United States always soliciting war, not peace

In a brilliant op-ed published in the New York Times, the Quincy Institute's Trita Parsi explained how China, with help from Iraq, was able to mediate and resolve the deeply-rooted conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia, whereas the United States was in no position to do so after siding with the Saudi kingdom against Iran for decades.

The title of Parsi's article, "The US is not an indispensable peacemaker", refers to former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's use of the term "indispensable nation" to describe the US role in the post Cold War world.

The irony in Parsi's use of Albright's term is that she generally used it to refer to US war-making, not peacemaking. In 1998, Albright toured the Middle East and then the United States to rally support for President Clinton's threat to bomb Iraq. After failing to win support in the Middle East, she was confronted by heckling and critical questions during a televised event at Ohio State University, and she appeared on the Today Show the next morning to respond to public opposition in a more controlled setting.

Albright claimed, "..if we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future, and we see here the danger to all of us. I know that the American men and women in uniform are always prepared to sacrifice for freedom, democracy and the American way of life."

Albright's readiness to take the sacrifices of American troops for granted had already got her into trouble when she famously asked General Colin Powell, "What's the use of having this superb military you're always talking about if we can't use it?" Powell wrote in his memoirs, "I thought I would have an aneurysm."

But Powell himself later caved to the neocons, or the "fucking crazies" as he called them in private, and dutifully read the lies they made up to try to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq to the UN Security Council in February 2003.

For the past 25 years, administrations of both parties have caved to the "crazies" at every turn. Albright and the neocons' exceptionalist rhetoric, now standard fare across the US political spectrum, leads the United States into conflicts all over the world, in an unequivocal, Manichean way that defines the side it supports as the side of good and the other side as evil, foreclosing any chance that the United States can later play the role of an impartial or credible mediator.

Today, this is true in the war in Yemen, where the US chose to join a Saudi-led alliance that committed systematic war crimes, instead of remaining neutral and preserving its credibility as a potential mediator.

It also applies, most notoriously, to the US blank check for endless Israeli aggression against the Palestinians, which doom its mediation efforts to failure.

For China, however, it is precisely its policy of neutrality that has enabled it to mediate a peace agreement between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and the same applies to the African Union's successful peace negotiations in Ethiopia, and to Turkey's promising mediation between Russia and Ukraine, which might have ended the slaughter in Ukraine in its first two months but for American and British determination to keep trying to pressure and weaken Russia.

Neutrality has become anathema to US policymakers. George W. Bush's threat, "You are with us, or you are with the terrorists," has become an established, if unspoken, core assumption of 21st century US foreign policy.

The response of the American public to the cognitive dissonance between our wrong assumptions about the world and the real world they keep colliding with has been to turn inward and embrace an ethos of individualism.

This can range from New Age spiritual disengagement to a chauvinistic America First attitude. Whatever form it takes for each of us, it allows us to persuade ourselves that the distant rumble of bombs, albeit mostly American ones, is not our problem.

The US corporate media has validated and increased our ignorance by drastically reducing foreign news coverage and turning TV news into a profit-driven echo chamber peopled by pundits in studios who seem to know even less about the world than the rest of us.

Most US politicians now rise through the legal bribery system from local to state to national politics, and arrive in Washington knowing next to nothing about foreign policy. This leaves them as vulnerable as the public to neocon clichés like the ten or twelve packed into Albright's vague justification for bombing Iraq: freedom, democracy, the American way of life, stand tall, the danger to all of us, we are America, indispensable nation, sacrifice, American men and women in uniform, and "we have to use force."

Faced with such a solid wall of nationalistic drivel, Republicans and Democrats alike have left foreign policy firmly in the experienced but deadly hands of the neocons, who have brought the world only chaos and violence for 25 years.

All but the most principled progressive or libertarian members of Congress go along to get along with policies so at odds with the real world that they risk destroying it, whether by ever-escalating warfare or by suicidal inaction on the climate crisis and other real-world problems that we must cooperate with other countries to solve if we are to survive.

It is no wonder that Americans think the world's problems are insoluble and that peace is unattainable, because our country has so totally abused its unipolar moment of global dominance to persuade us that that is the case. But these policies are choices, and there are alternatives, as China and other countries are dramatically demonstrating.

President Lula da Silva of Brazil is proposing to form a "peace club" of peacemaking nations to mediate an end to the war in Ukraine, and this offers new hope for peace.

During his election campaign and his first year in office, President Biden repeatedly promised to usher in a new era of American diplomacy, after decades of war and record military spending. Zach Vertin, now a senior adviser to UN Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield wrote in 2020 that Biden's effort to "rebuild a decimated State Department" should include setting up a "mediation support unit… staffed by experts whose sole mandate is to ensure our diplomats have the tools they need to succeed in waging peace."

Biden's meager response to this call from Vertin and others was finally unveiled in March 2022, after he dismissed Russia's diplomatic initiatives and Russia invaded Ukraine.

The State Department's new Negotiations Support Unit consists of three junior staffers quartered within the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations. This is the extent of Biden's token commitment to peacemaking, as the barn door swings in the wind and the four horsemen of the apocalypse - War, Famine, Conquest and Death - run wild across the Earth.

As Zach Vertin wrote, "It is often assumed that mediation and negotiation are skills readily available to anyone engaged in politics or diplomacy, especially veteran diplomats and senior government appointees. But that is not the case. Professional mediation is a specialized, often highly technical, tradecraft in its own right."

The mass destruction of war is also specialized and technical, and the United States now invests close to a trillion dollars per year in it. The appointment of three junior State Department staffers to try to make peace in a world threatened and intimidated by their own country's trillion-dollar war machine only reaffirms that peace is not a priority for the US government.

By contrast, the European Union created its Mediation Support Team in 2009 and now has 20 team members working with other teams from individual EU countries. The UN's Department of Political and Peace Building Affairs has a staff of 4,500, spread all across the world.

The tragedy of American diplomacy today is that it is diplomacy for war, not for peace. The State Department's top priorities are not to make peace, nor even to actually win wars, which the United States has failed to do since 1945, apart from the reconquest of small neocolonial outposts in Grenada, Panama, and Kuwait.

Its actual priorities are to bully other countries to join US-led war coalitions and buy US weapons, to mute calls for peace in international fora, to enforce illegal and deadly coercive sanctions, and to manipulate other countries into sacrificing their people in US proxy wars.

The result is to keep spreading violence and chaos across the world. If we want to stop our rulers from marching us toward nuclear war, climate catastrophe, and mass extinction, we had better take off our blinders and start insisting on policies that reflect our best instincts and our common interests, instead of the interests of the warmongers and merchants of death who profit from war.

 

IMF approves US$15.6 billion loan for Ukraine

The International Monetary Fund said on Friday its executive board approved a four-year US$15.6 billion loan program for Ukraine.

The decision clears the way for an immediate disbursement of about US$2.7 billion to Kyiv, and requires Ukraine to carry out ambitious reforms, especially in the energy sector, the Fund said in a statement.

The Extended Fund Facility (EFF) loan is the first major conventional financing program approved by the IMF for a country involved in a large-scale war.

Ukraine's previous, US$5 billion long-term IMF program was canceled in March 2022 when the fund provided US$1.4 billion in emergency financing with few conditions. It provided another US$1.3 billion under a "food shock window" program last October.

Ukraine must meet certain conditions over the next two years, including steps to boost tax revenue, maintain exchange rate stability, preserve central bank independence and strengthen anti-corruption efforts.

Deeper reforms will be required in the second phase of the program to enhance stability and early post-war reconstruction, returning to pre-war fiscal and monetary policy frameworks, boosting competitiveness and addressing energy sector vulnerabilities, the IMF said.

