UN Chief Fears Russia-Ukraine Conflict Could Turn Into ‘Wider War’

Antonio Guterres says the world is heading toward a wider war with 'its eyes wide open

by Dave DeCamp Posted on February 6, 2023

https://news.antiwar.com/2023/02/06/un-chief-fears-russia-ukraine-conflict-could-turn-into-wider-war/

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned Monday that the world is heading toward a “wider war” as the conflict in Ukraine continues to escalate.

“The Russian invasion of Ukraine is inflicting untold suffering on the Ukrainian people, with profound global implications. The prospects for peace keep diminishing,” Guterres told the UN General Assembly.

“I fear the world is not sleepwalking into a wider war. I fear it is doing so with its eyes wide open,” he added.

Guterres’ comments come as the US and its allies continue to escalate military aid for Ukraine, bringing NATO and Russia closer to a direct clash, which could quickly spiral into a nuclear war.

The UN chief is the latest world leader to warn that the war in Ukraine could spark a global conflict. Even Western officials in charge of the policy of flooding Ukraine with weapons have recognized the risk.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg warned in December that he feared “the war in Ukraine will get out of control, and spread into a major war between NATO and Russia.” He said that when things go wrong, “they can go horribly wrong.”

President Biden said in October that the world was closer to “nuclear armageddon” than at any time since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Despite the realization, his administration has continued to test Russia’s red lines.

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists believes the risk of nuclear war is higher now than at any time during the Cold War. The group placed their Doomsday Clock at 90 seconds to midnight, the closest it has ever been.

The Rand Corporation, a Pentagon-funded think tank that has been shaping US policies for decades, recognized in a recently issued report titled “Avoiding a Long War” that a protracted conflict brings a greater risk of nuclear war.

The Missed Opportunities of the War in Ukraine

by Ted Snider | Feb 6, 2023

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/the-missed-opportunities-of-the-war-in-ukraine/

The devastation has unfolded in Ukraine. As former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates say in The Washington Post, Ukraine’s “economy is in a shambles, millions of its people have fled, its infrastructure is being destroyed, and much of its mineral wealth, industrial capacity and considerable agricultural land are under Russian control.”

As of January 23, almost 8 million people, or around 19% of the population, have fled Ukraine for Europe.

So many Ukrainian soldiers have died that a Ukrainian commander in Bakhmut, where the fighting is at its heaviest, said that “the exchange rate of trading our lives for theirs favors the Russians. If this goes on like this, we could run out.” Estimates of the number of Ukrainian soldiers killed range from over 300 to nearly 450 a day. Der Spiegel reports that German intelligence is “alarmed” by the “high losses suffered by the Ukrainian army” in the battle for Bakhmut. They told German politicians in a secret meeting that the loss of life for Ukrainian soldiers is in “three-digit number[s]” every day on that battleground alone.

What is so sad is that there were so many missed opportunities to avoid this suffering. The biggest was the opportunity missed by Russia to continue to pursue a resolution to their security concerns in a theater other than war. But there were opportunities that were missed both before and after that biggest of missed opportunities. Sadly, there were at least six.

Minsk: Not Pushing Poroshenko

Negotiated in 2014 and 2015, the Minsk agreements represented the best opportunity for peace between Russia and Ukraine. The Minsk agreements were brokered by France and Germany, agreed to by Ukraine and Russia, and accepted by the United States and United Nations. They promised to peacefully return the Donbas to Ukraine while granting it full autonomy.

But Pyotr Poroshenko, the Ukrainian president who negotiated it, said that “he had known that it would never be implemented because neither the political establishment nor public opinion in Ukraine would accept it,” according to Putin biographer Philip Short. Though they had brokered the agreement, Germany did not push Poroshenko to implement it. According to Fedor Lukyanov, professor at the National Research University Higher School of Economics in Moscow, “It was then said on the sidelines that Merkel actually did not advise Poroshenko to sign the proposed text.” Though the U.S. officially accepted the Minsk agreements, they never did anything to encourage or force their implementation. There have also been reports that “the U.S., the only party who could have really pressured [Poroshenko], told him not to follow up on the agreement.”

The first opportunity was lost when Poroshenko never implemented the Minks agreements. The U.S. never pushed him toward the diplomatic solution and may have even subtly encouraged the military alternative. On the heels of the signing of the agreements, by March 2015 the Obama administration had sent $75 million of defensive military aid to Ukraine. By April, hundreds of American, British, and Canadian military trainers were in Ukraine.

Minsk: Not Supporting Zelensky

In 2019, Zelensky was elected in large part because his platform of making peace with Russia and signing the Minsk II Agreement won him the Russian speaking vote in the south and east. But to fulfill his promise, Zelensky had to have the support of the U.S. He didn’t get it.

Pushed off the path of diplomacy by ultranationalist elements in Ukraine, Zelensky reversed his campaign pledge and refused to implement the agreement. The U.S. then failed to pressure him back onto the road of diplomacy. Richard Sakwa, Professor of Russian and European Politics at Kent, told me that “As for Minsk, neither the U.S. nor the EU put serious pressure on Kiev to fulfil its part of the agreement.” Anatol Lieven of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft agrees. Though the U.S. officially endorsed Minsk, Lieven told me that “they did nothing to push Ukraine into actually implementing it.”

