Both Egypt and Jordan have stated that this is a non-starter and will not happen.
Israeli extremists have welcomed Trump’s comments with the hope that the forced expulsion of Palestinians would pave the way for Jewish settlements in Gaza.
But the truth is that Israeli leaders likely feel deceived by Trump more than anything else. Benjamin Netanyahu and most of Israeli society were once clamouring for Donald Trump.
Since then, Israeli leaders and Israeli society, are seemingly taken aback by Trump’s more restrained approach toward the Middle East and desire for a ceasefire.
While the current ceasefire in place is a precarious endeavour at best, Israeli reactions to the cessation of hostilities highlight a profound point: not only did Netanyahu misread Trump’s intentions, but the entire Israeli political system itself seemingly only thrives during conflict in which the US provides it with unfettered military and diplomatic support.
Geostrategic calculus
Firstly, Israel believed that Trump’s second term would likely be a continuation of his first — where the US based its geostrategic calculus in the Middle East around Israel’s interests. This gave Israeli leaders the impression that Trump would give them the green light to attack Iran, resettle and starve Gaza, and formally annex the West Bank.
Trump blessing an Israel-Iran showdown seems to be off the table. Trump himself stated this and is backing up his words by appointing Washington-based analyst Mike DiMino as a top Department of Defence advisor.
The Trump effect As it pertains to his vision for the Middle East, Trump has been adamant about expanding the Abraham Accords, deepening US military ties with Saudi Arabia, and possibly pioneering Saudi-Israeli “normalisation”.
While there is an explicit pro-Israel angle to all these components, none of Trump’s objectives for the Middle East would be feasible if the genocide in Gaza continued or if the US allowed Israel to formally annex the occupied West Bank, something Trump stopped during his first term.
Witkoff’s willingness to meet with PA, along with the quiet yet growing relationship between Trump and Abbas, was likely something Netanyahu did not anticipate and may have also factored into Netanyahu’s acquiescence in Gaza.
Of equal importance, the Gaza ceasefire deal proves that Israeli politics can only survive if it’s engaged in perpetual war.
Brutal occupation
This is evidenced by its brutal occupation of the Palestinians, destroying Gaza, and attacking its neighbours in Syria and Lebanon. Now that Israel is forced to stop its genocide in Gaza, at least for the time being, fissures within the Israeli government are already growing.
Such dynamics within the Israeli government and its necessity for conflict are only possible because the US allows it to happen.
In providing Israel with unfettered military and diplomatic support, the US allows Israel to torment the Palestinian people. Now that Israel cannot punish Gaza, it has shifted their focus to the West Bank.
Since the ceasefire’s implementation, the Israeli army has engaged in deadly raids in the Jenin refugee camp which had displaced over 2000 Palestinians. The Israeli army has also imposed a complete siege on the West Bank, shutting down checkpoints to severely restrict the movement of Palestinians.
All of Israel’s genocidal practices are a direct result of the impunity granted to them by the Biden administration; who willingly refused to impose any consequences for Israel’s blatant violation of US law.
Joe Biden could have enforced either the Leahy Law or Section 620 I of the Foreign Assistance Act at any time, which would ban weapons from flowing to Israel due to their impediment of humanitarian aid into Gaza and use of US weapons to facilitate grave human rights abuses in Gaza.
Instead, he chose to undermine US laws to ensure that Israel had everything it facilitate their mass slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza.
The United States has always held all the cards when it comes to Israel’s hawkish political composition. Israel was simply the executioner of the US’s devastating policies towards Gaza and the broader Palestinian national movement.
Abdelhalim Abdelrahman is a freelance Palestinian journalist. His work has appeared in The New Arab, The Hill, MSN, and La Razon. Tis article was first published by The New Arab and is republished under Creative Commons.
Timing is everything in geopolitics. This past Friday in Moscow, only three days before the inauguration of US President Donald Trump in Washington, top BRICS member leaders Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian signed a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreement, detailed in 47 articles, twice as many as in the recent Russian–North Korean deal.
This strategic partnership is now set in stone just as the – unpayable – humongous debt of the US government reaches an unprecedented $36.1 trillion, equivalent to $106.4k per American, and just as the US share of the global economy falls below 15 percent for the first time, based on World Bank/IMF figures.
