Israel Secretly Targets U.S. Lawmakers with Influence Campaign on Gaza War

Israel’s Ministry of Diaspora Affairs ordered the operation, which used fake social media accounts urging U.S. lawmakers to fund Israel’s military, according to officials and documents about the effort.

https://archive.vn/u3mPT

By Sheera Frenkel

Reporting from Tel Aviv

June 5, 2024

Israel organized and paid for an influence campaign last year targeting U.S. lawmakers and the American public with pro-Israel messaging, as it aimed to foster support for its actions in the war with Gaza, according to officials involved in the effort and documents related to the operation.

The covert campaign was commissioned by Israel’s Ministry of Diaspora Affairs, a government body that connects Jews around the world with the State of Israel, four Israeli officials said. The ministry allocated about $2 million to the operation and hired Stoic, a political marketing firm in Tel Aviv, to carry it out, according to the officials and the documents.

The campaign began in October and remains active on the platform X. At its peak, it used hundreds of fake accounts that posed as real Americans on X, Facebook and Instagram to post pro-Israel comments. The accounts focused on U.S. lawmakers, particularly ones who are Black and Democrats, such as Representative Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader from New York, and Senator Raphael Warnock of Georgia, with posts urging them to continue funding Israel’s military.

ChatGPT, the artificial intelligence-powered chatbot, was used to generate many of the posts. The campaign also created three fake English-language news sites featuring pro-Israel articles.

The Israeli government’s connection to the influence operation, which The New York Times verified with four current and former members of the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs and documents about the campaign, has not previously been reported. FakeReporter, an Israeli misinformation watchdog, identified the effort in March. Last week, Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, and OpenAI, which makes ChatGPT, said they had also found and disrupted the operation.

The secretive campaign signals the lengths Israel was willing to go to sway American opinion on the war in Gaza. The United States has long been one of Israel’s staunchest allies, with President Biden recently signing a $15 billion military aid package for the country. But the conflict has been unpopular with many Americans, who have called for Mr. Biden to withdraw support for Israel in the face of mounting civilian deaths in Gaza.

The operation is the first documented case of the Israeli government’s organizing a campaign to influence the U.S. government, social media experts said. While coordinated government-backed campaigns are not uncommon, they are typically difficult to prove. Iran, North Korea, China, Russia and the United States are widely believed to back similar efforts around the world, but often mask their involvement by outsourcing the work to private companies or running them through a third country.

“Israel’s role in this is reckless and probably ineffective,” said Achiya Schatz, the executive director of FakeReporter. That Israel “ran an operation that interferes in U.S. politics is extremely irresponsible.”

Israel’s Ministry of Diaspora Affairs denied involvement in the campaign and said it had no connection to Stoic. Stoic didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The campaign didn’t have a widespread impact, Meta and OpenAI said last week. The fake accounts accumulated more than 40,000 followers across X, Facebook and Instagram, FakeReporter found. But many of those followers may have been bots and didn’t generate a large audience, Meta said.

The operation began just weeks into the war in October, according to Israeli officials and the documents on the effort. Dozens of Israeli tech start-ups received emails and WhatsApp messages that month inviting them to join urgent meetings to become “digital soldiers” for Israel during the war, according to messages viewed by The Times. Some of the emails and messages were sent from Israeli government officials, while others came from tech start-ups and incubators.

The first meeting was held in Tel Aviv in mid-October. It appeared to be an informal gathering where Israelis could volunteer their technical skills to help the country’s war effort, three attendees said. Members of several government ministries also took part, they said.

Participants were told that they could be “warriors for Israel” and that “digital campaigns” could be run on behalf of the country, according to recordings of the meetings.

The Ministry of Diaspora Affairs commissioned a campaign aimed at the United States, the Israeli officials said. A budget of about $2 million was set, according to one message viewed by The Times.

Stoic was hired to run the campaign. On its website and on LinkedIn, Stoic says it was founded in 2017 by a team of political and business strategists and calls itself a political marketing and business intelligence firm. Other companies may have been hired to run additional campaigns, one Israeli official said.

Many of the campaign’s fake accounts on X, Instagram and Facebook posed as fictional American students, concerned citizens and local constituents. The accounts shared articles and statistics that backed Israel’s position in the war.

The operation focused on more than a dozen members of Congress, many of whom are Black and Democrats, according to an analysis by FakeReporter. Representative Ritchie Torres, a Democrat from New York who is outspoken about his pro-Israel views, was targeted in addition to Mr. Jeffries and Mr. Warnock.

