Khamenei advises Erdogan not to launch military operation in Syria

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Khamenei received Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his delegation on Tuesday. During the meeting, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution emphasized the need to increase cooperation between the two countries, especially commercial cooperation.

Discussing the Syrian conflict, the Leader reiterated the need to honor the territorial integrity of Syria. Responding to some statements about a possible Turkish military operation in northern Syria, he said, “Maintaining the territorial integrity of Syria is very important and any military attack in northern Syria will definitely harm Turkey, Syria and the entire region, and it will benefit the terrorists.”

Leader warned, if there is a policy to block the border between Iran and Armenia, the Islamic Republic will oppose it, as this border is a connection route that has been thousands of years old. The Leader added, “This is definitely to the detriment of Syria, Turkey, and the region. It will not achieve the expected political results from the Syrian government.”

Khamenei said the honor and greatness of the Islamic Ummah will be dependent on overcoming differences of opinion, as well as vigilance against divisive policies, mentioning the occupation regime of Israel as one of the causes of discord and enmity in the region.

The Leader considered Palestine as the first issue of the Islamic world and emphasized, “Despite the favor of some governments towards the Zionist regime, the nations are deeply opposed to this usurping regime.”

Emphasizing that the US and the Israeli regime should not be relied upon, he underlined, “Today, neither the Zionist regime, nor the United States, nor others will be able to stop the deep-rooted movement of the Palestinians, and the end result will be in the interest of the Palestinian people.”

Referring to the Turkish president's hatred of terrorist groups, Khamenei said terrorism must be countered, but a military attack in Syria will benefit terrorists, although terrorists are not limited to a specific group.

In response to the Turkish president's request for Iran's cooperation in fighting terrorist groups, the Leader said, “We will certainly cooperate with you in the fight against terrorism.”

Emphasizing that Tehran considers the security of Turkey and its borders as its own, Khamenei told Erdogan, “You also consider the security of Syria to be your security. The Syrian issues should be resolved through negotiations, and Iran, Turkey, Syria and Russia should resolve this issue through dialogue.”

Erdogan said, “In Syria, terrorist groups are supported by heavy weaponry from Western countries such as Germany, England, France, and especially the United States.”The Leader of the Islamic Revolution also called the rising cooperation between Iran and Turkey on all regional issues useful and necessary and said Iran has always defended Erdogan’s government in internal conflicts and against interference.

“As you said, we are friends of each other in difficult times and we pray for the Muslim nation of Turkey,” the Leader highlighted. 

Khamenei called the volume and quality of economic exchanges and cooperation between the two countries much less than the existing capacities, stressing that this issue should be resolved in the negotiations between the presidents.

In the meeting, which was also attended by President Ebrahim Raisi, Erdogan said it is necessary to unite the Islamic Ummah and increase the solidarity between Iran and Turkey. 

“Turkey has never been silent in the face of injustices against Iran, and the brotherhood of Iran and Turkey should expand in all areas,” Erdogan said in reference to illegal sanctions against Iran. 

Emphasizing that he has always been and will be against unilateral sanctions against Iran, Erdogan pointed out that Ankara supports Iran's legitimate demands based on the JCPOA talks and encourages Turkish companies to invest in Iran.

Referring to Iran and Turkey’s campaigns against terrorists for many years, the Turkish president said, “In Syria, terrorist groups are supported by heavy weaponry from Western countries such as Germany, England, France, and especially the United States.”

Erdogan concluded his remarks by stating that Turkey's position regarding the territorial integrity of Syria is clear, saying, “We expect the Syrian government to start political processes. At the Astana process, the Syrian issue is on top of the agenda, and we hope to achieve good results.”

Putin arrives in Iran

On Tuesday, in his first trip since the invasion of Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin arrived in Iran for a summit with his Iranian and Turkish counterparts.

The three countries are working together to try to reduce the violence in Syria despite supporting opposing sides in the war. Russia and Iran are Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s strongest backers, while Turkey supports anti-Assad insurgents.

Turkish President, Tayyip Erdogan has threatened to launch another operation in Northern Syria, which Tehran and Moscow oppose. In Tehran, Putin and Erdogan will meet to discuss a deal aimed at resuming Ukraine’s Black Sea grain exports.

The emergence of an US-backed Arab-Israeli bloc that could tilt the Middle East balance of power further away from Iran has accelerated its clerical rulers’ efforts to strengthen strategic ties with the Kremlin.

