAR. To Engage Moscow and Weaken the Russian Army in Ukraine Nasrallah: “New Blasts Declaration of WAR”! ISRAELI MOSSAD MASSACRE IN LEBANON, SYRIA. UN and Russia Condemn Civilians’ Carnage Depleted Uranium Cloud toward Europe: Expert’s Proofs! High Radioactivity Recorded by Monitors in Poland after Ammo Depot Destroyed in Ukraine Bombshell! 9/11, PLANDEMIC & MOSCOW MASSACRE. Black Man of CIA Intrigues alongside Biden jr in Ukrainian Company Accused of Financing Crocus’ Terrorists NUCLEAR NIGHTMARE. Israeli Attacks in Lebanon despite Iran is Close to have Atomic Warheads Iran’s revenge starts from Qom. Thanks to Fordow’s nuclear bunker plant AL BAGHDADI: ISIS CALIPH AND MOSSAD-CIA AGENT HIDDEN BY US L’INCUBO DI UNA GUERRA NUCLEARE. Dettaglio delle Devastanti Conseguenze anche per la Popolazione dell’eventuale Paese Vincente Vatican Cardinal who Bless Gays discredits Medjugorje Visionaries and Queen of Peace Messages (Visited 1.132 times, 2 visits today) FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailLinkedInTelegramCondividi https://www.gospanews.net/en/2024/10/06/freemasonry-and-zionism-2-toward-diabolical-apocalypse-guardian-forecast-hundreds-of-casualties-in-israel-then-thousands-in-west-for-nuke-winds/
    WWW.GOSPANEWS.NET
    FREEMASONRY and ZIONISM – 2. Toward Diabolical Apocalypse. Guardian Forecast Hundreds of Casualties in Israel. Then Thousands in West for Nuke Winds
    By Carlo Domenico CristoforiVERSIONE IN ITALIANOUnlike other investigations, this one will be shorter.Especially because too many American and European idiots have not yet understood the tremendous danger to which Biden-NATO's wars in Ukraine and the Middle East are exposing us. If you c
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3181 Views
  • Is Gaza-Israel Fighting “A False Flag”? They Let It Happen? Their Objective Is “to Wipe Gaza Off the Map”?

    ***

    First published on October 17, 2023 at the outset of Israel’s act of genocide against Palestine. Revised in April 2024

    There is an ongoing propagandIa campaign which categorically denies the existence of a False Flag, the objective of which is to justify the genocide against the People of Palestine.

    The evidence is overwhelming.

    A False Flag conducted by US intelligence in coordination with US-NATO is a criminal undertaking.

    .

    Introduction.

    Was it a False Flag?


    Military operations are invariably planned well in advance. Was “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” a “surprise attack” ? Or Was it “A False Flag”.

    In the words of Philip Giraldi:

    “As a former intelligence officer, I find it impossible to believe that Israel did not have multiple informants inside Gaza as well as electronic listening devices all along the border wall which would have picked up movements of groups and vehicles.

    In other words, the whole thing might be a tissue of lies as is often the case.”

    A Tissue of Lies

    “A Tissue of Lies” has served to justify the killing in the Gaza Strip of more than 35,000 civilians, of which 70% are women and children coupled with total destruction and an endless string of atrocities.

    The Cat is out of the bag. Netanyahu has tacitly acknowledged that it was “A False Flag” which was intent upon justifying a carefully planned genocidal attack against Palestine:

    “Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he [Netanyahu] told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” (Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added)

    Does this candid statement not suggest that Netanyahu and his military-intelligence apparatus are responsible for the killings of innocent Israeli civilians?

    On that same day of October 7, 2023 Netanyahu launched a carefully planned military operation against the Gaza Strip entitled “State of Readiness For War”.

    Military operations are invariably planned well in advance.

    Had “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” been a “surprise attack” as parroted by the media, Netanyahu’s “State of Readiness For War” could not have been carried out (at short notice) on that same day, namely October 7, 2023.

    South Africa’s Legal Procedure against The State of Israel

    On January 11, 2024, The Republic of South Africa presented to The Hague World Court, a carefully formulated Legal Procedure against the State of Israel predicated on The Genocide Convention.

    This legal procedure, however, has not contributed to repealing the ongoing genocide and saving the lives of tens of thousands of civilians.

    I should mention that the False Flag issue –which constitutes a crime against humanity– was casually ignored by the ICJ.

    Our suggestion is that an investigation followed by a legal procedure pertaining to the “False Flag” should be undertaken.

    The heads of State and heads of government who have endorsed Israel’s Genocidal Acts are from a legal standpoint complicit.

    The ICJ Judgement was contradictory. The Presiding Judge (former legal advisor to Hillary Clinton) was in conflict of interest:

    The ICJ Judgment of January 26, 2024 assigns the Netanyahu government representing the State of Israel –accused by the Republic of South Africa of genocide against the People of Palestine– with a mandate to “take all measures within its power” to “prevent and punish” those responsible for having committed “Genocidal Acts”. (under Article IV of the Genocide Convention)

    Sounds contradictory? What the ICJ judgment intimates –from a twisted legal standpoint– is that Netanyahu’s Cabinet which was “appointed” to implement the “prevent and punish” mandate cannot be accused of having committed “Genocidal Acts”.

    See

    “Fake Justice” at The Hague: The ICJ “Appoints” Netanyahu to “Prevent” and “Punish” Those Responsible for “Genocidal Acts”

    By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, April 24, 2024

    Our intent is to provide a broad and detailed understanding of the false flag issue pertaining to Palestine

    The titles of the videos, articles and texts presented below:

    Is the Gaza-Israel Fighting “A False Flag”? They Let it Happen? Their Objective Is “to Wipe Gaza Off the Map”?, by Dr. Philip Giraldi.
    Video: ICJ Hearings in The Hague,
    Text of Israel’s Secret Intelligence Memorandum. Planning the Forcible Exclusion of Palestinians from Their Homeland
    Video: “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map”, Interview. Michel Chossudovsky with Caroline Mailloux
    “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map”, by Michel Chossudovsky
    Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor? But Who Actually Did What to Whom? “This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation”, by Philip Giraldi
    In solidarity with the People of Palestine.

    Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, January 11, 2024, September 14, 2024

    Part I

    Is the Gaza-Israel Fighting “A False Flag”?

    They Let it Happen?

    Their Objective Is “to Wipe Gaza Off the Map”?

    by Dr. Philip Giraldi

    October 8, 2023

    Am I the only one who read about a speech given by Netanyahu or someone in his cabinet about a week ago in which he/they in passing referred to a “developing security situation” which rather suggests (to me) that they might have known about developments in Gaza and chose to let it happen so they can wipe Gaza off the map in retaliation and, possibly relying on the US pledge to have Israel’s “back,” then implicating Iran and attacking that country.