By the end of 2021, according to Nicolai Petro, the Minsk agreements were “explicitly rejected by senior Ukrainian government officials.”

When first elected, Zelensky seems to have been sincere about keeping his campaign promise to implement Minsk. Upon being elected, Zelensky told reporters that he would “reboot” peace talks with separatists in Donbas. He told them that “we will continue in the direction of the Minsk [peace] talks and head towards concluding a ceasefire.” On October 1, 2019, Zelensky signed the German and French brokered Steinmeier Formula that called for elections in Donbas and recognition of their autonomy.

Being forcefully pushed off the path of diplomacy, Zelensky was abandoned by the U.S. Again, the U.S. may have done the opposite of supporting diplomacy. Reporting on the signing of the Steinmeier Formula, Foreign Policy said that “U.S. officials have pushed for the reinstatement of Ukrainian control of its international border” and for “a tougher stance on Russia’s annexation of parts of Ukraine.”

The second opportunity was lost when the U.S. failed to support Zelensky, which was a second opportunity to prevent war by implementing the Minsk Agreements.

Minsk: On the Eve of War

Russia remained committed to the Minsk agreements as the only path to peace right up to the days before the war. Putin said that he was “convinced” there is “still…no alternative.”

Russian specialist Geoffrey Roberts, professor emeritus of history at University College Cork, says that in a November 13 interview, Putin “reiterated Russia’s commitment to the implementation of the Minsk agreements, saying there was no other mechanism to resolve the Donbas problem.”

Putin continued to meet with his Minsk counterparts right up to the eve of the war. On August 20, 2021, Putin complained to Merkel that “Ukraine has adopted a number of laws and regulations that essentially contradict the Minsk agreements. It is as if the leadership of that country has decided to give up on achieving a peaceful settlement.” Roberts reports that Putin spoke with Macron on February 12 and complained of the West’s failure to prompt Kiev to implement the agreements. The next day he told German Chancellor Olaf Scholz that he believed a solution within the Minsk agreements was still possible but that Germany and France had to pressure Ukraine. That was nine days before Russia made the decision to invade Ukraine.

Though the key players in the Minsk negotiations—France, Germany, Russia. and Ukraine—met in the days before the war, “it was clear,” Richard Sakwa says, “that Ukraine was in no mood to fulfill the Minsk-2 agreement.” It was clear, too, that the U.S. and Europe did nothing to pressure them. Putin complained to both Macron and Scholz that the West had failed to pressure them.

That was the third and final missed opportunity on Minsk. The Minsk agreements were now dead.

Russia’s Security Proposals

On December 17, 2021, Russia delivered proposals on security guarantees to both the U.S. and NATO. The key demands included no NATO expansion to Ukraine and no deployment of weapons or troops to Ukraine.

On January 26, the U.S. and NATO rejected Russia’s essential demand for a written guarantee that Ukraine would not join NATO. Derek Chollet, counselor to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, has admitted that the U.S. told Moscow that negotiating NATO expansion into Ukraine was never even on the table. Putin simply remarked “that fundamental Russian concerns were ignored.”

The official Russian response came on February 17, 2022. It said that the U.S. and NATO offered “no constructive answer” to Russia’s key demands. It then added that if the U.S. and NATO continued to refuse to provide Russia with “legally binding guarantees” regarding its security concerns, Russia would respond with “military-technical means.”

The last best opportunity to prevent the invasion was missed. One week later, Russia “respond[ed] with ‘military-technical means.’”

Istanbul: Discouraging Talks

In April 2022, negotiations in Istanbul produced a “tentatively agreed” upon settlement. A negotiated end to the war seemed to be within reach. Then the U.S. and the United Kingdom put a stop to it, and the war went on. From that moment on, the U.S. shared responsibility for the war.

Ukraine and Russia were ready to end the war. But the U.S. and UK pressured Ukraine not to pursue its own goals and sign an agreement that could have ended the war. They then pressured Ukraine to continue the war to fight for larger American goals.

The State Department rejected ending the war on Ukraine’s terms because “this is a war that is in many ways bigger than Russia, it’s bigger than Ukraine.” The war could have ended with Ukraine’s interests addressed. But the U.S. insisted that it continue until American interests were addressed.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson then rushed to Kiev to tell Zelensky that Putin “should be pressured, not negotiated with.” He added that, even if Ukraine was ready to sign some agreements with Russia, the West was not.

Turkish Foreign Minister, Mevlut Cavusoglu, said in an interview that “There are countries within NATO who want the war to continue.” He said that “following the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, it was the impression that…there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue, let the war continue and Russia get weaker.”

The first missed opportunity to stop the war came in the early days. Russia and Ukraine had reached a tentative agreement that satisfied their interests. But they did not satisfy the interests of the United States. The war now raged on in pursuit of U.S. goals.

