Iconos

Iconos
Zapata

miércoles, 27 de marzo de 2024

Russian FSB Chief Says US, UK, and Ukraine Could Have Been Involved in Moscow Terror Attack

Putin said the attack was committed by 'radical Islamists' but has hinted that Ukraine was involved.

by Dave DeCamp March 26, 2024

https://news.antiwar.com/2024/03/26/russian-fsb-chief-says-us-uk-and-ukraine-could-have-been-involved-in-moscow-terror-attack/

The head of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) said Tuesday that the US, the UK, and Ukraine could have been involved in the terrorist attack on a concert hall outside of Moscow that killed 139 people.

FSB chief Aleksandr Bortnikov told reporters that Russia was trying to identify everyone who was involved in the massacre and was asked if the US, Britain, and Ukraine were involved.

“We think that this is so. In any case, we are now talking about the information that we have. This is general information, but they [investigators] also have concrete results,” Bortnikov replied, according to RT.

The ISIS affiliate based in Afghanistan, known as Islamic State – Khorasan Province, or ISIS-K, has taken credit for the attack, a claim backed by the US. Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Monday that “radical Islamists” carried out the attack but suggested Ukraine could have been involved.

Putin also questioned the US assertion that ISIS-K was responsible. “We are seeing that the US, through various channels, is trying to convince its satellites and other countries of the world that, according to their intelligence, there is allegedly no Kyiv trace in the Moscow terror attack — that the bloody terrorist act was committed by followers of Islam, members of the Islamic State group,” he said. “Those who support the Kyiv regime don’t want to be accomplices in terror and sponsors of terrorism, but many questions remain.”

If Russia believes that Ukraine or any NATO country was in some way responsible for the Moscow terrorist attack, it could lead to a major escalation of the war in Ukraine. The Russian military has already escalated its missile strikes across Ukraine in response to the Ukrainian attacks inside Russia.

According to TASS, Bortnikov noted that Ukraine had been increasing its attacks on Russian territory and said US and British intelligence were involved in the operations. “There have been drone strikes, strikes by uncrewed boats at sea, and incursions by groups of saboteurs and terrorist organizations into our territory,” he said.

In recent weeks, Ukraine has launched heavy drone and artillery attacks on Russian territory. The Russian Volunteer Corps, a neo-Nazi militia made up of Russian volunteers that have US armored vehicles, launched ground incursions into Russian border regions from Ukraine.

martes, 26 de marzo de 2024

Israel Is a Strategic Liability for the United States

The special relationship does not benefit Washington and is endangering U.S. interests across the globe.

MARCH 22, 2024 • COMMENTARY

By Jon Hoffman

https://www.cato.org/commentary/israel-strategic-liability-united-states#

U.S. President Joe Biden recently proclaimed that “there’s no going back to the [Middle East] status quo as it stood on Oct. 6.” But the truth is that Biden refuses to abandon the status quo, particularly regarding Washington’s so​called special relationship with Israel.

Unwavering U.S. support for Israel has been a consistent element of U.S. Middle East policy since the establishment of the state in 1948. President John F. Kennedy coined the phrase “special relationship” in 1962, explaining that Washington’s ties to the state were “really comparable only to that which it has with Britain over a wide range of world affairs.” By 2013, then​Vice President Biden argued that “it’s not only a long​standing moral commitment; it’s a strategic commitment.”

According to Biden, “if there were no Israel, we’d have to invent one.” In 2020, then​President Donald Trump cut through some of the fog, admitting that “we don’t have to be in the Middle East, other than we want to protect Israel.”

The core of the U.S.-Israel relationship is the unparalleled amount of aid that Washington bestows upon its ally. Israel is the top recipient of U.S. military aid, receiving more than $300 billion (adjusted for inflation) from the United States since World War II.

Washington continues to provide Israel with roughly $3.8 billion annually in addition to other arms deals and security benefits. (Some of the other top recipients of U.S. aid, such as Egypt and Jordan, receive large amounts in exchange for maintaining normalized relations with Israel). Israel and its supporters are hugely influential in Washington, commanding attention on both sides of the political aisle through different forms of direct and indirect lobbying and influence.