    I cannot find a link to it, but have a fairly strong recollection of what I read as I thought at the time it would serve as a pretext for another massacre of Palestinians.

    As a former intelligence officer, I find it impossible to believe that Israel did not have multiple informants inside Gaza as well as electronic listening devices all along the border wall which would have picked up movements of groups and vehicles.

    In other words, the whole thing might be a tissue of lies as is often the case.

    And as is also ALWAYS the case Joe Biden is preparing to send some billions of dollars to poor little Israel to pay for “defending” itself.

    Part II

    VIDEO. ICJ Hearings in The Hague

    January 2024

    ICJ Hearings

    1. January 11, 2024. Click Here to View the ICJ Hearings,

    2. January 12, 2024. Israel’s Legal Team’s response to South Africa, ICJ The Hague at 10 am. Video in Real Time



    3. Video: South Africa’s Closing Argument against Israel for Genocide. January 11 Hearing at the World Court





    Part III

    Israel’s Secret Intelligence Memorandum

    Planning the Forcible Exclusion of Palestinians from Their Homeland

    by Michel Chossudovsky

    October 2023

    An official “secret” memorandum authored by Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence “is recommending the forcible and permanent transfer of the Gaza Strip’s 2.2 million Palestinian residents to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula”, namely to a refugee camp in Egyptian territory. There are indications of Israel-Egypt negotiations as well as consultations with the U.S.

    The 10-page document, dated Oct. 13, 2023, bears the logo of the Intelligence Ministry … assesses three options regarding the future of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip … It recommends a full population transfer as its preferred course of action. … The document, the authenticity of which was confirmed by the ministry, has been translated into English in full here on +972.

    See below, click here or below to access complete document (10 pages)



    For further details and analysis see:

    “Wiping Gaza Off the Map”: Israel’s “Secret” Intelligence Memorandum “Option C” by Michel Chossudovsky

    Part IV

    Video: “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map”

    Interview: Michel Chossudovsky and Caroline Mailloux

    October 17, 2023



    To comment or access Rumble

    Part V



    “False Flag”. Wiping Gaza Off the Map

    by

    Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

    October 12, 2023

    .

    Introduction

    .

    Early Saturday October 7, 2023, Hamas launched “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” led by Hamas’ Military Chief Mohammed Deif. On that same day, Netanyahu confirmed a so-called “State of Readiness For War”.

    Military operations are invariably planned well in advance (See Netanyahu’s January 2023 statement below). Was “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” a “surprise attack” ?

    U.S. intelligence say they weren’t aware of an impending Hamas attack.

    “One would have to be almost hopelessly naïve to buy the corporate state media line that the Hamas invasion was an Israeli “intelligence failure”. Mossad is one of, if not the, most powerful intelligence agencies on the planet.”

    Did Netanyahu and his vast military and intelligence apparatus (Mossad et al) have foreknowledge of the Hamas attack which has resulted in countless deaths of Israelis and Palestinians.

    Was a carefully formulated Israeli plan to wage an all out war against Palestinians envisaged prior to the launching by Hamas of “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm”? This was not a failure of Israeli Intelligence, as conveyed by the media. Quite the opposite.

    Evidence and testimonies suggest that the Netanyahu government had foreknowledge of the actions of Hamas which have resulted in hundreds of Israeli and Palestinian deaths. And “They Let it Happen”:

    “Hamas fired between 2-5 thousand rockets at Israel and hundreds of Israeli are dead, while dozens of Israelis were captured as prisoners of war. In the ensuing air response by Israel, hundreds of Palestinians were killed in Gaza.” (Stephen Sahiounie)

    Following the Al Aqsa Storm Operation on October 7, Israel‘s defence minister described Palestinians as “human animals” and vowed to “act accordingly,” as fighter jets unleashed a massive bombing of the Gaza Strip home of 2.3 million Palestinians…” (Middle East Eye). A complete blockade on the Gaza Strip was initiated on October 9, 2023 consisting in blocking and obstructing the importation of food, water, fuel, and essential commodities to 2.3 Million Palestinians. It’s an outright crime against humanity. It’s genocide.

    It is worth noting, that Netanyahu’s military actions are not targeting HAMAS, quite the opposite: he is targeting 2.3 million innocent Palestinian civilians, in blatant violation of the Four Basic Principles of The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC):

    “….respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects [schools, hospitals and residential areas], the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.” [Additional Protocol 1, Article 48]

    Ironically, according to Scott Ritter, Hamas’ has acquired U.S. weapons in Ukraine.

    .

    This was Not a “Surprise Attack”

    Was the Hamas Attack a “False Flag”?

    “I served in the IDF 25 years ago, in the intelligence forces. There’s no way Israel did not know of what’s coming.

    A cat moving alongside the fence is triggering all forces. So this??

    What happened to the “strongest army in the world”?

    How come border crossings were wide open?? Something is VERY WRONG HERE, something is very strange, this chain of events is very unusual and not typical for the Israeli defense system.

    To me this suprise attack seems like a planned operation. On all fronts.

    If I was a conspiracy theorist I would say that this feels like the work of the Deep State.

    It feels like the people of Israel and the people of Palestine have been sold, once again, to the higher powers that be.

    (Statement by Efrat Fenigson, former IDF intelligence, October 7, 2023, emphasis added)

    Ironically, the media (NBC) is now contending that the “Hamas attack bears hallmarks of Iranian involvement”

    History: The Relationship between Mossad and Hamas

    What is the relationship between Mossad and Hamas? Is Hamas an “intelligence asset”? There is a long history.

    Hamas (Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya) (Islamic Resistance Movement), was founded in 1987 by Sheik Ahmed Yassin. It was supported at the outset by Israeli intelligence as a means to weaken the Palestinian Authority:

    “Thanks to Mossad, (Israel’s “Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks”), Hamas was allowed to reinforce its presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, Arafat’s Fatah Movement for National Liberation as well as the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression and intimidation.

    Let us not forget that it was Israel, which in fact created Hamas. According to Zeev Sternell, historian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, “Israel thought that it was a smart ploy to push the Islamists against the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)”. (L’Humanité, translated from French)

    The links of Hamas to Mossad and US intelligence have been acknowledged by Rep. Ron Paul in a statement to the U.S Congress: “Hamas Was Started by Israel”?

    “You know Hamas, if you look at the history, you’ll find out that Hamas was encouraged and really started by Israel because they wanted Hamas to counteract Yasser Arafat… (Rep. Ron Paul, 2011)

    What this statement entails is that Hamas is and remains “an intelligence asset”, namely “an “asset” to intelligence agencies”

    See also the WSJ (January 24, 2009) “How Israel helped to Spawn Hamas”.