“Considering the evolving geopolitical ties after the Ukraine war, the establishment tries to secure Moscow’s support in Tehran’s confrontation with Washington and its regional allies,” said a senior Iranian official, who asked not to be named.

Sending a clear message to the West that Russia will seek to boost ties with anti-West Iran, Putin will meet the Islamic Republic’s most powerful authority, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, just a few days after US President Joe Biden visited Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Putin’s visit to Tehran is watched closely as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has reconfigured the global oil market and because of Washington’s warning about Tehran’s plan to provide Russia with up to several hundred drones. Tehran has denied selling drones to Moscow to use in Ukraine.

Emboldened by high oil prices after the Ukraine war, Tehran is betting that with Russia’s support it could pressure Washington to offer concessions for revival of a 2015 nuclear deal.

Under the deal, Tehran curbed its sensitive nuclear work in exchange for lifting international sanctions.

But former US President Donald Trump exited the pact in 2018 and reimposed crippling sanctions on Iran. A year later, Tehran started violating nuclear limits of the pact.

Almost a year of indirect talks between Tehran and Washington in Vienna stalled in March, with Iran questioning the United States’ resolve and Washington calling on Tehran to drop extra demands.

But Moscow and Tehran, both subject to US sanctions, have overlapped interests. Iran, whose oil industry has struggled for years under US sanctions, has long relied on Chinese oil purchases to keep the economy afloat. Since the start of Ukraine war, Moscow has taken away Iran’s oil market in Asia.

In May, Reuters reported that Iran’s crude exports to China have fallen sharply as Beijing favoured heavily discounted Russian barrels, leaving almost 40 million barrels of Iranian oil stored on tankers at sea in Asia and seeking buyers.

 

Russia seeking oil payments from India in UAE dirhams

Russia is seeking payment in United Arab Emirates dirhams for oil exports to some Indian customers, three sources said and a document showed, as Moscow moves away from the US dollar to insulate itself from the effects of Western sanctions.

Russia has been hit by a slew of sanctions from the United States and its allies over its invasion of Ukraine in late February, which it terms a "special military operation".

Russian oil major Rosneft is pushing crude through trading firms including Everest Energy and Coral Energy into India, now its second biggest oil buyer after China.

Western sanctions have prompted many oil importers to shun Moscow, pushing spot prices for Russian crude to record discounts against other grades.

That provided Indian refiners, which rarely bought Russian oil due to high freight costs, an opportunity to snap up exports at hefty discounts to Brent and Middle East staples.

Moscow replaced Saudi Arabia as the second biggest oil supplier to India after Iraq for the second month in a row in June.

At least two Indian refiners have already settled some payments in dirhams, the sources said, adding more would make such payments in coming days.

The United Arab Emirates, seeking to maintain what it says is a neutral position, has not imposed sanctions on Moscow, and the payments could add to the frustration of some in the West, who privately say the UAE's position is untenable and siding with Russia.

The trading firms used by Rosneft have started asking for the dollar equivalent payment in dirhams from this month, the sources said.

Russia wants to increase its use of non-Western currencies for trade with countries such as India, its foreign minister Sergi Lavrov said in April.

The country's finance minister last month also said Moscow may start buying currencies of "friendly" countries, using such holdings to influence the exchange rate of the dollar and euro as a means of countering sharp gains in the rouble.

The Moscow currency exchange is preparing to launch trading in the Uzbek sum and the dirham.

Dubai, the Gulf's financial and business centre, has emerged as a refuge for Russian wealth.

India, also maintaining a neutral position, recognizes insurance cover by Russian companies and has offered classification to ships managed by a Dubai-based subsidiary of Moscow's top shipping group to enable trade.

India's central bank last week introduced a new mechanism for international trade settlements in rupees, which many experts see as a way to promote trade with countries that are under Western sanctions, such as Russia and Iran.

 

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.

Pakistan: Little has changed in 75 years

Thanks to Facebook for reminding me of one of my blogs titled “Ruling Elites of Pakistan” posted on July 24, 2015. I am sure as the readers go through, they may find it very current. The situation hasn’t improved in Pakistan in the last seventy five years. Thanks to the morons adamant at maintaining the status quo.

In the recent past I got a unique opportunity to talk to the students of various business schools. The topic of my presentation was “Pakistan: Opportunities, Challenges and threats”. The consensus arrived at was that the country offers enormous opportunities but people in general and investors in particular suffer from ‘confidence deficit’.

