Angry Americans Hysterical Reactions

After Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi virtually addressed the 76th United Nations General Assembly, many political analysts commented on the contents of his speech. However, what is interesting is that the authors of the JCPOA are crying over an empty coffin. 

To examine this issue, let’s review what the president told the UN General Assembly.

“Sanctions are the US new way of war with the nations of the world,” Raisi said at his speech. 

Is this a remark that anyone can object it? No. The fact is the United States has imposed crippling sanctions against Iran cannot be denied. Even the American or hardliner Israeli analysts admit this. As the Iranian president rightfully said, sanctions against the Iran started “not with my country’s nuclear program; they even predate the Islamic Revolution and go back to the year 1951 when oil nationalization went underway in Iran…”

The United States went too far in its illegal sanctions on Iran to the extent that strict financial sanctions even impeded the import of medicine and medical equipment to Iran at the time of the global Coronavirus pandemic. There is little doubt that the Americans committed medical terrorism against the Iranian people. Raisi also pointed to this fact in his speech.

“Sanctions, especially on medicine at the time of the COVID-19 pandemic, are crimes against humanity,” he said.

He also emphasized, “I, on behalf of the Iranian nation and millions of refugees hosted by my country, would like to condemn the continued illegal US sanctions especially in the area of humanitarian items, and demand that this organized crime against humanity be recorded as a symbol and reality of the so-called American human rights.”

Soon after the speech, a network of analysts and commentators started bashing Raisi, as well as screaming over a revival of the JCPOA. Since Raisi administration took the power in early August, Iran started to patiently evaluate the situation to return to the negotiations table. In a phone call on 14th September 201 with former British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian said that Iran is in the process of “consultations on how to continue the Vienna talks,. He reiterated to welcome negotiations that have tangible results and secure the rights and interests of the Iranian people.”   

This is what the Iranian president had previously touched on during first TV interview on 5th September.

“Negotiation is an option as a tool for diplomacy, but negotiation under pressure and threats is not acceptable at all,” Raisi insisted.

After Raisi’s speech, Ali Vaez, Director of Iran Project and Senior Advisor to the Crisis Group tweeted, “.@raisi_com’s speech at #UNGA was one of the most anti-American speeches I’ve heard from an Iranian president in years.” 

Barbara Slavin, Director of the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council, replied to Vaez’s tweet, saying, “As harsh as @Ahmadinejad1956 but more coldly rational. Did you notice at the end, #Raisi said #Iran wanted 'large scale economic and political cooperation with all countries of the world? We need to remember, as well, that he is only the front man, not the decider.” 

Yet, the most predictable strategy was outlined by the CEO of The Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), Mark Dubowitz.

He tweeted, “Raisi’s new negotiating team will ask for total sanctions relief and give less than the JCPOA. @USEnvoyIran @Rob_Malley will give them 97% and then pretend that they held the line and that there’s a “longer and stronger” deal to be had.”

It seems that the thinkers, who helped draft the JCPOA, don’t agree with the text anymore, as it ostensibly contradicts their desires. The plan is now clear. Bashing Raisi and his foreign policy team with every tool in order to write a “longer and stronger” deal to satisfy desires is not helpful at all. But what is really a longer and stronger deal? 

The United States has always been interested in dragging the Iranian missile program into the negotiations. For eight years, since the intensive negotiations started, Iran has made it crystal clear that its defensive capabilities are not up for negotiations. Yet, the United States is using various pressure tools to impose a deal on Iran. Iran has always reiterated that it will only go back to the original 2015 JCPOA text, if and only if the US verifiably lifts all sanctions. 

As for Raisi’s speech, he condemned US terrorism and extremism in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, asked for the lifting of all sanctions, and restated that Iran will return to the Vienna talks were intended to revitalize the nuclear deal.

If this is too harsh for the Crisis Group, then it shows that the JCPOA revival is not their concern. Had it been so, they would not have objected to a rational speech in which Raisi insisted on the need to lift sanctions. It is advised that the thinkers would not shed crocodile tears over the JCPOA revival. 

Pakistan Stock Exchange Benchmark Index Declines 3.4%WoW

Moving along the trend set in motion in previous week, Pakistan Stock Exchange posted negative performance throughout the week. On last trading day of the week ended on 24th September 2021, bench mark index closed at 45,073 points, touching a low of 44,788 points. 

During the outgoing week, the index cumulatively lost 1,562 points or 3.4%. A 25bps hike in interest rates by the central bank suggests further hikes in future.

Other major news flows during the week included: 1) the central bank tightening regulations on consumer financing and mandating banks to share 5-day import payments schedule, 2) the GoP considering re-imposing higher regulatory duties to curb auto imports, 3) Petroleum division proposing to increase gas prices by up to 35 percent, 4) Pakistan planning to issue international Sukuk in October 2021 to raise US$1.5 billion and 5) EU extending GSP+ status for Pakistan with six new conventions.

