US Suezcide
It started in the Suez. The US is bent out of shape by peace. Egypt & Syria advance peace, Iran gets air security, Media hype hurts Australia, Ukraine has another problem - corruption.
UPDATE: The Suez Crisis of 1956 was primarily a story about the decline of post-war British and French power, but it was really about oil and US reliability.
For most of the past half-century, the United States sought to reshape China through economic and diplomatic engagement — or, in the case of the Trump administration, through economic and diplomatic disengagement. The Biden administration, by contrast, has shelved the idea that China can be changed in favor of the hope that it can be checked.
Egypt's foreign minister met Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on Monday in what is the first visit by a top Egyptian envoy to Syria since its civil war began in 2011. A significant indicator of healing relations between President Bashar al-Assad and Arab countries.
Iran has reached a deal with Russia to buy the cutting-edge Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets and ensure entering its air-space will be much harder than before.
Australian media has turned to mass propaganda to generate public support for its role as a military forward base for US nuclear powered submarines and the nuclear missiles they carry.
The Ukraine has a major problem emanating from the rivers of money and guns arriving from the US and EU - corruption.
US Suezcide
The Suez Crisis of 1956 was primarily a story about the decline of post-war British and French power. However, the Suez crisis revealed that oil supply was at the centre of global power equations. In 1956, 70% of Western Europe’s oil supplies were imported via the Suez Canal. The nationalisation of the canal by the government of Gamal Abdul Nasser catalysed panic in Britain and France. Against US wishes both countries united with Israel in a military campaign to reassert control of the vital Sea Line of Communication (SLOC). This prompted a furious President Eisenhower to punish his disobedient allies by refusal to release emergency supplies from their reserves; thus, forcing the British, French and Israeli forces to abandon their military assault on Egypt. The action of the United States, to not act as the oil supplier of last resort to its allies, inspired a loss of trust that would have lasting consequences.
French humiliation confirmed the need to accelerate development of a nuclear energy program and deeper integration with Germany, which laid the foundations of the European Union (EU). German chancellor Konrad Adenauer was reported to have told French prime minister Guy Alcide Mollet that: “Europe will be your revenge.” Another fateful outcome was that Western Europe sought to gain access to the vast oil and gas reserves of the USSR and launched a long-term energy development program with Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev. Pipelines were built from East to West, re-establishing Russia as a major energy exporting power.
Today, Europe has allowed the United States to lead it into NATO expansionism that has climaxed in a Ukraine proxy war of attrition with Russia. Thus, Ukraine, the poorest country in Europe, is destroyed, destitute and depopulated, because of the cowardly servility of France, Germany and Britain to Washington’s geopolitical grand strategy. Moreover, the EU severed its industrial base and consumers from cheap reliable pipeline energy and once again become dependent on maritime supplies from West Asia via the Suez canal and expensive trans-Atlantic shipments from the least dependable of all suppliers - the United States of America.
The recently announced rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran, brokered by China, has generated severe neuralgia in the United States. For the first time in modern history, neither the US or Europe is the dominant power in West Asia and its abundant oil supplies. Meanwhile, China has leveraged its surging political, economic and technological influence to foster the region’s adoption of independent foreign policies that preference the Global South over their former imperial masters in Europe and Washington.
Both Iran and Saudi Arabia are eager to be at the nexus of global supply chains generating economic growth in the BRICS, SCO and the 140 plus Belt and Road partners. China is the leading trade partner of all and espouses sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-interference in the internal affairs of others. Moreover, US deafness to the interests of the Global South, selfish hubris in the weaponisation of the dollar and incompetent management of its own economy have confirmed what India, China, Africa, Latin America and ASEAN have variously said all along - the United States pursues its hegemonic interests by fomenting conflict, inducing subversion and launching military interventions with no regard for the victims of its violence.