A senior US Treasury official said the program was really solid and included commitments from Ukrainian authorities to achieve 19 structural benchmarks over the next year alone.

IMF First Deputy Managing Director Gita Gopinath said the program faced exceptionally high risks, and its success depended on the size, composition and timing of external financing to help close fiscal and external financing gaps and restore Ukraine's debt sustainability.

The decision formalizes an IMF staff-level agreement reached with Ukraine on March 21 that takes into consideration Ukraine's path to accession to the European Union after the war.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy welcomed the new funding.

"It is an important help in our fight against Russian aggression," he said on Twitter. "Together we support the Ukrainian economy. And we are moving forward to victory!"

US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, who pushed hard for the past year to secure the IMF funding package and paid a surprise visit to Ukraine in February, said the package would help secure the country's economic and financial stability and set the foundation for long-term reconstruction.

"I call on all other official and private creditors to join this initiative to assist Ukraine as it defends itself from Russia’s unprovoked war," she said in a statement. "The United States will continue to stand by Ukraine and its people for as long as it takes."

The IMF said international financial institutions, private-sector firms, and most of Ukraine's official bilateral creditors and donors backed a two-step debt treatment process for Ukraine that includes adequate financing assurances on debt relief and concessional financing during and after the program.

The broad support reassured the IMF, the senior Treasury official said, adding, “That was really helpful for them to see that we really mean to be there for the long haul."

LONGER WAR SCENARIO

IMF official Gavin Gray told reporters the fund's baseline scenario assumed the war would wind down in mid-2024, resulting in the projected financing gap of $115 billion, which would be covered by the multilateral and bilateral donors and creditors.

The fund's "downside scenario" saw the war continuing through the end of 2025, opening a much larger $140 billion financing gap that would require donors to dig deeper, he said.

Gray said the program had been designed to function, even if economic circumstances were "considerably worse" than the baseline. He said the countries providing financing assurances had agreed to work with the IMF to ensure Ukraine was able to service its debt to the IMF if larger sums if needed.

Ukraine will face quarterly reviews beginning as early as June, he said.

 

 

  

US and Europe losing battle against Russia

The crisis of the power of United States has begun. Its economy is tipping over, and Western financial markets are quietly panicking. Imperiled by rising interest rates, mortgage-backed securities and US Treasuries are losing their value. The market’s proverbial vibes —feelings, emotions, beliefs, and psychological penchants—suggest a dark turn is underway inside the US economy.

The US power is measured by its military capability as well as economic potential and performance. There is growing realization that the US and European military-industrial capacity cannot keep up with Ukrainian demands for ammunition and equipment. It is an ominous signal sent during the proxy war that Washington insists its Ukrainian surrogate is winning.

Russian economy of force operations in southern Ukraine appear to have successfully ground down attacking Ukrainian forces with the minimal expenditure of Russian lives and resources. While Russia’s implementation of attrition warfare worked brilliantly, Russia mobilized its reserves of men and equipment to field a force that is several magnitudes larger and significantly more lethal than it was a year ago.

Russia’s massive arsenal of artillery systems including rockets, missiles, and drones linked to overhead surveillance platforms converted Ukrainian soldiers fighting to retain the northern edge of the Donbas into pop-up targets. How many Ukrainian soldiers have died is unknown, but one recent estimate wagers between 150,000-200,000 Ukrainians have been killed in action since the war began, while another estimates about 250,000.

Given the glaring weakness of NATO members’ ground, air, and air defense forces, an unwanted war with Russia could easily bring hundreds of thousands of Russian Troops to the Polish border, NATO’s Eastern Frontier. This is not an outcome Washington promised its European allies, but it’s now a real possibility.

In contrast to the Soviet Union’s hamfisted and ideologically driven foreign policymaking and execution, contemporary Russia has skillfully cultivated support for its cause in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia.

The fact that the West’s economic sanctions damaged the US and European economies while turning the Russian ruble into one of the international system’s strongest currencies has hardly enhanced Washington’s global standing.

Biden’s policy of forcibly pushing NATO to Russia’s borders forged a strong commonality of security and trade interests between Moscow and Beijing that is attracting strategic partners in South Asia like India, and partners like Brazil in Latin America. The global economic implications for the emerging Russo-Chinese axis and their planned industrial revolution for some 3.9 billion people in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) are profound.

Washington’s military strategy to weaken, isolate, or even destroy Russia is a colossal failure and the failure puts Washington’s proxy war with Russia on a truly dangerous path. To press on, undeterred in the face of Ukraine’s descent into oblivion, ignores three metastasizing threats:

1. Persistently high inflation and rising interest rates that signal economic weakness. (The first American bank failure since 2020 is a reminder of US financial fragility.)

2. The threat to stability and prosperity inside European societies already reeling from several waves of unwanted refugees/migrants.

3. The threat of a wider European war.

Inside presidential administrations, there are always competing factions urging the president to adopt a particular course of action. Observers on the outside seldom know with certainty which faction exerts the most influence, but there are figures in the Biden administration seeking an off-ramp from involvement in Ukraine.

Even Secretary of State Antony Blinken, a rabid supporter of the proxy war with Moscow, recognizes that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s demand that the West help him recapture Crimea is a red line for Putin that might lead to a dramatic escalation from Moscow.

Backing down from the Biden administration’s malignant and asinine demands for a humiliating Russian withdrawal from eastern Ukraine before peace talks can convene is a step Washington refuses to take. Yet it must be taken.

The higher interest rates rise, and the more Washington spends at home and abroad to prosecute the war in Ukraine, the closer American society moves toward internal political and social turmoil. These are dangerous conditions for any republic.

From all the wreckage and confusion of the last two years, there emerges one undeniable truth. Most Americans are right to be distrustful of and dissatisfied with their government. President Biden comes across as a cardboard cut-out, a stand-in for ideological fanatics in his administration, people that see executive power as the means to silence political opposition and retain permanent control of the federal government.

Americans are not fools. They know that members of Congress flagrantly trade stocks based on inside information, creating conflicts of interest that would land most citizens in jail. They also know that since 1965 Washington led them into a series of failed military interventions that severely weakened American political, economic, and military power.

Far too many Americans believe they have had no real national leadership since January 21, 2021. It is high time the Biden administration found an off-ramp designed to extricate Washington DC, from its proxy Ukrainian war against Russia.

It will not be easy. Liberal internationalism or, in its modern guise, moralizing globalism, makes prudent diplomacy arduous, but now is the time. In Eastern Europe, the spring rains present both Russian and Ukrainian ground forces with a sea of mud that severely impedes movement. But the Russian High Command is preparing to ensure that when the ground dries and Russian ground forces attack, the operations will achieve an unambiguous decision, making it clear that Washington and its supporters have no chance to rescue the dying regime in Kiev. From then on, negotiations will be extremely difficult, if not impossible.

 

Washington denounces Xi visit to Moscow

According to Reuters, Vladimir Putin and his dear friend Chinese leader Xi Jinping planned more talks on Tuesday after a Kremlin dinner where the isolated Russian president showcased his most powerful ally in the face of Western opposition to the war in Ukraine.

Washington denounced Xi's visit, saying the timing just days after an international court accused Putin of war crimes indicated Beijing was providing Moscow with diplomatic cover to commit additional crimes.

It was Xi's first trip abroad since he obtained an unprecedented third term last month. The Chinese leader has been trying to portray Beijing as a potential peacemaker in Ukraine, even as he deepens economic ties with his closest ally.

Putin and Xi greeted one another as dear friend when they met in the Kremlin on Monday, and Russian state news agencies later reported they held informal talks for nearly 4-1/2 hours, with more official talks scheduled for Tuesday.

In televised comments, Putin told Xi he viewed China's proposals for resolution of the Ukraine conflict with respect. He confessed to being slightly envious of China's very effective system for developing the economy and strengthening the state.