What exactly the United States gets in return for this unidirectional relationship remains unclear.

Proponents claim that unfaltering support is critical for the advancement of U.S. interests in the Middle East. Sen. Lindsey Graham, for example, once referred to Israel as the “eyes and ears of America” in the region. While intelligence​sharing may have some strategic value, the past five months of war in Gaza have made clear the numerous negative effects of the relationship, namely how Washington’s emphatic embrace of Israel has undermined its strategic position in the Middle East while damaging its global image. The war has starkly highlighted the underlying failures of U.S. Middle East policy.

It’s past time for a fundamental reevaluation of the U.S.-Israel relationship.

ISRAEL’S CAMPAIGN of collective punishment in Gaza has been historic in scale. According to the Gazan health authorities, the official death toll across the enclave is now roughly 32,000 people, the vast majority of whom are women and children. U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin recently claimed that 25,000 women and children alone had been killed as a result of the war in Gaza. While some, including Biden himself, have raised concern over whether the casualty figures coming out of Gaza are inflated, others argue that the death toll is likely even higher because ongoing hostilities prevent researchers from the accounting for thousands of people whose fate or whereabouts are unknown.

Across the strip, civilian infrastructure has been systematically decimated, and starvation and disease are spreading rapidly. The situation inside Gaza is so bad that the U.S. government—alongside other countries, such as France, Jordan, and Egypt—is now airlifting aid into the strip, and the United States is deploying 1,000 troops to build a pier off the shore of the enclave in order to break the siege that its supposed ally—using U.S. weapons—refuses to lift.

Despite this, the Biden administration has continued to supply Israel with advanced weaponry—including both smart and “dumb” bombs as well as tank and artillery ammunition—approving more than 100 foreign military sales to Israel since Oct. 7, 2023, and invoking emergency rules on two different occasions to circumvent Congress. The United States recently issued its third veto in the U.N. Security Council since the conflict began, being the only country to block a resolution calling for an immediate humanitarian cease​fire. This is in addition to another $14 billion in military aid for Israel recently passed by the Senate.

It’s difficult to fathom that this war could get worse, but all indicators point in that direction, as Israel insists that it will continue to push into the southern Gaza city of Rafah, despite U.S. objections, where more than 1.5 million Palestinians—exceeding half the population of Gaza—have fled.

The Biden administration has said it opposes an invasion of Rafah “without a credible and executable plan for ensuring the safety of and support for the civilians.” In an interview with MSNBC, Biden spoke of a “red line” in response to a question about a possible military operation in Gaza, saying, “[we] cannot have another 30,000 more Palestinians dead,” but he then immediately stated that “the defense of Israel is still critical, so there’s no red line.” This incoherence not only negates Biden’s leverage, but also binds Washington to whatever policies the far​right government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ultimately adopts.

Unsurprisingly, Netanyahu remains adamant that he will not bow to Biden’s ethereal red line by calling off his plan for a ground invasion of Rafah. Netanyahu recently stated that he made it “supremely clear” to Biden that he is “determined to complete the elimination of these battalions in Rafah, and there’s no way to do that except by going in on the ground.”

Israel has demonstrated no long​term political strategy in Gaza beyond the systematic destruction of the enclave and killing of its inhabitants. Netanyahu—whose support has reached all​time lows, and who faces growing protests calling for early elections—seems to know that once this ends, his time in power is over.

Yet Biden has been either unable or unwilling to leverage the special relationship with Israel or sway Netanyahu, who has previously boasted of his ability to manipulate the United States.

The White House has begun strategically leaking reports of Biden’s increasing “frustration” with Netanyahu, and the administration is becoming more vocal in its support for a temporary pause to the fighting. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer delivered an unprecedented public condemnation of Netanyahu on March 14, arguing that he has “lost his way” while also calling for new elections in Israel.