Volumes relatively dried up with average daily turnover sliding to 383.5 million shares as against 400.1 million shares a week ago. Major activity tilted towards main board items. Pressure was witnessed across sectors, with Engineering hit the most, registering a decline of 6.3%WoW followed by Auto Assemblers, down 5.9%WoW. Refineries emerged the worst performer (down 17.2%) over uncertainty on refinery policy. The resignation of SAPM Tabish Gauhar, the architect of the Policy, hints towards possible delays in finalization of the Policy.

Flow-wise, Foreigners and Others played a major role in absorbing selling pressure by other participants, with cumulative net inflow at US$12.6 million, while Individuals and Companies cumulatively squared US$11.0 million positions. The major gainers were: HMM, PSEL, SCBPL, ARPL and SNGPL, while laggards were, ANL, ATRL (down 17.9%WoW), BYCO, PAEL and BNWM.

Market is likely to remain volatile in the near term, direction to be determined by IMF review. Reversing certain incentives such as in the case of Autos should be viewed as material positive particularly from a macro perspective, easing pressure on external account. Moreover, investors should adopt a top-down approach to investing where possibility of further interest rate hikes could bring Banking Sector into limelight, while Techs and Textiles (on currency depreciation where stronger earnings are yet to be priced in) are other sectors of interest. Techs may remain under pressure owing to structural impediments faced by one of the companies. The weakness should be taken as an opportunity to accumulate.

United States supports Iron Dome funding for Israel

The US House of Representative passed legislation on Thursday to provide US$ one billion to support Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system.

The standalone bill to ensure the Iron Dome funding passed handily on a bipartisan basis, 420-9, with two Democrats voting present. Eight liberal Democrats and one Republican voted in opposition.

The debate over the Iron Dome funding once again laid bare the internal Democratic divisions over Israel, which have repeatedly flared since they took over the House majority two years ago.

Those tensions flashed on the House floor Thursday as Rep. Rashida Tlaib, the lone Palestinian American member of Congress, spoke out against the Iron Dome funding.

“We cannot be talking only about Israelis’ need for safety at a time when Palestinians are living under a violent apartheid system,” Tlaib said, calling the Israeli government an apartheid regime.

“We should also be talking about Palestinian need for security from Israeli attacks,” she said. 

Rep. Ted Deutch, who is Jew, subsequently abandoned his prepared remarks and angrily blasted Tlaib for having besmirched our ally.

“I cannot, I cannot allow one of my colleagues to stand on the floor of the House of Representatives and label the Jewish democratic state of Israel an apartheid state. I reject it,” Deutch said.

The Senate is expected to consider the standalone Iron Dome funding bill at a later time.

United States paving way for export of Iranian fuel to Afghanistan

Reportedly, the US administration is reviewing waiver of 2018 sanctions, which allowed Afghanistan to purchase Iranian gasoline and diesel.

According to the details a State Department spokesperson told London-based Middle East Eye online news outlet that the waiver put in place by former president Donald Trump's administration remains under active review after the overthrow of the Afghan government last month.

An amendment to repeal a part of the waiver reached the House Foreign Relations Committee last month but was blocked by the Committee Chairman Gregory Meeks.

According to Alex Zerden, who led the Treasury Department's office at the US embassy in Kabul from 2018 to 2019, the sanctions waiver on Iranian fuel exports to Afghanistan was intended at the time to protect Kabul even as Washington was pushing ahead its maximum pressure campaign against Tehran. 

“There were real concerns about Iran sanctions harming Afghanistan's economy and a waiver to import Iranian fuel was seen as crucial,” Zerden noted.

Trump left the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018 and reimposed the sanctions on Tehran that had been lifted.

Zerden said the 2018 waiver on Iranian fuel sales to Afghanistan was intended to allow fuel traders to skip the sanctions imposed on Tehran, but not Taliban sanctions.

Taliban have already been subject to a range of US sanctions under an executive order enacted after the 9/11 attacks.

Howard Shatz, a senior economist at the Rand Corporation, said that even if Washington wanted to enforce the sanctions, it could prove difficult. “We don't have a lot of leverage with Iran and Afghanistan,” he said.

Zerden said, "Enforcing violations of sanctions would be difficult because this occurs outside formal financial channels." 

The fuel sales take place in cash at the Iranian-Afghan border. Most of the transactions occur through Afghanistan's informal Hawala banking system.

The main Iranian fuel exports to Afghanistan are gasoline and diesel. Iran exported about 400,000 tons of fuel to its eastern neighbor from May 2020 to May 2021, according to a report published by PetroView, an Iranian oil and gas research and consultancy platform.