Xi, for his part, praised Putin and predicted Russians would re-elect him next year.

Moscow has been publicly promoting plans for a visit by Xi for months. But the timing gave the Chinese leader's personal support new meaning, after the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant on Friday accusing Putin of war crimes for deporting children from Ukraine.

Moscow denies illegally deporting children, saying it has taken in orphans to protect them. It opened a criminal case against the court's prosecutor and judges. Beijing said the warrant reflected double standards.

The West says the warrant should make the Russian leader a pariah.

"That President Xi is travelling to Russia days after the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for President Putin suggests that China feels no responsibility to hold the Kremlin accountable for the atrocities committed in Ukraine," US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said.

"Instead of even condemning them, it would rather provide diplomatic cover for Russia to continue to commit those grave crimes.”

White House spokesman John Kirby said Xi should use his influence to press Putin to withdraw troops from Ukraine, and Washington was concerned that Beijing might instead call for a ceasefire that would let Russian troops stay.

China has released a proposal to solve the Ukraine crisis, largely dismissed in the West as a ploy to buy Putin time to regroup his forces and solidify his grip on occupied land.

Russia and China do not have the same network of friends and partners around the world as the United States, and that's why they are tightening their relationship now, Kirby said.

"It's a bit of a marriage of convenience, I'd say, less than it is of affection," Kirby told reporters.

Washington has said in recent weeks it also fears China might arm Russia, which Beijing has denied.

 

 

No White House visit for Netanyahu

Eleven weeks into his third term as Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu has yet to be received at the White House, signaling apparent US unhappiness over the policies of his right-wing government.

Most new Israeli leaders had visited the United States or met the president by this point in their premierships, according to a Reuters review of official visits going back to the late 1970s. Only two out of 13 previous prime ministers heading a new government waited longer.

The White House declined to confirm Netanyahu has yet to be invited. A State Department spokesperson referred Reuters to the Israeli government for information about the prime minister's travel plans.

Israel’s embassy in Washington declined to comment.

"The message they clearly want to send is, if you pursue objectionable policies, there's no entitlement to the Oval Office sit-down,” said David Makovsky, a former senior adviser to the Special Envoy for Israeli-Palestinian Negotiations, now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Since the start of the year, demonstrators have filled Israel's streets to protest the government's plan to curb the power of the Supreme Court, which critics say removes a check on the governing coalition.

Amid escalating West Bank violence, the right-wing government's action authorizing settler outposts and inflammatory comments from a member of Netanyahu's cabinet with responsibilities over Jewish settlements have drawn criticism from US officials, including from Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin during a visit to Israel last week.

US-Israeli ties remain close. The United States has long been Israel’s main benefactor, sending more than US$3 billion each year in military assistance.

President Joe Biden has known Netanyahu for decades, the two have spoken by phone, and senior officials in both countries have made visits since Netanyahu's government was formed in December 2023, despite Israel's spiraling political crisis.

But the lack of a White House visit underscores both the desire of the Biden administration to see different policies in Israel and what critics say is a reluctance to take more forceful steps.

US statements on events in Israel have often comprised “frustrating boiler-plate language,” said Sarah Yerkes, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who formerly worked at the State Department on policy towards Israel and the Palestinians.

“It has been frustrating to see this lack of teeth to any of the US responses,” Yerkes said.

“They don't get to be treated with the same kid gloves that they've always been treated with because ... they’re on the path to not being a democracy anymore.”

The Biden administration prefers quiet conversations over public criticism, a senior State Department official said, especially when it comes to the crisis over a proposed Israeli judicial overhaul.

“Anything that we would say on the specific proposals has the potential to be deeply counterproductive,” the official said, adding the goal was to encourage Israel’s leaders to build consensus over the reforms, rather than to be prescriptive on what the outcome should be.

Chris Murphy, a Democratic member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he hopes the administration will persist with a clear message to Israel.

"I would certainly like to see the administration to be sending a strong signal that we have to maintain our support for a future Palestinian state and the decisions that the Netanyahu government are making now greatly compromise that future," Murphy said.

A separate group of 92 progressive lawmakers warned in a letter to Biden that the judicial overhaul could empower those in Israel who favor annexing the West Bank, "undermining the prospects for a two-state solution and threatening Israel’s existence as a Jewish and democratic state.”

US leaders have rarely criticized Israeli policies since Secretary of State James Baker in 1989 advised the country against moves toward annexing Palestinian territory and expanding settlements. Baker later banned Netanyahu, at the time a deputy minister of foreign affairs, from the State Department after he criticized US policy toward Israel.

Biden, a Democrat who describes himself as a Zionist, says US support for Israel is ironclad.

“Biden’s own personal instincts are such that it’s very difficult for him to want to adopt an extremely tough posture towards Israel,” Dennis Ross, a veteran US Middle East peace negotiator now with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

“He would prefer to have the Middle East in a box so he can focus only on Russia, Ukraine and China. Unfortunately, the Middle East has a way of imposing itself, unless we initiate enough to try to manage the environment.”

 

 

Five key takeaways from the Russian jet-US drone incident

Two Russian jets sparked the latest diplomatic crisis between Moscow and Washington on Tuesday when they forced down an unmanned American aircraft into the Black Sea.

The White House blasted the incident as unsafe and reckless, while Russia has downplayed the event, even accusing the US of provocative drone flights approaching Russian territory.

Charles Kupchan, a senior fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations, called it an extraordinary and worrying clash between Russia and the Western security alliance NATO.

“Whatever the intent of the Russians, this is a very dangerous situation,” he said. “On a daily basis we have Russian weapons and aircraft and personnel in close proximity to NATO territory, NATO personnel, NATO platforms. And so the risk of escalation is significant.”

Here are five key takeaways from the downed drone.

Airspace interceptions aren’t new, but this was rare

The US intercepts Russian fighter jets several times a year in the Air Defense Identification Zone that covers international airspace outside of the US and Canada. That includes the interception of four Russian fighter jets near Alaska last month.

There have also been interceptions of US and NATO aircraft by Russian planes in the Black Sea in recent years. But the drone attack was particularly concerning for Washington, which said the MQ-9 Reaper drone was flanked by two Russian jets before one Russian jet dumped fuel on the drone.

A Russian jet then damaged the propeller of the drone and forced it down into the Black Sea.

National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said the attack of a US drone was especially alarming compared to previous interceptions.

“This one obviously is noteworthy because of how unsafe and unprofessional it was,” Kirby told reporters on Tuesday.

Neither the US nor Russia has recovered the drone

The $32 million dollar drone may never be recovered.

Speaking to CNN on Wednesday, Kirby said the drone plunged into very deep water, and US officials are determining whether recovery efforts are possible.

But Russia is pushing forward to recover the aircraft, according to Nikolai Patrushev, the secretary of Russia’s Security Council.

“I don’t know if we can recover them or not, but we will certainly have to do that, and we will deal with it,” Patrushev said on Russian television Wednesday, according to The Associated Press.

Kirby said the US has taken steps to protect the information and data the drone has to limit intelligence collection from Russia.

Russia accuses US of provocation

Russia claims the US drone maneuvered sharply and crashed into the Black Sea on its own.

The Russian Defense Ministry also slammed the US for operating near the region of Crimea, which Moscow illegally annexed from Ukraine in 2014 — but which the US refused to recognize as Russian territory.

Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov told reporters Tuesday, after being summoned to the State Department, that the drone was moving deliberately and provocatively towards the Russian territory.

“The unacceptable actions of the United States military in the close proximity to our borders are cause for concern,” Antonov said. “We are well aware of the missions such reconnaissance and strike drones are used for.”

US says it will continue patrols

The US has operated reconnaissance missions over the Black Sea for more than a year, predating Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said the US will not be deterred by the incident.