But empty rhetoric without policy change will accomplish nothing.

SYMBOLIC ACTS—such as the recent U.S. executive order sanctioning two Israeli settler outposts in the West Bank or Biden’s decision to reestablish the position that Israeli settlement expansion is “inconsistent with international law”—is not going to stop the carnage in Gaza, absolve Washington of complicity, or contribute to future stability.

Likely in direct response to these actions, Israel just authorized the construction of 3,400 new houses in West Bank settlements amid historic levels of violence against Palestinians; the United States has done little to punish or halt the move.

Netanyahu’s recently revealed postwar plan contains little more than a plan for the prolonged military occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, which would guarantee future instability. Since Oct. 7, Netanyahu has repeatedly bragged that he is “proud” to have prevented the emergence of a Palestinian state, promising that he alone can continue stopping one.

In contrast to Netanyahu’s plan, the Biden administration’s day​after blueprint includes a vision for a “pathway” toward a Palestinian state. Notably, though, it contains no concrete plans, much less intent, for implementation on the part of the United States or Israel.

The war in Gaza should demonstrate that trying to sidestep the future of the Palestinian people is a foolish strategy. But for Netanyahu—and for Biden, by extension—it has perversely deepened a commitment to that status quo.

Washington’s unwavering support for Israel amid the war in Gaza has also had disastrous regional ramifications. From the Eastern Mediterranean to the Red Sea, a series of different flash points risk dragging the region—and the United States—into full​scale war. Additionally, Washington’s continued support of Israel’s brutal campaign in Gaza has tarnished Washington’s image as a lodestar of liberal values, making a mockery of claims about a U.S.-led “liberal international order.”

A regional war would be disastrous for the Middle East and the interests of the United States. Nor would such a war be a matter of Israel’s survival. No state—including Iran—is about to push Israel into the sea. Israel’s military superiority, nuclear arsenal, and strategic alignment with the majority of governments in the region guarantee its security against existential challenges.

Washington’s stance allows Israel to act with impunity while bending U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East in pursuit of objectives that lie well beyond Washington’s interests. U.S. interests in the region include protecting the safety and prosperity of the American people and preventing the emergence of a regional hegemon while upholding the values that the country claims to stand for. Knee​jerk support for Israel does not advance any of these.

The pathologies of the special relationship with Israel have hindered Washington’s strategic maneuverability in the Middle East and inhibited U.S. leaders’ ability to even think clearly about the region. In late 2023, for example, Biden defamed his own country when he declared that “were there no Israel, there wouldn’t be a Jew in the world who was safe.”

This kind of thinking makes sound statecraft impossible.

THE UNEVEN U.S. RELATIONSHIP with Israel has, for example, hindered Washington’s ability to engage diplomatically with Iran while pushing the United States toward the use of military force there.

Over the past five months, Israel has repeatedly attempted to pressure the United States into direct confrontation with Iran, despite this being anathema to U.S. interests and regional stability. High​level military drills between Israel and the United States, Israel’s recent attack on major gas pipelines in Iran, and continued escalation between Iranian​backed groups and the United States across the Middle East risk sparking a regionwide catastrophe.

Washington’s engagement with Israel—like any other state—should be driven by the pursuit of concrete U.S. interests. Even U.S. relations with treaty allies such as France or South Korea feature debates, disagreements, and the normal push and pull of diplomacy. By contrast, the special relationship with Israel has fueled some of the worst actors in Israeli politics, encouraged ruinous policies, and generally done violence to the long​term interest of both countries.

Washington’s subsidies for Israeli policies have insulated Israel from the costs of those policies. What incentive does Israel face to change course when the most powerful state in the world refuses to condition its profound levels of political, economic, and military support? Were Israel forced to bear the full costs of its policies in the West Bank, for example, its pro​settler agenda would become harder to sustain.

A special relationship with Israel does virtually nothing for the United States while actively undermining U.S. strategic interests and often doing violence to the values that Washington claims to stand for.