For Europe to have secure cheap energy and a balanced and fruitful relationship with its Afro-Eurasian partners it needs to return to a policy of ensuring security and prosperity for all, including Russia, Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia. To achieve peace and prosperity the EU needs to regain “strategic autonomy”, remove sanctions on China, Russia, Iran and Syria, amongst others and reject NATO and its US-led policies of expansion and implicit threat of violence, in Europe and Asia-Pacific. By promoting an immediate peaceful settlement of the Ukraine crisis, within the 12-point position statement released by China, and placing the United Nations at the core of the international multilateral system, Europe can rapidly return to the path of peaceful economic and social development and avoid the contamination of division, deception and violent dominion, which are the hallmarks of US foreign policy.
The Editor
A Misshapen Past Has Shaped the US Future
For most of the past half-century, the United States sought to reshape China through economic and diplomatic engagement — or, in the case of the Trump administration, through economic and diplomatic disengagement. The Biden administration, by contrast, has shelved the idea that China can be changed in favor of the hope that it can be checked.
The White House has moved to limit economic ties with China, to limit China’s access to technology with military applications, to pull back from international institutions where the United States has long sought to engage China and to strengthen ties with China’s neighbors. In recent months, the United States has restricted semiconductor exports to China, and this week it moved ahead with plans to help Australia obtain nuclear submarines. The administration also is seeking to impose new restrictions on American investments in certain Chinese companies. In treating China as a growing threat to American interests, it is acting with broad support, including from leading Republicans, much of the military and foreign policy establishments, and a growing portion of the business community.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken provided the clearest articulation of the administration’s China policy in a speech last May at George Washington University. Dismissing engagement as a policy failure.
The United States had tried with little success to persuade or compel China to abide by American rules or the rules of international institutions. China is increasingly determined to impose its priorities on other nations […] China is the only country with both the intent to reshape the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military and technological power to do it […] Beijing’s vision would move us away from the universal values that have sustained so much of the world’s progress over the past 75 years.” (Blinken, 2022)
It is true that engagement with China has yielded less than its proponents hoped and prophesied. China’s embrace of capitalism has not proved to be a first step toward the liberalization of its society or political system. Indeed, the United States continues to press China’s leadership on Uyghur Muslims, intellectual property rights, the South China Sea, Taiwan Strait and most recently balloons and military aid for Russia.
However, these glib invocations of the Cold War are misguided. China’s foreign engagements remain primarily economic and it shows little interest in persuading other nations to adopt its social and political values. In international affairs China has steadfastly pursued consensus and peaceful resolutions including the new agreement to re-establish relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The core of America’s China strategy, however, repeats the language of Blinken’s speech.
“We’re trying to make sure that we can outcompete them when it comes to hearts and minds around the globe” (Shalanda Young, director of the Office of Management and Budget)
Despite the rapidly worsening state of the US economy, the proposed US budget for 2023-24 ignores the domestic polycrisis of inflation, debts, interest rates and wars to include billions of dollars of military spending, foreign aid and investments to buttress US allies in the Indo-Pacific region.
Much of the shift in China policy has been justified as necessary for national defense, but it only legitimises the vocabulary for protectionist measures that are not in the interest of Americans. The Biden administration has declined to appoint appellate judges for the WTO, because two-thirds of all cases are against unilateral US trade practices including tariffs and sanctions. Moreover, the United States has also pulled back from committees at the WTO that write the rules of trade. When Mr. Xi proposed in November 2021 to use the WTO as a forum for establishing rules about state-owned enterprises, a key American goal, the United States didn’t show much interest.
Not only does the United States obstruct and hinder the functions of multilateral institutions, it often refuses participation or fails to pay its dues. The Biden administration’s continuation of Trump-era restrictions on trade with China, and its imposition of a host of new restrictions, is a foolish strategy yielding limited short-term benefits. In the long term, the best guarantee of American security has always been American prosperity and engagement with the rest of the world.
The Editor.