“Make no mistake, the United States will continue to fly and to operate wherever international law allows,” Austin said on Wednesday.

Fears of escalation persist

Tensions between the US and Russia have reached the highest point since the Cold War, rising after Russia’s invasion of Crimea in 2014, escalating further after Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and then skyrocketing after Moscow’s full invasion of Ukraine last year.

The US and Russia maintain a crisis communication line to deal with incidents such as the drone attack, but Moscow has not picked up the phone at some critical moments during the war in Ukraine.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Wednesday  described the relationship between Moscow and Washington as at its lowest point, although he said Russia would continue to engage in diplomacy.

“Russia has never rejected a constructive dialogue, and it’s not rejecting it now,” Peskov said.

 

 

 

 

Saudi Arabia strives to develop relations with Russia

Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said that the Kingdom strived to strengthen and develop relations with Russia at all levels.

The foreign minister made the remarks during a session of talks with his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov in Moscow on Thursday. “I look forward to today’s discussions contributing to unifying visions and supporting bilateral relations. There is always something new in the relations between our two friendly countries, which we seek to strengthen and develop at all levels,” he said.

The visit of the Saudi foreign minister to Moscow comes after his visit to Ukraine on Sunday for the first time since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries 30 years ago. The minister said that he discussed with Lavrov the challenges affecting the world, and they also exchanged views on international crises.

Prince Faisal praised the existing coordination in various fields between the two countries with regard to developing joint relations and coordination to face international challenges.

On his part, Lavrov welcomed Saudi Arabia’s increased interest in actively participating not only in the resolution of regional issues but also issues at the international level. The Russian minister said he sees the importance of permanent and mutual coordination between the two countries at the level of ministries and government agencies and in the areas of trade, economy, and investments between Riyadh and Moscow.

"We always agree on the necessary steps to develop cooperation between Russia and Saudi Arabia," Lavrov added.

India leads world in cutting internet access for 5th year in a row

India imposed by far the highest number of internet shutdowns in the world in 2022, internet advocacy watchdog Access Now said on Tuesday, as the country topped the list for the fifth successive year.

Out of 187 internet shutdowns globally recorded by Access Now, 84 took place in India, including 49 in Indian- administered Kashmir, the New York-based digital rights advocacy group said in a report published on Tuesday.

"Authorities disrupted internet access at least 49 times in Kashmir due to political instability and violence, including a string of 16 back-to-back orders for three-day-long curfew-style shutdowns in January and February 2022," the watchdog report added.

Kashmir has long been a flashpoint between India and archrival Pakistan, which claim the region in full but rule only parts.

In August 2019, the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi scrapped the autonomy of the Muslim-majority state of Jammu and Kashmir, splitting it into two federally administered territories.

The government has since regularly imposed communications restrictions on the region on security grounds, which rights groups have condemned and described as measures to quash dissent.

Militants have battled India's rule in Kashmir for more than three decades. The South Asian country blames Pakistan for stoking the revolt. Islamabad denies the claims.

Although India once again led the world in internet shutdowns, 2022 marked the first time since 2017 that there were fewer than 100 shutdowns in the country, the watchdog said.

Ukraine was second on the list, with the Russian military cutting access to the internet at least 22 times after Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24 last year.

"During Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the Russian military cut internet access at least 22 times, engaging in cyberattacks and deliberately destroying telecommunications infrastructure," the watchdog said in its report.

Ukraine was followed on the list by Iran where authorities imposed 18 internet shutdowns in 2022 in response to demonstrations against the government.

Nationwide anti-government protests erupted in Iran last fall after the death of 22-year-old Kurdish Iranian woman Mahsa Amini in police custody on September 16, last year. Amini was arrested in Tehran by the morality police for flouting the hijab rules, which require women to entirely cover their hair and bodies. She died while in custody.

 

Zelensky thanks Saudi Arabia for support

Saudi Arabia and Ukraine signed an agreement and a memorandum of understanding (MoU) for the provision of humanitarian aid, amounting to US$400 million, to the war-stricken European country.

This is in implementation of the pledge made by Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed Bin Salman during his phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in October 2022 with regard to the provision of an additional humanitarian aid package to Ukraine.

The ceremony of signing the pacts was held on the occasion of the visit of Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal Bin Farhan to Ukraine and his meeting with Zelenskyy.

Prince Faisal Bin Farhan and Director of the Office of the Ukrainian President Andriy Yermak attended the signing ceremony of the agreement and MoU between the Kingdom and Ukraine, with a value of up to US$400 million.

The agreement includes a joint cooperation program to provide humanitarian aid from the Kingdom to Ukraine, amounting to US$100 million.

The agreement was signed by Advisor at the Royal Court and General Supervisor of the King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief Center (KSRelief) Dr. Abdullah Al-Rabeeah and Deputy Prime Minister for Restoration of Ukraine – Minister for Communities, Territories and Infrastructure Development of Ukraine Oleksandr Kubrakov.

The MoU also includes financing oil derivatives worth US$300 million as a grant from the government of Saudi Arabia through the Saudi Fund for Development in favor of Ukraine.

Earlier, Zelensky received Prince Faisal and his accompanying delegation at the presidential residence in the capital city. At the outset of the meeting, Prince Faisal conveyed the greetings of Custodian of the

Two Holy Mosques King Salman and the Crown Prince to the president, the government, and the people of Ukraine.

Zelensky conveyed his greetings and appreciation to King Salman, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and the government and people of Saudi Arabia.

During the reception, they reviewed the bilateral relations between the two countries and ways to further promote them. They also discussed a number of regional and international issues of common concern.

The foreign minister reiterated the Kingdom’s keenness and support for all international efforts aimed at resolving the Ukrainian-Russian crisis politically, and the continuation of its efforts to contribute to mitigating the humanitarian effects resulting from it.

The reception was attended by Dr. Abdullah Al-Rabeeah, CEO of the Saudi Fund for Development Sultan Al-Murshed, Saudi Ambassador to Ukraine Muhammad Al-Jabreen, and Director General of the Office of the Foreign Minister Abdul Rahman Al-Daoud.

Prince Faisal also met with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine Dmytro Kuleba. During the meeting, they discussed the latest developments in the Ukraine crisis.

The Saudi foreign minister emphasized the Kingdom’s support for everything that contributes to de-escalation, protection of civilians, serious pursuit of negotiated political solutions, and support for all international efforts aimed at resolving the political crisis.

The signing of the agreement and the MoU reflects the keenness of the Saudi government to support Ukraine and its friendly people in facing the social and economic challenges that the country is going through and to contribute to mitigating the resulting humanitarian impacts.

Biden to send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine

Finally, US President Joe Biden has agreed to send 31 M1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine, matching a German announcement to immediately provide Leopard tanks that Kyiv says are essential in their fight against Russia.

It must be kept in mind that the Abrams tanks are not expected to reach the battlefield for months related to the time needed to procure the tanks and carry out the training necessary for Ukrainian forces, senior administration officials told reporters Wednesday.

The decision to provide the Abrams tanks marks a stunning reversal for the Biden administration, which had previously argued they would be of little benefit to Ukraine.

But the decision to send the tanks helped get Germany to move forward with a separate effort to provide Leopard tanks to Ukraine, which the US had seen as benefitting Kyiv.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced Wednesday that Berlin would send Leopard tanks to Ukraine and allow for other European nations to also send to Kyiv the German-made tanks.

“Today’s announcement really was the product of good diplomatic conversations as part of our regular and ongoing close consultations with allies and partners on security assistance to Ukraine,” a senior administration official said, “Certainly very appreciative of Chancellor Scholz’s announcement today.”