It’s time to “normalize” the United States’ relationship with Israel. This does not mean making Israel an enemy of the United States, but rather approaching Israel the same way that Washington should approach any other foreign nation: from arm’s‑length.

No longer would decisions about military aid, arms sales, or diplomatic cover be rooted in path dependency or muscle memory, but rather in officials’ perceptions of the U.S. interests at stake. Instead of enabling, shielding, and subsidizing Israeli policy, the United States should reorient its relationship with Israel on the basis of concrete U.S. interests.

This would entail Washington ending its willingness to turn a blind eye to Israeli affronts to U.S. interests, by providing huge amounts of aid, and pushing for a swift end to this disastrous war and a permanent political solution to the Israeli​Palestinian conflict.

The Biden administration faces a choice: continue following the Netanyahu government into the abyss, or forcefully pressure it to change course.

 

lunes, 25 de marzo de 2024

AOC decries ‘unfolding genocide’ in Gaza, urges halting weapons to Israel

Progressive US legislator Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez delivers impassioned speech condemning abuses against Palestinians.

By Al Jazeera Staff

Published On 22 Mar 2024

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/22/aoc-decries-unfolding-genocide-in-gaza-urges-halting-weapons-to-israel

Washington, DC – Describing the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza as a genocide, progressive Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has called on the United States to suspend weapons transfers to Israel.

In an impassioned speech on the floor of the House of Representatives on Friday, Ocasio-Cortez condemned the Israeli blockade on Gaza, which the United Nations says has put the territory on the verge of famine.

“This is a mass starvation of people, engineered and orchestrated following the killing of another 30,000, 70 percent of whom were women and children killed. There is hardly a single hospital left. And this was all accomplished, much of this accomplished, with US resources and weapons,” Ocasio-Cortez, a US representative from New York, said.

“If you want to know what an unfolding genocide looks like, open your eyes. It looks like the forced famine of 1.1 million innocents. It looks like thousands of children eating grass as their bodies consume themselves, while trucks of food are slowed and halted just miles away.

“It looks like good and decent people who do nothing, or too little, too late.”

Ocasio-Cortez, one of the most recognised names in Congress and a rising star in President Joe Biden’s Democratic Party, had previously faced criticism from the left for failing to join many of her fellow progressive in accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza.

The Biden administration rejects allegations that Israel is systematically committing human rights violations in Gaza. Earlier this year, it called South Africa’s petition to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accusing Israel of genocide unfounded.

Ocasio-Cortez said on Friday that the US cannot continue to “facilitate” mass killings in Gaza in the name of honouring its alliance with Israel.

“The time is now to force compliance with US law and the standards of humanity, and fulfill our obligations to the American people to suspend the transfer of US weapons to the Israeli government in order to stop and prevent further atrocity,” the congresswoman said.

The US is Israel’s top weapons supplier.

Washington provides at least $3.8bn in aid to Israel annually, and Biden is working with Congress to secure $14bn in additional aid to the US ally.

Public opinion polls, however, show that the Biden administration’s steadfast support for Israel may cost the president votes as the election season gets under way, and Biden and key Democrats have in recent weeks been more forceful in their criticism of the Israeli government siege of Gaza.

US officials have repeatedly warned Israel against invading Rafah in southern Gaza, where more than one million displaced Palestinians have taken shelter.

But White House national security spokesperson John Kirby suggested on Friday that Washington will not halt its weapon transfers to Israel. US officials have said that they share Israel’s goals of eliminating Hamas in Gaza.

Asked whether the US will use its “leverage” to dissuade Israel from launching a major ground operation in Rafah, Kirby said, “We’re going to continue to approach this with Israel as we have in the past, which is to make sure that they have the tools they need to defend themselves against a still-viable threat.”

Kirby added that, at the same time, the US will use its ties with Israel and the relationship between Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to “urge them to minimise civilian casualties” and allow more humanitarian assistance to Gaza.