    Instead of trying to curb Gaza’s Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction, Yasser Arafat’s Fatah. (WSJ, emphasis added)





    “The Hamas Partnership” is confirmed by Netanyahu



    “The Cat is Out of the Bag”

    “Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he [Netanyahu] told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” (Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added)

    Does this statement not suggest that Netanyahu and his military-intelligence apparatus are responsible for the killings of innocent Israeli civilians?

    “Support” and “Money” for Hamas.

    “Transferring Money to Hamas” on behalf of Netanyahu is confirmed by a Times of Israel October 8, 2023 Report:

    “Hamas was treated as a partner to the detriment of the Palestinian Authority to prevent Abbas from moving towards creating a Palestinian State. Hamas was promoted from a terrorist group to an organization with which Israel conducted negotiations through Egypt, and which was allowed to receive suitcases containing millions of dollars from Qatar through the Gaza crossings.” (emphasis added)

    .

    The Dangers of Military Escalation?

    Let us be under no illusions, this “false flag” operation is a complex military-intelligence undertaking, carefully planned over several years, in liaison and coordination with US intelligence, the Pentagon and NATO.

    In turn, this action against Palestine is already conducive to a process of military escalation which potentially could engulf a large part of Middle East.

    Israel is a de facto member NATO (with a special status) since 2004, involving active military and intelligence coordination as well as consultations pertaining to the occupied territories.

    Military cooperation with both the Pentagon and NATO is viewed by Israel’s Defence Force (IDF) as a means to “enhance Israel’s deterrence capability regarding potential enemies threatening it, mainly Iran and Syria.”

    The premise of NATO-Israel military cooperation is that “Israel is under attack”. Does Israel’s agreement with the Atlantic Alliance “obligate” NATO “to come to the rescue of Israel” under the doctrine of “collective security” (Article 5 of the Washington treaty)?

    In recent developments, U.S. military deployments in the Middle East are ongoing allegedly to avoid escalation.

    According to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg:

    There is always the risk that nations and/or organisations hostile to Israel will take try to take advantage. And that includes, for instance, organisations like Hezbollah or a country like Iran. So this is a message to countries and organisations hostile to Israel that they should not try to utilise the situation. And the United States have deployed, or has deployed more military forces in the region, not least to deter any escalation or prevent any escalation of the situation. (NATO Press Conference, Brussels, October 12, 2023, emphasis added)

    Netanyahu’s “New Stage”

    “The Long War” against Palestine

    Netanyahu’s stated objective, which constitutes a new stage in the 75 year old war (since Nakba, 1948) against the people of Palestine is no longer predicated on “Apartheid” or “Separation”. This new stage –which is also directed against Israelis who want peace— consists in “total appropriation” as well as the outright exclusion of the Palestinian people from their homeland:

    “These are the basic lines of the national government headed by me [Netanyahu]: The Jewish people have an exclusive and unquestionable right to all areas of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel — in the Galilee, the Negev, the Golan, Judea and Samaria.” (Netanyahu January 2023. emphasis added)

    We bring to the attention of our readers the incisive analysis of Dr. Philip Giraldi pointing to the likelihood of a “False Flag’”.

    Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, October 8, 2023, Above text updated on October 12, 2023

    .



    Part VI

    Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor?

    But Who Actually Did What to Whom?

    “This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation”

    by

    Dr Philip Giraldi

    October 16, 2023

    .

    “As a former on-the-ground intelligence officer, I am somewhat convinced that this was likely more like a false flag operation rather than a case of institutional failure on the part of the Israelis.”

    It’s amazing how America’s thought-controlled media is able to come up with a suitable narrative almost immediately whenever there is an international incident that might be subject to multiple interpretations.

    ***

    Since 1948 Israel has expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes,

    has occupied nearly all of the historic Palestine, has empowered its army to kill thousands of local people, and

    has more recently established an apartheid regime that even denies that Palestinian Arabs are human in the same sense that Jews are.

    Netanyahu-allied government minister Ayelet Shaked memorably has called for Israel not only to exterminate all Palestinian children, whom she has described as “little snakes,” but also to kill their mothers who gave birth to them.

    But when the Arabs strike back against the hatred that confronts them with their limited resources it is Israel that is described as the victimand the Palestinians who are dehumanized and portrayed as the “terrorists.”

    Media in the US and Europe were quick to label the Hamas offensive breaching the formidable Israeli border defenses as “Israel’s 9/11” or even “Israel’s Pearl Harbor” to establish the context that the Israelis have been on the receiving end of an “unprovoked” attack by a cruel and heartless enemy.

    Israel has responded to the attack with a heavy bombardment of Gaza that has destroyed infrastructure, including hospitals and schools, while also cutting off food supplies, water and electricity.

    It has demanded that residents of north Gaza, all 1.1 million of them, evacuate to make way for a possible ground offensive but there is nowhere to go as all the borders are closed, and the United Nations is calling it a demand with “devastating humanitarian consequences.” Journalist Peter Beinart has commented “This is a monstrous crime. It’s happening in plain view, with US support.”

    And the United States government is indeed typically on the same page as Israel. President Joe Biden, citing fabricated stories about dead Jewish babies, speaks of how Israel has a “duty” to defend itself, while the Palestinians somehow have no right to protect themselves at all, much less to rise up against their persecutors in a struggle for freedom.

    And Washington has also unhesitatingly chosen to directly involve itself in the conflict, completely on the side of the Jewish state, asserting repeatedly that “Israel has a right to defend itself” and telling the Israelis that “we have your back” while also dispatching two aircraft carrier groups to the scene of the fighting as well as the 101st Airborne to Jordan and increasing the readiness of Marines stationed in Kuwait.

    The White House could have taken more aggressive steps to encourage a ceasefire and talks but has chosen instead to issue essentially toothless calls to let the trapped civilians escape while also backing a devastating Israeli military response.



    US Secretary of State Antony Blinken meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Tel Aviv, Oct. 12, 2023. – Secretary Antony Blinken on X

    Israel is also hosting the worthless and brain dead Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin who will be providing advice along the lines of his insightful comment that Hamas is “evil” and “worse than ISIS.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken is already in Jerusalem, announcing that the US is there to support Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s unity government “as long as America exists” after first saying “I come before you not only as the United States Secretary of State, but also as a Jew.”

    Blinken’s explicit association of his personal religion with his official role as a representative of the US government makes clear that a key element in why he is there is because he is “a Jew.” Perhaps he should recuse himself from policy making involving Israel as being “a Jew” would not appear to be a United States national interest and is likely to produce irrational responses to developing situations.