Some of the fake accounts responded to posts by Mr. Torres on X by commenting on antisemitism on college campuses and in major U.S. cities. In response to a Dec. 8 post on X by Mr. Torres about fire safety, one fake account replied, “Hamas is perpetrating the conflict,” referring to the Islamist militant group. The post included a hashtag that said Jews were being persecuted.

On Facebook, the fake accounts posted on Mr. Jeffries’s public page by asking if he had seen a report about the United Nations’ employing members of Hamas in Gaza.

Mr. Torres, Mr. Jeffries and Mr. Warnock didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The campaign also created three fake news sites with names like Non-Agenda and UnFold Magazine, which stole and rewrote material from outlets including CNN and The Wall Street Journal to promote Israel’s stance during the war, according to FakeReporter’s analysis. Fake accounts on Reddit then linked to the articles on the so-called news sites to help promote them.

The effort was sloppy. Profile pictures used in some accounts sometimes didn’t match the fictional personas they cultivated, and the language used in posts was stilted.

In at least two instances, accounts with profile photos of Black men posted about being a “middle-aged Jewish woman.” On 118 posts in which the fake accounts shared pro-Israel articles, the same sentence appeared: “I gotta reevaluate my opinions due to this new information.”

Last week, Meta and OpenAI published reports attributing the influence campaign to Stoic. Meta said it had removed 510 Facebook accounts, 11 Facebook pages, 32 Instagram accounts and one Facebook group tied to the operation. OpenAI said Stoic had created fictional personas and biographies meant to stand in for real people on social media services used in Israel, Canada and the United States to post anti-Islamic messages. Many of the posts remain on X.

X didn’t respond to a request for comment.

On its LinkedIn page, Stoic has promoted its ability to run campaigns backed by A.I. “As we look ahead, it’s clear that A.I.’s role in political campaigns is set for a transformative leap, reshaping the way campaigns are strategized, executed and evaluated,” it wrote.

By Friday, Stoic had removed those posts from LinkedIn.

Reports Suggest Israel Is Gearing Up for Lebanon War

Britain says to prepare for conflict by mid-June

by Jason Ditz June 4, 2024

https://news.antiwar.com/2024/06/04/reports-suggest-israel-is-gearing-up-for-lebanon-war/

Tensions continue to rise on Israel’s northern border with Lebanon, and there are reports of Israel’s war cabinet discussing a full-scale war against Lebanon.

Hezbollah and Israel have been fighting almost daily since October, with nearly constant Israeli airstrikes against southern Lebanon. The US and France have been trying to negotiate a settlement to see the attacks stopped by both sides and Hezbollah moved back from the Litani River.

Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir doesn’t want to wait for a deal. Visiting the north today to inspect the damage from rocket fire, Ben Gvir insisted that Israel’s military duty now is to “destroy Hezbollah.”

Britain recently warned Lebanon of the likelihood of an imminent Israeli attack, in mid-June, and the start of a war “whose geographic expansion and duration will not be known.”

Qatar also spoke up, expressing concern about Israel’s intentions toward Lebanon, saying it does not believe Israel wants a ceasefire. Following Ben Gvir’s comments, this seems a realistic take on the situation, at least given the current government.

While a mid-June date is not far away, it should be remembered that Israel mentioned numerous deadlines for launching the war in winter and spring. The US has repeatedly warned Israel that launching a concurrent war in Lebanon, in tandem with the ongoing conflict in Gaza, would stretch Israel’s resources too far.

Israeli officials dismissed the idea they’d be stretched thin by multiple full-scale wars on their border, and military officials have repeatedly expressed readiness for the conflict.

 

Russia Warns US Close to Making ‘Fatal’ Miscalculation Over Ukraine

Russia's deputy foreign minister says the US must heed Putin's warnings about Ukraine striking Russian territory with US weapons

by Dave DeCamp June 3, 2024

https://news.antiwar.com/2024/06/03/russia-warns-us-close-to-making-fatal-miscalculation-over-ukraine/

On Monday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov warned the US to listen to warnings from Russian President Vladimir Putin about allowing Ukraine to strike Russian territory with American-made weapons.

“I would like to caution American officials against miscalculations which may have fatal consequences. For some unknown reason, they underestimate the seriousness of the rebuff they may receive,” Ryabkov said, according to the Russian news agency TASS.

“I am urging these officials who seemingly are not bothered by anything, to take some time away from playing computer games, which is apparently what they are doing, given their light-hearted approach to serious issues, and take a closer look at what Putin said, particularly at a press conference following talks in Tashkent,” he added, referring to a warning Putin issued during a recent visit to Uzbekistan.