Earlier on Friday, the UN Security Council failed to adopt a US-authored proposal around a ceasefire in Gaza. The measure backed the “imperative” for “an immediate and sustained ceasefire to protect civilians on all sides” but fell short of explicitly demanding an end to the war.

Kirby said the draft resolution signals no change in the Biden administration’s position, which has been to push for a temporary cessation of hostilities as part of a deal that would see the release of Israeli captives in Gaza.

“It is in line with our longstanding calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza over a period of at least six weeks as part of our hostage deal – nothing new there,” he said.

The White House spokesperson added that progress is being made in the talks to reach a truce agreement. “Nothing is negotiated until it’s all negotiated. But we do believe that the gaps are narrowing and we are getting closer,” he told reporters.

However, US progressives have long argued that a temporary halt in fighting is not sufficient, calling on Washington to revise its unconditional support for Israel.

“This is not just about Israel or Gaza. This is about us. The world will never be the same,” Ocasio-Cortez said on Friday of the mounting death toll and hunger in the Palestinian territory.

“Our story must be not that we were good men who did nothing, but that we were a committed democracy that did something.”

domingo, 24 de marzo de 2024

It’s War: The Real Meat Grinder Starts Now

PEPE ESCOBAR • MARCH 23, 2024

https://www.unz.com/pescobar/its-war-the-real-meat-grinder-starts-now/

No more shadow play. It’s now in the open. No holds barred.

Exhibit 1: Friday, March 22, 2024. It’s War. The Kremlin, via Peskov, finally admits it, on the record.

The money quote:

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

Translation: the Hegemon-constructed Kiev mongrel is doomed, one way or another. The Kremlin signal: “We haven’t even started” starts now.

Exhibit 2: Friday afternoon, a few hours after Peskov. Confirmed by a serious European – not Russian – source. The first counter-signal.

Regular troops from France, Germany and Poland have arrived, by rail and air, to Cherkassy, south of Kiev. A substantial force. No numbers leaked. They are being housed in schools. For all practical purposes, this is a NATO force.

That signals, “Let the games begin”. From a Russian point of view, Mr. Khinzal’s business cards are set to be in great demand.

Exhibit 3: Friday evening. Terror attack on Crocus City, a music venue northwest of Moscow. A heavily trained commando shoots people on sight, point blank, in cold blood, then sets a concert hall on fire. The definitive counter-signal: with the battlefield collapsing, all that’s left is terrorism in Moscow.

And just as terror was striking Moscow, the US and the UK, in southwest Asia, was bombing Sana’a, the Yemeni capital, with at least five strikes.

Some nifty coordination. Yemen has just clinched a strategic deal in Oman with Russia-China for no-hassle navigation in the Red Sea, and is among the top candidates for BRICS+ expansion at the summit in Kazan next October.

Not only the Houthis are spectacularly defeating thalassocracy, they have the Russia-China strategic partnership on their side. Assuring China and Russia that their ships can sail through the Bab-al-Mandeb, Red Sea and Gulf of Aden with no problems is exchanged with total political support from Beijing and Moscow.

The sponsors remain the same

Deep in the night in Moscow, before dawn on Saturday 23. Virtually no one is sleeping. Rumors dance like dervishes on countless screens. Of course nothing has been confirmed – yet. Only the FSB will have answers. A massive investigation is in progress.

The timing of the Crocus massacre is quite intriguing. On a Friday during Ramadan. Real Muslims would not even think about perpetrating a mass murder of unarmed civilians under such a holy occasion. Compare it with the ISIS card being frantically branded by the usual suspects.

Let’s go pop. To quote Talking Heads: “This ain’t no party/ this ain’t no disco/ this ain’t no fooling around”. Oh no; it’s more like an all-American psy op. ISIS are cartoonish mercenaries/goons. Not real Muslims. And everyone knows who finances and weaponizes them.

That leads to the most possible scenario, before the FSB weighs in: ISIS goons imported from the Syria battleground – as it stands, probably Tajiks – trained by CIA and MI6, working on behalf of the Ukrainian SBU. Several witnesses at Crocus referred to “Wahhabis” – as in the commando killers did not look like Slavs.