Inflection Point: the Missed Window

In November, the war reached what military analysts call an inflection point. Ukraine’s military gains seemed to have reached an apex at which point continued fighting might lead to no further territorial gains for Ukraine but possible territorial losses to Russia. Some military analysts suggested that Kherson was likely the last Russian held ground that Ukraine will be able to retake in the foreseeable future.

The Biden administration had long said that the goal was to put Ukraine in the best possible position “on the battlefield” to “be in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table.” That time seemed to have arrived. The German and French militaries began to believe that “parity will not last long and that now is the optimal time for Ukraine to start talking.” On November 9, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley said, “There has to be a mutual recognition that a military victory is probably, in the true sense of the word is maybe not achievable through military means,” adding, “and therefore you need to turn to other means.”

Ukraine was at the best possible position on the battlefield to be in the best possible position at the negotiating table. And the West was at a fork in the road. They could now exert pressure on Ukraine to turn to negotiations. Or they could resolve the problem of Ukraine getting as far as they could with the weapons they had by providing them with heavier more advanced weapons.

The U.S. missed the opportunity to escort Ukraine to the negotiating table. Instead, they chose the weapons route and sent Bradleys and Strykers and tanks.

That was the most recent of the six missed opportunities to avoid or end the tragedy unfolding in Ukraine.

Élite de Davos a la deriva frente a policrisis del capitalismo global

William I. Robinson*

https://www.jornada.com.mx/2023/02/05/opinion/011a2pol

La élite política y corporativa trasnacional estuvo de regreso en Davos del 16 al 20 de enero para su cónclave anual en medio de la crisis más severa del capitalismo global desde la fundación del Foro Económico Mundial (FEM) hace medio siglo. En años previos los participantes en la reunión exclusiva bajaron a la estación de esquí en sus jets privados rebosando confianza en la hegemonía del capitalismo. Pero esta vez, la incertidumbre sobre su capacidad para manejar la crisis, mantener el control, restabilizar el sistema y reconstruir el consenso fracturado en sus filas estaba a la plena vista.

El FEM fungió como centro de intercambio y órgano de planificación de la clase capitalista trasnacional (CCT) y sus aliados políticos en el apogeo de la globalización, pero ahora los grupos dominantes parecen estar en permanente gestión de crisis. El informe del Foro para 2023, Riesgos globales, denominó la crisis global como policrisis, con dimensiones económicas, políticas, militares y ecológicas.

El FEM reúne al círculo íntimo de la CCT y sus representantes políticos en los Estados y las organizaciones internacionales. Cada año la crema y nata de la élite corporativa y política se reúne en Davos para dimensionar el estado del capitalismo global, debatir los problemas y desafíos que enfrentan como clase dominante y considerar programas y políticas para abordar estos desafíos a su dominación clasista. En pocas palabras, Davos es donde los señores del capital elaboran su estrategia sobre cómo gobernarán el orbe.

El núcleo de la membresía del FEM lo constituyen los directores ejecutivos de las mil corporaciones trasnacionales más grandes del mundo, junto con representantes de los grupos mediáticos más poderosos, los formuladores de políticas claves de los gobiernos alrededor del mundo y de los organismos internacionales, y una selección de expertos de los campos científico, social y tecnológico. Entre los 2 mil 700 participantes en la junta de 2023, figuraron directores ejecutivos de más de 600 corporaciones, 51 jefes de Estado, 56 ministros de finanzas, 19 gobernadores de bancos centrales, 30 ministros de Comercio, 35 ministros de Exteriores y los directores de las principales organizaciones internacionales, como el Fondo Monetario Internacional, el Banco Mundial, El Banco Central de la Unión Europea, Naciones Unidas y el secretario general de la OTAN.

La globalización impulsada por el FEM ha resultado en una concentración y centralización sin precedente del capital a escala mundial en manos de la CCT. Esta globalización ha desatado desigualdades inéditas y desencadenado conflictos sociales y políticos en todo el mundo. La Fundación Carnegie para la Paz Internacional informó pocos días antes de arrancar la reunión de Davos que más de 400 protestas antigubernamentales de gran envergadura han estallado en el mundo desde 2017, una cuarta parte de ellas sostenidas durante tres meses o más, muchas involucrando a cientos de miles y hasta millones de manifestantes, y no menos de 32 estaban en curso mientras el cónclave se puso en marcha.

Además de la crisis estructural de la sobreacumulación, los grupos dominantes enfrentan una crisis política de la legitimidad estatal, hegemonía capitalista, y desintegración social generalizada; una crisis internacional de la confrontación geopolítica, y otra ecológica de proporciones históricas. Como contexto de fondo, un informe de inteligencia del gobierno estadunidense de 2021 advirtió que el mundo enfrentará desafíos globales más intensos en los próximos años, que “producirán tensiones generalizadas en los Estados y las sociedades, así como shocks que podían ser catastróficos”.