    If all of this sounds a lot like Ukraine it should, except that in Ukraine the US and NATO are fighting against Russia, which is being demonized for occupying what is claimed Ukrainian territory, whereas in Palestine they are supporting the occupier of actual Palestinian territory, Israel.

    Funny thing that, and the word “hypocrisy” comes immediately to mind. As it turns out, however, I am somewhat on the same page as much of the media, agreeing that the Hamas incursion is something like 9/11, though I am sure that my take would not be found acceptable to the CNN Jake Tappers of this world.

    My thinking is that Israel knew in advance about 9/11 in the United States due to its extensive spying network and chose not to share the information because it was to their advantage not to do so.

    Indeed, a pleased Netanyahu even stated several years later that “9/11 was a good thing because it made the United States join us in our fight.”

    That the attacks killed 3,000 Americans did not bother the Israeli government as Israel has a long history of killing Americans when it can benefit from so doing, starting with the attack on the USS Liberty in 1967 which killed 34 sailors.

    So too in this case in Gaza, Netanyahu may have decided to encourage an unexpected development, making it like 9/11, that would enable him to escalate and “mow the grass” as the Israelis put it, in the remainder of Arab Palestine.

    And bear in mind that the actual incident that triggered the uprising was a rampage involving at least 800 Israeli settlers in and around the al-Aqsa mosque, the third holiest site in Islam, beating pilgrims and destroying Palestinian shops, all without any interference from the nearby Israeli security forces. The rioting was clearly allowed and even encouraged by the government.

    Drawing on my experience as a former on-the-ground intelligence officer, I am somewhat convinced that this was likely more like a false flag operation rather than a case of institutional failure on the part of the Israelis.

    Israel had an extensive electronic and physical wall backed by soldiers and weaponry that completely surrounded Gaza on the landward side, so effective that it was claimed that not even a mouse could get in.

    The Mediterranean side of Gaza was also tightly controlled by the Israeli Navy and boats to and from Gaza were completely blocked.

    Egypt tightly controlled the southern part of Gaza bordering on the Sinai. So Gaza was under 24/7 complete surveillance and control at all times. Israeli military intelligence also certainly had a network of recruited informants inside Gaza who would report on any training or movements, easy enough to do when you can approach people who are starving and make them an offer they cannot refuse just for providing information on what they see and hear.

    And then there was a warning from the Egyptian government to Israel ten days before the Hamas attack, with Egypt’s Intelligence Minister General Abbas Kamel personally calling Netanyahu and sharing intelligence suggesting that the Gazans were likely to do “something unusual, a terrible operation.” Other media accounts reveal how Hamas trained and practiced their maneuvers publicly. There were also assessments made by US intelligence, which were shared with Israel, suggesting that something was afoot. So, given all of the evidence, there likely was no intelligence failure to anticipate and counter the Hamas attack but rather a political decision made by the Israeli government that knew what might be coming and chose to let it proceed to provide a casus belli to destroy Gaza, vowing that “Every member of Hamas is a dead man,” and then go on from there. And “from there” might well include Lebanon, Syria and Iran, possibly with the assistance of the United States to do the heavy lifting. Iran in particular is already being blamed by the usual suspects as a party involved in the Hamas attack, so far without any evidence whatsoever, which is typical of how these stories evolve.

    Image: Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir visits Al-Aqsa, 3 January (Social Media)



    And Israel has moved far to the right politically to such an extent that it might appreciate a little ethnic cleansing to demonstrate its seriousness. Netanyahu and other senior government officials in his cabinet have recently been making passing references to a “developing security situation” in the country to justify the intensifying of the raids by the army against Palestinian towns and refugee camps. The new government in Israel has also placed police under the control of ultra-nationalist Jewish Power party head Itamar Ben-Gvir as National Security Minister. He has been exploiting his position to call in particular for a war to destroy Hamas in Gaza, which is precisely what is happening. Gaza might be of particular interest to Ben-Gvir and others as it uniquely shelters an armed and organized resistance in the form of Hamas, which, oddly, was founded with the support of Israel to split the Palestinian political resistance with Fatah controlling the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza.

    There is another issue relating to the recent fighting that one would like to know the answer to, namely how did Hamas get its weapons in the first place?

    Some were clearly manufactured from parts and scrap but others were sophisticated and, as Gaza is blockaded on all sides, smuggling them in becomes problematical. One argument is that they were supplied by Iran and others to be brought in by tunnels, but the tunnels on two sides would end up in Israel and on the third side in Egypt. The fourth side is the Mediterranean Sea. So how did they arrive? Is there a possible triple or even quadruple cross taking place with different parties lying to each other? And should there be concerns that after the American armada arrives off the coast of Gaza there just might be some kind of false flag incident engineered by Netanyahu that will involve Washington directly in the fighting?

    And there is what amounts to a related issue that should be of concern to everyone in the US and generically speaking the “Western world” where human rights are at least nominally respected. The message from almost all Western governments is that Israel has a carte blanche to do whatever it likes even when it involves war crimes to include mass forced displacement or genocide. In this case, the coordinated government-media response which is intended to protect Israel from any criticism almost immediately began circulating fabricated tales of atrocities while also delivering a hit on freedom of speech and association. President Biden, who should be trying to defuse the crisis, is instead adding fuel to the flames, saying of Hamas that “Pure, unadulterated evil has been unleashed on the earth!”

    In Florida the arch Zionist stooge Governor Ron Desantis met with Jewish leaders in a synagogue to announce draconian measures against Iran to include sanctions on companies that are in any way linked to that country. One might point out that those businesses have done nothing wrong and Desantis also called for “eradication of Hamas from the earth.” His intellectual depth was at the same time revealed when he said the US should not take in any Gazan refugees because they are “antisemites.”

    And in South Carolina, America’s favorite he/she Senator Lindsey Graham is calling for a US attack on Iran as well as declaring the war against Hamas to be “a religious war” and urging the Israeli army to invade Gaza and do “Whatever the hell you have to do to” to “level the place.”

    And the Europeans are equally spineless in their deference to Israel. The Israeli president declared the that there are no innocent civilians in Gaza, and not long after that top European Union representatives met with him to offer their unqualified support. Meanwhile in France, the spineless and feckless government of Emmanuel Macron has sought to outlaw any gathering that expresses support for Palestinian rights.

    And in the UK, the Home Secretary Suella Braverman has proposed criminalizing any protest against Israeli actions or anything in support of Palestine to include banning any public display of the Palestinian national flag, which she regards as a “criminal offense toward the Jewish community in Britain.”

