Trust me, western media is dishonest

I started this blog in June 2012 and the focus has remained on Geopolitics in South Asia and MENA. Over the years my conviction has got stronger that western media is dishonest. Since media is supported by conglomerates, especially ‘Military Complexes’ the focus remains on creating conflicts that can lead to proxy wars and ultimately sale of arms. Referring to two mantras: Presence of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and Iraq building weapons of mass destruction (WMD) may help the readers understand my assertion.

I am listing titles of some of my blogs and their links with a request o readers to spend a few minutes in reading these blogs and then decide does the western media publishes/ airs real stories or these are tweaked to achieve their ultimate objective of selling lethal arms to facilitate their military complexes working at the best capacity utilization.

To read details click the following links

Ten dumbest things propagandists want people to believe

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2023/10/ten-dumbest-things-propagandists-want.html

Dishonest western media not reporting correct situation of oil market

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2022/07/dishonest-western-media-not-reporting.html

Media in United States in the grip of intelligence agents

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2019/10/media-in-united-states-in-grip-of.html

Time to mend Saudi-Iranian relationship

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2019/08/time-to-mend-saudi-iranian-relationship.html

Trump acts touching insanity

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2019/06/trump-acts-touching-insanity.html

As world faces Armageddon, west seems leaderless

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2019/06/as-world-faces-armageddon-western-world.html

Western Media is Key to Syria Deception

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2019/05/western-media-is-key-to-syria-deception.html

Syria planning another chemical attack, another hoax call by the US

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2017/06/syria-planning-another-chemical-attack.html

Anti Iran stance of western media

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2017/01/anti-iran-stance-of-western-media.html

What are the motives behind alleging Russia of hacking US election?

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2016/12/what-are-motives-behind-alleging-russia.html

The Long History of Lies about Iran

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-long-history-of-lies-about-iran.html

 

War is good for business, mantra of military industrial complexes

Military industrial complex players big and small gathered in London this month, hawking everything from long-range missiles to gold plated pistols to arms fair attendees—including representatives of horrific human rights violators—as weapon-makers and other merchants of the machinery of death reap record profits.

"War is good for business," one defense executive attending the biennial Defense and Security Equipment International (DSEI) conference at ExCel London flat-out told Reuters. "We are extremely busy," Michael Elmore, head of sales at the UK-based armored steelmaker MTL Advanced, told the media agency.

Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine and the West's scramble to arm Ukrainian homeland defenders have been a bonanza for arms-makers.

"Ukraine is a very interesting combination of First and Second World War technologies and very modern technology," Kuldar Vaarsi, CEO of the Estonian unmanned ground vehicle firm MILREM, told Reuters.

Saber-rattling and fearmongering by government, media, and business figures amid rising tensions between the US and its allies on one side, and a fast-rising China on the other, have also spurred military spending, including Japan's US$320 billion buildup announced last December.

"We think this is a longer-term essentially 'sea change' in national defense strategy for the U.S. and for our Western allies," Jim Taiclet, CEO of US arms giant Lockheed Martin, told investors during a call earlier this summer announcing higher-than-expected sales and profit outlooks.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the United States, Russia, France, China, and Germany were the world's top arms exporters from 2018-22, with the five nations accounting for 76% of all weapons exports during that period. The U.S. accounted for nearly 40% of such exports during those five years, while increasing its dominance in the arms trade. The US also remains by far the world's biggest military spender.

In addition to major corporations, middlemen like Marc Morales have also been profiting handsomely from wars in countries including Ukraine. Morales happened to have a warehouse full of ammunition in Bulgaria that the Pentagon originally intended for Afghanistan when Russia invaded its neighbor, and he has been richly rewarded as the US spends tens of billions of dollars arming Ukrainian forces. He named his new US$10 million yacht Trigger Happy.

Outside the sprawling ExCel convention center in London's Docklands, anti-war protesters rallied against the global arms trade and the death and destruction it fuels. The Guardian reported that at least a dozen demonstrators were arrested during the course of the conference, including nine on Thursday for blocking a road outside the venue.

Sam Perlo-Freeman, a researcher at the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT), told The Guardian that a lot of countries that are being talked about as new arms export markets are ones we would be concerned about.

"Egypt is a repressive regime and Vietnam an absolute dictatorship," Perlo-Freeman added. "Indonesia is involved in brutality in West Papua."

Emily Apple, also of CAAT, told People's World that the companies exhibiting read as who is who of the world's worst arms dealers.

"Israel is an apartheid state, and it is disgusting that the UK is not only selling weapons to Israel but encouraging Israeli arms companies to sell their weapons in London," she continued.

"Representatives from regimes such as Saudi Arabia, who have used UK made weapons to commit war crimes in Yemen, will be wined and dined and encouraged to buy yet more arms."

"Deals done at DSEI will cause misery across the world, causing global instability, and devastate people's lives," Apple added.

Inside ExCel, it was business as usual. Pressed by Declassified UK chief reporter Phil Miller on why Britain's right-wing government supports selling arms to the Saudi dictatorship that sentences someone to death for tweeting, Minister of State for the Armed Forces James Heappey deflected.

Private sector leaders, however, have been more forthcoming. As Raytheon CEO Greg Hayes opined during a 2021 investor call touting the company's solid growth, "Peace is not going to break out in the Middle East anytime soon."

 

Raisi visit to Syria

Two Iranian lawmakers have welcomed the upcoming visit by President Ebrahim Raisi to Syria, saying the visit would strengthen the Axis of Resistance. 