Los asistentes a Davos este año discutieron las variadas dimensiones de la policrisis, pero parecieron estar a la deriva sobre cómo restabilizar el capitalismo global y rechazar la amenaza de la revuelta de masas desde abajo, como la de la derecha populista, el nacionalismo y el neofascismo a la globalización capitalista. La directora general del FMI se vio obligada a admitir que la economía mundial enfrenta quizá su mayor prueba desde la Segunda Guerra Mundial. En tanto, la invasión rusa a Ucrania en 2022 y la respuesta política, militar y económica radical de Occidente, junto con la nueva guerra fría entre Washington y Pekín, están acelerando un violento colapso del sistema internacional posguerra.

Cada año, la agencia de desarrollo Oxfam programa la publicación de su informe sobre las desigualdades globales para que coincida con Davos; según el informe para este año Supervivencia de los más ricos, las fortunas de los multimillonarios están aumentando en 2.7 mil millones de dólares al día, incluso cuando al menos 1.7 mil millones de trabajadores ahora viven en países donde la inflación supera los salarios. En medio de la crisis mundial energética y alimentaria, las 95 corporaciones alimentarias y energéticas principales más que duplicaron sus ganancias en 2022, lograron 306 mil millones de dólares en ganancias extraordinarias y pagaron 257 mil millones a accionistas ricos, al mismo tiempo que casi mil millones de personas pasaron hambre en el mundo. El informe advirtió que tres cuartas partes de los gobiernos del orbe están planeando recortes al gasto público durante los próximos cinco años, incluida la educación y la atención médica, por la friolera de 7.8 billones de dólares.

La fragmentación y la confrontación geopolítica están llegando a un punto de ruptura. La crisis de hegemonía en el sistema internacional tiene lugar dentro de esta economía global única e integrada. El fin de la dominación occidental del capitalismo mundial está sobre nosotros a medida que el centro de gravedad de la economía global se desplaza hacia China. Pero ésta no se convertirá en la nueva potencia hegemónica; más bien, el mundo gira hacia la multipolaridad política en un momento de crisis aguda en el capitalismo global –turbulencia económica prolongada y la decadencia política.

Nos enfrentamos a la descomposición de la civilización capitalista. El compromiso del FEM de defender y expandir a toda costa la acumulación interminable de capital a escala mundial hace imposible que la clase dominante global ofrezca soluciones viables a la crisis de época. Abordar ésta implica una redistribución de gran alcance de la riqueza y el poder hacia abajo, la regulación de los mercados globales, controlar el capital trasnacional, la desmilitarización global, y medidas ambientales radicales. Tales soluciones sólo vendrán de la lucha de masas desde abajo en contra de la clase dominante de Davos.

* Profesor de sociología de la Universidad de California, en Santa Bárbara

ISRAEL/OPT: PALESTINIAN LIVES IN PERIL AS ISRAEL REINFORCES APARTHEID      

February 2, 2023

https://www.amnestyusa.org/press-releases/israel-opt-palestinian-lives-in-peril-apartheid/

Israeli authorities must dismantle the system of apartheid which is causing so much suffering and bloodshed, Amnesty International said today. Since the organization launched a major campaign against apartheid one year ago, Israeli forces have killed almost 220 Palestinians, including 35 in January 2023 alone. Unlawful killings help maintain Israel’s apartheid system and constitute crimes against humanity, as do other serious and ongoing violations by Israeli authorities such as administrative detention and forcible transfer. 

Over the past few days, a series of deadly attacks have underscored the urgent need for accountability. On 26 January, Israeli forces carried out a raid on the Jenin refugee camp and killed 10 Palestinians, including a 61-year-old woman. On 27 January, seven Israeli civilians were killed when a Palestinian gunman opened fire in Neve Ya’akov, an Israeli settlement in occupied East Jerusalem. In response to this attack, Israeli authorities have stepped up collective punishment against Palestinians, carrying out sweeping mass arrests and threatening punitive home demolitions. 

“The devastating events of the past week have exposed yet again the deadly cost of the system of apartheid. The international community’s failure to hold Israeli authorities to account for apartheid and other crimes has given them free rein to segregate, control and oppress Palestinians on a daily basis, and helps perpetuate deadly violence. Apartheid is a crime against humanity, and it is frankly chilling to see the perpetrators evade justice year after year,” said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General.  

“Israel has long attempted to silence findings of apartheid with targeted smear campaigns, and the international community allows itself to be cowed by these tactics. Until apartheid is dismantled there is no hope of protecting civilian lives, and no hope of justice for grieving families in Palestine and Israel.”  

Under apartheid, Israeli authorities control virtually every aspect of Palestinians’ lives and subject them to daily oppression and discrimination through territorial fragmentation and legal segregation. Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) are segregated into separate enclaves, with those living in the Gaza Strip isolated from the rest of the world through Israel’s illegal blockade, which has caused a humanitarian crisis and is a form of collective punishment. 

Daily evidence of apartheid  

On 1 February 2022, Amnesty International released a report setting out how Israel enforces an institutionalized system of oppression and domination against Palestinians  wherever it has control over their rights: in Israel, the OPT, and against displaced refugees by denying their right to return. It showed how Israeli laws, policies, and practices are enacted with the overarching aim of maintaining a Jewish demographic majority and maximizing control of land and resources to benefit Jewish Israelis to the detriment of Palestinians.  