Iranian fuel flows have been vital to Afghanistan in the last few years, according to traders and an Afghan Government report.

Between March 2020 and March 2021, Iran accounted for US$367 million of imports, mostly fuel, according to the report compiled by the Afghan Ministry of Finance, chambers of commerce, and data from private enterprises.

Meeting of Foreign Ministers of SAARC countries scheduled for 25th September cancelled

A meeting of foreign ministers of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) countries, scheduled on Saturday, 25th September 2021 in New York, has been cancelled.

It is being stated by certain quarters that Pakistan wanted the Taliban to represent Afghanistan in the SAARC meet.

India along with some other members objected to the proposal and due to lack of consensus or concurrence, the meeting has to be cancelled.

Nepal is the host of the meeting, which is annually held on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly.

An official letter sent by the SAARC secretariat to the foreign ministries of the eight countries stated it received a note verbal or unsigned diplomatic correspondence from Nepal’s foreign ministry that stated the informal meeting of foreign ministers will not take place because of the lack of concurrence from all member states.

Sovereign Palestinian State: Best option for maintaining peace in Middle East

US President Joe Biden said on Tuesday that a sovereign and democratic Palestinian state is the best way to ensure Israel's future. “We must seek a future of greater peace and security for all people of the Middle East,” Biden said in a speech at the UN General Assembly.

“The commitment of the United States to Israel's security is without question and our support for an independent Jewish state is unequivocal,” he said.

“But I continue to believe that a two-state solution is the best way to ensure Israel's future as a Jewish democratic state, living in peace alongside a viable, sovereign and democratic Palestinian state,” he said.

“We're a long way from that goal at this moment but we should never allow ourselves to give up on the possibility of progress.”

The US will help resolve crises from Iran to the Korean Peninsula to Ethiopia, Biden told the annual UNGA gathering.

The world faces a “decisive decade”, Biden said, one in which leaders must work together to combat a raging coronavirus pandemic, global climate change and cyber threats. He said the US will double its financial commitment on climate aid and spend $10 billion to fight hunger.

Biden did not ever say the words “China” or “Beijing” but sprinkled implicit references to America's increasingly powerful authoritarian competitor throughout his speech, as the two nations butt heads in the Indo-Pacific and on trade and human rights issues.

He said the US will compete vigorously, both economically and to push democratic systems and rule of law.

“We'll stand up for our allies and our friends and oppose attempts by stronger countries to dominate weaker ones, whether through changes to territory by force, economic coercion, technical exploitation or disinformation. But we're not seeking — I'll say it again — we are not seeking a new Cold War or a world divided into rigid blocs,” Biden said.

Biden came to the UN facing criticism at home and abroad for a chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan that left some Americans and Afghan allies still in that country and struggling to get out.

His vow for allied unity is being tested by a three-way agreement among the US, Australia and Britain that undermined a French submarine deal and left France feeling stabbed in the back.

“We've ended 20 years of conflict in Afghanistan and as we close this era of relentless war, we're opening a new era of relentless diplomacy,” Biden said.

He vowed to defend vital US national interests, but said that “the mission must be clear and achievable,” and the American military “must not be used as the answer to every problem we see around the world”.

Biden, a Democrat, hoped to present a compelling case that the US remains a reliable ally to its partners around the world after four years of America First policies pursued by his Republican predecessor Donald Trump.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, who begins a second five-year term at the helm of the world ,warned earlier of the dangers of the growing gap between China and the US, the world's largest economies.

“I fear our world is creeping towards two different sets of economic, trade, financial and technology rules, two divergent approaches in the development of artificial intelligence — and ultimately two different military and geopolitical strategies,” Guterres said.

“This is a recipe for trouble. It would be far less predictable than the Cold War,” Guterres said.

Chinese President’s most audacious geopolitical bet

A head-spinning series of seemingly disparate moves over recent months add up to nothing less than a generational wager that Chinese President, Xi Jinping  can produce the world’s dominant power for the foreseeable future by doubling down on his state-controlled economy, party-disciplined society, nationalistic propaganda, and far-reaching global influence campaigns.

With each week, Xi raises the stakes further, from narrowing seemingly mundane personal freedoms like karaoke bars or a teenager’s permitted time for online gaming to three hours weekly to the multi million US dollar investor hit from his increased controls on China’s biggest technology companies and their foreign listings.  

It is only in the context of Xi’s increased repressions at home and expanded ambitions abroad that one can fully understand Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s decision this week to enter a new defense pact, which he called “a forever agreement,” with the United States and the United Kingdom.

Much of the news focus was either on the eight nuclear-powered submarines that Australia would deploy or the spiraling French outrage that their own deal to sell diesel submarines to Australia was undermined by what French officials called a “betrayal” and a “stab in the back” from close allies. France went so far as to recall its ambassador to the United States for the first time in the history of the NATO alliance.