Egypt's top diplomat visits Syria for first time in a decade
Egypt's foreign minister met Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on Monday in what is the first visit by a top Egyptian envoy to Syria since its civil war began in 2011. A significant indicator of healing relations between President Bashar al-Assad and Arab countries. Assad has benefited from an outpouring of Arab support since devastating earthquakes hit his country and neighbouring Turkey this month, helping to ease the diplomatic isolation he has faced over Syria's civil war which began in 2011.
"I had the honor this morning to meet with President Bashar Al-Assad to convey to His Excellency a message from His Excellency President Al-Sisi, a message of solidarity and sympathy with the Syrian people and our readiness to provide whatever support we can to confront the effects of the earthquake," said Sameh Shoukry, Egyptian Foreign Minister.
When terrible earthquakes struck his nation and neighboring Turkey earlier this month, Assad has benefitted from an outpouring of Arab solidarity, which has helped to lessen the diplomatic isolation he has endured as a result of Syria's civil conflict, which began a decade ago.
"The relations between the two peoples are well-established and strong. We are always working on solidarity and to confront the challenges facing the Syrian people, and we look forward to Syria to overcome the consequences of this earthquake," added Sameh Shoukry.
While Cairo and Damascus have largely maintained relations during the conflict, the Cairo-based Arab League suspended Syria in 2011 and some other Arab countries have severed ties with it.
Cairo's relations with Ankara have been frosty since a 2013 coup that propelled Sisi to power, deposing Islamist president Mohamed Morsi and outlawing his Muslim Brotherhood, many members of which had sought refuge in Turkey.
In November, Sisi and Erdogan shook hands in Qatar, in what the Egyptian presidency heralded as a new beginning in their ties.
Read full story here.
Iran says deal reached to buy Russia's Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets
Iran has reached a deal with Russia to buy the cutting-edge Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets, according to state media. "Moscow is ready to deliver the fighter jets to Iran," the country's mission to the United Nations was quoted as saying in the official Islamic Republic News Agency.
"Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets were technically approved by the Iranian aviation experts, and therefore... Iran finalised the contract to buy those planes," it said. There was no immediate confirmation of the deal from Russia. According to reports earlier in the year, Iran had placed an order for 24 of Russia's most advanced jets along with other military hardware, including air defence systems, missile systems and helicopters.
The deal comes amid increased defence cooperation between the two countries in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Reports suggest that Moscow has bought several hundred drones from Tehran, with another 1,000 ordered. The use of Iranian-made drones by Russia in the Ukraine conflict has been widely documented.
Iran's drone and missile advances in recent decades have been primarily driven by a lack of air power, which Tehran is now looking to rebuild with the new Russian jets deal. In the past, Russia has been wary of giving Iran a military edge in the region, but that has changed due to Moscow's global isolation over Ukraine and increasing reliance on Iran.
The "unprecedented" deal means that Iran-Russia military cooperation "has entered into a completely new phase", geopolitics and security expert Hamidreza Azizi previously told Middle East Eye.
Read full article here.
Media hype of war with China forgets the impact on Australian society
Much ink has been spilled in Australia on war scenarios with China. Some experts claim that unless Australia takes action now, a war with China will be inevitable in three years. This type of commentary and analysis inflates the role Australia plays in deterring China while underselling the roles other countries in the region play. In addition, only military aspects of war are usually considered while the economic and social consequences are ignored.
In much of the media reporting in Australia, the world comprises only three countries – China, Australia and the US – fighting over Taiwan. In a possible conflict scenario in east Asia, the considerations and actions of Japan and South Korea, both US allies, would be much more important than Australia’s. Yet, most often their considerations are missing, or they are assumed to be fully on board with the US, ignoring the domestic debates occurring in these countries.
And of course, other countries in the region, such as Singapore or Indonesia, don’t even get a mention as concerned stakeholders. This is odd seeing that we like to emphasise our geographical location in the Indo-Pacific as the reason that we must do something about China. Yet, the considerations of other countries in the region are absent. This is out of step with the current government’s priorities.