    She has also said that “I would encourage police to consider whether chants such as: ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’ should be understood as an expression of a violent desire to see Israel erased from the world, and whether its use in certain contexts may amount to a racially aggravated section 5 public order offence.” Berlin’s Public Prosecutor’s Office has also classified the use of the expression as a “criminal offense.” The manner in which most Western political elites are lining up unquestionably and even enthusiastically behind Israel and its craven leaders’ desire for bloody vengeance is truly shocking but comes as no surprise.

    Beyond the issue of Gaza itself, some in Israel are arguing that Netanyahu has personally benefitted from the unrest through the creation of the national unity government which has ended for the time being the huge demonstrations protesting his judicial reform proposals. If all of this comes together politically as it might in the next several weeks, we could be seeing the initial steps in what will develop into the complete ethnic cleansing of what was once Palestine, in line with Netanyahu’s assertion that “the Jewish people have an exclusive and inalienable right to all parts of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop the settlement of all parts of the Land of Israel.” So all of the former Palestine is now a land to be defined by its Jewishness where Jews are in full control and are free to do whatever they want without any objection, referred to by the Israeli government as “an exclusive right to self-determination.” And it has all possibly been brought to fruition by the enablement provided by the current developments in Gaza.

    The original source of Dr. Giraldi’s October 16, 2023 article.

    Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor but Who Actually Did What to Whom? “This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation”

    By Philip Giraldi, October 16, 2023

    ***

    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.