2022 went on to become one of the deadliest years for Palestinians in the occupied West Bank since at least 2005, with some 153 Palestinians, including dozens of children, killed by Israeli forces, mostly in the context of increased military raids and arrest operations. Research by Amnesty International found that 33 Palestinians, including 17 civilians, were killed by Israeli forces during their August 2022 offensive on Gaza, and that at least seven civilians were killed by rockets launched by Palestinian armed groups.  

Meanwhile, incidents of Israeli settler violence against Palestinians increased for the sixth consecutive year in 2022, with attacks including physical assaults, damage to property, and destruction of olive groves. There is extensive documentation of the Israeli authorities condoning and facilitating this violence, including by arresting the Palestinians who are under attack, providing armed escort to settlers, or simply looking on from the sidelines while Palestinians are beaten and their property destroyed.  his culture of impunity has encouraged further violence, as demonstrated by the spate of attacks by settlers which have taken place in recent days.  

Following the Neve Ya’akov shooting attack, Israeli authorities have appeared to incite further violence against Palestinians by announcing plans to expedite gun licenses “in order to enable thousands of additional citizens to carry weapons”. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has already pledged to massively expand illegal settlements across the OPT, also said the government was planning to “strengthen settlements”.   

All Israeli settlements in the OPT are illegal under international law, and Israel’s long-running policy of settling civilians in occupied territory amounts to a war crime.  

Increased settlement expansion will put countless more Palestinians at risk of forcible transfer – a crime against humanity which Israeli authorities have committed on a systematic basis. A recent example is the May 2022 Supreme Court ruling which greenlighted the forcible transfer of more than 1,150 Palestinians from Masafer Yatta in the West Bank. In the past year, Israeli authorities also scaled up plans to demolish the unrecognized village of Ras Jrabah in Israel’s Negev/Naqab region and displace its 500 Palestinian-Bedouin residents, while in January 2023 the Bedouin village of Al-Araqib was demolished for the 212th time. Amnesty International’s apartheid report showed how forced evictions in the Negev/Naqab, and across the OPT, are carried out in pursuit of Israel’s demographic objectives. 

Growing recognition  

Amid these violations, there is growing international recognition that Israeli authorities are committing apartheid. Palestinians have long been calling for an understanding of Israel’s rule as apartheid, and Palestinian organizations such as Al-Haq, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, and Al Mezan have been at the forefront of UN advocacy to this end.   

The push for such recognition gained momentum in 2022 with two UN Special Rapporteurs concluding that Israeli authorities are committing apartheid. The number of states at the Human Rights Council referring to apartheid by Israel doubled from nine in 2021 to 18 in 2022. Notably, South Africa and Namibia are among the states who have expressed concern that Israel’s treatment of Palestinians constitutes apartheid. Several international and Israeli human rights organizations have also called for an end to apartheid, including Human Rights Watch, B’Tselem, and Yesh Din.    

Israeli authorities have gone to great lengths to suppress and discredit the findings of apartheid. The consequences are particularly serious for Palestinian human rights defenders – in August last year, Israeli authorities raided the offices of seven leading Palestinian NGOs after branding them “terrorist entities” and outlawing them. In December, Salah Hammouri, a field researcher at the prisoners’ rights organization Addameer, was stripped of his Jerusalem residency and deported to France after spending nine months in Israeli administrative detention.   

Disregard for international law  

In May 2023, Israel’s human rights record will come under scrutiny through the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the UN Human Rights Council. Amnesty International has written to the Israeli authorities urging them to engage, but they have yet to submit to the review process. Israeli authorities have ignored most of the recommendations put forward by reviewing states and endorsed by the Human Rights Council during the previous UPR cycle in 2018. For example, despite being urged repeatedly over the years, and then again in 2018, to end administrative detention, Israel is currently holding over 860 Palestinians without charge or trial – the highest number in 15 years. 

“The Israeli authorities’ longstanding disregard for their obligations under international law and the recommendations of the international community continues to have dire consequences for Palestinians and undermines rights protection for Israelis as well,” said Agnès Callamard.     

“No state should be able to systematically flout international law, including binding UN Security Council resolutions, with impunity. We call on states to end all forms of support for Israel’s violations, and to break with years of complicit inaction by holding the Israeli authorities to account.”  

Contact: media@aiusa.org

Report: Biden Pushed Peace Plan that Recognized Russia’s Control Over 20% of Ukraine

https://news.antiwar.com/2023/02/03/report-biden-pushed-peace-plan-that-recognized-russias-control-over-20-of-ukraine/

The White House offered the proposal within days of rolling out a military aid package for Kiev that included main battle tanks, reflecting a growing rift in the Joe Biden administration.

by Kyle Anzalone Posted on February 3, 2023

President Joe Biden dispatched his CIA Director to Kiev with a proposal to end the war in Ukraine last month, according to the Swiss outlet Neue Zürcher Zeitung. The peace plan was offered at the same time the White House was preparing significant escalations in military support for Kiev, including announcing that it will send Abrams tanks to Ukraine.