Ukraine lobbied hard for US, Germany and other countries to supply the tanks, which it said would be critical to a spring counteroffensive against Moscow.

“So the tank coalition is formed. Everyone who doubted this could ever happen sees now, for Ukraine and partners impossible is nothing,” Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dymtro Kuleba tweeted.

A senior administration official, responding to a question over whether the delivery of Abrams was a precondition for the Germans to greenlight Leopards, said Biden and Sholz spoke several times by phone over the past month and that the tank discussion was part of an “iterative conversation” between the US and Germany.

“We have closely coordinated our security assistance with allies and partners throughout the conflict, including Germany,” the official said.

Biden spoke Wednesday morning with Sholz, French President Emanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Rishi Sumak, officials said.

A senior administration official said the US expects other nations to announce contributions of additional armored capability, including some that will be readily available for use on the battlefield in the coming weeks and months. 

The administration expects that Russian President Vladimir Putin will push for the Russian military to go on another offensive as the weather improves, another senior administration official said. The tanks decision is meant to help give the Ukrainians the the ability to retake, to reclaim their sovereign territory and that means everything that is recognized by international borders.

The British Ministry of Defense said in a recent intelligence assessment that Ukraine has liberated around 54% of the maximum amount of extra territory Russia seized since it launched its full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022.

Russia still controls around 18% of internationally recognized areas of Ukraine, including the eastern region of Ukraine, called the Donbas, and the Crimean peninsula, which Moscow seized in 2014. Their annexations have been rejected by the US and other international partners. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has said the full liberation of Ukrainian territory, and in particular Crimea, is necessary for any peace talks with Russia. 

The Biden administration has been careful in offering military support to Ukraine, wary of Putin threats to use nuclear weapons.

Russian ambassador to Germany, Sergei Nechaev, reportedly said in a statement Wednesday that Germany’s decision to approve the delivery of Leopards is extremely dangerous and takes the conflict to a new level of confrontation. 

Western support of advanced military capabilities is viewed as essential for Ukrainians to mount a counter offensive that could threaten Russia’s holding of the Crimean peninsula.

The senior administration official, responding to a question of whether the administration supports Ukraine retaking territory in the Donbas and Crimea, said that the US does not tell the Ukrainians where to strike, where to attack, where to conduct offensive operations.

“Crimea is Ukraine. We’ve never recognized the illegal annexation of Crimea,” the official continued. “But where the Ukrainians decide to go and how they decide to conduct operations in their country, those are their decisions to make.” 

It is expected to take months before the Abrams reach the battlefield. Training of Ukrainian forces for operating and maintaining the tanks is expected to take place outside of Ukraine, the officials said. 

A senior administration official described the coordination on tanks for Ukraine as an impressive display of unity nearly a year into the conflict, underscoring Biden’s focus on coordination with allies and partners. 

“The President has been extremely focused on the importance of alliance-unity, of Trans-Atlantic unity, and we have tried to make that a hallmark of everything that we have done for Ukraine throughout the 11 months of this conflict.”

Ukraine-Russia Grain Deal: Success or Failure

On October 29, 2022 Russia announced it had quit the grain deal brokered by the UN and Turkey in July 2022 to allow Ukraine to export grain by the Black Sea. Moscow’s move was in response to an attack by Ukraine on the Russian fleet around Sevastopol city. Despite Russia’s warnings, a group of ships loaded with grain nonetheless exited through the safe corridor, exporting grain that had been loaded in Ukrainian ports.

Shortly thereafter, Russia made a U-turn and announced it would return to the agreement after negotiations with Turkey. Moscow cited written guarantees from Ukraine that Kyiv would not use this corridor for military purposes or attacks against Russia.

This brief spat over the deal, which to that point had worked for all parties, left a mixed impression. On the one hand, Russia’s actions underscored that the agreement was vulnerable and weak, and made clear Moscow’s readiness to abandon it at any moment it saw fit. On the other hand, Turkey’s intervention, which secured the continuation of the deal and convinced the Kremlin to rejoin it, illustrated the significant influence Ankara wields in the Black Sea, both as a key interlocutor between parties and as a counteracting player to Russia.

Russia’s move was inevitable. From the very beginning Moscow has seen the grain deal as affording it leverage over Ukraine and the West. Grain exports are one of the few sources of hard-currency income for the Ukrainian economy. What is more, being a security guarantor of the agreement allows Russia to raise the stakes with minimal effort every time it wants to pressure the West by destabilizing world food prices, which in turn has an impact on inflation worldwide. Indeed, Russia’s brief suspension of its participation in the grain deal caused a spike in wheat prices across the globe.

The most obvious goal of the deal was to ensure food security. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine caused a surge in global food prices, dealing a heavy blow to countries already at risk of food insecurity. Ukraine has been one of the world’s largest exporters of grain, contributing 42% of the global share of sunflower oil, 16% of maize, and almost 10% of wheat. Not only are Ukraine’s exports essential for the stability of world markets, but Ukraine’s grain exports have also contributed greatly to the World Food Program’s humanitarian stocks, shipped regularly to such war-ridden countries as Yemen, Ethiopia, Somalia, and South Sudan.

The July agreement between Russia and Ukraine allowing grain and fertilizers to return to the market probably averted a humanitarian catastrophe and economic meltdown. Since the signing of the deal, around 9.5 million tons of grain products have left Ukraine by sea. More than 100 ships have sailed from Ukraine, with 47% of the grain cargoes going to Turkey and Asian countries, 36% going to the EU, and 17% to Africa. Immediately after the agreement went into effect, food prices fell by 7.90 percent since March 2022. After hitting an all-time high immediately after Russia’s invasion in February 2022, world wheat prices dropped by 14.5% and cereal prices dropped by 11.5%. Prices for those grains are still higher than they were in 2021, but the deal certainly eased pressure on the market. In terms of stabilizing markets, the deal has proved to be effective.

However, the agreement was not designed to save conflict-affected communities around the world, which for the most part continue to suffer critical food shortages. Particularly, Russia has constantly criticized the agreement, alleging that the grain is not reaching countries that need it the most.

Indeed, contrary to popular perception, the majority of grain exports that were shipped out of Ukrainian Black Sea ports didn`t go to the poorest and most needed countries but rather to Europe and Turkey. Over the past five months, more than 12.3 tons of grain was shipped from Ukraine, with 44% of it being corn rather than wheat. The main destinations of the cargoes were Spain, China, Turkey, Italy, and the Netherlands.

Most of the grain that had been held up in Ukrainian silos after February 24 was corn, contracted by international companies, not necessarily to feed people but, for example, to use as biofuel or animal food. Therefore, the agreement wasn’t designed to immediately avert famine in countries like Yemen or Somalia but rather to stabilize the market and contain prices, which in turn hurt countries’ ability to purchase food.

From the Ukrainian perspective the agreement has positive implications. It allowed Ukraine to return to almost prewar amounts of exports, increasing its share from 1–1.5 million tons to almost 4 million tons.

In addition, the deal freed up some space for Ukraine to store the next harvest, which is expected to amount to 53 million tons, far exceeding domestic needs. The deal allows Ukrainian farmers to start planting crops for next year.

The deal also ensures that Ukraine’s farming sector is not totally destroyed. Because of the war, Ukraine’s farming industry has lost 50% of its 2021 gross output, which has led to serious liquidity problems for farmers. The grain had to be moved out of storage silos to avert a storage crisis, and if the whole goal of the deal was to move grain out of Ukraine, then the treaty made it possible.

Any hope that the grain deal might serve as a basis for the slow build-up of a potential compromise between Russia and Ukraine/the West has been dashed.