Putin said there would be “serious consequences” for any NATO country that allowed Ukraine to hit Russian territory with its weapons. “This constant escalation can lead to serious consequences. If these serious consequences occur in Europe, how will the US behave, bearing in mind our parity in the field of strategic weapons? Hard to say. Do they want global conflict?” Putin said.

Ryabkov called Putin’s comments “a very significant warning, and it should be treated with the utmost seriousness.”

Russia also previously warned the UK that it would strike British military sites in Ukraine “and beyond” if British weapons were used on Russian territory.

US and other Western officials have shrugged off the warnings despite the major risk of escalation. “This is nothing new. It has … been the case for a long time that every time NATO allies are providing support to Ukraine, President Putin is trying to threaten us to not do that,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Friday.

Despite Stoltenberg’s comments, the risk of Russian retaliation is very high since Putin has a history of escalating the war in Ukraine in direct response to attacks on Russian territory. For example, Russia did not begin major strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure until after the first bombing of the Crimean Bridge in October 2022.

Putin has also said that Russia’s new offensive in Kharkiv is a response to Ukrainian attacks on Russia’s Belgorod Oblast, which borders Kharkiv. He said the purpose of the offensive was to create a “buffer zone” to prevent attacks on Belgorod.

THE TRIUMPH OF CONTINUITY

AUTHORITARIANISM, CORRUPTION AND SLAUGHTER WILL FOLLOW

The winning candidate in Mexico’s presidential elections, Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo of the coalition formed by the Movimiento de Regeneración Nacional (Morena), Partido Verde Ecologista de México (PVEM) and Partido del Trabajo (PT) parties based her electoral campaign on the promise to maintain the public policies promoted by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO); and with this, in the words of the candidate, to build a “second floor” of what the Mexican president called the Fourth Transformation of the country (having been the first three: Independence; the War of Reforma; and the Mexican Revolution).

But what does it mean that López Obrador's policies continue?
According to the president, his government had a popular mandate to end the neoliberal policies that the governments of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (1982-2000 and 2012-2018) and the National Action Party (2000-2012) applied in the country, which resulted in a greater concentration of income in a minority; more inequality and poverty; greater subordination to the main capitalist powers; greater corruption; and the empowerment of the main organized crime organizations in the country.

For this reason, most voters in 2018 gave their confidence to López Obrador to change this reality that seriously affects the poor and middle classes.

And what did Lopez Obrador do? As a good magician, he deceived a large part of the population (around 60%) into believing that all the policies that had affected the population were now being “transformed” in favor of the people, especially the poorest people in the country.
The instrument used was to channel a large part of the budget from sectors such as health, education and natural disaster care to social programs through which direct monetary resources were granted to some 30 million inhabitants (the elderly, the disabled, single mothers, peasants and students), which, in the last year of its administration, amounted to up to 1 billion pesos ($60 billion).

In this way, a part of the poor and lower middle classes felt directly benefited from the government, and with this the social base and the electoral clientele of the government and the political parties that make up it expanded.

The problem with this is that institutionalized health care collapsed, and up to 50 million people who previously had health services were left out of the system and had to turn to private medicine for treatment (care dropped by 13.3% in public hospitals, but increased by 7% in private neighborhood pharmacies, which provide the service of a doctor).

Likewise, the deficiencies in the care of the Covid pandemic caused that of the 800,000 deaths in Mexico, there was an excess of deaths of the order of 350,000. This excess of deaths was due to the shortcomings of the health system.

During the pandemic, the government did not provide grants or loans to micro and small entrepreneurs, who create 70% of formal jobs, causing a million of these small businesses to go bankrupt during the pandemic, affecting hundreds of thousands of families.

Education was completely forgotten, which was reflected in the results of the OECD's PISA test in more than 80 countries, with Mexico ranked 51st in the last test conducted in 2022.

In addition, Mexico allocated only 3.2% of its GDP to education by 2024, while the OECD recommends that it should be 4%.

The AMLO government spent 3.6 times less per pupil in primary education and 3.9 times less in secondary education, than the average of the countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

It also highlights that Mexico has the lowest rate of higher education among OECD countries, with only 27% of people between the ages of 25 and 34 reaching this level.

On the other hand, López Obrador determined an increase in minimum wages, which during his administration became 150% higher than at the beginning of his mandate, and a total of 22 million formal jobs were created.