Javad Karimi Quddousi, a member of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, said the visit is meant to strengthen the Resistance Front and the economies of the two countries. 

“After 13 years, the president of Islamic Iran will travel to Syria and I wish he had at least one trip to Syria during the 11th and 12th governments so that the Resistance Front will be strengthened even more,” Quddousi told IRNA.

“Among the closure of the country's diplomacy in the previous government was the closure of the diplomacy of the Resistance area, which in fact resulted in indifference to the member countries of the Resistance Front, including Syria.”

He added, “In these 44 years that have passed since the victory of the revolution, countries such as Syria and the oppressed people of Palestine were an important support for the resistance front. The proxy wars that the Zionist regime and the West started with the support of ISIS in Syria took place because of the Syrian people's support for the Resistance Front.”

Quddousi considered Raisi's visit to Syria as the culmination of Ayatollah Raisi's presidential and strategic trips. “At this point, when there has been a great victory for the Resistance Front in all fields, the president will visit this country because the plans and movements of Iran and Syria have been shared and they have formed a united front against their enemies,” he continued. 

Stating that today Gaza is not separated from the West Bank, he said, “Quds is not separated from Gaza and the West Bank, and Syria and Lebanon are connected to all these areas. Along with these countries, the Yemenis formed a united front which caused the defeat of the Hebrew, Arab, and Western united front against the Resistance Front.”

Underlining that today Zionists and Westerners admit that Bashar al-Assad and his people won, Quddousi noted, “Ayatollah Raisi's trip at this point is very effective in terms of politics, security and strategy for the liberation of Quds. And the second dimension will be the reconstruction of Syria.”

He said, “The reconstruction of Syria with the mobilization of the private sector is a good opportunity to provide civil and economic services, especially in the construction industry sector and take over the Syrian economic market.”

The lawmaker added, “During a visit to the Syrian city of Aleppo, half of this city has been razed to the ground, and Syrian statesmen suggested to the 12th government [the Rouhani administration] to undertake the reconstruction of this city, in which case twice the amount proposed to European countries will be paid to Iran. But the previous government did not make an effort in this regard.”

Ebrahim Azizi, another lawmaker sitting on the Committee, said the visit is an indication that Iran’s regional policies won. 

“The President's visit to Damascus shows the victories of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the regional and international scene and shows the depth of greatness that Muslim nations created in different scenes in the fight against arrogance,” Azizi said in remarks to IRNA.

“The media of the West has been presenting the Americans as invincible for years, but the victory of the Resistance Axis in Syria showed that it is possible to stand against the domination system and defeat them.”

He added, “The normalization of relations with Syria can be effective in the path of economic, commercial, cultural and security exchanges in the region, since the countries of the region have turned to the view of the Islamic Republic today, it is a wise and intelligent move, it can help the development of peace and stability in the region.”

 

 

US budget will support proxy wars in 2023

The US Senate has passed legislation for the Pentagon budget next year, whopping US$858 billion. The unprecedented package is US$45 billion more than President Joe Biden had requested and is set to have consequences for global peace and security. The bill passed so easily in both chambers tells about the priorities of Washington. 

The bill is the largest budget in the history of the world. It is about three to four times larger than the budget of China whose population last year was reported at 1.412 billion, in comparison to the 331.9 million of the United States.

It is also a conservative budget as it does not include other aspects of the US military such as America’s nuclear weapons program, which is in the region of trillions of dollars. Nor does it include the Central Intelligence Agency. Last year, Congress gave the CIA US$25 billion more than it asked for.

Experts say this huge US military budget supports a network of global occupation. An occupation that has a military presence that includes Europe, parts of East Asia, in particular Japan and South Korea, nations across West Asia, and parts of Africa.

The amount of money being spent on the military has been met with anger among Americans, especially during this period of economic hardship on the backdrop of a global pandemic and war in Ukraine.

Since 2001, conservative estimates suggest the US has spent at least US$20 trillion on war and military adventurism abroad.

This is while the latest US$858 billion bill has no purpose to protect the people of the United States. Nobody is threatening the US mainland which raises the question of why such a large amount is being spent by Washington on its military. Nearly half of the US discretionary budget is spent on the military.

The diversion of these resources could be used for feeding, clothing, educating, building, and treating Americans back home who are desperately in need of such services.

There is a lack of healthcare or enough housing, adequate food and clean water, or a clean environment inside the United States. These issues are rarely mentioned by the US media.

There has been a very extensive propaganda campaign inside the US in support of the US proxy war in Ukraine, which seems to have won. This campaign is being launched by bipartisan parties in Congress.

This is a war that could have easily been avoided and prevented the suffering of the Ukrainian people as well as citizens across Europe.

The huge amount of money in the military is being used to support the declining US worldwide empire. Washington has to resort to keeping this sinking empire in power and in place through militarism expenditure.

The US is slipping in many ways, as far as being the dominant world power when it comes to economics and finance, and diplomacy. But it does claim to be the world’s leading military power, which other countries can depend on.

History has proven that to be false and such a claim by Washington of being the world’s number one military power is not something to be proud of considering its multiple military defeats.

The budget also allocates funds to send more military aid to Ukraine which raises the question if Washington is seeking to prolong the war.

Experts say the aim is to seek regime change in Russia, in particular, after Moscow sent its forces to Syria to help Damascus fight terrorism.

The idea of dismantling the Russian Federation has been openly talked about at the US state department. It is actively holding public forums in various places with groups that the US claims are repressed nationalities in Russia under the context of liberation movements.