Historic examples in countries such as Portugal and Greece show how military defeats can catalyze democratic transitions by exposing the incompetence of authoritarian regimes. After the recent change in Syria, I thought that this piece with its focus on HRDs deserves wider attention:
The Stimson Center published this anonymously on January 9, 2025 as the author is a Tehran-based analyst who has requested anonymity out of legitimate concern. The writer is known to appropriate staff, has a track record of reliable analysis, and is in a position to provide an otherwise unavailable perspective.
While the world focuses on regional turmoil, Iran is undergoing significant transformation domestically, albeit at a slow pace.
At the heart of this evolution is a surprisingly robust society-based reform movement that is actively challenging the existing power structure, leading to a noticeable weakening of the regime. This emerging dynamic holds the potential to produce a system more representative of wishes of the Iranian population than the theocracy/flawed democracy in place for the past 46 years.
Fundamental reform of the existing constitution, along with empowering civil society, can lead to more democracy provided that Iranians do not get caught up in radical movements and wars. The implications of such changes could extend beyond Iran’s borders to neighboring Arab states. Historian Robert D. Kaplan has argued that Iran serves as the Middle East’s geopolitical pivot point, and that nothing could change the region as profoundly as the emergence of a more liberal regime in Iran.
Iranian people have paid a high price in pursuit of democracy. One metric is the number of political prisoners. While it is difficult to give an accurate estimate, human rights organizations have estimated that hundreds of Iranians are being held on vague national security charges and denied due process. Conditions in Iranian prisons are abysmal, with reports of poor healthcare, abuse, and medical neglect. High-profile cases have drawn international condemnation, but the government shows little willingness to address these systematic abuses. The continued detention and mistreatment of political prisoners remains a major concern, reflecting the Islamic Republic’s intolerance of dissent and disregard for fundamental civil liberties.
Yet despite the repression, protests continue and at an accelerated pace. They include the “Bloody November” 2019 protests sparked by fuel price increases, the popular reaction to the U.S. assassination of Gen. Qassem Soleimani in January 2020 and the accidental Iranian downing of a Ukrainian passenger plane that followed, and the “Women, Life, Freedom” movement of 2022 against enforced veiling These developments, coupled with recent military defeats of Iran and its non-state partners, have dampened the Islamic Republic’s regional power while undercutting its domestic legitimacy, which had rested on electoral and ideological pillars.
Since the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, and the devastating Israel response, the region has witnessed repeated and dramatic setbacks for Iran and its partners in Gaza, Lebanon and most recently in Syria. Historic examples in countries such as Portugal and Greece show how military defeats can catalyze democratic transitions by exposing the incompetence of authoritarian regimes. In Iran, the ongoing erosion of both electoral and ideological legitimacy may compel the regime to seek a more democratic approach to governance.
The path toward society-based reform in Iran is centered on strengthening civil society. Other strategies – such as seeking change through foreign intervention as advocated by some in the diaspora – would not produce a better outcome.
The society-based reform movement in Iran encompasses various grassroots efforts aimed at addressing social, political, and economic issues. Reformists emphasize grassroots engagement and building connections with the public. Key aspects include empowering local communities, promoting decentralized decision-making, rebuilding trust between citizens and political entities, and encouraging participatory decision-making. The movement prioritizes social issues and adopts a long-term vision for sustainable development.
The challenges to change remain significant. The regime continues to arrest and otherwise repress activists and economic constraints limit participation. Many Iranians are disillusioned and society is fragmented by cultural barriers. Despite these obstacles, society-based reform aims to facilitate meaningful change by leveraging the strengths and voices of local communities.
The reform movement in Iran has deep historical roots, predating the Constitutional Revolution of 1905-1911, which created the first elected parliament in the Middle East. The oil nationalization movement in the early 1950s was another significant turning point, leading to widespread social mobilization and civil society involvement, including the emergence of political organizations, intellectual activism, popular protests, and women’s participation. While then Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh is often credited with initiating nationalization, his true achievement lay in strengthening civil society, establishing an independent Bar Association, labor unions, and implementing reforms that favored peasants and small businesses.
Mossadegh was deposed in 1953 in a CIA-led coup which restored the monarchy and led to severe repression of civil society. The Shah’s regime viewed civil society organizations as threats, leading to political repression, media censorship, and the targeting of student and labor movements. This suppression dismantled the civil society infrastructure, contributing to widespread discontent and ultimately the Iranian Revolution of 1979.