All that noise should not distract from the more significant message of the ground-breaking agreement. Prime Minister Morrison saw more strategic advantage and military capability from the US-UK alignment in a rapidly shifting Indo-Pacific atmosphere, replacing his previous stance of trying to balance US and Chinese interests.

“The relatively benign environment we’ve enjoyed for many decades in our region is behind us,” Morrison said on Thursday. “We have entered a new era with challenges for Australia and our partners.”

For China, that new era has many faces: a rapid rollback of economic liberalization, a crackdown on individual freedoms, an escalation of global influence efforts and military buildup, all in advance of the 20th national party congress in October 2022, where Xi hopes to seal his place in history and his continued rule.

Former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, one of the world’s leading China experts, points to Xi’s “bewildering array” of economic policy decisions in a recent speech as president of the Asia Society.

They started last October with the shocking suspension of Alibaba financial affiliate Ant Group’s planned initial public offering in Hong Kong and Shanghai, clearly aimed at Alibaba co-founder Jack Ma. Then in April, Chinese regulators imposed a $3 billion fine on Alibaba for “monopolistic behavior.”

In July, China’s cyber regulator removed ride-hailing giant Didi from app stores, while an investigative unit launched an examination of the company’s compliance with Chinese data-security laws.

Then this month, China’s Transport Ministry regulators summoned senior executives from Didi, Meituan and nine other ride-hailing companies, ordering them to “rectify” their digital misconduct. The Chinese state then took an equity stake in ByteDance, the owner of TikTok, and in Weibo, the micro-blogging platform.

Xi was ready to accept the estimated US$1.1 trillion cost in shareholder value wiped from China’s top six technology stocks alone between February and August. That doesn’t factor in further losses among the education, transportation, food delivery, entertainment and video gaming industries.

Less noticed have been a dizzying array of regulatory actions and policy moves whose sum purpose appears to be strengthening state control over, well, just about everything. 

“The best way to summarize it,” says Rudd, “is that Xi Jinping has decided that, in the overall balance between the roles of the state and the market in China, it is in the interests of the Party to pivot toward the state.” Xi is determined to transform modern China into a global great power, “but a great power in which the Chinese Communist Party nonetheless retains complete control.”

That means growing controls as well over the freedoms of its 1.4 billion citizens.

Xi has acted, for example, to restrict the video gaming of school-aged children to three hours a week, and he has banned private tutoring. Chinese regulators have ordered broadcasters to encourage masculinity and remove “sissy men,” or niang pao, from the airwaves. Regulators banned “American Idol”-style competitions and removed from the internet any mention of one of China’s wealthiest actresses, Zhao Wei.

“The orders have been sudden, dramatic and often baffling,” wrote Lily Kuo in the Washington Post. Jude Blanchette of the Center for Strategic and International Studies says, “This is not a sector-by-sector rectification; this is an entire economic, industry and structural rectification.”

At the same time, President Xi has launched a push to share the virtues and successes of the Chinese authoritarian model with the rest of the world. 

“Beijing seeks less to impose a Marxist-Leninist ideology on foreign societies than to legitimate and promote its own authoritarian system,” Charles Edel and David Shullman, the recently appointed director of the Atlantic Council’s new China Global Hub, wrote in “Foreign Affairs.” “The CCP doesn’t seek ideological conformity but rather power, security, and global influence for China and for itself.”

The authors detail China’s global efforts to not remake the world in its image, but rather “to make the world friendlier to its interests — and more welcoming to the rise of authoritarianism in general.”

Those measures include “spreading propaganda, expanding information operations, consolidating economic influence, and meddling in foreign political systems” with the ultimate goal of “hollowing out democratic institutions and norms within and between countries,” Edel and Shullman write.

Within President Xi’s bold bet lie two opportunities for the US and its allies.

The first is that Xi, by overreaching in his controls at home, will undo just the sorts of economic and societal liberalization China needs to succeed. At the same time, the world’s democracies, like Australia, are growing more willing to seek a common cause to address Beijing.

In the end, however, Xi’s concerted moves require an equally concerted response from the world’s democracies. The French-US crisis following the Australian defense deal this week provides just one example of how difficult that will be to achieve and sustain.

Israeli showoff for friends backfires

According to a report by The Tehran Times, in a heavily fictionalized report published on Saturday night in the New York Times, Ronen Bergman, who is mostly known as the official voice of the Israeli regime in the New York Times, claimed to have “revealed” some new, groundbreaking information regarding the assassination of the Iranian scientist, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. 

The report did not add anything to the spectrum of this cowardly assassination by the Mossad. It was mostly information already published in media outlets put together.