It was up to Serbia’s Aleksandar Vucic to cut to the chase. He directly connected the “warnings” in early March from American and British embassies directed at their citizens not to visit public places in Moscow with CIA/MI6 intel having inside info about possible terrorism, and not disclosing it to Moscow.

The plot thickens when it is established that Crocus is owned by the Agalarovs: an Azeri-Russian billionaire family, very close friends of…

… Donald Trump.

Talk about a Deep State-pinpointed target.

ISIS spin-off or banderistas – the sponsors remain the same. The clownish secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, Oleksiy Danilov, was dumb enough to virtually, indirectly confirm they did it, saying on Ukrainian TV, “we will give them [Russians] this kind of fun more often.”

But it was up to Sergei Goncharov, a veteran of the elite Russia Alpha anti-terrorism unit, to get closer to unwrapping the enigma: he told Sputnik the most feasible mastermind is Kyrylo Budanov – the chief of the Main Directorate of Intelligence at the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense.

The “spy chief” who happens to be the top CIA asset in Kiev.

It’s got to go till the last Ukrainian

The three exhibits above complement what the head of NATO’s

military committee, Rob Bauer, previously told a security forum in Kiev: “You need more than just grenades – you need people to replace the dead and wounded. And this means mobilization.”

Translation: NATO spelling out this is a war until the last Ukrainian.

And the “leadership” in Kiev still does not get it. Former Minister of Infrastructure Omelyan: “If we win, we will pay back with Russian oil, gas, diamonds and fur. If we lose, there will be no talk of money – the West will think about how to survive.”

In parallel, puny “garden-and jungle” Borrell admitted that it would be “difficult” for the EU to find an extra 50 billion euros for Kiev if Washington pulls the plug. The cocaine-fueled sweaty sweatshirt leadership actually believes that Washington is not “helping” in the form of loans, but in the form of free gifts. And the same applies for the EU.

The Theater of the Absurd is unmatchable. The German Liver Sausage Chancellor actually believes that proceeds from stolen Russian assets “do not belong to anyone”, so they can be used to finance extra Kiev weaponizing.

Everyone with a brain knows that using interest from “frozen”, actually stolen Russian assets to weaponize Ukraine is a dead end – unless they steal all of Russia’s assets, roughly $200 billion, mostly parked in Belgium and Switzerland: that would tank the Euro for good, and the whole EU economy for that matter.

Eurocrats better listen to Russian Central Bank major “disrupter” (American terminology) Elvira Nabiullina: The Bank of Russia will take “appropriate measures” if the EU does anything on the “frozen”/stolen Russian assets.

It goes without saying that the three exhibits above completely nullify the “La Cage aux Folles” circus promoted by the puny Petit Roi, now known across his French domains as Macronapoleon.

Virtually the whole planet, including the English-speaking Global North, had already been mocking the “exploits” of his Can Can Moulin Rouge Army.

So French, German and Polish soldiers, as part of NATO, are already in the south of Kiev. The most possible scenario is that they will stay far, far away from the frontlines – although traceable by Mr. Khinzal’s business activities.

Even before this new NATO batch arriving in the south of Kiev, Poland – which happens to serve as prime transit corridor for Kiev’s troops – had confirmed that Western troops are already on the ground.

So this is not about mercenaries anymore. France, by the way, is only 7th in terms of mercenaries on the ground, largely trailing Poland, the US and Georgia, for instance. The Russian Ministry of Defense has all the precise records.

In a nutshell: now war has morphed from Donetsk, Avdeyevka and Belgorod to Moscow. Further on down the road, it may not just stop in Kiev. It may only stop in Lviv. Mr. 87%, enjoying massive national near-unanimity, now has the mandate to go all the way. Especially after Crocus.

There’s every possibility the terror tactics by Kiev goons will finally drive Russia to return Ukraine to its original 17th century landlocked borders: Black Sea-deprived, and with Poland, Romania, and Hungary reclaiming their former territories.