The theocracy ushered in a new era of repression but that eased following the election of reformist President Mohammad Khatami in 1997. Iran’s reform movement split at the time into two factions: society-centered intellectuals and a power-centered left within the regime. Differences in approach emerged during 2001 presidential elections as well as the 2009 Green Movement against the fraud-tainted re-election of then President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Since the 2022 protests, however, reformists who once favored participating in elections and government have shifted toward embracing society-based efforts. Azar Mansouri of the Iran Reform Front noted this change, emphasizing the need for unity among reformists and the importance of community-centered reforms given government-imposed limits on reformist participation in officially sanctioned politics. Former president Khatami and theorist Mahmoud Mir-Lohi have also highlighted that the movement is transitioning from an “election-centered” to a “society-centered” focus, aiming to reconnect with citizens and address societal needs.
This movement is characterized by a range of actors who include those working on:
Human Rights. Numerous organizations and activists, some with external links,are dedicated to promoting freedom of speech, press freedom, and the rights of minorities and marginalized groups as well as opposing arbitrary detention, torture, and the death penalty. The groups include HRANA, the Center for Human Rights in Iran and Defenders of Human Rights in Iran.
Women’s Rights. Women’s rights activists are at the forefront of the reform movement, challenging discriminatory laws and advocating for gender equality. Activists such as Nasrin Sotoudeh, Narges Mohammadi, Parvin Ardalan and Sepideh Gholian promote the right of women to choose whether to wear the hijab and have garnered significant attention and support both domestically and internationally. These activists have paid a high price for their beliefs and many are in prison serving long terms although Mohammadi, a 2023 Nobel peace prize laureate, was recently allowed home for a brief period after undergoing medical treatment.
Student Activism. Iranian students have a long history of political activism, often taking a leading role in protests and reform movements. Student organizations suchas the Independent Student Union advocate for educational reform, political freedom, and social justice.
Labor Movements. Workers’ rights groups have organized to demand better working conditions, fair wages, and labor protections. During the 2022 Women, Life, Freedom movement, 14 unions formed a coalition to push for new labor laws as part of a broader reform agenda. The Haft-Tappeh Sugar Cane Company union succeeded in ousting the director of the company, returning laid-off workers and encouraging formation of more independent unions.
Environmental Activism. Civil society groups are increasingly focused on environmental issues, advocating for sustainable development and government accountability regarding natural resource management and combating water scarcity and pollution.
Social Media and Digital Activism. Social media has empowered activists to organize, share information, and mobilize more effectively despite government attempts to suppress or filter access to the internet.
Various other initiatives promote civic awareness and participation. One such entity, www.karzar.net has initiated hundreds of big and small campaigns on a wide range of issues, most recently opposing a new law meant to enforce veiling. In reaction to widespread public rejection of the law, the government of President Masoud Pezeshkian paused its implementation in December.
Despite facing significant challenges, the society-based reform movement remains a vital factor in Iran’s political landscape. The example set by the fall of the repressive Assad regime in Syria may embolden the Iranian public to demand reforms and increase international pressure on Iran to embrace democratic changes.
Aotearoa New Zealand’s coalition government has introduced a bill to criminalise “improper conduct for or on behalf of a foreign power” or foreign interference that echoes earlier Cold War times, and could capture critics of New Zealand’s foreign and defence policy, especially if they liaise with a “foreign country”.
It is a threat to our democracy and here is why.
Two new offences are:
Offence 78AAA — a person thus charged must include all three of the following key elements — they:
know, or ought to know, they are acting for a foreign state, and
act in a covert, deceptive, coercive, or corruptive manner, and
intend to, or are aware that they are likely to, harm New Zealand interests specified in the offence through their actions OR are reckless as to whether their conduct harms New Zealand’s interests.
Offence 78AAB – a person thus charged must commit:
any imprisonable offence intending to OR being reckless as to whether doing so is likely to provide a relevant benefit to a foreign power.
New Zealand’s “interests” include its democratic processes, its economy, rights provisions, as well as its defence and security. A “Foreign Power” ranges from a foreign government to an association supporting a political party; “relevant benefit to a foreign power” includes advancing “the coercive influence of a foreign power over persons in or outside New Zealand”.