The report cites high-level sources in Berlin who claim William Burns, the head of America’s spy agency, traveled to Kiev in mid-January to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. On January 19, the Washington Post reported that Burns recently traveled to Ukraine to meet with Zelensky. During that trip, Burns is said to have offered a deal to Zelensky wherein Ukraine would cede about 20% of its territory to Russia in exchange for Moscow ending its war in Ukraine.

NZZ’s sources claim that both Kiev and Moscow rejected the proposal. In a statement to Newsweek, the CIA denied Burns delivered the proposal. Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov also dismissed the NZZ report labeling it a "canard."

According to German sources, the peace proposal reflects a growing rift within the White House on how to handle the war in Ukraine. "Security adviser Jake Sullivan and Burns [wanted] to end the war quickly so they could focus on China." The report continued, "on the other side would be Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. They did not want to let Russia get away with destroying the rules-based peace order and called for massive military support for Ukraine."

After Burns failed to sway Kiev and Moscow to agree with Washington’s plan, Blinken and Austin were able to sway the president to authorize the transfer of Abrams tanks to Ukraine.

NZZ reports the decision for the US to send main battle tanks to Ukraine caught German leader Olaf Scholz off guard. The Union in the German Bundestag issued a statement saying, “Scholz did not want to deliver until the very end because he firmly assumed that the Americans would not send battle tanks either.”

Negotiations between Kiev and Moscow have stalled for nearly a year. Last March, Turkish diplomats facilitated talks that nearly ended the war with Russian forces withdrawing from Ukrainian territory captured after the start of the invasion. However, then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson traveled to Kiev and told Zelensky that Ukraine’s Western backers were not prepared to allow the war to end.

Kyle Anzalone is the opinion editor of Antiwar.com, news editor of the Libertarian Institute, and co-host of Conflicts of Interest.

The Middle East Facing a Tempest

ISRAEL SHAMIR • JANUARY 31, 2023

 https://www.unz.com/ishamir/the-middle-east-facing-a-tempest/

Iran, a member of the Axis of Evil, has been attacked by the Forces of Good. Will it come to the Third World War? We shall see. But now from the beginning.

After the recent elections, Bibi Netanyahu had formed his sixth government after one-and-a-half-year break and Israelis opposing Bibi began a street revolt against the new government. They took a leaf from the Ukraine-2014 book, and created a Maidan in Tel Aviv, with up to a hundred thousand citizens gathering in neighbourhood squares every Sabbath. The would-be-revolutionaries are similar to US Democrats, while the government supporters remind us of US Republicans. To complicate the comparison further, note that Israeli Jews predominantly support US Republicans, and US Jews vote for the Dems. Yet this colour revolution on the streets and squares of Tel Aviv is a pro-American revolt (as is usual for colour revolutions). And US Dems, with their Israeli analogues are used to winning their revolutions, by whatever means necessary.

The new government has declared a plan for legal reform, directly confronting the Judicial Branch which has historically dominated the Executive Branch in Israel. Israeli judges do not like strong men, and often torpedo their measures. High Court judges are elected by other judges, and the High Court can overturn any Parliamentary or Government decision. In Israel, there is the additional ethnic tension between European (Ashkenazi) Jews and Oriental (Sephardic) Jews. All of them are against the Palestinians – with exception of the Communists. It would be a mistake to consider some of them being on the Left. There is practically no Left in Israel. This title has been seized by the gender-obsessed lesbians of Tel Aviv. As for Israeli men, they choose between Rightist or Far-Rightist.

Bibi Netanyahu is greatly disliked by many, but the majority still votes for him.

His enemies hope to use their tame judges to send Netanyahu to jail for some terrible crime, like receiving a box of cigars from a friendly Hollywood producer.

Meanwhile they have derailed Arye Der’i, the minister of Interior. They think he does not deserve to be a minister. Bibi plans to enact a law that will strip the courts of their powers to bar a minister, or even to deal with their persons. The government coalition intends to enact the law Do Not Touch Der’i. But Bibi is even more worried about himself.

He thinks the judges will remove him from office and send him to jail. To defend himself he has decided to stir up the Iranians. Bibi has long record of poking Iran. Years ago he presented a drawing of an Iranian nuclear bomb – to the amusement of the world. After that, he fought against the nuclear deal between the US and Iran. Over the years, he has tried to convince each US President to bomb Iran – after his own generals refused to undertake the enterprise. Now he sends some drones over to bomb an Isfahan installation, hoping it will incite an Iranian response and unite people of Israel behind him.

The Iranians have not responded, yet. As long as Israel does not officially admit the act of war, one can expect any Iranian response to be similarly deniable, as it has been all the previous times. To be sure they knew that Israel destroyed Iranian trucks along the Syrian border, yet Iran refused to be drawn in. Israeli aggression is sanctioned by the US, and the US is still too strong to be effectively retaliated against by Iran – or even by Russia, a country with feeling of friendship to Iran. The US spends more money on defence than all the rest of mankind, and it still packs a punch. To add insult to injury, the bottomless military budget does not hurt the pocketbooks of American citizens; they just add it to their debt.