    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.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/is-the-gaza-israel-fighting-a-false-flag-they-let-it-happen-their-objective-is-to-wipe-gaza-off-the-map/5835310
    Is Gaza-Israel Fighting “A False Flag”? They Let It Happen? Their Objective Is “to Wipe Gaza Off the Map”? *** First published on October 17, 2023 at the outset of Israel’s act of genocide against Palestine. Revised in April 2024 There is an ongoing propagandIa campaign which categorically denies the existence of a False Flag, the objective of which is to justify the genocide against the People of Palestine. The evidence is overwhelming. A False Flag conducted by US intelligence in coordination with US-NATO is a criminal undertaking. . Introduction. Was it a False Flag? Military operations are invariably planned well in advance. Was “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” a “surprise attack” ? Or Was it “A False Flag”. In the words of Philip Giraldi: “As a former intelligence officer, I find it impossible to believe that Israel did not have multiple informants inside Gaza as well as electronic listening devices all along the border wall which would have picked up movements of groups and vehicles. In other words, the whole thing might be a tissue of lies as is often the case.” A Tissue of Lies “A Tissue of Lies” has served to justify the killing in the Gaza Strip of more than 35,000 civilians, of which 70% are women and children coupled with total destruction and an endless string of atrocities. The Cat is out of the bag. Netanyahu has tacitly acknowledged that it was “A False Flag” which was intent upon justifying a carefully planned genocidal attack against Palestine: “Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he [Netanyahu] told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” (Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added) Does this candid statement not suggest that Netanyahu and his military-intelligence apparatus are responsible for the killings of innocent Israeli civilians? On that same day of October 7, 2023 Netanyahu launched a carefully planned military operation against the Gaza Strip entitled “State of Readiness For War”. Military operations are invariably planned well in advance. Had “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” been a “surprise attack” as parroted by the media, Netanyahu’s “State of Readiness For War” could not have been carried out (at short notice) on that same day, namely October 7, 2023. South Africa’s Legal Procedure against The State of Israel On January 11, 2024, The Republic of South Africa presented to The Hague World Court, a carefully formulated Legal Procedure against the State of Israel predicated on The Genocide Convention. This legal procedure, however, has not contributed to repealing the ongoing genocide and saving the lives of tens of thousands of civilians. I should mention that the False Flag issue –which constitutes a crime against humanity– was casually ignored by the ICJ. Our suggestion is that an investigation followed by a legal procedure pertaining to the “False Flag” should be undertaken. The heads of State and heads of government who have endorsed Israel’s Genocidal Acts are from a legal standpoint complicit. The ICJ Judgement was contradictory. The Presiding Judge (former legal advisor to Hillary Clinton) was in conflict of interest: The ICJ Judgment of January 26, 2024 assigns the Netanyahu government representing the State of Israel –accused by the Republic of South Africa of genocide against the People of Palestine– with a mandate to “take all measures within its power” to “prevent and punish” those responsible for having committed “Genocidal Acts”. (under Article IV of the Genocide Convention) Sounds contradictory? What the ICJ judgment intimates –from a twisted legal standpoint– is that Netanyahu’s Cabinet which was “appointed” to implement the “prevent and punish” mandate cannot be accused of having committed “Genocidal Acts”. See “Fake Justice” at The Hague: The ICJ “Appoints” Netanyahu to “Prevent” and “Punish” Those Responsible for “Genocidal Acts” By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, April 24, 2024 Our intent is to provide a broad and detailed understanding of the false flag issue pertaining to Palestine The titles of the videos, articles and texts presented below: Is the Gaza-Israel Fighting “A False Flag”? They Let it Happen? Their Objective Is “to Wipe Gaza Off the Map”?, by Dr. Philip Giraldi. Video: ICJ Hearings in The Hague, Text of Israel’s Secret Intelligence Memorandum. Planning the Forcible Exclusion of Palestinians from Their Homeland Video: “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map”, Interview. Michel Chossudovsky with Caroline Mailloux “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map”, by Michel Chossudovsky Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor? But Who Actually Did What to Whom? “This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation”, by Philip Giraldi In solidarity with the People of Palestine. Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, January 11, 2024, September 14, 2024 Part I Is the Gaza-Israel Fighting “A False Flag”? They Let it Happen? Their Objective Is “to Wipe Gaza Off the Map”? by Dr. Philip Giraldi October 8, 2023 Am I the only one who read about a speech given by Netanyahu or someone in his cabinet about a week ago in which he/they in passing referred to a “developing security situation” which rather suggests (to me) that they might have known about developments in Gaza and chose to let it happen so they can wipe Gaza off the map in retaliation and, possibly relying on the US pledge to have Israel’s “back,” then implicating Iran and attacking that country. I cannot find a link to it, but have a fairly strong recollection of what I read as I thought at the time it would serve as a pretext for another massacre of Palestinians. As a former intelligence officer, I find it impossible to believe that Israel did not have multiple informants inside Gaza as well as electronic listening devices all along the border wall which would have picked up movements of groups and vehicles. In other words, the whole thing might be a tissue of lies as is often the case. And as is also ALWAYS the case Joe Biden is preparing to send some billions of dollars to poor little Israel to pay for “defending” itself. Part II VIDEO. ICJ Hearings in The Hague January 2024 ICJ Hearings 1. January 11, 2024. Click Here to View the ICJ Hearings, 2. January 12, 2024. Israel’s Legal Team’s response to South Africa, ICJ The Hague at 10 am. Video in Real Time 3. Video: South Africa’s Closing Argument against Israel for Genocide. January 11 Hearing at the World Court Part III Israel’s Secret Intelligence Memorandum Planning the Forcible Exclusion of Palestinians from Their Homeland by Michel Chossudovsky October 2023 An official “secret” memorandum authored by Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence “is recommending the forcible and permanent transfer of the Gaza Strip’s 2.2 million Palestinian residents to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula”, namely to a refugee camp in Egyptian territory. There are indications of Israel-Egypt negotiations as well as consultations with the U.S. The 10-page document, dated Oct. 13, 2023, bears the logo of the Intelligence Ministry … assesses three options regarding the future of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip … It recommends a full population transfer as its preferred course of action. … The document, the authenticity of which was confirmed by the ministry, has been translated into English in full here on +972. See below, click here or below to access complete document (10 pages) For further details and analysis see: “Wiping Gaza Off the Map”: Israel’s “Secret” Intelligence Memorandum “Option C” by Michel Chossudovsky Part IV Video: “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map” Interview: Michel Chossudovsky and Caroline Mailloux October 17, 2023 To comment or access Rumble Part V “False Flag”. Wiping Gaza Off the Map by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky October 12, 2023 . Introduction . Early Saturday October 7, 2023, Hamas launched “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” led by Hamas’ Military Chief Mohammed Deif. On that same day, Netanyahu confirmed a so-called “State of Readiness For War”. Military operations are invariably planned well in advance (See Netanyahu’s January 2023 statement below). Was “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” a “surprise attack” ? U.S. intelligence say they weren’t aware of an impending Hamas attack. “One would have to be almost hopelessly naïve to buy the corporate state media line that the Hamas invasion was an Israeli “intelligence failure”. Mossad is one of, if not the, most powerful intelligence agencies on the planet.” Did Netanyahu and his vast military and intelligence apparatus (Mossad et al) have foreknowledge of the Hamas attack which has resulted in countless deaths of Israelis and Palestinians. Was a carefully formulated Israeli plan to wage an all out war against Palestinians envisaged prior to the launching by Hamas of “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm”? This was not a failure of Israeli Intelligence, as conveyed by the media. Quite the opposite. Evidence and testimonies suggest that the Netanyahu government had foreknowledge of the actions of Hamas which have resulted in hundreds of Israeli and Palestinian deaths. And “They Let it Happen”: “Hamas fired between 2-5 thousand rockets at Israel and hundreds of Israeli are dead, while dozens of Israelis were captured as prisoners of war. In the ensuing air response by Israel, hundreds of Palestinians were killed in Gaza.” (Stephen Sahiounie) Following the Al Aqsa Storm Operation on October 7, Israel‘s defence minister described Palestinians as “human animals” and vowed to “act accordingly,” as fighter jets unleashed a massive bombing of the Gaza Strip home of 2.3 million Palestinians…” (Middle East Eye). A complete blockade on the Gaza Strip was initiated on October 9, 2023 consisting in blocking and obstructing the importation of food, water, fuel, and essential commodities to 2.3 Million Palestinians. It’s an outright crime against humanity. It’s genocide. It is worth noting, that Netanyahu’s military actions are not targeting HAMAS, quite the opposite: he is targeting 2.3 million innocent Palestinian civilians, in blatant violation of the Four Basic Principles of The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC): “….respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects [schools, hospitals and residential