New Zealand’s “interests” include its democratic processes, its economy, rights provisions, as well as its defence and security. A “Foreign Power” ranges from a foreign government to an association supporting a political party; “relevant benefit to a foreign power” includes advancing “the coercive influence of a foreign power over persons in or outside New Zealand”.
The bill also extends laws on publication of classified information, changes “official” information to “relevant” information, increases powers of unwarranted searches by authorities, and allows charging of people outside of New Zealand who “owe allegiance to the Sovereign in right of New Zealand” and aid and abet a non-New Zealander to carry out a “relevant act” of espionage, treason and inciting to mutiny even if the act is not in fact carried out.
Why this legislation is dangerous 1. Much of the language is vague and the terms subjective. How should we establish what an individual ‘ought to have known’ or whether he or she is being “reckless”? It is entirely possible to be a loyal New Zealand and hold a different view to that of the government of the day about “New Zealand’s interests” and “security”.
This proposed legislation is potentially highly undemocratic and a threat to free speech and freedom of association. Ironically the legislation is a close copy of similar legislation passed in Australia in 2018 and it reflects the messaging about “foreign interference” promoted by our Five Eyes partners.
How should we distinguish “foreign interference” from the multitude of ways in which other states seek to influence our trade, aid, foreign affairs and defence policies? It is not plausible that the motivation behind this legislation is to limit Western pressure on New Zealand to water down its nuclear free policy.
Or to ensure that its defence forces are interoperable with those of its allies and to be part of military exercises in the South China Sea. Or to host spyware tools on behalf of the United States. Or to sign trade agreements that favour US based corporates.
The government openly supports these activities, so it seems that the legislation is aimed at foreign interference from current geostrategic “enemies”. Which ones? China, Russia, Iran?
The introduction of a bill to criminalise foreign interference has echoes of earlier Cold War times as it has the potential to criminalise members of friendship organisations that seek to improve understanding and cooperation with people in countries such as China, Russia or North Korea.
It is entirely possible that their efforts could be seen as engaging in conduct “for or on behalf of” a foreign power.
There is also real concern is that this legislation could capture critics of New Zealand’s foreign and defence policy, especially if they liaise with a “foreign country”. There is a global movement of resistance to economic sanctions on Cuba and other countries including Venezuela, and North Korea.
Supporters are likely to liaise with representatives of those countries, and perhaps circulate their material. Could that be considered harming New Zealand’s interests? The inclusion of such vague wording (Clause 78AAB) as “enhancing the influence” of a foreign power is chilling in its potential to silence open debate, and especially dissent or protest.
The legislation is unnecessary Existing law already criminalises espionage which intentionally prejudices the security or defence of New Zealand. There are also laws to cover pressurising others by blackmail, corruption, and threats of violence or threats of harm to people and property.
It is true that diaspora critics of authoritarian regimes come under pressure from their home governments. Such governments seek to silence their critics who are outside their jurisdiction by threatening harm to their families still living in the home country.
But it is not clear how New Zealand law could prevent this as it cannot protect people who are not within its jurisdiction. This is something which diaspora citizens and overseas students studying here must be acutely conscious of. This issue is one for diplomacy and negotiation rather than law.
A threat to democracy The terms sedition and subversion have gone into disuse and are no longer part of our law.
They were used in the past to criminalise some and ensure that others were subject to intrusive surveillance.
In essence both terms justified State actions against dissidents or those who held an alternative vision of how society should be ordered. In Cold War times the State was particularly exercised with those who championed communist ideas, took an interest in the Soviet Union or China or associated with Communists.
Those who associated with Soviet diplomats or attended functions at the Soviet Embassy would often be subject to SIS surveillance.
Outgoing CIA director William Burns stated in an interview on 10 January that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program, following a decision it made in 2003, and that the US is concerned about the revival of ISIS.
In an interview with state broadcaster National Public Radio (NPR) to discuss his time as director of the notorious spy agency under President Joe Biden, Burns was asked whether Iran may accelerate its efforts to obtain nuclear weapons given the setbacks the Islamic Republic and its allies in the regional Axis of Resistance have sustained over the past year.
Incoming U.S. President Donald Trump adopted an aggressive Iran policy in his first term. He withdrew from the Obama administration’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), adopted harsh sanctions on the country, and assassinated Iranian military commander Qassem Suleimani.