Peeping into the history reveals that the country has been ruled by those having common vested interest and most of the sitting/past members of Senate, National and Provincial Assemblies could be labeled ‘turn coats’. They change loyalty because they wish to remain part of ruling junta, be it democratic or autocratic rule.

 The younger generation continues to suffer from illusion because of mudslinging by the leading political parties i.e. PML-N, PPP, MQM and PTI. Some claim to be opposition parties but have been part of ruling junta for decades. The incumbent prime minister and chief mister of Punjab are the legacy of a ‘Military Dictator, Zia ul- Hq. PTI has formed government in KPK province after 2013 election and is in fact part of ruling junta. MQM has remain in power for considerably long time

Some critics say the country is a victim of geopolitics because super powers install and dislodge rulers in Pakistan to pursue their ‘expansionism’ and politics prove to be ‘loyal than king’. Starting from Liaquat Ali Khan to Nawaz Sharif all the rulers have been towing the US foreign policy for the region.

Ayub Khan’s ten year rule was due to Pakistan’s assigned role in ‘cold war’. For ten years Zia ul Haq fought the US proxy war in Afghanistan to avert USSR attack on the country and frustrate its attempt to get access to ‘warm waters’ that also led to installation of Taliban government  there. When the status of Taliban turned to foe from friend the crusade against them was led by Pervez Musharraf. Asif Zardari did the same and Nawaz Sharif also seems to be following his footsteps.

People believed that PTI would usher a change but forgot that the same old faces control its hierarchy and political agenda. The only inspiration of its chief is to become the next prime minister of Pakistan. Though the decision of Judicial Commission is out, the perception prevails that elections were engineered to create history by making Nawaz Saharif prime minister of Pakistan for the third time.

Many term hanging of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto ‘judicial murder’ and the mystery surrounding assassination of  Benazir Bhutto and earlier dismissal of her government twice pre-maturely raises many question. Many critics find some similarity in killing of Mr. Aquino and his wife becoming president of Philippines and Benazir’s widower becoming president of Pakistan after her assassination, the strings in both the cases were moved from outside.

Decades of participation in the proxy war has proliferated political uncertainty, religious fanaticism, arms and drug trade. On top of all funding of local terrorist, be it in the name of creation of supremacy of Shariah or fighting for the deprived has resulted in assignation and destruction of civilian and military installations.

Some experts say all this is part of a great plan to keep Pakistan dependent on multilateral donors i.e. International Monetary Fund, World Bank, Asian Development Bank and even Islamic Development Bank. Keeping the country dependent on these institutions that are arms of super powers makes it easier to rein Pakistan. It is difficult to bring any change in the country without changing the mindset of masses.

 

West must stop its unconditional support for Zelensky

Amid the Russia-Ukraine war, Nato and the  European Union offer a perfect example of a type of “war communication”. In terms of censorship, disinformation and propaganda, the world is witnessing a replay of the happenings during the Gulf War and the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

The only voices authorized to speak are those giving the official party line, Nato spokespersons, retired officers converted to the lucrative business of security consulting, geopolitical experts (those who stick to the script), Russia’s political opponents, Ukrainian deputies and other allies of President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The mythification of Zelensky has reached absurdist levels, partly by the acting talents of Zelensky, a professional comedian who has shrewdly seized the moment to radically rebrand himself as a symbol of resistance, freedom and democracy.

Zelensky is a populist demagogue and a manipulator; an autocrat at the head of a regime that can best be described as proto-fascist.

With his demagogic cry of “the people against the elites”, his rudimentary electoral program, his false promises to fight corruption that were forgotten as soon as he was elected, and his brutal authoritarian leanings, Zelensky is a perfect example of western populism.

The Kyiv regime also exhibits a growing number of proto-fascistic characteristics: the cult of the personality, which turns the head of state into a venerated and untouchable figure; the militarization of society; the saturation of media and cultural spaces with war propaganda.

Before the war, western media were recognizing the reality of that problem - but as soon as the war started, these groups were magically whitewashed as freedom fighters, and praised as heroic resistors through typical spin. Anyone who now raises the issue is immediately accused of disseminating Putin’s propaganda or being an agent of the Kremlin. 

Even more shocking, yet typical of war propaganda, has been the systematic censorship by dominant western media of any information that would undermine the Zelensky worship and unconditional support for the Kyiv regime. 

In a March presidential decree, Zelensky banned the opposition by suspending the activities of 11 political parties accused of having links with Russia. Thus, the invasion was used in the most cynical manner as a convenient excuse to crack down on political opposition through false rhetoric about collaboration with the enemy. 