Remaining Ukrainians will start to ask serious questions about what led them to fight – literally to their death – on behalf of the US Deep State, the military complex and BlackRock.

As it stands, the Highway to Hell meat grinder is bound to reach maximum velocity.

sábado, 23 de marzo de 2024

LA CIA, EL MI6 Y EL MOSSAD LOS MÁS PROBABLES ORGANIZADORES DE LA MASACRE EN MOSCÚ

Un grupo armado de alrededor de 11 personas irrumpió en el Crocus City Hall del pueblo de Krasnogorsk, en las afueras de Moscú, antes del inicio del concierto del grupo de rock Picnic, la noche del viernes 22 de marzo, abriendo fuego indiscriminadamente.

Hasta el momento van contabilizados 133 muertos (incluidos niños) y 121 heridos.

Según los servicios de seguridad rusos los once involucrados ya han sido aprehendidos; algunos de ellos estaban a punto de huir hacia Ucrania.

El Estado Islámico (ISIS) se ha adjudicado el atentado, supuestamente como “venganza” por lo que Rusia ha hecho en Chechenia y en el Medio Oriente.

Para el gobierno ruso los más probables autores intelectuales de este atentado son los servicios de inteligencia de Ucrania, que como todos saben, están manejados por la CIA, el MI6 y el Mossad.

No tiene absolutamente ninguna lógica el que el Estado Islámico ataque a Rusia.

Hay que recordar que dicha organización terrorista sólo estuvo interesada en atacar al régimen de Bashar el Assad en Siria y a los gobiernos de Irak, después de la invasión estadounidense de 2003.

Jamás atacó a las fuerzas occidentales como su primer objetivo (sólo de manera defensiva) y nunca a Israel. De hecho, cuando en alguna ocasión, al estar atacando en el Oeste de Siria a las fuerzas del gobierno de Assad, algunas bombas cayeron en los Altos del Golán -que como sabemos están ocupadas ilegalmente por Israel desde 1967- inmediatamente la dirigencia de ISIS se disculpó con el gobierno de Tel Aviv.

¿Cuándo se ha visto que una organización terrorista islámica se disculpe por atacar al que es considerado el principal enemigo de los fundamentalistas musulmanes, es decir Israel?

Desde el 7 de marzo la embajada de Estados Unidos en Moscú advirtió a sus ciudadanos que no asistieran a eventos masivos, porque había información creíble de posibles atentados terroristas.

Igual que cuando antes del 11 de septiembre del 2001 hasta 4000 judíos de Nueva York recibieron mensajes en los que se les advertía no acercarse a las Torres Gemelas de Nueva York, pues había la certeza de que habría ataques contra ellas.

Así, Washington, Londres y Tel Aviv le están cobrando a Putin no sólo su reciente apabullante triunfo en las elecciones presidenciales en Rusia; sino también su apoyo a la causa palestina ante el genocidio que comete Israel; y por supuesto, la derrota que los rusos le siguen infringiendo a Ucrania en la guerra que sostienen ambos países.

viernes, 22 de marzo de 2024

Large blaze rages at Russian mall hit by terrorist attack.

https://www.rt.com/russia/594727-russian-mall-terrorist-fire/

The popular shopping center and music venue outside Moscow was set on fire after gunmen entered it and began shooting at visitors

Multiple fire brigades and aircraft have been deployed to put out a blaze at a large mall outside Moscow that was attacked by terrorists on Friday night. The popular shopping center and music venue is located in Krasnogorsk, just northwest of the Russian capital. 

A group of gunmen stormed the Crocus City Hall on Friday night, killing at least 40 people, according to the authorities.

The assailants reportedly set the building on fire. Witnesses also said they heard explosions inside the mall.

According to regional emergency services, around 100 people have been evacuated from the underground floor. The rescuers are working to evacuate people from the roof.

More than 320 firefighters are on site, officials said. Three helicopters are dropping water on the blaze.