Should we expect more of the same this time around? Does he actually want a deal with the country? Who might end up pushing him on the issue behind the scenes? Is there any reason to take his non-interventionist seriously or does neocon ideology still prevail within the Republican party? Is the Iranian government actually vulnerable right now? What role does Israel play in all of this?
Washington D.C., January 8, 2025—The Committee to Protect Journalists is alarmed by reports that Islamic Republic of Iran authorities arrested Iranian journalist Mohammad-Hossein (Mehrdad) Aladin in the capital, Tehran, and have since detained him in Evin prison, according to newsreports.
“Iranian authorities must immediately and unconditionally release journalist Mehrdad Aladin and cease the practice of arbitrarily jailing members of the press,” said Yeganeh Rezaian, CPJ’s interim Middle East and North Africa program coordinator. “Journalists must be able to work without fear of retaliation.”
Aladin, a reporter, photojournalist, and a documentary filmmaker for the Didban Iran news website, was immediately arrested Janurary 7 after appearing at the preliminary court known as Shahi Moghadas, which is based inside Evin prison. Aladin was summoned earlier in the week to be interviewed before the court, according to reports.
Authorities have yet to publicly announce any charges against Aladin.
CPJ was also unable to confirm whether the journalist had been charged.
Aladin covers social and environmental issues. Aladin’s brother Koroush Aladin is a U.S. based journalist who reports for Voice of America Persian service.
CPJ emailed the Iranian mission to the United Nations in New York requesting comment on the arrest of Aladin but did not receive a response.
In recent months, even across the collective West’s media, growing admissions are being made about both Russia and China’s superior military industrial capacity. With Russia’s first use of the intermediate-range ballistic missile, the Oreshnik, it is admitted that Russia (and likely China) possess formidable military capabilities the collective West currently lacks.
Despite the collective efforts of NATO in arming, training, and backing Ukraine, Ukrainian forces continue to give ground at an accelerated rate across the entire line of contact amid the ongoing Russian Special Military Operation (SMO).
New York, December 28 2024—CPJ is deeply concerned by the arrest of Italian journalist Cecilia Sala in Iran.
Italy’s foreign ministry said Sala was arrested on December 19 and was being held in Iran’s notorious Evin prison, although news of her arrest was only made public on December 27.
“Iran has a long and ignominious history of detaining journalists — both local and foreign — for reporting the realities of life in the country. We urge authorities to release Cecilia Sala immediately,” said CPJ CEO Jodie Ginsberg.
Iran — the world’s sixth-worst jailer of journalists in CPJ’s last annual prison census, with 17 imprisoned journalists as of December 1, 2023 — has not yet commented publicly on the arrest.
From an exuberant mountaineering woman to a boy representing unheard refugees, here are some of the brave individuals that gave us hope
Nine years ago, Cecilia Llusco was one of 11 Indigenous women who made it to the summit of the 6,088 metre-high Huayna Potosí in Bolivia. They called themselves the cholitas escaladoras (the climbing cholitas) and went on to scale many more peaks in Bolivia and across South America. Their name comes from chola, once a pejorative term for Indigenous Aymara women.
The situation in Syria has generated more questions than answers. Some ten days after the seizure of power by the terrorists, there are still no clear ideas as to what will happen. Three powers are occupying parts of Syria: the United States, Israel and Türkiye. The new government has made not the slightest move to prevent this occupation.
Today the new regime is complicit in the partition of its country, the destruction of its sovereignty and the disappearance of the Syrian state.
Undoubtedly in the tactical sense, Israel, Türkiye and the United States are winners following the collapse of the regime of Bashir al-Assad.
On December 8, the United States and Israel, with support from Turkey, succeeded in overthrowing the Syrian government using Islamic jihadist militants as proxies. Some people in the United States are claiming this as a victory for the Syrian people even though the proxies are Al Qaeda terrorists. Clearing the FOG speaks with Ajamu Baraka about the coup, the history of resistance in Syria and in the region, and what this means for the Syrian people. Baraka discusses Israel’s immediate expansion of its occupation in Syria and its quest for a ‘Greater Israel.’ He also discusses a tendency for some Left forces in the United States to side with US imperialism and why it is important to have ideological clarity about what is happening.
Strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities are being seriously considered within the Donald Trump transition team, according to the Wall Street Journal. While there is no proof Tehran is trying to make a nuclear weapon, Washington and Tel Aviv are threatening to attack Iran’s nuclear energy infrastructure.