Recently a Jewish gentleman-of-the-press, Mr Bret Stephens, unfavourably compared Mr Netanyahu to Mr Zelensky, in an article called A Tale of Two Jewish Leaders, in NY Times. Unfortunately, his case fails when it is confronted with reality. Mr Zelensky pulled the Ukraine into war with Russia. He caused more than half of its population to leave the country. He is leading the Ukraine into economic collapse and military defeat.

On the other hand, Bibi Netanyahu has been cautious and prudent with his country. One obvious difference is that Zelensky has deliberately dragged the Ukraine into unconditional war against Russia, while Netanyahu has repeatedly scored political points against Iran without committing to his people to total war. Now, inspired by Bret Stephens and other media figures, Bibi has been driven to openly attacking Iran.

Neocons may love Israel, but they dream of the Jewish state fighting on the front lines of the American Empire. Netanyahu’s current problem is that he wants to keep his friendship with Russia, and the Neocons will not allow him that. Indeed, today the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the new Israeli government said he intends to visit Kiev immediately. Israel has been a consistent supporter of Ukrainian ambitions. The previous government led by Mr Bennett and Mr Lapid sent 500 war advisers to help the Ukrainian army, and it was openly hostile to Putin.

Russia has condemned in the strongest terms the US/Israeli attack on Iran. Russia considers the US to be the primary instigator of the two. This is by no means certain – Bibi has had a long time feud with Iran. Still, the prudent Mr Netanyahu has avoided open warfare. Yet now it seems he would go to war so that American Neocons might approve of him.

Meanwhile the Palestinian front is warming up. It is not obvious whether the Third Intifada (uprising) has begun, but it is certainly not far away. For a long time, the Palestinians have been left alone but not at peace. They are murdered by the defence forces at an average of one or two per day, each day. And then there was the Israeli attack on the Jenin refugee camp with its ten victims. The Palestinians responded with three attacks in Jerusalem; ten Israelis were killed. Although the attack in Jenin passed without any comments, the counter-attack in Jerusalem awoke President Biden to condemnation. He said, “This was an attack against the civilized world.” The initial Israeli attack was not even mentioned. Israeli atrocities do not bother the civilised world.

In a relatively new development, one of the counter-attacks in Jerusalem was ascribed to “a terrorist, 13”. Yes, a thirteen-year-old boy was called “a terrorist”, and was killed on the spot. But seven children of his age were killed last month, and 34 last year.

The raid on Jenin was probably a stunt by the new government. The Palestinians did not join in the demonstrations against Netanyahu. They reasonably thought that these political struggles are an internal Jewish affair. But the extreme Nationalists in the government, Mr Smotrich and Mr Ben-Gvir, have wanted for a long time to implement a Final Solution for the Palestinian Problem; whether to kill them or to transfer them abroad. This is probably the reason behind the recent rise of anti-Palestinian violence, and the current wave of victims can be laid at their doorstep.

Ben-Gvir and Smotrich fit right into the Ukrainian adventure. They are typical Banderites. They are chickenhawks who might join the Azov regiment any time. They are doing their best to destroy the myth that “Jews can’t be Nazis”. They certainly talk the talk, and the rhetoric is becoming ever more extreme. Yet the difference between them and ordinary Israelis is minor. These two want to ruin villages and starve people, but many other members of Knesset will agree to it. The adversaries of Netanyahu care about preserving the High Court with its privileges, and what happens to the Palestinians makes no difference to them.

Probably things won’t change in the Middle East until the US debt is called, and the US dollar ceases to act as an international mean of payment. Here’s hoping that it will come soon. Just recently, Mohammed Al-Jadaan told Bloomberg TV in Davos that “There are no issues with discussing how we settle our trade arrangements, whether it is in the US dollar, whether it is the euro, whether it is the Saudi riyal.” The end of Israeli Apartheid and US global domination may be closer than you think!

With help of Paul Bennett

Trials and Tribulations of the Collective West

February 01, 2023 

https://thesaker.is/trials-and-tribulations-of-the-collective-west/

by Pepe Escobar, widely distributed on the Internet and posted with the author’s permission

Sit back, relax, and enjoy a race to the bottom of the Grand Canyon. The only question is who will get there first: the EU, NATO, or both. 

One may be excused to imagine all sorts of amusement games unrolling at the HQ of the Russian General Staff as The Empire and NATO go literally bonkers. What crazy stunt will they come up with next – short of WWIII?

Here is a delightful putdown of NATO’s dementia praecox. Everything so far has failed, from “crippling sanctions” to all sorts of wunderwaffen, while the whole Global South marvels at the exploits of Wagner PMC – now configured as the planet’s top urban fighting machine.

CIA mouthpiece Washington Post duly released how Washington, once again, had the Liver Sausage Chancellor Scholz for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. The idea was floated by Secretary of State Tony Blinken: let’s announce we will deliver M1 Abrams to Ukraine in a hazy, unspecified future, thus providing cover for Scholz to release the Leopards now.