However, the increase in minimum wages and the creation of formal jobs has not generated quality jobs, since during the López Obrador government the number of employees earning only a minimum wage (around $18 a day) rose from 8.5 million in 2018 to 19.2 million in 2023, which means that while more people have jobs, it is less well paid.

If we add to this that the average GDP growth during the López Obrador government will be 0.9% per year (the worst in 40 years), it explains that during the AMLO government 1,200,000 Mexicans left the country for the United States in search of a better standard of living, 57.8% more than the 760,000 Mexicans who emigrated between 2013 and 2018.

But it was not only the economic situation that led to greater emigration of Mexicans to the United States; the increase in violence and insecurity in the country was also a major cause.

Although López Obrador said that he would reverse the situation of insecurity that the country was experiencing, with a policy that he called “of hugs and not bullets,” that is, that he would not directly combat criminal organizations, but would address the social and economic causes that lead to crime of hundreds of thousands of Mexicans, what really happened was that the government withdrew and let the drug cartels and criminal organizations dominate up to a third of the country’s territory, grow businesses like extortion, the assault on road transport and the control of illegal immigration, to direct it to the United States.

Accusations by journalists (both domestic and foreign), researchers, academics, opposition parties and non-governmental organizations about links to organized crime by members of the AMLO government (including himself), governors of his party, members of his family (his eldest son) and contractors and businessmen associated with his government, proliferated throughout his tenure in government, and although they were repeatedly denied by AMLO, the amount of data and information that was made public in Mexico and abroad on this matter was overwhelming.

Thus, the murders reached 190,000 during this government; the highest number ever recorded; the disappearances, during this government alone, reached 50,000, also the highest number ever recorded.

Furthermore, these elections have been the most violent in recent history, with 37 candidates for popularly elected positions murdered.
And all this is related to rates of corruption that even during the highly corrupt neoliberal governments, had not been recorded before.

AMLO determined that all government works were of “national security,” so it was not possible to audit them and review the use made of billions of pesos, which have not been accounted for and which, according to researchers, have ended up in accounts in tax havens abroad.

There are scandalous cases such as that of the official candidate for the government of the state of Veracruz, Rocío Nahle, who was Secretary of Energy for 5 years under the AMLO government, and the main person in charge of the construction of the Dos Bocas refinery, in the state of Tabasco (Gulf of Mexico), which is supposed to cost only 8 billion dollars; but its cost has already exceeded 20 billion dollars and it is not yet operational.

Nahle has been discovered luxury properties in Mexico and abroad for 300 million pesos ($17,640,000); and her son-in-law has been awarded concessions and contracts by the government for almost 700 million pesos ($41,176,000); but since the Attorney General of the Republic, who is supposed to be independent, has no interest in investigating the members of the ruling party, she is unpunished; as is Ignacio Ovalle (who was the first head of AMLO in the government) who was the director of the state-owned company Seguridad Alimentaria Mexicana. responsible for embezzlement of 18 billion pesos ($1,058,823,000). But not only has he not been investigated, but to protect him, AMLO gave him an appointment within the Ministry of the Interior, and he has not even been called to testify on this matter.

Likewise, the government's most emblematic project, the Mayan Train on the Yucatan Peninsula (which, according to many environmental organizations, is one of the most destructive ecocides in the world in recent decades), was supposed to cost 150 billion pesos ($8,823,529,000); but almost 600 billion pesos ($35,294,117,000) have already been spent, and the train is not yet fully operational (in addition to the fact that the service is slow and deficient).

According to Transparency International, Mexico has not moved from 126th place out of 180 countries in the fight against corruption and every year, up to 100 billion dollars are lost to the corruption of politicians and businessmen linked to the government.

For AMLO, neoliberal policies have fallen behind, but in terms of debt, the situation has worsened because now every Mexican owes 7% more than six years ago (the public debt increased by 76%), and in terms of economic growth per capita GDP decreased by 6.6%.

In terms of oil production, it is the lowest in 40 years with only 1,470,000 barrels per day of production; besides that, PEMEX is the most indebted oil company in the world ($106,000,000,000)

And in terms of public deficit, the figure of 5.9% for 2024 is the worst in 34 years.

As far as the concentration of economic power in a minority is concerned, this has not changed at all, and has even gotten worse, for example, Mexico's 14 super-rich increased their fortunes during the AMLO government by 70% and the richest man in Mexico and Latin America, Carlos Slim, a great ally of the President of Mexico, not only received contracts worth more than 60 billion pesos ($3,530,000,000) from this government, but also increased his personal fortune from 48 billion dollars in 2018 to more than 100 billion dollars today.