Critics say Washington is doing or trying to do what was done to the Soviet Union in 1991.

But critics also say some policymakers at the US State Department are under the illusion or delusional enough to believe that Washington can re-enact the events of 1991 (when the Soviet Union was dissolved) and have the Russian Federation collapse by expanding NATO.

Washington is playing with fire in Ukraine as Russia says if it sends Patriot missile batteries to Kyiv that means American military personnel would be operating the missile systems.

This could pit Russian forces in direct combat with American forces and could potentially expand the war. Should the US military sustain casualties by Russian retaliatory attacks, this would lead to nowhere but a third world war.

It highlights the instability of America’s delusional policy-making. The US invaded Afghanistan but never succeeded in occupying the country in 20 years with no plans on how to withdraw until it fled in a very chaotic nature in similar scenes to Afghanistan.

The massive military policy bill also includes the authorization of up to US$10 billion in military assistance and fast-tracked weapons procurement for Taiwan.

One think tank says it will allow a regional contingency stockpile that will allow the Pentagon to place weapons in Taiwan (which is part of China) for use if a military conflict with Beijing arises.

The US Indo-Pacific Command’s outgoing Admiral Phil Davidson, before leaving office, said the island chain countries have to be prepared for war. In other words, places like Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, and others have to prepare for war triggered by the US.

Analysts have interpreted this until today, as meaning that countries surrounding China have to be built up militarily so that if a war occurs with China these countries and regions get hit and suffer casualties as well as destruction.

But Washington needs the same countries and regions to have so much weaponry so they can continue fighting or serve as the basis for the US to continue a war against China until victory.

It highlights how little concern the US has towards those countries and how cold-blooded the US approach to war is.

It also means the United States is disregarding the Shanghai Communique which recognizes on both sides of the strait, everyone recognizes only one China. Now Washington is not treating Taiwan as part of China which is very dangerous.

There has been an ongoing drive to militarize some nations surrounding China, in a similar fashion to Russia.

In Africa, the US is fighting in five or six places in addition to the Ukraine war, the Yemen war, and other civil wars that Washington is waging through various proxies.

The timing of the budget comes at a time when the US national debt stands at around US$31 trillion, which puts into question the thought process of those making decisions in America.

US senators backed the bill overwhelmingly which means there is always consensus on the war in a congress that the US arms companies have the lawmakers their pockets. The military-industrial complex, along with the banks and the oil companies are the only beneficiaries of war.

Unlike healthcare, abortion, gun control, and so many other issues that take so long to pass Congress amid deep divisions between the Republicans and the Democrats, when it comes to militarism, there is no bickering at all.

 

Why are United States assets not being frozen?

The European Union (EU) is planning to use frozen Russian assets to finance the reconstruction of Ukraine. A question arise, why United States and NATO countries having indulged in wars, invasions, and carpet bombings have not met the similar fate?

The EU’s plans include an attempt to re-invest the international reserves of the Russian Central Bank in Ukraine. 

Moscow’s assets frozen under sanctions imposed by the EU can be divided into two main sections. Private assets are worth nearly €19 billion while public assets held by state entities are about €300 billion of international reserves owned by the Russian Central Bank.

"Russia must also pay financially for the devastation that it caused,” European Commission Ursula von der Leyen said. Moscow has “to compensate Ukraine for the damage and cover the costs for rebuilding the country." she added.

In the midst of rising inflation across Europe, freezing and selling Russian assets is being viewed as an avenue by the 27-member bloc to raise funds for Ukraine.

However, EU sanctions are always temporary, so the assets at the end of the day must be returned to their original owners.

It seems that before this happens the EU is working hard to move the goalposts and ensure the frozen assets become a solid, bulletproof solution to make Russia pay, as von der Leyen put it.

NATO could have prevented this war by not expanding its military equipment and troops eastwards toward Russian borders in the years prior to the war.

The US could have avoided the crisis in Ukraine and the suffering of Ukrainians by choosing to negotiate rather than reject the Kremlin’s proposals of security guarantees, which were sent to Washington months before the conflict erupted.

The Minsk agreements which began in 2014 after fighting erupted between ethnic Russian forces and the Ukrainian army in the eastern Donbas region could have been implemented to avoid a war.

Experts have questioned the double standards of the EU asking why such efforts have not been applied to the US-led wars, proxy wars, invasions, and carpet bombings that have led to the complete destruction of many countries over the past decades.

The US invasion and 20-year occupation of Afghanistan saw an unprecedented rise in terrorism (ironically Washington invaded the country under the pretext of its war on terror). During the two-decade occupation, Afghans witnessed nothing but destruction, terror, violence, mass killings, and other atrocities.

As a result of the spike in terrorism and regular US attacks, the destruction of the country’s infrastructure and the damage caused to Afghan public sectors has left a humanitarian catastrophe after the US fled Afghanistan in 2020.

The Afghanistan Country Director of Save the Children said in mid-February: “I’ve never seen anything like the desperate situation we have here in Afghanistan. We treat frighteningly ill children every day who haven’t eaten anything except bread for months. Parents are having to make impossible decisions – which of their children do they feed? Do they send their children to work or let them starve? These are excruciating choices that no parent should have to make.”

America’s longest war killed at least 66,000 Afghan national military and police as well as tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of Afghan civilians, with different monitoring groups providing different death tolls.

In an ideal, just world, US assets should have been frozen and used to finance the reconstruction of Afghanistan. American assets should have also been frozen and used to compensate the families of Afghans killed as a result of the US invasion.