“The military-strike option against nuclear facilities is now under more serious review by some members of his transition team,” the WSJ explained. “Iran’s weakened regional position and recent revelations of Tehran’s burgeoning nuclear work have turbocharged sensitive internal discussions, transition officials said.”
The US and Israel bear joint responsibility for the current situation in Syria, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said during a public event in Tehran on Wednesday, December 11. This was the first time Khamenei addressed the topic following the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government and the establishment of a Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)-backed administration in Syria.
While acknowledging Turkey’s role in supporting HTS, a designated terrorist organization that seized power after President Assad left the country on Sunday, Khamenei said that “the main conspirator, the main planner and the command centre lie in America and the Zionist regime,” IRNA reported.
Even as Bashar al-Assad was scrambling to get out of Syria, Israel was mobilizing its military to take advantage of the power vacuum that Assad’s ouster had created. After five decades of a low-level conflict between the two countries, Israel saw an opportunity to change the calculus, and it seized it.
As of Wednesday, Israel had struck Syria nearly 500 times. Their goal with these attacks has been to essentially destroy Syria’s military capability, and they have already succeeded. Reports by Israeli media claim that well over 80% of Syria’s weaponry, ships, missiles, aircraft, and other military supplies have been damaged or destroyed.
Even as Bashar al-Assad was scrambling to get out of Syria, Israel was mobilizing its military to take advantage of the power vacuum that Assad’s ouster had created. After five decades of a low-level conflict between the two countries, Israel saw an opportunity to change the calculus, and it seized it. As of Wednesday, Israel had struck Syria nearly 500 times. Their goal with these attacks…
AMY GOODMAN: We begin today’s show in Syria, where tens of thousands of people gathered at the Great Mosque of Damascus for the first Friday prayers since longtime authoritarian President Bashar al-Assad was toppled by opposition fighters.
DAMASCUS RESIDENT: [translated] Hopefully this Friday is the Friday of the greatest joy, a Friday of victory for our Muslim brothers. This is a blessed Friday.
AMY GOODMAN: Syria’s new caretaker Prime Minister Mohammed al-Bashir was among those at the mosque. He’ll act as prime minister until March.
This comes as the World Food Programme is appealing to donors to help it scale up relief operations for the approximately 2.8 million displaced and food-insecure Syrians across the country. That includes more than 1.1 million people who were forcibly displaced by fighting since late November.
Israel’s Defence Minister has told his troops to prepare to spend the winter holding the demilitarized zone that separates Syria from the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. Earlier today, Prime Minister Netanyahu toured the summit of Mount Haramun in the UN-designated buffer zone. Netanyahu said this week the Golan Heights would “forever be an inseparable part of the State of Israel”.
On Thursday, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called for an urgent deescalation of airstrikes on Syria by Israeli forces, and their withdrawal from the UN buffer zone.
In Ankara, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Turkey’s Foreign Minister and the President, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Blinken said the US and Turkey would [work] to prevent a resurgence of the Islamic State group in Syria. Meanwhile, Erdoğan told Blinken that Turkey reserves the right to strike the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, led by the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), which Turkey considers “terrorist”.
For more, we go to Damascus for the first time since the fall of longtime authoritarian President Bashar al-Assad, where we’re joined by the Associated Press investigative reporter Sarah El Deeb, who is based in the Middle East, a region she has covered for two decades.
Sarah, welcome to Democracy Now! You are overlooking —
SARAH EL DEEB: Thank you.
AMY GOODMAN: — the square where tens of thousands of Syrians have gathered for the first Friday prayers since the fall of Assad. Describe the scene for us.
Report from Damascus: Searching for loved ones in prisons and morgues. Video: Democracy Now!
SARAH EL DEEB: There is a lot of firsts here. It’s the first time they gather on Friday after Bashar al-Assad fled the country. It’s the first time everyone seems to be very happy. I think that’s the dominant sentiment, especially people who are in the square. There is ecstasy, tens of thousands of people. They are still chanting, “Down with Bashar al-Assad.”
But what’s new is that it’s also visible that the sentiment is they’ve been, so far, happy with the new rulers, not outpour — there is no criticism, out — loud criticism of the new rulers yet. So, I’d say the dominant thing is that everyone is happy down there.