The Times claims that its report is “based on interviews with American, Israeli and Iranian officials, including two intelligence officials familiar with the details of the planning and execution of the operation…”

According to the Times, the assassination occurred in the most fictional way, something that could only be spotted at commercial fictions in Hollywood. The authors seem to have forgotten that this is not some Mission Impossible scene.

Many Iranians looked at the report with a pinch of salt. The described fictionalized surveillance operation was something that caught the eyes of many Iranians, as well as a poorly described Fakhrizadeh. Who would have thought that the Times would resort to such desperate measures such as the ring late Fakhrizadeh wore? 

“…the machine gun, the robot, its components and accessories together weigh about a ton. So the equipment was broken down into its smallest possible parts and smuggled into the country piece by piece, in various ways, routes and times, then secretly reassembled in Iran,” Bergman says in the report!

Expressions such as “sending data at the speed of light,” or “Israel had an effective network of collaborators inside Iran” clearly shows that the piece was meant to be written as propaganda for the Israeli regime, and to show off the non-existent high-tech Mossad intelligence facilities. While there are several examples of Iranian intelligence power, which the Tehran Times is not authorized to discuss in detail, Iran has never felt the need to brag about its intelligence activities and continues to do its job in total silence. 

Well, there is no doubt that a report, co-authored by Ronen Bergman, is nothing but a cheesy attempt to promote and propagate Israel for its friends and allies. Now, why is the New York Times becoming a mouthpiece for propagating Israel? The answer lies within the disputes between the EU bloc, the United States, and Israel. 

The Israeli regime looks confused about the new approach taken by the American establishment. The case in point is the embarrassing withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, the AUKUS pact, and even Biden taking a joyful nap in his meeting with the Israeli regime’s Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett. 

The piece says that preparations for the assassination began “after a series of meetings toward the end of 2019 and in early 2020 between Israeli officials, led by the Mossad director, Yossi Cohen, and high-ranking American officials, including President Donald J. Trump, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and the CIA Director, Gina Haspel.” 

Everyone knew that the assassination was done with the backing of the United States and it is evident that such cowardly acts could not have taken place without Washington’s consent. The Times have taken the bull by the horns! 

Bergman who wrote a book titled “Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations”, is the co-author of this piece. It is no surprise to describe the assassination scene like a fictional Hollywood movie. 

The NYT must know that its readers are smart enough to be able to distinguish facts from fiction. It must also remember that it has not revealed a wow! factor. Most of what they published had already been on the news outlets. This is not investigative journalism.

Surge in militant activity in West Bank

According to a report, over the last six months, there has been a notable increase in militant activity in the West Bank, particularly by the members of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. 

A surge in militant activity has been reported in the West Bank. Although, a recent US Department of State Travel Advisory on 13th September warned, ‘exercise increased caution when travelling to the West Bank due to terrorism and civil unrest.’ 

The rise in activity can be linked to a number of factors; the high number of killings of Palestinian Islamic Jihad and al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades militants by Israeli security forces since May and the recent escape of six Palestinian militants from a high-security prison in northern Israel. 

One can look back to the postponement of Palestinian elections and TikTok intifada as the initial stages of this surge. However, it was the conflict between Israel and Palestinian factions in May that spurred the West Bank’s militant groups to become operationally more active. 

On 18th May, Palestinian Islamic Jihad sent one of its militants in Hebron, Islam Zahideh, to attack an IDF post in the West Bank as a part of what Palestinian factions dubbed ‘Sword of Islam’ operation during the Gaza conflict. Zahideh, armed with pipe bombs and a Carlo-style submachine gun, was killed during the attack. Several days later, PIJ acknowledged its responsibility for the attack and named Zahideh as the perpetrator. 

Two weeks after the killing of Zahideh, Fadi Weshat, an al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades member, died from a gunshot wound received by Israeli security forces during clashes in the West Bank. 

On 9th June, Israeli counter-terrorism forces entered Jenin and shot two Palestinian Islamic Jihad members, killing one and capturing the second. 

Two months later, Diya’a al-Sabarini, an al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades militant died of wounds he received after clashing with Israeli security forces in Jenin. 

Several days later, four Palestinians were killed in clashes with Israeli counter-terrorism forces in Jenin. Two of those Palestinians were members of militant groups. 

The deaths of the militants mentioned above, including more than 40 Palestinians killed in a period of six months in clashes with Israeli security forces, have spurred armed groups to march openly in the streets calling for revenge. 

Lastly, the escape of six militants from a high-security prison in northern Israel on 6th September exacerbated the already unstable security situation in the West Bank. Factions held rallies in Gaza and the West Bank threatening a response if the escapees were harmed. 