Following its embarrassing and chaotic withdrawal, Washington seized Afghanistan’s assets leading to further humanitarian suffering for Afghans, the majority of whom now live in poverty.

Likewise, the US invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq saw widespread damage to the country’s infrastructure. Damage that has yet to be rebuilt.

Washington claims it waged war against Iraq to remove the former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein from power. Everyone wanted to see the end of Saddam, but very few wanted the US to be involved, especially considering the widespread hatred of America among Iraqis.

Even before the American invasion, US-backed UN sanctions against Baghdad killed at least half a million Iraqi children, with some studies putting the number at around 1.5 million Iraqis, primarily children, who died as a direct consequence of the imposed sanctions, citing UNICEF estimates.

During the US war itself from 2003 to 2011, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died, again because of an unprecedented rise in terrorism as a result of the US war on terror and many other civilians were killed because of attacks by the US military.

The damage to Iraq's infrastructure as a result of US interference in the country (in the form of sanctions, airstrikes, and wars) from 1991 until its occupation which is ongoing until this day is estimated to have cost the nation trillions of dollars.

How many Iraqi civilians have been killed because of terrorist groups that did not exist before Washington’s 2003 invasion and US carpet bombings in cities such as Mosul?

With such vast oil wealth, Iraqi infrastructure has been damaged to such an extent that the country still relies on Iranian energy exports for its electricity.

Why are US assets not being frozen and used to finance the reconstruction of Iraq? Why are US assets not being frozen and used to compensate the families of civilians murdered because of terrorism that came with the US invasion?

As many reports have emerged over the years, NATO killed civilians when it waged war on Libya to allegedly help overthrow longtime ruler Muammar al-Gaddafi. The US-led military alliance’s bombing campaign had a devastating toll but, more than a decade after the war, NATO has yet to take any responsibility.

There was no terrorism before NATO bombed Libya. Since then, the country has been embroiled in terror with Daesh and other Takfiri groups wreaking havoc in the North African country.

The US military is occupying regions in eastern and northeastern Syria and looting the country’s oil in an attempt to prevent Damascus from restoring its own infrastructure and services following a decade of US-backed war on the country.

Yemen, the poorest country in West Asia, has faced an eight-year, US-backed bombing campaign that has destroyed the country’s entire infrastructure. Hundreds of thousands of Yemenis have been killed because of US-made bombs that have been dropped using US intelligence with warplanes whose pilots were trained by the US and UK military.

Rights groups accuse the US and its allies, including Canada and European countries of being directly complicit in the war. Yemeni officials say Saudi Arabia was used as a proxy by Washington and that the US was the one that waged war on it in March 2015.

Such is the damage inflicted on Yemen, which is too difficult to estimate, and U.S. assets should be frozen and used to finance the reconstruction of Yemen.

Yemen is a country that the United Nations has described as having the worst humanitarian crisis in the world.  

Washington’s support for the Israeli regime’s ethnic cleansing, and genocidal terrorism campaign against the Palestinians is well documented.

The list of US wars is long. Washington economically survives on waging wars, and invasions and using proxies to trigger violence, unrest, terrorism, and civil wars in regions well beyond its borders.

From the Vietnam War to the shadow wars in Somalia, Pakistan, and the African continent, why isn’t the US being held accountable? Why are US assets not being frozen? Why are there no punitive actions against Washington? 

 

Iran publishes list of sensitive sites in Israel

Under the guise of reporting on reports by Beirut-based Al Mayadeen, a pan-Arabist satellite news channel, media outlets close to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) have published a list of “sensitive” sites that could be targeted in a future war. The reports listed a number of buildings and sites in Israel in what was clearly intended as a threat, reported The Jerusalem Post.

Iran’s Tasnim News Agency on Monday reported, “In this regard, Al Mayadeen network has published a report on the analysis of Israel’s target bank and the sensitive positions of this regime that can be targeted in any war. At the beginning of this report, the general situation of the Zionist regime at the military level and its equipment has been examined.”

The article included a list of sites in Israel, such as the Knesset, the Prime Minister’s Office and the Defense Ministry. It included what Tasnim characterized as nuclear sites and facilities. In the list of warehouses and facilities, the report included a Rafael Advanced Defense Systems site in Haifa, the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot and the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa.

The report also examined airports and military and intelligence bases. It mentioned civilian airports, such as Ben-Gurion Airport and Ramon Airport near Eilat. A list of military bases followed.

This appears to be one of the few times that Iranian media close to the regime have so openly published what it claims is a list of Israeli sites that could be targeted in a future war. This appears to point to Iran and its proxies’ estimates of their targeting ability.

In the last conflict with Hamas, the terrorist group claimed to have targeted Ramon Airport. Operations at the airport were briefly suspended during that conflict. Hamas also appeared to target other sites that have infrastructure, using large-scale salvos of rockets to try to overwhelm the Iron Dome air-defense system.

Hezbollah has also made threats regarding targeting Israel’s infrastructure, including threatening gas rigs off the coast and industrial sites near Haifa.

The overall context of Iran can be seen as merely bragging and threatening. But it also illustrates the shift in thinking in Tehran and among Iran’s proxy groups. The proxies include Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, the Houthis in Yemen and members of Hashd al-Shaabi in Iraq.

Recent reports that an Iranian IRGC member linked to Iran’s drone program was killed in Syria, and that Iran wants to move air-defense systems to Syria, show Iran’s possible concerns regarding these latest tensions and threats.

Publishing the kind of list that Iran’s pro-regime media published on Monday, listing sites that Iran thinks are sensitive, can be seen as a message to Israel.