Opened in 2009, Crocus City Hall is a bustling shopping and entertainment hub, which hosts many high-end stores and a music venue. The rock band Picnic was set to perform there on Friday night, so the building was packed with fans at the time of the attack.

Why US ceasefire proposal failed at UNSC

Russia and China vetoed language which did represent a shift for Biden — but the devil is in the details

TRITA PARSI

MAR 22, 2024

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/us-ceasefire-gaza-un/

Russia and China just vetoed Biden's draft resolution on Gaza at the UN Security Council. Algeria also voted against it.

Though the resolution fell short of clearly demanding a ceasefire, Moscow and Beijing nevertheless enable Biden to shift the blame to Russia for the Council's inaction, even though Biden has been the key obstacle to progress at the Council for the last six months.

Though much of the debate will be on their vetoes, an analysis of the resolution text reveals both movements in Biden's position, as well as why his shift remains insufficient in many aspects.

First of all, this is significantly stronger than previous American drafts, yet it still falls short of a clear and unequivocal demand for an unconditional ceasefire. One one hand, it no longer calls for a ceasefire as soon as practicable, as a previous U.S. resolution did, which was a remarkably weak formulation. But the operative clause is still very convoluted and unnecessarily complicated — which has become the hallmark of everything Biden has done on Gaza:

(The Security Council) Determines the imperative of an immediate and sustained ceasefire to protect civilians on all sides, allow for the delivery of essential humanitarian assistance, and alleviate humanitarian suffering, and towards that end unequivocally supports ongoing international diplomatic efforts to secure such a ceasefire in connection with the release of all remaining hostages;

The clause does not demand a ceasefire but determines that it is imperative. Its support is not directly for the ceasefire but for the negotiation process the U.S. has been co-leading and whose parameters the U.S. has sought to determine in favor of Israel. The text points out that this effort to secure a ceasefire is "in connection with the release of all remaining hostages." (Emphasis mine.)

This is an Israeli demand that is not likely to be accepted by Hamas in return for a time-limited ceasefire rather than a permanent one. As such, the American draft endorses the Israeli position in the negotiations and indirectly conditions the ceasefire on the release of all hostages, effectively making two million civilian Gazans hostages as well.

Other operative clauses are stronger and more direct, although they fall short of calling out Israel by name. For instance, the draft is very strong in:

— “Rejecting…any forced displacement of the civilian population in Gaza."

— “Demanding ...that Hamas and other armed groups immediately grant humanitarian access to all remaining hostages."

— “Rejecting… actions that reduce the territory of Gaza, including through the establishment officially or unofficially of so-called buffer zones."

— “Condemning ... calls by government ministers for the resettlement of Gaza and rejects any attempt at demographic or territorial change in Gaza."

Of course, the government ministers in question are all Israeli, but the text falls short of naming Israel. Still, this should arguably commit the U.S. to stopping Israel's ongoing efforts to carve territory in Gaza and build buffer zones. Otherwise, the U.S. will fail to act on demands it itself put into its own UN resolution.

On one crucial point, though, as UN journalist Rami Ayarihas reported, the text has weakened. Earlier drafts strongly opposed any Israeli attack on Rafah, but the current draft has watered down the language and moved it to the preamble, only expressing "concern that a ground offensive into Rafah would result in further harm to civilians" instead of demanding that it be prevented.

Note that during the Security Council debate, US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield made a critical statement: If Russia puts forward a resolution that does not support the "diplomacy on the ground" — that is, the diplomatic process co-led by the US — the Council will remain deadlocked. This is a direct threat by the US to veto any resolution that doesn't endorse the US diplomatic process and the American/Israeli parameters for a ceasefire.

In conclusion, this is a shift in Biden's position, but there may be less here than meets the eye. Undoubtedly, Biden's rhetorical shift in favor of a ceasefire is noteworthy, but the devil is in the details. The unnecessarily convoluted operative clause raises concerns that this shift is less straightforward than it could and should be.

Trita Parsi

Trita Parsi is the co-founder and Executive Vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.