However, despite weeks of threatening rhetoric from militant groups, including a reported resurrection of the ‘Joint Operations Room’ of Palestinian factions in the West Bank, the last two remaining militants on the run were captured on Sunday by Israeli forces in the militant stronghold of Jenin, unharmed and undefended by Palestinian factions.

The surge in militant activity in the West Bank over the last six months has likely reached its peak with the capture of the last two remaining militants. A few rockets may be fired by Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza out of frustration over the arrests in the coming days, but the success of Israeli security forces in capturing all of the militants alive and unharmed will likely have a stabilizing effect over the coming weeks in the West Bank. 

Amendment introduced in US Defense Budget Bill to suspend sale of arms to Israel

In United States, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has introduced an amendment to the US Defense Budget Bill which would suspend the transfer of US$735 million worth of Boeing Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) to Israel. JDAMs are kits that convert unguided bombs into precision-guided munitions.

The amendment was introduced alongside six others, including one to block arms sales to the Saudi Arabia, allegedly involved in the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and an amendment concerning the US relationship with Colombia.

Ocasio-Cortez’s office announced that the amendment concerning the sale of weapons to Israel was meant to block the transfer of the same kind of Boeing weaponry that the Israeli government used to kill 44 Palestinians in one night in al-Rimal, an Israeli airstrike on Hamas, led to a building collapse killing 44 Gazans.

Israeli Ambassador to the United States and the United Nations, Gilad Erdan criticized Ocasio-Cortez for her new amendment, stating he would expect a Congressperson to understand that Israel is defending its citizens against Hamas.

“Your amendment further legitimizes their heinous attacks against innocent civilians, as well as antisemitic lies,” Erdan wrote on Twitter. “Israel is a world leader in the fight against terrorism, and our partnership has helped prevent terrorist attacks against American citizens,” the ambassador added.

Biden administration approved the sale of US$725 million in JDAMs to Israel in May as Israel and Gaza fought in Operation Guardian of the Walls, according to The Washington Post. Congress was officially notified about the sale about a week before the fighting broke out.

During the fighting, US President Joe Biden expressed support for Israel, saying “my expectation and hope is this will be closing down sooner than later, but Israel has a right to defend itself.”

The congresswoman, along with a number of other House Democrats, including Rashida Tlaib, introduced a similar resolution shortly afterward.

“For decades, the US has sold billions of dollars in weaponry to Israel without ever requiring them to respect basic Palestinian rights. In so doing, we have directly contributed to the death, displacement and disenfranchisement of millions,” said Ocasio-Cortez in a statement in May. “At a time when so many, including President Biden, support a ceasefire, we should not be sending ‘direct attack’ weaponry to the then Prime Minister Netanyahu to prolong this violence.”

The resolution in May was endorsed by over 70 organizations, including IfNotNow, Jewish Voice for Peace Action, and Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Hassan Nasrallah Messiah for Lebanese

In the recent past Lebanon has faced multiple domestic crises. At present one of the biggest challenges facing the country is the unprecedented energy crisis that is literally suffocating a nation struggling to keep the light on. 

This crisis got worse, on the verge of reaching a point where hospitals, shops, bakeries, etc. cannot function because of a lack of fuel. Lebanon was heading towards the unknown. 

Hezbollah devised a plan to alleviate the crisis, while preventing any foreign interference or trouble for Lebanon. 

After careful consideration, Secretary General of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah and other high ranking officials in the movement decided to purchase oil from the Islamic Republic of Iran and bring the oil tankers to Lebanon itself. 

Hezbollah chief said, after being told of possible sanctions or other measures by the United States that could hurt the government if the tankers docked in Lebanon; it decided to dock the first vessel in neighboring Syria and take the cargo by land across Lebanese-Syrian border crossing. 

Nasrallah extended his gratitude to the Syrian government for helping coordinate the logistics of importing this vital commodity. He thanked the Syrian government for understanding the situation of Lebanon and the dangers of Lebanese and Syrian enemies in trying to harm Damascus for the assistance it provided.

The vessel was expected to dock at Syrian seaport by Sunday and the process of unloading and dispatching fuel to Lebanon was has to be completed by Thursday. Hezbollah said, this is the first of many ships to bring oil from Iran to Lebanon.

According to Nasrallah, the negative statements were the following and he noted how they ended up in dustbin of history. 

One: The announcement of importing oil from Iran was just a stunt. However, the oil has arrived.

Two: Those who said the operation will fail because Iran itself has problems exporting gasoline and diesel. 

Three: Those who stated Israel will prevent the tanker from reaching Lebanon or Syria, especially because Hezbollah announced the move publicly on the day of Ashura. It wasn’t a secret operation.

Nasrallah believes it's unfortunate that some had hoped Israel would prevent the ship from reaching Lebanon. 