Don’t you just love German sovereignty in action?

Every military analyst with an IQ over room temperature knows all those Leopards will be duly incinerated – or better yet, captured, and dissected by Russian military specialists.

So what happens next is yet another vector of the – very successful so far – U.S.-unleashed German de-industrialization racket: the Americans will invade the German industrial military complex with their “much improved” Abrams – which may perhaps arrive in 2024, when only a rump Ukraine may still exist, or never arrive at all. So no need for the Abrams to prove themselves in actual combat – as in being captured and/or incinerated.

Rumors in Washington advance that the U.S. “strategy” in Ukraine – extensively detailed by endless think tank reports – had to be adapted. It’s not about “defeating Russia” anymore but providing Kiev with the means to “scare” Russia. The Russian General Staff must be trembling in their boots.

Meanwhile, in real life, nearly every possible scenario gamed in Washington and Brussels finishes with NATO like a giant, armored version of Wile E. Coyote plunging to the depths of the Grand Canyon. And that happens even if the much-ballyhooed “Big Arrow” Russian offensive starts in a few days or weeks, or never starts at all.

Arguably the Russian General Staff has concluded a long time ago there’s no point in reducing Ukraine to rubble in a matter of hours – something they could easily accomplish. Thus the fabled mincing machine approach – offering no excuses for NATO to “escalate” (which they continue to do anyway, as Jens “War is Peace” Stoltenberg is so fond of parroting).

The trick is that NATO’s escalation overdrive, as it happens, is somewhat controlled by the Russian General Staff, which is always calculating which optimal maneuvers will consume NATO’s military hardware faster. Call it a Russian version of the popular axiom “frog in a boiling pot doesn’t realize it’s being cooked until it croaks.”

Attacking Russia-China-Iran

Absolute desperation is now graphically extrapolating into attacks on Iran. Both Russia and China have Iran as their key ally in West Asia for the whole, complex process of Eurasia integration; strategic partnerships interlink the trio.

So attacking the Ministry of Defense in Isfahan with drones – total fail – and bombing an IRGC convoy of humanitarian aid crossing from Iraq to Syria is a serious U.S.-Israel-coordinated provocation.

Essentially these are also attacks against Russia and China. Israel cannot lift its hand or foot without U.S. permission. Iranian intel may be able to establish how the Straussian neo-con and neoliberal-con cabal in charge of U.S. foreign policy authorized if not ordered these attacks, which of course are directly connected to NATO’s desperation in Ukraine.

When in doubt, just come back to Zbig “Grand Chessboard” Brzezinski: “Potentially, the most dangerous scenario would be a grand coalition of China, Russia and perhaps, Iran, an ‘anti-hegemonic’ coalition united not by ideology but by contemporary grievances. It would be reminiscent in scale and scope of the challenge once posed by the Sino-Soviet bloc.”

And mirroring Ukraine/Russia there’s of course Taiwan/China.

As Credit Suisse strategist Zoltan Pozsar has extensively explained, if Taiwan manufactures chips for U.S. missiles Washington then sends them to Taiwan for its “self-defense”, but Taiwan needs to wait because the missiles are needed for Ukraine instead, or chips can’t be shipped to the U.S. owing to a possible sea and air blockade imposed by China, the Americans will be operationally ill-equipped to support their two-front war against peer competitors Russia and China.

Bye, bye Pax Americana. It’s the fear, actually, paranoia, of a destroyed Taiwan – and the destruction in every scenario would be provoked by the Americans themselves – that has led the Straussian neo-con and neoliberal-con cabal to demand their chips be Made in the USA.

On the energy front, since U.S. energy costs are low, Washington gambled that much of the deindustrialization of Germany would revert to American benefit. Yet since Iranian, Russian, and Venezuelan oil prices are lower than the U.S., not much production may be shifting to the Hegemon: it will go to China.

To the bottom of the Grand Canyon!

The January 10 joint declaration between EU-NATO graphically shows how the EU is no more than the P.R. arm of NATO.

This NATO-EU joint mission consists in using all economic, political, and military means to make sure the “jungle” always behaves according to the “rules-based international order” and accepts to be plundered ad infinitum by the “blooming garden”.

So in the end what’s left of “Europe”, when it’s NATO – actually Washington – that really rules?

“Europe”, according to relentless propaganda, means defending “our values” – as in peace, democracy, and prosperity. The trick is that unelected elites forced the implicit identification of this imagined, practically sacred “Europe” with the European Union. And that’s how the EU has acquired a mythical identity.

Of course, in real life the EU – as in the real, politically organized “Europe” – has performed as a toxic instrument of division among European peoples.

Instead of peace, it has invested in an all-out rabid war against Russia. The EU is arguably the most democratically irresponsible institution on the planet: spend a day in Brussels and you understand everything. And instead of prosperity, the EU has institutionalized austerity.

So sit back, relax, and enjoy a race to the bottom of the Grand Canyon. The only question is who will get there first: the EU, NATO, or both.