It can also be seen as illustrating that Tehran believes the conflict with Israel is entering a strategic stage in which Iran would like to supply proxy groups in Lebanon and Syria with more advanced weapons, including drones and precision-guided munitions that can target the sites Al Mayadeen listed.

Iran has increased its drone threats against Israel in recent years, and Tehran works closely with Hamas and Hezbollah to try to learn from past conflicts and tensions with Israel.

 

 

 

Biological war suspected in Syria and Lebanon

Cholera continues to sweep through Syria and Lebanon at an alarming pace, leaving thousands sick and hundreds dead. The number of cases of the bacterial disease in both countries is steadily increasing, with UNICEF estimating the total in Syria at 35,569 while the Ministry of Public Health puts that in Lebanon at 3,369. 

According to the European Union, the causes of the outbreak in Syria include drought, economic decline, and the battered state of the country’s water infrastructure, which leaves 47% of the population relying on unsafe sources of water for their daily needs.

Cholera is contracted by ingesting contaminated food or drinking water and causes intestinal problems and dehydration that can be fatal unless treated quickly. The key to fighting off the disease is good hygiene and clean water, yet in some remote and undeveloped areas in Syria access to these is scarce, meaning there is a real chance that the number of cases could soar.

In late September thousands of people across Syria started complaining of acute diarrhea, and the number of cases has grown steadily since.

According to the International Rescue Committee (IRC), part of the cholera outbreak was due to cowboy merchants near the Euphrates River running a water scam, whereby they sold unclean water from unregulated trucks and billed it as clean.

Syria’s problems with water treatment are far broader and largely due to the impact of the decade-long war: Nearly two-thirds of the country’s water plants, half of its pumping stations, and one-third of its water towers have been damaged because of the conflict.

The unofficial total is thought to be higher — and 35,000 suspected cases. The scale and speed of the outbreak has prompted the EU to act, providing €700,000 in humanitarian aid to contain the epidemic. 

Cholera spreads into Lebanon

As the outbreak in Syria has grown, cholera has spread to neighboring Lebanon, which itself suffers from an economic collapse, an ongoing political crisis, and a plethora of other problems.

The transmission of the disease has been facilitated by the free movement between the two countries. Lebanon is home to a large number of Syrian refugees, estimated at 1.5 million, or one-fourth of the total population.

After cholera spread to Lebanon, the World Health Organization (WHO) assessed the risk of an outbreak there as high due to the shortage of drinking water and the country's fragile and strained health system. A lack of electricity and a significant shortage of fresh water in Lebanon have placed further pressure on the system.  

The first cases in Lebanon were reported in early October. Speaking about them at the time, Lebanese Health Minister Firas Abiad said, “The common point between these cases is the majority of patients are displaced Syrians.” He added, “The absence of basic services, like safe water and sewage networks, in places where refugees gather constitutes a fertile ground for the epidemic too.”

According to official figures from Lebanon’s Ministry of Public Health, as of Nov. 13 around 3,369 people have been infected and 18 have died in the first cholera outbreak in the country in more than 30 years.

UNICEF has taken rapid action to help with the effort in Lebanon, distributing 80,000 liters of fuel to water pumping and wastewater treatment stations in locations with confirmed and suspected cases, as well as procuring emergency medical supplies to treat cholera, such as oral rehydration salts and treatment kits.

The WHO has also gotten involved, helping to arrange a shipment of 600,000 doses of cholera vaccine. A vaccination campaign in Lebanon was launched on November 12, 2022 targeting both Lebanese and refugees.

The epidemic is spreading quickly in both countries and threatens to plunge Syria and Lebanon into more uncertainty, despair, and crisis. Unless the fundamental drivers are addressed and water treatment plants and facilities, especially in Syria, are improved, outbreaks will no doubt reoccur in the future with regularity.

Unveiling the real face of United States

The United States has been involved in hundreds of wars, invasions, coups and conflicts around the globe, yet it claims to be the flag-bearer of the international fight for freedom, liberation and human rights.

Even a cursory look reveals that in addition to its crimes, atrocities and attempts to divide countries, Washington stands accused of seditious acts through a widespread social media campaign and its embassies around the globe have been censured for their role in destabilizing different regions of the world.

It is often alleged that the United States itself was founded on violence against the indigenous people of America and since then it has survived on instigating violence with its hegemonic dreams and hopes of global hegemony following the collapse of the British Empire.

Over the past two decades Washington has had its eyes on West Asia with the disastrous invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as its support for Takfiri terrorist groups in countries such as Syria and Libya and in particular Iran.

It has since expanded its warmongering approach towards Eastern Europe with the aim of containing rising superpowers such as Russia. It has also pinned its hopes on China’s domestic issues such as Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet, Xinjiang and elsewhere with the hope of containing the rising economic and military power of Beijing. In essence, what is very clear is that wherever there is a US presence, there is also insecurity and no stability in that part of the world.

President Joe Biden claims the US will free Iran. Speaking at a campaign speech in California recently, he said, "Don't worry, we're gonna free Iran". The reality is, as noted by Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, Iran was freed from US captivity by toppling the Pahlavi regime. 

"I am telling Biden that Iran was freed 43 years ago," Raisi said in reference to the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

It is also important to note that the Iranian people were free in 1953 before the American CIA and British MI6 orchestrated a coup that toppled the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq and replaced it with a puppet regime to loot the country’s large oil and gas resources.