As for Australia, our participation is assumed to be automatic – there is no choice but to join the US. Despite all the rhetoric around sovereignty recently, the analyses tend to treat Australia almost as a vassal state of the US. The interests of the US are taken to be exactly the same as the interests of Australia. Whenever the US goes to war, so must we, no matter the circumstances or the costs. Going to war alongside the US is almost an autonomic reflex for Australia.
The media hype on a war scenario forces Australians to take a binary position even in the absence of war. Australians are expected to treat any links to China with suspicion, as they are assumed to be detrimental to Australia’s interests. Among all talks about preparation for a war, preparing the population for a potentially divisive society is not part of it, even though, unlike war, this is already happening.
Read full article here.
How Kiev plundered US aid, wasted soldiers, endangered civilians, and lost the war
In a video sent via Facebook messenger in July 2022, Ivan* can be seen standing next to his car, an early 2010s model Mitsubishi SUV. Smoke is pouring out of the rear window. Ivan laughs and pans his phone’s camera across the length of the vehicle, pointing out bullet holes. “The turbocharger died in my car,” he said, panning his phone toward the front of the vehicle. “My commander says I should pay to repair it myself. So to use my own car in the war, I need to buy a new turbocharger with my own money.”
“The weapons are stolen, the humanitarian aid is stolen, and we have no idea where the billions sent to this country have gone”
Ivan flipped the camera toward his face. “Well, you fucking motherfucker members of parliament, I hope you fuck each other. Devils. I wish you were in our place,” he said.
Last month, Ukraine’s parliamentarians voted to give themselves a 70% salary increase. Filings indicate the raise was enabled and encouraged by the billions of dollars and euros of aid that have poured in from the US and Europe.
“We, the Ukrainian soldiers, have nothing,” said Ivan. “The things the soldiers have been given to use in the war came directly from volunteers. The aid that goes to our government will never reach us.”
Ivan has been a soldier since 2014. Currently, he’s stationed in the Donbas region, where he is tasked with using small, consumer-grade drones to spot Russian positions for artillery targeting. “There are so many problems on the frontline now,” he said. “We don’t have an internet connection, which makes our work basically impossible. We have to drive to get a connection on mobile devices. Can you imagine?”
Another soldier in Ivan’s unit sent us a video of himself from a trench near the frontlines in Donbas. “According to documents, the government has built us a bunker here,” he says. “But as you see, there are only a few centimeters of a wood covering over our heads, and this is supposed to protect us from tank and artillery shelling. The Russians shell us for hours at a time. We dug these trenches ourselves. We have two AK-47s between 5 soldiers here, and they jam constantly because of all the dust.
“I went to my commander and explained the situation. I told him it’s too hard to hold this position. I told him I understand this is a strategically important point, but our squad is broken, and no relief is coming for us. In 10 days, 15 soldiers died here, all from shelling and shrapnel. I asked the commander if we could bring some heavy equipment to build a better bunker and he refused, because he said the Russian shelling could damage the equipment. Does he not care that 15 of our soldiers died here?”
“If you tried to explain the situation Ukrainian soldiers are facing to an American soldier, they would think you were insane,” said Ivan. “Imagine telling an American soldier that we are using our personal cars in the war, and we’re also responsible for paying for repairs and fuel. We’re buying our own body armor and helmets. We don’t have observation tools or cameras, so soldiers have to pop their heads out to see what’s coming, which means at any moment, a rocket or tank can tear their heads off.”
Illya*, a 23 year-old soldier from Kiev, says his unit is facing the same conditions in another part of the Donbas region. He joined the Ukrainian Army shortly after the war started. He has a background in IT and knew such expertise was in high demand. “If I had known how much deception there was in this Army, and how everything would be for us, I never would have joined,” he said. “I want to go home, but if I flee, I face prison.”
Illya and the other soldiers in his unit lack weapons and protective gear. “In Ukraine, people cheat each other even in war,” he said. “I’ve watched the medical supplies donated to us being taken away. The cars that drove us to our position were stolen. And we have not been replaced with new soldiers in three months, though we should have been relieved three times by now.”
Read full story here.
Listen to another Ukrainian military corruption report here.