Thus, the country’s banks (most of them foreign) have made the highest profits in their history during the AMLO government, so the president’s claim that “political power has already been separated from economic power” is yet another lie.

And what about militarization, since AMLO increased the budget of the armed forces by 150% to assign them up to 250 functions previously performed by civilians, with the obvious goal that the works, services, and functions to be performed would not be audited, supervised, and evaluated by the other powers of the Union, by civil society or by the international community. As we have already mentioned, practically all government activity was classified as “national security”, which meant that there was no longer any way for transparency and accountability on the part of the government.

For this reason, López Obrador tried throughout his government to eliminate the autonomous bodies charged with preventing government corruption, as well as to hold the authorities accountable to society. For example, the National Institute for Access to Information and Protection of Personal Data, was constantly attacked by AMLO, reducing its budget, and preventing the appointment of all the commissioners that make up its board, to stop its operation. But the Supreme Court allowed the Institute to continue operating, even though the ruling majority in the Senate opposed appointing all its commissioners.

AMLO has tried to undermine the Judiciary by accusing it (without proof) of being corrupt and subordinate to the oligarchs; but what is publicly denounced is that the former president of the Court during the first four years of the AMLO government, retired minister Arturo Zaldívar, received orders from the president to pressure judges and magistrates to rule on various matters in favor of the government. Now Zaldívar is one of Claudia Sheinbaum's main advisors.

For this reason, AMLO is trying to “transform” the Judiciary, for which it sent a constitutional reform that establishes the popular election of ministers, magistrates and judges, so that its political party would have the possibility of controlling the Judiciary, if it remained as the majority party (two-thirds of Congress to amend the Constitution), something it was unable to achieve during its government, so that the few constitutional changes it made had to be made through alliances with opposition parties.

Likewise, throughout his government, AMLO has disqualified the independent press, harassed journalists who have documented the corruption of his government; attacked the middle classes, disqualifying them as “conservatives” and even as “Nazis”, for the simple fact that they did not support most of his government’s policies; ignored and never received mothers seeking their children and/or husbands disappeared by organized crime; ordered the suppression of feminist demonstrations that have been ignored during his government; also he has called fake environmentalists those who have criticized his government for the damage to nature caused by its mega-works; and at no time, throughout his term, has he met with the leadership of opposition parties; and has also disqualified lawmakers who opposed his reforms as “traitors to the fatherland.”

All this has created a division between those who support and those who oppose the government, which has polarized the country in a very dangerous way, to the point where both sides talk about destroying the adversary.

All this reflects his authoritarian and undemocratic way of governing, to the point that he went so far as to say that his “moral authority” was above the law, and reproached journalists and intellectuals who criticize his lack of adherence to constitutional norms, with the expression “don’t tell me that the law is the law”, demonstrating his contempt for the laws he swore to uphold and enforce.

Throughout the electoral process, he intervened illegally on behalf of his coalition of parties, which led the electoral authority (the National Electoral Institute) to reprimand him up to 53 times, while the electoral court sanctioned him up to 30 times, without deterring him from continuing to illegally support his candidates.

In short, the triumph of Mrs. Sheinbaum (former head of government of Mexico City), who has been a subordinate of López Obrador for 25 years, is the continuation of all these disastrous policies, which will continue to plunge the country into corruption, inequality, violence, insecurity, and mediocrity.

But it seems that the majority of Mexicans who depend on the direct aid that the government gives them, prefer to receive that payment, to try to rescue the country from this alliance between corrupt politicians-oligarchs-military and organized crime, which has risen to the top of the country's political and economic power, in order to continue plundering the treasury and exploiting the country's natural wealth and the Mexican population.

Will Gen Z change America’s foreign policy towards Israel?

Not just the protests, but myriad polls show a dramatic shift away from unconditional support

JAMES DURSO

MAY 27, 2024

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/young-americans-israel/

That Gen Z Americans have unique foreign policy views isn’t news, but the recent student-led protests over the Israel-Hamas war has highlighted the generational differences in this country and may portend a future political distancing of the U.S. from its long-time client in Tel Aviv.

Some of the indicators may be concerning. Aside from displaying more support for ceasefire than their older cohorts, a majority of 18-24 year-olds in a December Harvard/Harris poll — 67% — said they believe Jews “as a class” are oppressors, and that the 10/7 attack was justified by Palestinians’ grievances (60%). But then, the poll also found 78% of Americans aged 18-34 believe Israel has a right to exist. The majority of this cohort also called what Hamas did on Oct. 7 terrorism and said anti-Semitism is on the rise on college campuses.