areas], the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.” [Additional Protocol 1, Article 48] Ironically, according to Scott Ritter, Hamas’ has acquired U.S. weapons in Ukraine. . This was Not a “Surprise Attack” Was the Hamas Attack a “False Flag”? “I served in the IDF 25 years ago, in the intelligence forces. There’s no way Israel did not know of what’s coming. A cat moving alongside the fence is triggering all forces. So this?? What happened to the “strongest army in the world”? How come border crossings were wide open?? Something is VERY WRONG HERE, something is very strange, this chain of events is very unusual and not typical for the Israeli defense system. To me this suprise attack seems like a planned operation. On all fronts. If I was a conspiracy theorist I would say that this feels like the work of the Deep State. It feels like the people of Israel and the people of Palestine have been sold, once again, to the higher powers that be. (Statement by Efrat Fenigson, former IDF intelligence, October 7, 2023, emphasis added) Ironically, the media (NBC) is now contending that the “Hamas attack bears hallmarks of Iranian involvement” History: The Relationship between Mossad and Hamas What is the relationship between Mossad and Hamas? Is Hamas an “intelligence asset”? There is a long history. Hamas (Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya) (Islamic Resistance Movement), was founded in 1987 by Sheik Ahmed Yassin. It was supported at the outset by Israeli intelligence as a means to weaken the Palestinian Authority: “Thanks to Mossad, (Israel’s “Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks”), Hamas was allowed to reinforce its presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, Arafat’s Fatah Movement for National Liberation as well as the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression and intimidation. Let us not forget that it was Israel, which in fact created Hamas. According to Zeev Sternell, historian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, “Israel thought that it was a smart ploy to push the Islamists against the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)”. (L’Humanité, translated from French) The links of Hamas to Mossad and US intelligence have been acknowledged by Rep. Ron Paul in a statement to the U.S Congress: “Hamas Was Started by Israel”? “You know Hamas, if you look at the history, you’ll find out that Hamas was encouraged and really started by Israel because they wanted Hamas to counteract Yasser Arafat… (Rep. Ron Paul, 2011) What this statement entails is that Hamas is and remains “an intelligence asset”, namely “an “asset” to intelligence agencies” See also the WSJ (January 24, 2009) “How Israel helped to Spawn Hamas”. Instead of trying to curb Gaza’s Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction, Yasser Arafat’s Fatah. (WSJ, emphasis added) “The Hamas Partnership” is confirmed by Netanyahu “The Cat is Out of the Bag” “Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he [Netanyahu] told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” (Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added) Does this statement not suggest that Netanyahu and his military-intelligence apparatus are responsible for the killings of innocent Israeli civilians? “Support” and “Money” for Hamas. “Transferring Money to Hamas” on behalf of Netanyahu is confirmed by a Times of Israel October 8, 2023 Report: “Hamas was treated as a partner to the detriment of the Palestinian Authority to prevent Abbas from moving towards creating a Palestinian State. Hamas was promoted from a terrorist group to an organization with which Israel conducted negotiations through Egypt, and which was allowed to receive suitcases containing millions of dollars from Qatar through the Gaza crossings.” (emphasis added) . The Dangers of Military Escalation? Let us be under no illusions, this “false flag” operation is a complex military-intelligence undertaking, carefully planned over several years, in liaison and coordination with US intelligence, the Pentagon and NATO. In turn, this action against Palestine is already conducive to a process of military escalation which potentially could engulf a large part of Middle East. Israel is a de facto member NATO (with a special status) since 2004, involving active military and intelligence coordination as well as consultations pertaining to the occupied territories. Military cooperation with both the Pentagon and NATO is viewed by Israel’s Defence Force (IDF) as a means to “enhance Israel’s deterrence capability regarding potential enemies threatening it, mainly Iran and Syria.” The premise of NATO-Israel military cooperation is that “Israel is under attack”. Does Israel’s agreement with the Atlantic Alliance “obligate” NATO “to come to the rescue of Israel” under the doctrine of “collective security” (Article 5 of the Washington treaty)? In recent developments, U.S. military deployments in the Middle East are ongoing allegedly to avoid escalation. According to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg: There is always the risk that nations and/or organisations hostile to Israel will take try to take advantage. And that includes, for instance, organisations like Hezbollah or a country like Iran. So this is a message to countries and organisations hostile to Israel that they should not try to utilise the situation. And the United States have deployed, or has deployed more military forces in the region, not least to deter any escalation or prevent any escalation of the situation. (NATO Press Conference, Brussels, October 12, 2023, emphasis added) Netanyahu’s “New Stage” “The Long War” against Palestine Netanyahu’s stated objective, which constitutes a new stage in the 75 year old war (since Nakba, 1948) against the people of Palestine is no longer predicated on “Apartheid” or “Separation”. This new stage –which is also directed against Israelis who want peace— consists in “total appropriation” as well as the outright exclusion of the Palestinian people from their homeland: “These are the basic lines of the national government headed by me [Netanyahu]: The Jewish people have an exclusive and unquestionable right to all areas of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel — in the Galilee, the Negev, the Golan, Judea and Samaria.” (Netanyahu January 2023. emphasis added) We bring to the attention of our readers the incisive analysis of Dr. Philip Giraldi pointing to the likelihood of a “False Flag’”. Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, October 8, 2023, Above text updated on October 12, 2023 . Part VI Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor? But Who Actually Did What to Whom? “This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation” by Dr Philip Giraldi October 16, 2023 . “As a former on-the-ground intelligence officer, I am somewhat convinced that this was likely more like a false flag operation rather than a case of institutional failure on the part of the Israelis.” It’s amazing how America’s thought-controlled media is able to come up with a suitable narrative almost immediately whenever there is an international incident that might be subject to multiple interpretations. *** Since 1948 Israel has expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes, has occupied nearly all of the historic Palestine, has empowered its army to kill thousands of local people, and has more recently established an apartheid regime that even denies that Palestinian Arabs are human in the same sense that Jews are. Netanyahu-allied government minister Ayelet Shaked memorably has called for Israel not only to exterminate all Palestinian children, whom she has described as “little snakes,” but also to kill their mothers who gave birth to them. But when the Arabs strike back against the hatred that confronts them with their limited resources it is Israel that is described as the victimand the Palestinians who are dehumanized and portrayed as the “terrorists.” Media in the US and Europe were quick to label the Hamas offensive breaching the formidable Israeli border defenses as “Israel’s 9/11” or even “Israel’s Pearl Harbor” to establish the context that the Israelis have been on the receiving end of an “unprovoked” attack by a cruel and heartless enemy. Israel has responded to the attack with a heavy bombardment of Gaza that has destroyed infrastructure, including hospitals and schools, while also cutting off food supplies, water and electricity. It has demanded that residents of north Gaza, all 1.1 million of them, evacuate to make way for a possible ground offensive but there is nowhere to go as all the borders are closed, and the United Nations is calling it a demand with “devastating humanitarian consequences.” Journalist Peter Beinart has commented “This is a monstrous crime. It’s happening in plain view, with US support.” And the United States government is indeed typically on the same page as Israel. President Joe Biden, citing fabricated stories about dead Jewish babies, speaks of how Israel has a “duty” to defend itself, while the Palestinians somehow have no right to protect themselves at all, much less to rise up against their persecutors in a struggle for freedom. And Washington has also unhesitatingly chosen to directly involve itself in the conflict, completely on the side of the Jewish state, asserting repeatedly that “Israel has a right to defend itself” and telling the Israelis that “we have your back” while also dispatching two aircraft carrier groups to the scene of the fighting as well as the 101st Airborne to Jordan and increasing the readiness of Marines stationed in Kuwait. The White House could have taken more aggressive steps to encourage a ceasefire and talks but has chosen instead to issue essentially toothless calls to let the trapped civilians escape while also backing a devastating Israeli military response. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Tel Aviv, Oct. 12, 2023. – Secretary Antony Blinken on X Israel is also hosting the worthless and brain dead Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin who will be providing advice along the lines of his insightful comment that Hamas is “evil” and “worse than ISIS.