Ukraine and Russia don’t trust each other and are not ready to negotiate. Russia’s attempt to abandon the deal demonstrated that Moscow doesn’t see it as a trust-building measure but rather is trying to instrumentalize it as part of its war effort. Nor does Ukraine see the agreement as part of a potential peace process. President Zelensky insists that Russia should leave all Ukrainian territory occupied since 2014, including Crimea, no matter whether there is a grain agreement in place or not.

If the agreement is thought of as a means of stabilizing the Black Sea situation and localizing the war in Ukraine, then one could argue it has partially succeeded. Although Russia didn’t stop its indiscriminate attacks against energy, military, and civilian infrastructure in Ukraine’s South, it did show restraint toward foreign ships, which started shipping grain out of Ukraine through the Turkey-supervised safe corridor. In some way, the agreement has contributed to the creation of certain rules.

Finally, if the agreement was about strengthening Turkey’s geopolitical leadership in the region, then it has definitely succeeded. Ankara boosted its diplomatic image by presenting the agreement as an achievement aiding food-dependent African and Asian countries. Moreover, Turkey cemented its role as a key mediator in the Russia-Ukraine war, capable of talking to both sides. President Erdoğan in particular has been able to capitalize on the deal by placing Turkey at the heart of any potential follow-up agreements between Kyiv and Moscow.

 

Hybrid wheat hitting United States

Global seed maker Syngenta will release a new type of wheat developed with complex cross-breeding techniques in the United States next year, beating out rival companies that are also trying to develop higher yielding wheat at a time of diminishing global grain supplies, reports Reuters.

The hybrid wheat, which combines positive traits from two parent plants, arrives after severe weather slashed grain harvests and the Ukraine war disrupted shipments to hungry importers, sending prices to record highs this spring.

Syngenta, which began working on hybrid wheat in 2010, told Reuters enough seeds will be on the market next year for US farmers to plant about 5,000 to 7,000 acres.

Though a tiny fraction of the nation's plantings, the previously unreported total represents the company's biggest ever release of hybrid wheat. It could open the door for larger seedings in 2024 and beyond, as war and climate change make the world's food supplies increasingly vulnerable.

Growers of corn and other crops like barley have long benefited from hybrid seeds boosting yields. The road to market has been extra slow for wheat because the development process is more costly and difficult, and companies saw lower potential for returns, researchers said.

Benefits of the new crop are still not certain. Three independent seed companies that produced hybrid wheat this year under agreements with Syngenta told Reuters they were unsure the crop will deliver game-changing results for growers. They added that it will take longer to determine how to cost effectively produce the best seeds.

Syngenta's French unit told Reuters the company postponed the launch of a similar type of wheat tested in France following disappointing results. The United States and French hybrids were tailored for local growing conditions, which can include threats from plant diseases and the need to meet quality standards for milling and baking, the company said.

Chinese-owned Syngenta said its US wheat, to be sold under the AgriPro brand, could increase yields by as much as 12% to 15% and make crops more stable, adding that it is attracting strong interest from farmers.

Wheat "is the only major food crop that has not yet benefited from significant technification. Hybrids will change this," said Jon Rich, Syngenta Seeds' head of North America cereals operations.

US approves record military spending

The US House of Representatives backed legislation on Thursday paving the way for the defense budget to hit a record US$858 billion next year, US$45 billion more than proposed by President Joe Biden.

The House passed the compromise version of the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, an annual must-pass bill setting policy for the Pentagon, by 350-80, far exceeding the two-thirds majority required to pass the legislation and send it for a vote in the Senate.

The fiscal 2023 NDAA authorizes US$858 billion in military spending and includes a 4.6% pay increase for the troops, funding for purchases of weapons, ships and aircraft; and support for Taiwan as it faces aggression from China and Ukraine as it fights an invasion by Russia.

"This bill is Congress exercising its authority to authorize and do oversight," said Representative Adam Smith, the Democratic chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, in a speech urging support for the measure.

Because it is one of the few major bills passed every year, members of Congress use the NDAA as a vehicle for a range of initiatives, some unrelated to defense.

This year's bill - the result of months of negotiations between Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate - needed a two-thirds majority in the House after disagreement from some House members over whether it should include an amendment on voting rights.

The fiscal 2023 NDAA includes a provision demanded by many Republicans requiring the Secretary of Defense to rescind a mandate requiring that members of the armed forces get COVID-19 vaccinations.

It provides Ukraine at least US$800 million in additional security assistance next year and includes a range of provisions to strengthen Taiwan amid tensions with China.

The bill authorizes more funds to develop new weapons and purchase systems including Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 fighter jets and ships made by General Dynamics.

The Senate is expected to pass the NDAA next week, sending it to the White House for President Joe Biden to sign into law.

NDAA is not the final word on spending. Authorization bills create programs but Congress must pass appropriations bills to give the government legal authority to spend federal money.

Congressional leaders have not yet agreed on an appropriations bill for next year.

 

British PM Rishi Sunak visits Ukraine

British Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak travelled to Ukraine to meet President Volodymyr Zelensky and confirmed a major new package of air defence for the war-torn country.

This is Sunak’s first visit to the region since he became prime minister and follows the footsteps of his predecessor Boris Johnson, who developed a personal friendship with its leader.

The £50 million package includes 125 anti-aircraft guns and technology to counter deadly Iranian-supplied drones, including dozens of radars and anti-drone electronic warfare capability. It follows more than 1,000 new anti-air missiles announced by the Defence Secretary earlier in November.

Earlier, Sunak used the G20 Summit in Bali to urge other world leaders to take a harder line against Russian aggression.

Sunak said, "Britain knows what it means to fight for freedom."We are with you all the way", he told President Zelensky in a tweet.

His pledge of continued support follows in the footsteps of both Johnson and Truss, when she was in Downing Street.

A Number-10 spokesperson said, "The Prime Minister is in Ukraine today for his first visit to Kyiv to meet President Zelensky and confirm continued UK support."

By the end of his time in office Johnson was much mocked amid claims he would use official phonecalls with the Ukranian leader to attempt to shore up his own popularity at home.

Sunak had condemned Russia for the invasion of Ukraine. He said the UK would continue to support Ukrainians in defending themselves against Russian action, and to help ensure Kyiv is in a position of strength when they decide the time is right for peace talks.

He told reporters travelling with him to Bali that the Russin leader Vladimir Putin had skipped the summit of world leaders.

"Russia is becoming a pariah state and he’s not there to take responsibility for what he’s doing," he said. "But I’m going to use the opportunity to put on the record my condemnation of what they’re doing.”

 

Disconnect in US foreign policy

The Ukraine war is just one symptom of a bigger disease. The war in Ukraine began with the 2014 US-backed coup d’état in Kiev and the weaponzing by the United States and NATO of an anti-Russian regime over eight years.

Absurd disconnect in US foreign policy, extraordinary provocations toward Russia, the scam of nuclear weapons and US military defense doctrine, and the stunning hubris of American national myth-making propaganda invoking a God-given right to control the world. This is the scope of US problems that threaten world peace.

Former Marine Corps intelligence officer Scott Ritter served as a United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq during the 1990s following the First Gulf War. He controversially challenged the official US and British narrative back then claiming Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Those claims were later exposed as lies and fabrications but they were used to launch the Second Gulf War in 2003. A criminal war with massive repercussions that still haunts today.

In this interview, Ritter calls out the absurdity of the United States voicing concerns about the danger of nuclear conflict with Russia while at the same time fueling a war in Ukraine on Russia’s doorstep.

“One has to question who is the power seeking to turn this into a nuclear conflict. Because I don’t think it is Russia.”

He says the US has abandoned diplomacy and respect for other nations. “We view Russia as a defeated enemy from the Cold War… we want to dictate to Russia” and others.

Ritter compares the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 and the present tensions and dangers between the United States and Russia. He says it’s like comparing a knife fight with a machine-gun battle in the present. “We had a handful of nukes back then which would have destroyed cities. We now have nation-destroying nuclear arsenals that would end the planet”.