Meanwhile, an April POLITICO-Morning Consult poll found only “15 percent of Gen Zers said they’re more sympathetic toward the Israelis, compared to 4o percent of Baby Boomers,” and 24% of Gen Zers said it was a top issue that would affect their vote vs. 11% for over-65 voters. Some 20% of Gen Zers support providing weapons to the Palestinians vs. 2% of over-65 voters.

And in April, Pew Research reported, “A third of adults under 30 say their sympathies lie either entirely or mostly with the Palestinian people, while 14% say their sympathies lie entirely or mostly with the Israeli people” and “older Americans, by comparison, are more likely to sympathize with Israelis than Palestinians.”

In November, the Brookings Institution reported, “Even before the Hamas invasion, there were distinct generational differences in Americans’ attitudes towards Israel,” adding, “only 41% of those aged 18-29 had a favorable view of Israel, compared to 69% of those aged 65 or older.”

To say this generation was primed for a shift is an understatement. New media has certainly taken advantage and is, at the same time, being fueled by these young voices and their consumption habits. Israel can no longer control the flow of information and messages. Networked tribalism, according to John Robb at City Journal, “bypasses traditional media by directly delivering information and moral framing to people using social networks.”. On TikTok, #freepalestine has 31 billion posts compared to 590 million for #standwithisrael, which led The New Arab to claim, “Palestinian solidarity won the internet.”

By the way, the U.S. has the most TikTok users — 116.5 million; a Pew survey late last year reported that about one-third of young Americans get their news from TikTok.

Recently, Senator Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and Secretary of State Tony Blinken commiserated over the negative effect of social media on the sustainability of the pro-Israel narrative. Romney volunteered that was the reason Congress voted to ban TikTok.

They don’t like that 50% of young Americans trust news from social media nearly as much as they do legacy media, and that more student protesters are relying on foreign media like Al Jazeera, which had been covering the conditions on the ground in graphic and persistent measure until Israel banned the network from operating there in early May.

Gen Z cannot be seen as a monolith but put the polling together and it would seem that younger Americnas are more questioning about why there is an unconditional relationship with Israel. Growing up in the shadow of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars they may be more skeptical about the prospect of another counterinsurgency at the expense of civilians, or collateral damage, which became the term of art during the years of the Global War on Terror.

Young Americans are rightly dubious when they see retired military officers — the same guys who led to the failures of Iraq and Afghanistan — on television supporting $175 billion to Ukraine for its role as a U.S. proxy in the NATO-Russia war, and over $300 billion to Israel — money that young Americans may think should be spent on “nation building here at home.”

And given the availability of information today, young Americans cannot be ignorant of the fact that far from being an underdog with persistent vulnerabilities in the region, Israel has nuclear weapons, is the most modern military in the region, and gets carte blanche from Washington via nearly $4 billion in military aid each year.

Add this to their social and economic challenges at home: Gen Z suffers from high levels of depression and anxiety. They sense their job prospects are limited, and that the American Dream is out of reach.

But there’s more grim news: America is almost $35 Trillion in debt, over $100,000 per citizen; its bond rating was recently cut to AA+; borrowing costs are climbing and interest costs on debt have nearly doubled to $659 billion over the course of two years. In addition, Social Security has an unfunded liability of almost $66 trillion and is approaching insolvency, probably depleting its reserves by 2033. Things are looking bleak for the U.S. economy as a whole.

Then there’s student loan debt of $1.75 trillion (including federal and private loans), $28,950 owed per borrower on average.

Both Republicans and Democrats would be wise to rethink their unconditional support for Israel as this demographic's support for it is no longer a given. Much of it too is the obvious gap between Israel’s professed ideals and the “facts on the ground.” According to Columbia University’s Rashid Khalidi, many of the students feel a “moral imperative” to support Palestinians and they may not easily be deterred. And their left flank is protected as more American Jews are protesting and calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.

When the Zs start running for political office and vote more in force, they may embark on a mission to rejuvenate America by first heeding the warning of George Washington and shaking off the “passionate attachment” to another nation that “produces a variety of evils” and could hazard America by creating "the illusion of a common interest ... where no common interest exists.”