This is something both Washington and its Western allies publicly acknowledge. The reality is that the US has been trying to repeat the exact same scenario in Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. It has no interest in freedom or the livelihoods of Iranian people. Experts say human rights are observed in Iran more than the United States where minority groups, including Black Americans, face systematic discrimination.

The US claims it wants to free the Iranian nation while at the same time it has imposed the harshest ever sanctions on Iranian people that have caused the majority of the country's population to suffer. American sanctions prevented and continue to prevent patients suffering from serious diseases, such as cancer or rare skin diseases, to gain access to vital medicines by banning money transfer from Iran. This is under the name of "US freedom".

American widespread support for riots in Iran over the past few weeks have also led to the brutal death of police forces. This is the freedom and human rights that America seeks to spread and preach about. 

The closer the United States approaches Iranian borders or any other border in West Asia and beyond, the more insecurity grows in that country. And the US has dozens of military bases surrounding Iranian borders but an independent Iran has proven it has the capability to prevent the Pentagon from toppling the Islamic Republic because of Tehran's military might.

The governments and kingdoms that have linked their own national security interests (knowingly or unknowingly, willingly or unwillingly) to the US have been toppled because of their lack of sovereignty.

In cases where they have not been toppled, the US is stirring sedition and divide nations. This policy of spreading instability helps American arms manufacturers make lucrative profits from weapons deliveries, as has been witnessed in many countries, such as Cuba and other Latin American countries and more recently to Syria, Libya, Ukraine, etc.  

The US State Department has demanded that North Korea refrain from taking any defensive measures to protect its territory, and instead engage in dialogue. This is while the United States has hundreds of warplanes buzzing around North Korean borders in joint war games that have been extended and which Pyongyang views as a rehearsal for an imminent invasion. North Korea has test-fired ballistic missiles in response to these war games and Pyongyang, unsurprisingly, has been denounced by Washington for stirring up trouble.

The US is allowed to hold the largest ever war games next to North Korea with the deployment of B-1B strategic bombers but the North is not allowed to test its own missiles to protect its territorial integrity.

The US Navy missile-guided destroyers and other warships including US warplane carriers and strike groups regularly sail in the South China Sea and expect China to remain silent, which by the way Beijing has exercised praiseworthy patience with its diplomatic approach to the US provocations. A reflection of how one country is not after seeking military confrontation and how another has a warmongering approach under the pretext of spreading freedom that nobody even requested in the first place.

Critics argue that the delusional idea that Washington can provide security guarantees for another country can’t be further from the truth. The fact of the matter is, as history has shown and proven, the US only looks after its own interests, makes lucrative profit from its military adventurism and once these America’s interests are gone, so are the alleged security guarantees that Washington once promised to provide for certain governments and rulers and kings.

 

Can Iraqi mediation bring Saudi Arabia and Iran closer?

According to a report by Saudi Gazette, Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi paid a visit to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, during which he met Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman. The visit was followed by another visit to the Iranian capital Tehran, during which he met senior Iranian officials of that country.

What emerged from these two visits was an attempt of mediation to ease the atmosphere and reduce tension in the region, through dialogue between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

There has been no halt for the Iraqi attempts of mediation over the past few years, especially after the assumption of office by Al-Kadhimi as prime minister of the country. Al-Kadhimi is a respectable leader for Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom sees him as a patriotic figure who works sincerely to resolve the huge crises that are afflicting Iraq.

The Iraqi viewpoint is that crises in inter-regional relations produce negative impact on Iraq internally. The more the region moves towards resolving crises and easing tension, the more this gives a comfortable ground for rulers in Mesopotamia.

It is true that the crises in Iraq are structural and it is very difficult to overcome most of these without understanding all the crises in their entirety. There is a possibility to mitigate the impact of these dilemmas, and perhaps the most important of them is the security dilemma.

It is ironic that Saudi Arabia, in its understanding and approach, is betting on Iran, which is striving to be a national state, and this is a major point of contention with Iran. The latter is betting on pre-state groups, and even supports them through illegal channels far from what is supposed to be from a national state, whether the militias in Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon and others.

Restoring the national state will not be an easy matter after years of tampering with the social fabric in the countries of the region, which negatively affected the security and stability of the entire region.

It goes without saying that restoration of the state’s presence and roles through internal dialogue and negotiations and by stopping states from interfering in the internal affairs of other states, all of this would contribute to averting these states and the entire region from bloodshed.

Saudi Arabia spares no effort in extending the hand of dialogue to all who want to reach to this end, despite the pile up of discouraging experiences in terms of dialogue.

A point of concern is the arms race that Tehran wants to launch. It will not serve anyone, and it will cause serious consequences for Iran itself. Here we are talking about two aspects: The first is the nuclear program and the anxiety it causes to countries in the region and the lack of confidence in Iranian promises, especially with the increase in the enrichment rate and the secret aspects that Iran seeks to hide.

The second aspect is the program of drones and ballistic missiles that pose a serious threat to the entire region, and in this also there is a threat to the arms race that has already begun.

Serious dialogue to reach a security system can be a window not to resolve crises, as we all wish, but at least to manage them. As for the idea of dialogue for the sake of image, it will not work as the region had tried it during the past decades, a dialogue that results in smiles in front of cameras but fears remain.

What is worst is that Tehran is using this dialogue to continue its troubling policies, all of which will not be useful.

Saudi Arabia, under the leadership of King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, continues its efforts in the region to restore stability, avoid tension, and defuse crises whenever it is possible.

Exploring motive behind attack on Israeli ship

What makes the attack on Mercer Street puzzling is its timing, as it occurred just days before the inauguration of the newly elected president of Iran, the ultraconservative hardliner Ebrahim Raisi.