Zelensky also invoked the war to eliminate media freedom by merging and nationalizing Ukrainian television channels into a single information platform called “United News” - a platform entirely dedicated to his propaganda.

Zelensky regime is controlled by the most hawkish and extremist escalationists, both Ukrainian and foreign, starting with US President Joe Biden, who has been shunting aside any talk of diplomatic negotiations.

Though at first willing to negotiate and compromise, Zelensky has since fallen in line with the most extremist war hawks, none of whom appear to care about the rest of Europe, which they view merely as something to exploit for more arms and money.

Instead of being emboldened in this reckless military escalation of a war that is devastating his own population and country, Zelensky should instead be pushed towards the negotiating table - for his own sake, that of his suffering people, and the good of the world, which is now itself suffering from a slew of setbacks: inflation, energy and food shortages, and a military-industrial complex ecstatic at the prospect of having trillions of dollars redirected towards it for years to come. A deal to end the war seems feasible, as there a reasonable peace plan on the table. 

In additional to all its other consequences, the Russian invasion has further fractured the US-led post-war global order, which has become a battleground between the ever-more hawkish and imperialistic US, backed by the EU and with the instrumentalization of institutions such as Nato and the G7; and the anti-western bloc led by China and Russia, now officially designated as the West’s two main geopolitical existential threats. 

Given the heavy dependence of Middle East on all involved parties - Russia, Ukraine and the West - for food and energy supplies, as well as national security, they know they have nothing to gain but a lot to lose from direct involvement in this conflict, or from overtly picking sides. They have thus uncomfortably strived to distance themselves from the war without alienating anyone - a tough balancing act that can see them accused of siding with the enemy for shying away from the western sanctions regime.

In fact, many have actively refused to side with Ukraine and the West against Russia for a number of reasons, including perceived western hypocrisy on the professed principle of non-aggression and respect for territorial sovereignty (Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan loom large here); racist double standards on the treatment of refugees; and widespread distrust of the West in general.

Biden leaves Saudi Arabia empty-handed

Joe Biden has left the region empty-handed hoping the OPEC+ group, comprising Saudi Arabia, Russia and other producers, will boost production at a meeting scheduled for August 03, 2022.

Gulf states, which have refused to side with the West against Russia over Ukraine, are seeking a concrete commitment from the United States to strategic ties that have been strained over perceived US disengagement from the region.

President Joe Biden told Arab leaders on Saturday that the United States would remain an active partner in the Middle East, but he failed to secure commitments to a regional security axis that would include Israel or an immediate oil output rise.

Biden, who began his first trip to the Middle East as president with a visit to Israel, presented his vision and strategy for America's engagement in the Middle East at an Arab summit in Jeddah.

The summit communiqué was vague, however, and Saudi Arabia, Washington's most important Arab ally, poured cold water on US hopes the summit could help lay the groundwork for a regional security alliance - including Israel - to combat Iranian threats.

A plan to connect air defence systems could be a hard sell for Arab states that have no ties with Israel and balk at being part of an alliance seen as against Iran, which has a strong regional network of proxies including Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen.

Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, said he was not aware of any discussions on a Gulf-Israeli defence alliance and that the kingdom was not involved in such talks.

He told reporters after the US-Arab summit that Riyadh's decision to open its airspace to all air carriers had nothing to do with establishing diplomatic ties with Israel and was not a precursor to further steps.

Biden focused on the summit with six Gulf states and Egypt, Jordan and Iraq, while downplaying the meeting with MbS which drew criticism in the United States over human rights concerns.

Biden needs the help of OPEC giant Saudi Arabia at a time of high crude prices and other problems related to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Washington also wants to curb Iran's sway in the region and China's global influence.

Biden came to Saudi Arabia hoping to reach a deal on oil production to help drive down gasoline prices that are driving inflation above 40-year highs and threatening his approval ratings.

He leaves the region empty-handed but hoping the OPEC+ group, comprising Saudi Arabia, Russia and other producers, will boost production at a meeting on Aug. 3.

Gulf states, which have refused to side with the West against Russia over Ukraine, are seeking a concrete commitment from the United States to strategic ties that have been strained over perceived US disengagement from the region.

Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have been frustrated by US conditions on arms sales and at their exclusion from indirect US-Iran talks on reviving a 2015 nuclear pact they see as flawed for not tackling concerns about Iran's missile program and behaviour.

Israel had encouraged Biden's trip to Saudi Arabia, hoping it would lead to warmer ties between it and Riyadh as part of a wider Arab rapprochement.