Ritter says the US leadership no longer fears or respects Russia as the John F Kennedy administration and previous administrations did. The stunning hubris in Washington makes the danger of war spinning out of control.

He also calls out the policy of ambiguity about under what circumstances the US would use nuclear weapons as a form of terroristic behavior.

Unlike Russia or China, the US deliberately refuses to adopt a sole-use purpose for defense and deterrence. This preemptive-use option is a form of blackmail on the rest of the world. Ultimately, the logic being used is, “Do what we say or we’ll nuke you”.

Ritter says a major structural problem is the money-making scam of the US nuclear and military-industrial complex where American politicians are bought and paid for to lobby for military profits; and therefore never adopt a more sane, peace-making and democratic policy in the interests of the majority of American citizens.

If the United States were to align its policy with that of Russia and China, that is, to adopt a sole-use purpose of defense then that would transform international relations, lower tensions and make eventual disarmament possible.

Ironically the United States is a hostage of its own nuclear blackmail against the world. It can’t adopt a saner, peaceful policy because of the propaganda narrative of depicting the world as full of enemies and because of the vested interests of the military-industrial complex and its politicians in Washington.

Ritter warns that America has to shed its supremacist thinking in the same way it has struggled for generations to overcome systematic racist attitudes. “Until we stop viewing ourselves as the exceptional people and start viewing ourselves as just another person, there isn’t going to be peace and harmony in the world.”

Creating unrest in Iran was American ‘Plan B’

Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian said Saturday that Iran’s recent unrest was ‘Plan-B’ pursued by the United States and it failed in implementing this plan.

Speaking to reporters, Amir Abdollahian said, “What our nation has seen over the last 40 days was the implementation of the very Plan B that the Americans wanted to pursue. But they failed in this regard due to the nation’s intuition and the guidance of the supreme leader.”

Iranian Foreign Minister also responded to Western allegations that Iran provided Russia with drones and missiles for use in the Ukraine war.

He said the West’s kerfuffle over the provision of missiles is entirely wrong, while the issues pertaining to the drones are right, according to Iranian state news agency IRNA.

“We provided a limited number of drones to Russia months before the start of the Ukraine war. And we agreed with the Ukrainian foreign minister that if you have any evidence of Russia using Iranian drones in Ukraine, give us the evidence,” he added.

He said this was agreed two weeks ago in a European country and a political and defense delegation from Iran went to that European country for a meeting with Ukrainian officials but the Ukrainian side called off the meeting in the last minute.

“The reason for the absence of the Ukrainian side was that the United States and some European countries, especially Germany, asked Ukraine not to participate in this meeting. They told the Ukrainian officials that while we want to impose sanctions against Iran over the provision of drones to Russia, you want to drink coffee with Iranians in a European country!” Amir Abdollahian said.

He added, “After that, in the telephone conversation that we had with the foreign minister of Ukraine last week, we agreed that if there is any evidence, they will provide us with it, and if the Ukrainian side sticks to its promise, we will be able to examine this issue in the coming days, and their evidence will be taken into consideration.”

In the phone conversation between Amir Abdollahian and his Ukrainian counterpart, Dmytro Kuleba, the two sides discussed the latest developments related to the Ukraine crisis and bilateral topics.

 Amir Abdollahian strongly dismissed the claims about the use of Iranian drones in the war in Ukraine, saying, “The Islamic Republic has had the experience of the eight-year imposed war and is thus opposed to war in Ukraine, Yemen, and elsewhere.”

The Iranian foreign minister said, “We have good ties with Russia and we have had defense cooperation from the past, but our policy toward the Ukraine war is to respect the territorial integrity of countries, not to send weapons to the conflicting parties, and to stop the war and the people’s displacement.”

“The Islamic Republic of Iran’s policy is fully transparent, is based on a unified standard, and is against war,” he said, according to the Iranian foreign ministry.

“We are ready for convening technical sessions with the participation of military experts between the two countries, without the need for any intermediary,” the foreign minister added.

He described the statements of some Western officials as baseless and referred to Tehran’s recurrent efforts to help bring about a ceasefire, adding, we stand ready to help establish a truce.

“I believe Ukraine had better be careful not be influenced by some radical politicians in Europe,” the top diplomat said.

The Ukrainian Foreign Minister, in turn, praised the Islamic Republic of Iran’s position on not dispatching arms for use in the Ukraine war, saying talks between technical military delegations of the two countries are important.

He pointed to Ukraine’s independence in its foreign relations and said his country does not take action under the influence of others.

The chief diplomat explained the consequences of war in his country and said Ukraine strives to safeguard the security and activities of embassies in accordance with international conventions.

Iran has said it does not support any side in the Ukraine war. It has said it support the settlement of the Ukraine crisis through dialogue and political ways. However, the West leveled accusations against Iran over the alleged provision of weaponry to Russia.
 

Can Black Sea grain deal survive without Russia?

According to a Reuters report, United Nations, Turkey and Ukraine pressed ahead to implement a Black Sea grain deal and agreed on a transit plan for Monday for 16 vessels to move forward, despite Russia's withdrawal from the pact that has allowed the export of Ukrainian agricultural products to the world markets.

Russia, which invaded Ukraine on February 24 this year, on Saturday halted its role in the Black Sea deal for an indefinite term, cutting shipments from one of the world's top grain exporters, because it said it could not guarantee safety of civilian ships travelling under the pact after an attack on its Black Sea fleet.

The move has sparked an outcry from Ukraine, NATO, the European Union and the United States, while the United Nations and Turkey, two main brokers of the July deal, scrambled on Sunday to save it.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres was deeply concerned about Russia's move and delayed a foreign trip to try and revive the agreement that was intended to ease a global food crisis, his spokesperson said.

Following Russia's move, Chicago wheat futures jumped more than 5% on Monday as both Russia and Ukraine are among the world's largest wheat exporters, analysts said.

More than 9.5 million tons corn, wheat, sunflower products, barley, rapeseed and soy have been exported since July. Under the deal, a Joint Coordination Centre (JCC) - made up of UN, Turkish, Russian and Ukrainian officials - agrees on the movement of ships and inspects the vessels.

No ships moved through the established maritime humanitarian corridor on Sunday. But the United Nations said in a statement that it had agreed with Ukraine and Turkey on a movement plan for 16 vessels on Monday - 12 outbound and 4 inbound.

It said the Russian officials at the JCC had been told about the plan, along with the intention to inspect 40 outbound vessels on Monday, and noted that "all participants coordinate with their respective military and other relevant authorities to ensure the safe passage of commercial vessels" under the deal.

During Sunday's session among the grain deal delegations, Russian officials said Moscow will continue the dialogue with the United Nations and the Turkish delegation on pressing issues, the UN said in its statement.

Turkish Defence Minister Hulusi Akar was in contact with his Russian and Ukrainian counterparts to try and salvage the agreement and had asked the parties to avoid any provocation, the Turkish defence ministry said.

NATO and the European Union have urged Russia to reconsider its decision. US President Joe Biden on Saturday called Russia's move purely outrageous and said it would increase starvation. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken accused Moscow of weaponizing food.

On Sunday, Russia's ambassador to Washington snapped back, saying the US response was outrageous and made false assertions about Moscow's move.

Bridge linking Russia and Crimea damaged

The bridge, commonly known as Crimean Bridge was built by Russia after it declared Crimea to be Russian territory in 2014. Russia uses it to move military equipment, ammunition, and personnel from Russia to battlefields in southern Ukraine. The bridge is particularly hated by Ukrainians as it is seen as a symbol of Russian occupation. However, Ukraine has not accepted responsibility of attack on the bridge.