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken is already in Jerusalem, announcing that the US is there to support Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s unity government “as long as America exists” after first saying “I come before you not only as the United States Secretary of State, but also as a Jew.” Blinken’s explicit association of his personal religion with his official role as a representative of the US government makes clear that a key element in why he is there is because he is “a Jew.” Perhaps he should recuse himself from policy making involving Israel as being “a Jew” would not appear to be a United States national interest and is likely to produce irrational responses to developing situations. If all of this sounds a lot like Ukraine it should, except that in Ukraine the US and NATO are fighting against Russia, which is being demonized for occupying what is claimed Ukrainian territory, whereas in Palestine they are supporting the occupier of actual Palestinian territory, Israel. Funny thing that, and the word “hypocrisy” comes immediately to mind. As it turns out, however, I am somewhat on the same page as much of the media, agreeing that the Hamas incursion is something like 9/11, though I am sure that my take would not be found acceptable to the CNN Jake Tappers of this world. My thinking is that Israel knew in advance about 9/11 in the United States due to its extensive spying network and chose not to share the information because it was to their advantage not to do so. Indeed, a pleased Netanyahu even stated several years later that “9/11 was a good thing because it made the United States join us in our fight.” That the attacks killed 3,000 Americans did not bother the Israeli government as Israel has a long history of killing Americans when it can benefit from so doing, starting with the attack on the USS Liberty in 1967 which killed 34 sailors. So too in this case in Gaza, Netanyahu may have decided to encourage an unexpected development, making it like 9/11, that would enable him to escalate and “mow the grass” as the Israelis put it, in the remainder of Arab Palestine. And bear in mind that the actual incident that triggered the uprising was a rampage involving at least 800 Israeli settlers in and around the al-Aqsa mosque, the third holiest site in Islam, beating pilgrims and destroying Palestinian shops, all without any interference from the nearby Israeli security forces. The rioting was clearly allowed and even encouraged by the government. Drawing on my experience as a former on-the-ground intelligence officer, I am somewhat convinced that this was likely more like a false flag operation rather than a case of institutional failure on the part of the Israelis. Israel had an extensive electronic and physical wall backed by soldiers and weaponry that completely surrounded Gaza on the landward side, so effective that it was claimed that not even a mouse could get in. The Mediterranean side of Gaza was also tightly controlled by the Israeli Navy and boats to and from Gaza were completely blocked. Egypt tightly controlled the southern part of Gaza bordering on the Sinai. So Gaza was under 24/7 complete surveillance and control at all times. Israeli military intelligence also certainly had a network of recruited informants inside Gaza who would report on any training or movements, easy enough to do when you can approach people who are starving and make them an offer they cannot refuse just for providing information on what they see and hear. And then there was a warning from the Egyptian government to Israel ten days before the Hamas attack, with Egypt’s Intelligence Minister General Abbas Kamel personally calling Netanyahu and sharing intelligence suggesting that the Gazans were likely to do “something unusual, a terrible operation.” Other media accounts reveal how Hamas trained and practiced their maneuvers publicly. There were also assessments made by US intelligence, which were shared with Israel, suggesting that something was afoot. So, given all of the evidence, there likely was no intelligence failure to anticipate and counter the Hamas attack but rather a political decision made by the Israeli government that knew what might be coming and chose to let it proceed to provide a casus belli to destroy Gaza, vowing that “Every member of Hamas is a dead man,” and then go on from there. And “from there” might well include Lebanon, Syria and Iran, possibly with the assistance of the United States to do the heavy lifting. Iran in particular is already being blamed by the usual suspects as a party involved in the Hamas attack, so far without any evidence whatsoever, which is typical of how these stories evolve. Image: Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir visits Al-Aqsa, 3 January (Social Media) And Israel has moved far to the right politically to such an extent that it might appreciate a little ethnic cleansing to demonstrate its seriousness. Netanyahu and other senior government officials in his cabinet have recently been making passing references to a “developing security situation” in the country to justify the intensifying of the raids by the army against Palestinian towns and refugee camps. The new government in Israel has also placed police under the control of ultra-nationalist Jewish Power party head Itamar Ben-Gvir as National Security Minister. He has been exploiting his position to call in particular for a war to destroy Hamas in Gaza, which is precisely what is happening. Gaza might be of particular interest to Ben-Gvir and others as it uniquely shelters an armed and organized resistance in the form of Hamas, which, oddly, was founded with the support of Israel to split the Palestinian political resistance with Fatah controlling the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza. There is another issue relating to the recent fighting that one would like to know the answer to, namely how did Hamas get its weapons in the first place? Some were clearly manufactured from parts and scrap but others were sophisticated and, as Gaza is blockaded on all sides, smuggling them in becomes problematical. One argument is that they were supplied by Iran and others to be brought in by tunnels, but the tunnels on two sides would end up in Israel and on the third side in Egypt. The fourth side is the Mediterranean Sea. So how did they arrive? Is there a possible triple or even quadruple cross taking place with different parties lying to each other? And should there be concerns that after the American armada arrives off the coast of Gaza there just might be some kind of false flag incident engineered by Netanyahu that will involve Washington directly in the fighting? And there is what amounts to a related issue that should be of concern to everyone in the US and generically speaking the “Western world” where human rights are at least nominally respected. The message from almost all Western governments is that Israel has a carte blanche to do whatever it likes even when it involves war crimes to include mass forced displacement or genocide. In this case, the coordinated government-media response which is intended to protect Israel from any criticism almost immediately began circulating fabricated tales of atrocities while also delivering a hit on freedom of speech and association. President Biden, who should be trying to defuse the crisis, is instead adding fuel to the flames, saying of Hamas that “Pure, unadulterated evil has been unleashed on the earth!” In Florida the arch Zionist stooge Governor Ron Desantis met with Jewish leaders in a synagogue to announce draconian measures against Iran to include sanctions on companies that are in any way linked to that country. One might point out that those businesses have done nothing wrong and Desantis also called for “eradication of Hamas from the earth.” His intellectual depth was at the same time revealed when he said the US should not take in any Gazan refugees because they are “antisemites.” And in South Carolina, America’s favorite he/she Senator Lindsey Graham is calling for a US attack on Iran as well as declaring the war against Hamas to be “a religious war” and urging the Israeli army to invade Gaza and do “Whatever the hell you have to do to” to “level the place.” And the Europeans are equally spineless in their deference to Israel. The Israeli president declared the that there are no innocent civilians in Gaza, and not long after that top European Union representatives met with him to offer their unqualified support. Meanwhile in France, the spineless and feckless government of Emmanuel Macron has sought to outlaw any gathering that expresses support for Palestinian rights. And in the UK, the Home Secretary Suella Braverman has proposed criminalizing any protest against Israeli actions or anything in support of Palestine to include banning any public display of the Palestinian national flag, which she regards as a “criminal offense toward the Jewish community in Britain.” She has also said that “I would encourage police to consider whether chants such as: ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’ should be understood as an expression of a violent desire to see Israel erased from the world, and whether its use in certain contexts may amount to a racially aggravated section 5 public order offence.” Berlin’s Public Prosecutor’s Office has also classified the use of the expression as a “criminal offense.” The manner in which most Western political elites are lining up unquestionably and even enthusiastically behind Israel and its craven leaders’ desire for bloody vengeance is truly shocking but comes as no surprise. Beyond the issue of Gaza itself, some in Israel are arguing that Netanyahu has personally benefitted from the unrest through the creation of the national unity government which has ended for the time being the huge demonstrations protesting his judicial reform proposals. If all of this comes together politically as it might in the next several weeks, we could be seeing the initial steps in what will develop into the complete ethnic cleansing of what was once Palestine, in line with Netanyahu’s assertion that “the Jewish people have an exclusive and inalienable right to all parts of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop the settlement of all parts of the Land of Israel.” So all of the former Palestine is now a land to be defined by its Jewishness where Jews are in full control and are free to do whatever they want without any objection, referred to by the Israeli government as “an exclusive right to self-determination.” And it has all possibly been brought to fruition by the enablement provided by the current developments in Gaza. The original source of Dr. Giraldi’s October 16, 2023 article. Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor but Who Actually Did What to Whom? “This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation” By Philip Giraldi, October 16, 2023 *** 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. 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. https://www.globalresearch.ca/is-the-gaza-israel-fighting-a-false-flag-they-let-it-happen-their-objective-is-to-wipe-gaza-off-the-map/5835310
    0 Comments 0 Shares 10609 Views
More Results