He highlighted that the 2006 war which created a security equation with Israel is what prevented the regime from stopping the fuel from arriving. This is despite the fact that Tel Aviv is very well aware the arrival of the fuel would increase Hezbollah’s popularity even more, something Israel has, for decades, tried to prevent.

Four: Those who said America will prevent this operation. Nasrallah noted the US knew any action would lead to a reaction “from a certain party”.

The Hezbollah chief said, the US only knows sanctions, tried to pressure Lebanese officials and when that did not work, the US embassy in Beirut presented an alternative plan.

The US plan had already been widely ridiculed among Lebanese commentators and analysts. 

Those who said the import of oil would cause problems for the new government and this never happened.

Five: Finally, those who said this was a sectarian move and the energy would only be distributed to Hezbollah strongholds in Southern Lebanon. Nasrallah said, oil would be sent to every region of Lebanon.

In the upcoming days, the second ship will dock in Syria and will also contain diesel.

A third ship has been loaded with gasoline and the paperwork has been completed for it to sail. The fourth tanker will contain diesel.

The fourth ship will contain diesel because it will arrive at a time when some areas of Lebanon get cold and more diesel is needed than gasoline. 

The Hezbollah chief reiterated the movement is not after trade and profit or competing with energy companies. The initiative is simply adding to a product short in supply. 

Nasrallah studied the distribution process from a humanitarian point of view and came up with the following.

A months’ worth of supply will be offered, free of charge, to government-run hospitals, centers that care for the elderly and vulnerable, every facility that cares for orphans, water facilities in poorer provinces, fire stations, the Lebanese Red Cross. 

The reality of this humanitarian mission cannot be emphasized enough when Hezbollah says it is offering the diesel to the above free of charge. 

The second list will be sold, but also in terms of priority, to those that need the energy most and at a reasonable price whereby other energy supplier’s businesses are not affected. 

Private hospitals, pharmaceutical manufacturers, mills, bakeries selling bread, companies purchasing, storing and selling vital food products, food manufacturers, and agricultural companies remain top priority. Among those also considered high-priority, that will be offered the diesel, are electricity companies who provide generators to help people with power outages. 

According to the Hezbollah Chief, the oil will not be sold to individuals, but he did leave this door open when the suffering among the priority lists is gone. 

A Lebanese company has been chosen to assist and Hezbollah says this company has been chosen because it is suffering under US sanctions. 

Nasrallah added this commodity is for all Lebanese, regardless of faith or political allegiance. It will be sent to every province in the country. 

Every effort will be done to prevent the oil from entering the black market “because the black market has already profited significantly”.

Hezbollah says this operation will hopefully break the black market, which is selling oil at unreasonable prices and hurting ordinary Lebanese waiting in line for hours. 

Hezbollah said, it will not consider the import costs of the oil tankers when it sells the oil. The movement says it will bear responsibility for these costs and says it doesn’t want to make a profit.

The Hezbollah Chief said, the movement wants this initiative to be considered as a gift to Lebanese people from the Islamic Republic of Iran and from Hezbollah. 

Nasrallah said, Hezbollah won’t use the dollar to sell any of the oil imports. Any fuel sold will be done using the Lebanese Lira. 

Hezbollah could have imported a flotilla of oil tankers and not begin with one ship. He pointed out this would have led to extensive media speculation about the whereabouts of the ships and when they will arrive; something that would have boosted Hezbollah’s popularity. 

The Hezbollah chief said, “We could have done that with the first tanker”. However, the moment chose to keep a low profile because it didn’t want to frighten the Lebanese people, especially when there are officials and enemies scaremongering the public. 

Hezbollah’s goal is easing the suffering of the people, serving the Lebanese nothing more, nothing less.

United States-China rivalry intensifies after withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan

The withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan last month finally put an end to the 20-year mission sparked by the terrorist attacks on US soil on 11th September 2001. But the move has also set the stage for Washington to turn its attention and refocus its energies and resources on continuing and even intensifying its strategic rivalry with China.

President Joe Biden alluded to it as much when he acknowledged that the withdrawal will give the US the opportunity to focus on countering Russia and China, particularly in meeting the “stiff competition” from “an increasingly assertive China”.

Afghanistan has already emerged as the latest arena for the rivalry, with China pledging to donate US$31 million dollars worth of aid, including food and coronavirus vaccines, to the war-torn country. 

Apart from the possibility of sending a peacekeeping force to Afghanistan if the security situation worsens, Beijing also made clear that it was ready to maintain communication with the Taliban.

China used what it calls the US “abandonment” of Afghanistan to remind America’s allies in Asia, especially Taiwan, not to rely on the US for protection, arguing that the island is merely used as a card to contain China.

Not to be outdone, the US has promised to continue humanitarian aid to the Afghan people through United Nations agencies and non-governmental organizations, including providing a further US$64 million in new humanitarian assistance.