Could Raisi have ordered a provocative attack on an Israeli-managed vessel, just days before taking office, when his highest priority is a lifting of the "maximum pressure" sanctions imposed on his country by former President Donald Trump? Why?

Would Raisi put at risk his principal diplomatic goal, just to get even with Israel for some earlier pinprick strike in the tit-for-tat war in which Iran and Israel have been engaged for years? Again, why?

If not Raisi, could the outgoing president, the moderate Hassan Rouhani, have ordered such an attack on his last hours in office and risk igniting a war with Israel and the US that his country could not win?

Could the attack have been the work of rogue elements in the Iranian Republican Guard Corps? Gantz and Foreign Minister Yair Lapid claim that Saeed Ara Jani, head of the drones section of the IRGC, "is the man personally responsible for the terror attacks in the Gulf of Oman."

Or was this simply a reflexive Iranian reprisal for Israeli attacks?

For years, Israel and Iran have been in a shadow war, with Iran backing Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthi rebels in Yemen, and the Shia militia in Syria and Iraq.

Israel has both initiated and responded to attacks with strikes on Iranian-backed militia in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, and by sabotaging Iran’s nuclear program and assassinating its nuclear scientists.

But whoever was behind the attack in the Gulf of Oman, and whatever the political motive, the US was not the target, and the US should not respond militarily to a drone strike that was not aimed at us.

No one has deputized us to police the Middle East, and we have not prospered these last two decades by having deputized ourselves.

With America leaving Afghanistan and US troops in Iraq transiting out of any "combat" role, now is not the time to get us ensnared in a new war with Iran.

It was in an August, 57 years ago, that the Tonkin Gulf incident occurred, which led America to plunge into an eight-year war in Vietnam.

President Joe Biden’s diplomatic goal with Iran, since taking office, has been the resurrection of the 2015 nuclear deal from which former President Donald Trump walked away. In return for Iran’s reacceptance of strict conditions on its nuclear program, the US has offered a lifting of Trump’s sanctions.

Whoever launched the drone strike sought to ensure that no new US-Iran deal is consummated, that US sanctions remain in place, and that a US war with Iran remain a possibility.

But, again, why would Tehran carry out such a drone attack and kill crewmen on an Israeli-managed vessel – then loudly deny it?

Since he took office, Biden has revealed his intent to extricate the US from the "forever wars" of the Middle East and to pivot to the Far East and China. By this month’s end, all US forces are to be out of Afghanistan, and the 2,500 US troops still in Iraq are to be repurposed, no longer to be designated as combat troops.

Those behind this attack on the Israeli-managed vessel do not want to reduce the possibility of war between the United States and Iran.

What after ceasefire?

Israel and Hamas finally agreed to a ceasefire on Thursday, ending a bruising 11-day war that caused widespread destruction in the Gaza Strip and brought life in much of Israel to a standstill. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accepted the Egyptian proposal and Hamas was quick to follow the suit.

In a statement, Netanyahu’s office said the security cabinet unanimously approved the proposal after recommendations from the military chief of staff and other top defence officials. The statement boasted of significant achievements in the operation, some of which are unprecedented.

The agreement would close the heaviest round of fighting between the bitter enemies since a 50-day war in 2014, and once again there was no clear winner. Israel inflicted heavy damage on Hamas but was unable to prevent the rocket fire that has disrupted life for millions of Israelis for more than a decade.

The fighting began on May 10, when Hamas fighters in Gaza fired long-range rockets toward Jerusalem after days of clashes between Palestinian protesters and Israeli police at the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound.

Israel launched hundreds of airstrikes targeting what it said was Hamas’ military infrastructure. Hamas fired over 4,000 rockets at Israeli cities, with hundreds falling short and most of the rest intercepted.

The OIC statement came after a virtual meeting in which Saudi Arabia condemned the violation of the sanctity of Muslim holy sites and evictions of Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud urged the global community to end the escalation in violence and revive peace negotiations based on a two-state solution.

Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates called for a ceasefire. "De-escalation and the highest degree of restraint are important to avoid dragging the region to new levels of instability," said UAE Minister of State for International Cooperation Reem al-Hashimy.

“The massacre of Palestinian children follows the purported normalization,” Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said. “This criminal and genocidal regime has once again proven that friendly gestures only aggravate its atrocities.” Zarif accused Israel of “genocide and crimes against humanity”.

"Each time Israel hears a foreign leader speak of its right to defend itself it is further emboldened to continue murdering entire families in their sleep," Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki told the Security Council.

The OIC video conference meeting attracted criticism on countries like Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates, which reached normalization deals last year to recognize Israel. Supporters of the Palestinians criticized the countries for recognizing Israel before the formation of an independent Palestinian state.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu joined Zarif in criticizing the normalization. Cavusoglu called for an international protection mechanism for Palestinian civilians and told the OIC that Israel should be held accountable for war crimes and that the International Criminal Court should play a role.

The United States told the United Nations Security Council that it has made clear to Israel, the Palestinians and others that it is ready to offer support should the parties seek a ceasefire to end the worsening violence by Israel in Gaza.

"The United States has been working tirelessly through diplomatic channels to try to bring an end to this conflict," US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield told the 15-member council. "Because we believe Israelis and Palestinians equally have a right to live in safety and security."

"We call upon the US to shoulder its responsibilities, take a just position, and together with most of the international community support the Security Council in easing the situation," said Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who chaired Sunday's meeting because China is president for May.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said the United Nations is "actively engaging all sides toward an immediate ceasefire" and called on them "to allow mediation efforts to intensify and succeed".