To Avoid Nuclear War, Putin Needs to be a Little Crazier

MIKE WHITNEY • MAY 31, 2024

https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/to-avoid-nuclear-war-putin-needs-to-be-a-little-crazier/

President Putin’s press conference on Wednesday in Uzbekistan might have been the most unusual and extraordinary event in his 24-year political career. After addressing the Constitutional issues surrounding Ukrainian President Zelensky’s decision to remain in office beyond his four-year term, Putin delivered a brief but disturbing statement on NATO’s plan to fire long-range weapons at targets inside Russia. Putin made it clear that Russia would respond to these attacks and that the countries that provided the weapons systems would be held responsible. He also gave a very detailed description of how the systems work and how they require contractors from the country-of-origin be directly involved in their operation. What is so remarkable about Putin’s comments is not the fact that they bring the world closer to a direct confrontation between nuclear-armed adversaries, but that he had to remind political leaders in the West that Russia is not going to sit back and be their punching bag. Here’s part of what Putin said:

With regard to the strikes, frankly, I am not sure what the NATO Secretary General is talking about. When he was the Prime Minister of Norway, (we had good relations) and I am positive he was not suffering from dementia back then. If he is talking about potentially attacking Russia’s territory with long-range precision weapons, he, as a person who heads a military-political organisation, even though he is a civilian like me, should be aware of the fact that long-range precision weapons cannot be used without space-based reconnaissance. This is my first point.

My second point is that the final target selection and what is known as launch mission can only be made by highly skilled specialists who rely on this reconnaissance data, technical reconnaissance data. For some attack systems, such as Storm Shadow, these launch missions can be put in automatically, without the need to use Ukrainian military. Who does it? Those who manufacture and those who allegedly supply these attack systems to Ukraine do. This can and does happen without the participation of the Ukrainian military. Launching other systems, such as ATACMS, for example, also relies on space reconnaissance data, targets are identified and automatically communicated to the relevant crews that may not even realise what exactly they are putting in. A crew, maybe even a Ukrainian crew, then puts in the corresponding launch mission. However, the mission is put together by representatives of NATO countries, not the Ukrainian military. Putin Presser in Uzbekistan, Kremlin

Let’s summarize:

1.   The long-range precision weapons (missiles) are provided by NATO countries

2.   The long-range precision weapons are manned by experts or contractors from the country of origin

3.   The long-range precision weapons must be linked to space reconnaissance data provide by the US or NATO

4.   The targets in Russia are also provided by space reconnaissance data provide by the US or NATO

The point that Putin is trying to make is that the long-range missiles are made by NATO, furnished by NATO, operated and launched by NATO contractors, whose targets are selected by NATO experts using space reconnaissance data provided by NATO. In every respect, the prospective firing of long-range precision weapons at targets in Russia, is a NATO-US operation. Thus, there should be no confusion about who is responsible. NATO is responsible which means that NATO is effectively declaring war on Russia. Putin’s lengthy comments merely underscore this critical point. Here’s more from Putin:

So, these officials from NATO countries, especially the ones based in Europe, particularly in small European countries, should be fully aware of what is at stake. They should keep in mind that theirs are small and densely populated countries, which is a factor to reckon with before they start talking about striking deep into the Russian territory. It is a serious matter and, without a doubt, we are watching this very carefully. Putin Presser in Uzbekistan, Kremlin

Naturally, the western media has focused all its attention on the paragraph above, and for good reason; Putin is stating the obvious: ‘If you attack Russia, we will retaliate.’ That is the underlying message. Here are a few of Friday’s (hysterical) headlines:

• Vladimir Putin Threatens ‘All-Out War’ if Ukraine Uses Western Weapons to Hit Russia — as Volodymyr Zelensky Asks Allies for Their Permission, MSN.com
• Why is Putin again threatening a nuclear war?, The Interpreter
• Putin warns the West: Russia is ready for nuclear war, Reuters
• TYRANT’S THREAT: Vladimir Putin threatens all-out war if Ukraine uses Western weapons to hit Russia, The Sun
• (and the best of all)
  Time to Call Putin’s Bluff, CNN

Is that what this is all about; testing Putin to see if he’s bluffing?

If it is, it is a uniquely risky strategy. But there is a grain of truth to what they say. After all, Putin is warning that any attack on Russia will trigger an immediate and ferocious retaliatory strike. And he is advising the leaders of ‘small, densely populated NATO countries’ to consider how a nuclear attack by Russia might impact their prospects for the future. Would they really put their entire civilization at risk to find out whether Putin is bluffing or not? Here’s Putin again:

Look at what your Western colleagues are reporting. No one is talking about shelling Belgorod (in Russia) or other adjacent territories. The only thing they are talking about is Russia opening a new front and attacking Kharkov. Not a word. Why is that? They did it with their own hands. Well, let them reap the fruits of their ingenuity. The same thing can happen in case the long-range precision weapons which you asked about is used.