US Vice President, Kamala Harris headed to Singapore and Vietnam to offer reassurance that Washington remains committed to the region, and she outlined the Biden administration’s Indo-Pacific strategy, which in recent months has become a buzzword for countering China.

The Americans also sailed the USS Kidd guided-missile destroyer and Coast Guard cutter Munro through the Taiwan Strait last month, and over the weekend deployed the littoral combat ship USS Tulsa and Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group, said to be a tit-for-tat move after four Chinese warships were spotted sailing in the waters off Alaska late last month.

In a brazen flexing of its military muscle, the US joined forces with its three allies in the Quad security grouping - India, Australia and Japan - in holding joint naval exercises off the coast of Guam, featuring anti-surface, anti-air and anti-submarine warfare drills.

The US is even considering the possibility of allowing Taipei’s US office to change its name from the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office to the Taiwan Representative Office, prompting Beijing to issue a terse warning to Washington not to challenge the one-China principle.

The relations between the world’s two highly disagreeable powers are so tense that cooperation in other areas, most notably in climate change, has taken a beating, with Beijing mincing no words when it declared that China would follow its own plan rather than bow to US pressure.

As both nations face pressure to improve ties, Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed in their first phone call in six months to manage the growing rivalry and to stop it from devolving into a conflict. While Biden focused on the way forward for the troubled bilateral relationship, Xi said “getting the relationship right is not optional, but something we must do and must do well”.

These are the most reassuring words that the world has heard in a while, but under the “new normal” in US-China relations, few concessions are likely, relations will remain hard-nosed, while hostile and prickly impulses will continue to undermine mutual interactions.

Iran attains full member status of SCO

While the West impatiently waits for an affirmative nod from Iran for resuming the stalled Vienna nuclear talks over reviving a 2015 nuclear deal, the new administration of Iran patiently carves a strategic path toward cementing ties with the East. 

On Friday, Iran ended a 16-year peripheral status at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and became a full member in the regional body.

At the end of the 21st Summit of SCO held in Tajik capital Dushanbe, the leaders of the eight main members of the organization agreed to change the membership of the Islamic Republic of Iran from an observer member to a full member.

The membership was attained during the first foreign visit by Ayatollah Seyed Ebrahim Raisi in his capacity as President of Iran. This gives Raisi team a boost at the start of their Asia-oriented foreign policy. 

Iran’s attaining full membership of SCO could be termed the first step on the path of the Raisi administration’s stated policy of strengthening relations with neighbors and regional organizations. 

Addressing the SCO summit in Dushanbe, Ayatollah Raisi elaborated on this policy. “When I took over the presidency of the Islamic Republic, I introduced my foreign policy orientation as focusing on ‘economic multilateralism’ and strengthening ‘neighborhood policy’ in its broadest sense, and strengthening its presence in regional organizations,” he said. 

“The combination of the Eurasia and One Road-One Belt initiatives can be an objective realization of this approach, and the vast potential of the Islamic Republic of Iran in terms of geopolitics, population, energy, transportation, human resources, and most importantly spirituality, culture and civilization can cause a significant stimulus to this outlook,” Iranian president added,

Iran’s top diplomat, Hossein Amir Abdollahian, described the country’s membership in the SCO as “strategic” that will have an important impact on Iran’s “comprehensive” cooperation within the framework of the Neighborhood and Asia-oriented Policy.

The membership was made possible due to Russia’s support and diplomacy. Preparations for the realization of Iran’s joining the SCO first came to light in mid-August when Ali Shamkhan, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, announced after a phone call with his Russian counterpart Nikolai Patrushev that Iran will soon become a full member of the SCO.

“Fortunately, the political obstacles to Iran's membership in the Shanghai CO have been removed and Iran’s membership will be finalized,” Shamkhani said on Twitter in August. 

Abdollahian also said that his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov and Russian President Vladimir Putin have supported Iranian membership. In a tweet on Friday, Abdollahian said he met with Lavrov on the sidelines of the SCO summit in Dushanbe and thanked him and Putin for their support of Iran’s membership in the organization.

Iran has been in talks with Russia and China in the last few years to sign long-term strategic partnerships that could shape its foreign policy for decades to come. By joining the SCO, Iran stepped closer to finalizing these partnerships and pushed forward its new Asia-centered foreign policy, which rests on two pillars: enhanced ties with neighbors and strategic partnerships with non-western powers. 

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh underlined this new policy in a tweet on Friday.

“Warmly welcome the decision of the SCO to approve Iran's full membership. It is a major step toward enhanced ties with neighbors and an important impetus for our Asia-centered foreign policy. We'll continue our efforts to build on indigenous initiatives for the good of the region,” Khatibzadeh said.