Russian authorities said that a massive explosion involving a truck on Saturday caused a fire and destroyed a section of a bridge linking Russia and Crimea, killing at least three people. The bridge is regarded as a key supply route for Russian troops in southern Ukraine.

The Crimean Bridge, a US$3.69 billion (230 billion rubles) project, was constructed following the annexation of Crimea. Russia opened the first part of the span to car traffic in May 2018. The parallel bridge for rail traffic opened the following year. Before the bridge’s existence, the Crimean Peninsula could only be reached from Russia by sea or air.

The Crimean Bridge—also called Kerch Strait Bridge or Kerch Bridge—is a structure 19 kilometers (12 miles) in length that passes across the Kerch Strait and links southern Russia to the Crimean Peninsula. The Kerch Strait links the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov.

A truck exploded on the bridge. Russia’s National Anti-Terrorism Committee announced that the explosion caused a fire on the parallel rail section, where seven railway cars carrying fuel caught fire. The blast also caused a “partial collapse of two sections of the bridge.”

The Russian Investigative Committee said in a statement that the incident killed at least three people, “presumably the passengers of a car that was driving by the truck that exploded on the bridge.”

‘The bodies of a woman and a man were recovered from the water, their identities are being established,” the statement reads, according to Russian state-owned news agency TASS.

The Crimean Peninsula is the key to sustaining Russia’s military operations in the south. If the bridge is made inoperable, it would make it significantly more challenging to ferry supplies to the peninsula. While Russia seized the areas north of Crimea early during the invasion and built a land corridor to it along the Sea of Azov, Ukraine is pressing a counteroffensive to reclaim them.

The explosion on the Crimean Bridge took place hours after multiple explosions early Saturday hit the eastern Ukrainian city of Kharkiv, which triggered a series of secondary explosions.

While no one has yet to explicitly claim public responsibility for the attack, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s aide, Mikhail Podoliak, posted on Twitter saying the explosion is “the beginning.”

Podoliak previously in August threatened the bridge, telling The Guardian that the bridge is “an illegal construction and the main gateway to supply the Russian army in Crimea” and that “such objects should be destroyed.”

US arms manufacturers making fortune from Ukraine war

Since the Ukraine war on February 24, Western governments have been shipping large quantities of weapons to the country, making the arms supply an extremely lucrative trade for dealers. 

The US administration under President Joe Biden has been announcing fresh military packages on a regular basis. Weapons being sent to Ukraine that will keep the US military complexes busy for a long time to come. 

The aggregate US military aid totals at least US$25 billion committed since late February until August 03, 2022 according to the Ukraine Support Tracker.

On Thursday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced another US$2.2 billion military package for Ukraine and neighboring countries. Earlier President Biden had also approved a separate US$675 million in weapons to Ukraine, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced. 

There is no sign the US is willing to end war; on Friday the White House said Biden will request a further US$11.7 billion in emergency funding from Congress to provide lethal aid and budget support.

The five largest companies in the world that manufacture weapons are all American namely: Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics. In fact, half of the top 100 producers of arms are based in the United States, while twenty are located in Europe. 

In the aftermath of the Ukraine conflict, these five American firms saw their stock prices soar in a sign that investors believed profitable days were ahead.

At a time when the broader stock market as measured by the S&P 500 had slumped by about 4%; Lockheed Martin’s stock price was up over 12% – with most of the gains occurring in its immediate aftermath. Northrop Grumman has jumped by 20%. 

It’s not just the dealers making profit, over the past months; reports have emerged showing how members of Congress stand to personally profit from the war with lawmakers or their spouses holding stock in arms dealers such as Lockheed Martin or Raytheon Technologies. 

Likewise, politicians in Britain such as members of the House of Lords made tens of thousands of pounds by owning shares in the largest British weapons manufacturer and sixth in the world, BAE Systems. The arms dealers’ share price rose by 23% following the outbreak of war in Ukraine. 

It’s not just politicians who benefit from the vast arms supplies to Eastern Europe; weapons dealers have many people on their payroll as well. These include the many pundits on the face of American mainstream media who discuss the war in Ukraine while having strong links with the US arms manufacturers.

It makes the job of the Biden administration much easier when trying to sell to the public the reasons to send more weapons and making announcements about new military packages. 

The US has shipped at least 5,500 Javelin anti-tank missiles manufactured jointly by Raytheon Technologies and Lockheed Martin. The two firms will be paid to replenish American stocks with the money coming from a US$40 billion package signed by Biden. 

The other weapons America has been sending include longer range missile systems, anti-ship missiles, anti-tank missiles, anti-aircraft missiles, helicopters, rockets, launchers, howitzers, radar systems, drones, aerial systems, armored vehicles, small arms, artillery and other arms. Washington has also put aside money for training, maintenance and sustainment. 

That’s a lot of arms being shipped over by the US, which is leading the Western war effort in Eastern Europe against Russia which has long blamed the US and NATO for triggering the conflict.

Moscow requested an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council on Thursday to discuss Western arms supplies to Ukraine. 

The Russian Ambassador, Vasily Nebenzya, told the council it was a fantasy to believe that Western powers can determine the outcome of the conflict with their weapons supplies.

A significant proportion of these weapons find itself in the hands of smugglers right from the warehouses. In the darknet, one can find all kinds of offers to buy these weapons. We’ve already seen similar situations in the Balkans and the Middle East where Western military arsenals were then re-exported to Europe and then used by criminal groups on European territory or found their way into the hands of terrorists. 

The UN disarmament chief, Izumi Nakamitsu, has also warned that the flood of weapons being sent to conflict areas such as Ukraine raises many concerns including the potential for diversion.

Campaigners have also been speaking out about the consequences of where the vast number of weapons may end up. Kristen Bayes, a spokesperson for the Campaign Against the Arms Trade, says the provision of weapons to Ukraine is not problem free. "You might think you're handing over weapons to people you know and like, but then they get sold on to people you absolutely don't”.

Campaigners say the risk of advanced and sophisticated weapons delivered to Ukraine ending up in the black market is high because authorities are not in full control of all territory. They argue it is also difficult to keep track of the arms when they have been sent so quickly.

In July, the Financial Times quoted Western officials with knowledge about talks between several NATO members and Kyiv to explore a tracking system or detailed inventory lists for weapons highlighting Western fears about missing weapons. 

“All these weapons land in southern Poland, get shipped to the border and then are just divided up into vehicles to cross in trucks, vans, sometimes private cars,” said one of the Western officials. “And from that moment we go blank on their location and we have no idea where they go, where they are used or even if they stay in the country.”

It’s not just the US; Britain has also committed at least £2.3 billion in military assistance.  Following the Britain are: Poland, Germany, Canada, the Czech Republic, Australia and France. Out of the 28 countries sending weapons, 25 are NATO members. 

Many European countries used the Ukraine conflict to announce plans for increased military spending. The additional commitments are worth at least €200 billion according to the EU.

Germany committed an extra €100 billion in the coming years, with Chancellor Olaf Scholz saying defense would make up two percent of his country’s GDP from now on. As a result of the news, German arms manufacturers can expect to see their sales grow significantly. Berlin has already announced it will be purchasing 35 American F-35 war planes, which are produced by Lockheed Martin and have an estimated lifetime cost of US$1.6 trillion. 

The French President Emmanuel Macron has pledged to expand his country's defence budget, while the British government had already planned increased spending before the conflict broke out but faces pressure from Labour to spend even more. 

Poland said that it had requested 500 HIMARS launchers and ammunition from Lockheed Martin. Estonia confirmed it has been in touch with the American manufacturer also to buy launchers and ammunition worth. Latvia and Lithuania are expected to follow suit.

Campaigners say with so much profit being made from the war, it’s not surprising that peace is not being pursued.