Way Forward

These quotes clearly indicate that the root cause of the problem is known to all and they are also aware of the solution. Following two states theory can help in establishing sustainable peace in the region. There is a need to convert ‘Gaza the world’s largest open air prison’ into home for Palestinians. United States and other world powers should support Palestine Authority (PA) to initiate economic activities. On top of all Israel must immediately stop eviction of Palestinians from Jerusalem and construction of settlements on occupied land.

Media in United States in the grip of intelligence agents

Some of my blog readers did not like a term coined by me “Dishonest Western Media”. Today I got an opportunity to read an article in "Information Clearing House", I am happy to share it verbatim.

After years in the shadows overseeing espionage, kill programs, warrantless wiretapping, entrapment, psyops and other covert operations, national security establishment retirees are are turning to a new line of work where they can carry out their imperial duties.

That is, propagandizing the public on cable news. Reborn as cable news pundits, these people are cashing in. So many years working in the dark, only to emerge in the studio lights of the same networks that rail all day everyday against state TV from countries that America hates.

It may look crazy how many former spooks have been hired at corporate news outlets like CNN and MSNBC as “analysts”. After spending their careers serving the national security state, they get to shape the news under the guise of expertise. It’s like state TV

Following is but a partial list of prominent former spooks turned mainstream media pundits and analysts, to say nothing of the even greater numbers of retired generals the network continuously rely on. 

Former CIA Director John Brennan who is now an NBC News senior national security and intelligence analyst

Fran Townsend, former homeland security advisor to George W. Bush. She's now a CBS News senior national security analyst. 

But CNN takes the cake — it's the biggest spook show of all

Jim Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence, now a CNN national security analyst

Retired General Michael Hayden, former director of the CIA and the NSA, now a CNN national security analyst

Asha Rangappa, former FBI special agent, now CNN legal analyst

James Gagliano, a retired FBI supervisory special agent, now a CNN law enforcement analyst

Tony Bliken, former deputy secretary of state and former deputy national security advisor, and now CNN global affairs analyst

Mike Rogers, former chair of the House Intelligence Committee, now CNN national security commentator

Samantha Vinograd senior advisor to the national security advisor under President Obama, now CNN national security analyst

Steven Hall, retired CIA chief of Russia operations, now a CNN national security analyst

Philip Mudd, former CIA counter-terrorism official, now CNN counter-terrorism analyst

Overtures and Confrontations between United States and Iran

I am an ardent reader of the proceedings of ‘United States Institute of Peace’, particularly on Iran. Today, I am referring to a few snapshots of its recent release on Iran. 

I want my readers to read the briefs but also keep two points in minds: 1) since Islamic revolution in Iran, US has emerged as its worst enemy and 2) every failed attempt to ‘change the regime in Iran’ adds to US frustration and desperation.

Keeping Iran under ‘stringent economic sanctions’ has not weakened it, on the contrary, Iran has emerged the biggest resistance in the creation of ‘US hegemony in the Arabian Peninsula’.

According to United States Institute of Peace, “Half of American adults expect the US to go to war with Iran “within the next few years.”  In a survey conducted by Reuters of a representative sample of 1,007 adults were asked a series of questions from May 17-20 amid heightened tensions between Washington and Tehran. Some 53 percent of adults considered Iran a “serious” or “imminent” threat. But only 12 percent said US forces should conduct a preemptive attack on Iranian military interests.” 

Since the 1979 revolution, Washington and Tehran have gyrated between hostile actions and diplomatic overtures. Relations have never recovered from the seizure of the US Embassy and 52 diplomats. The US attempted military action to end the drama but eventually turned to diplomacy. Since then, the Islamic Republic has been linked, directly or indirectly, to the deaths of hundreds of Americans, while the US has been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Iranians. Yet both countries have also dabbled in bold outreach, with mixed results.  

Lately, Acting US Defense Secretary, Patrick Shanahan has reiterated that the US does not want to go to war with Iran. On May 21, he told reporters that recent US moves have deterred attacks on US interests in the Middle East. “Our biggest focus at this point is to prevent Iranian miscalculation,” he said.

US lawmakers have been divided over what to do next to deal with the escalating tensions between the US and Iran. The split is largely along partisan lines. Democrats voiced concern that the Trump administration was leading the US into a new Middle East war. Republicans largely denied that the administration sought war with Iran but emphasized that the US would respond forcefully if its forces in the Middle East were attacked.  

A peep into recent history indicates President Trump’s election produced dramatic change in US policy in 2017. The US withdrew from the nuclear deal with Iran and the word’s major powers in May 2018. The Trump administration has been following a “maximum pressure campaign” to press Iran to change its policies and negotiate a more comprehensive deal.

Since taking office, Trump has taken an increasingly aggressive posture toward Iran. The tone was set less than two weeks into Trump’s presidency when then-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn responded to an Iranian missile test. “The Obama Administration failed to respond adequately to Tehran’s malign actions—including weapons transfers, support for terrorism, and other violations of international norms,” he said. “As of today, we are officially putting Iran on notice.” 

The recent attacks on ships near a UAE port provided the US an opportunity to accumulate its troops, naval ships and aircrafts closer to Iran to warn of a preemptive attack. Though, both Washington and Tehran have been saying ‘we do not want a war’, it is feared that any adventurous move by any of the proxies could ignite a spark enough to break a war between two mind sets, Zionist and Islamisit.