More broadly, this unending escalation can lead to serious consequences. If Europe were to face those serious consequences, what will the United States do, considering our strategic arms parity? It is hard to tell. Putin Presser in Uzbekistan, Kremlin

Putin seems genuinely mystified by the West’s behavior. Do US and NATO leaders really think they can attack Russia with long-range missiles and Russia won’t respond? Do they really think their ridiculous propaganda can impact the outcome of a clash between two nuclear-armed superpowers? What are they thinking or ARE they thinking? We don’t know. We seem to have entered ‘uncharted stupidity’ where desperation and ignorance converge to create a foreign policy that is utter madness. This is from an article at Tass News Service:

NATO countries that have approved strikes with their weapons on Russian territory should be aware that their equipment and specialists will be destroyed not only in Ukraine, but also at any point from where Russian territory is attacked, the Russian Security Council’s Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev said on his Telegram channel, noting that the participation of NATO specialists could be seen as a casus belli.

“All their military equipment and specialists fighting against us will be destroyed both on the territory of former Ukraine and on the territory of other countries, should strikes be carried out from there against Russian territory,” Medvedev warned.

He added that Moscow proceeded from the fact that all long-range weapons supplied to Ukraine were already “directly operated by servicemen from NATO countries”, which is tantamount to participation in the war against Russia and a reason to start combat operations. NATO weapons to be hit in any country from where Russia may be attacked — Medvedev, Tass

There it is in black and white. Where Putin chose to take the diplomatic approach, Medvedev opted for the hammer-blow. ‘If you attack Russia, we will bomb you back to the Stone Age.’ Not much wiggle-room there. But perhaps clarity is what’s needed for people who do not understand the potential consequences of their actions. In any event, no one in Washington or Brussels can say they weren’t warned.

We cannot exclude the possibility that Washington actually wants to expand the war despite the fact that cities across Eastern Europe could be incinerated in the process. It could be that beltway warhawks see a broader conflict as the only way to achieve their geopolitical ambitions. Putin knows that this is a real possibility, just as he knows that there is a sizable constituency in Washington that support the use of nuclear weapons. This might explain why he is proceeding so cautiously, because he knows there are crazies within the US establishment who look forward to a clash with their old rival Russia so they can implement their pet-theories about “usable” nukes for tactical advantage. Here’s Putin:

The United States has a theory of a ‘preventive strike’…Now they are developing a system for a ‘disarming strike’. What does that mean? It means striking at control centres with modern high-tech weapons to destroy the opponent’s ability to counterattack.

Putin has devoted a considerable amount of time studying US Nuclear Doctrine, and it has him deeply concerned. After all, didn’t the Biden administration launch an unprecedented attack on “a key element of Russia’s nuclear umbrella” just last week?

Indeed, they did.

And hasn’t the US (via its Nuclear Posture Review) rebranded the offensive use of nuclear weapons as a justifiable act of defense?

It has.

And doesn’t this revision provide US warhawks with the institutional framework needed to launch a nuclear attack without fear of legal prosecution?

It does.

And haven’t these same warhawks developed their respective theories on “first-strike”, “preemption” and “disarming strike” in order to lay the groundwork for a first-strike nuclear attack on a geopolitical rival of Washington?

They have.

And doesn’t US Nuclear Doctrine state that nuclear weapons can be used “in extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States or its allies and partners.”

It does.

And does that definition include economic rivals like China?

Yes.

And is that a defense of a “first strike” nuclear weapon attack?

It is.

And does that mean that the United States no longer regards its nuclear arsenal as purely defensive but as an essential instrument for preserving the “rules-based order”?

Yes, it does.

And does Putin know that there are powerful actors in the political establishment and deep state who would like to see the taboo on nuclear weapons lifted so they can be used in more situations and with greater frequency?

He does.

And does he know that Washington regards Russia and China as the primary threats to US global hegemony and the “rules-based order”?

Yes.

And does he realize that if the US implements its first-strike policy Russia may not have the time to retaliate?

He does.

And does Putin realize that foreign policy analysts regard him as a restrained and reasonable man who may not pull the trigger or respond promptly when Russia faces a preemptive attack that will inflict the strategic defeat on Moscow the West seeks?

No, he doesn’t. He still thinks that possessing a large cache of nuclear weapons will deter US aggression. But a large cache of nuclear weapons is no deterrent when your opponent is convinced you won’t use them.

Sometimes being reasonable is not the best way to fend off an adversary. Sometimes you have to be a little crazy.

That’s a lesson Putin needs to learn. Fast.