HAYAT AL-TURKI: [translated] I will show you the photo of my missing brother. It’s been 14 years. This is his photo. I don’t know what he looks like, if I find him. I don’t know what he looks like, because I am seeing the photos of prisoners getting out. They are like skeletons.
But this is his photo, if anyone has seen him, can know anything about him or can help us. He is one of thousands of prisoners who are missing. I am asking for everyone, not only my brother, uncle, cousin and relatives.”
AMY GOODMAN: Talk about this mad search by Syrians across the country.
SARAH EL DEEB: This is the other thing that’s been dominating our coverage and our reporting since we arrived here, the contrast between the relief, the sense of relief over the departure of Bashar al-Assad but then the sadness and the concern and the no answers for where the loved ones have gone.
Thousands — also, tens of thousands of people have marched on Sednaya [prison]. It’s the counter to this scene, where people were looking for any sign of where their relatives have been. As you know really well, so many people have reported their relatives missing, tens of thousands, since the beginning of the revolt, but also before.
I mean, I think this is a part of the feature of this government, is that there has been a lot of security crackdown. People were scared to speak, but they were — because there was a good reason for it. They were picked up at any expression of discontent or expression of opinion.
So, where we were in Sednaya two, three days ago, it feels like one big day, I have to say. When we were in Sednaya, people were also describing what — anything, from the smallest expression of opinion, a violation of a traffic light. No answers.
And they still don’t know where their loved ones are. I mean, I think we know quite a lot from research before arriving here about the notorious prison system in Syria. There’s secret prisons. There are security branches where people were being held. I think this is the first time we have an opportunity to go look at those facilities.
What was surprising and shocking to the people, and also to a lot of us journalists, was that we couldn’t find any sign of these people. And the answers are — we’re still looking for them. But what was clear is that only a handful — I mean, not a handful — hundreds of people were found.
Many of them were also found in morgues. There were apparent killings in the last hours before the regime departed. One of them was the prominent activist Mazen al-Hamada. We were at his funeral yesterday. He was found, and his family believes that — he was found killed, and his family believes his body was fresh, that he was killed only a few days earlier. So, I think the killing continued up until the last hour.
AMY GOODMAN: I was wondering if you can tell us more about —
SARAH EL DEEB: What was also — what was also —
AMY GOODMAN: — more about Mazen. I mean, I wanted to play a clip of Mazen’s nephew, Yahya al-Hussein.
YAHYA AL-HUSSEIN: [translated] In 2020, he was taken from the Netherlands to Germany through the Syrian Embassy there. And from there, they brought him to Syria with a fake passport.
He arrived at the airport at around 2:30 a.m. and called my aunt to tell her that he arrived at the airport, and asked for money. When they reached out to him the next day, they were told that air intelligence had arrested him.
AMY GOODMAN: That’s Mazen’s nephew, Yahya al-Hussein. Sarah, if you can explain? This was an activist who left Syria after he had been imprisoned and tortured — right? — more than a decade ago, but ultimately came back, apparently according to assurances that he would not be retaken. And now his body is found.
SARAH EL DEEB: I think it’s — like you were saying, it’s very hard to explain. This is someone who was very outspoken and was working on documenting the torture and the killing in the secret prisons in Syria. So he was very well aware of his role and his position vis-à-vis the government. Yet he felt — it was hard to explain what Mazen’s decision was based on, but his family believes he was lured into Syria by some false promises of security and safety.
His heart was in Syria. He left Syria, but he never — it never left him. He was working from wherever he was — he was in the Netherlands, he was in the US — I think, to expose these crimes. And I think this is — these are the words of his family: He was a witness on the crimes of the Assad government, and he was a martyr of the Assad government.
One of the people that were at the funeral yesterday was telling us Mazen was a lesson. The Assad government was teaching all detainees a lesson through Mazen to keep them silent. I think it was just a testimony to how cruel this ruling regime, ruling system has been for the past 50 years.
People would go back to his father’s rule also. But I think with the revolution, with the protests in 2011, all these crimes and all these detentions were just en masse. I think the estimates are anywhere between 150,000 and 80,000 detainees that no one can account for. That is on top of all the people that were killed in airstrikes and in opposition areas in crackdown on protest.
So, it was surprising that at the last minute — it was surprising and yet not very surprising. When I asked the family, “Why did they do that?” they would look at me and, like, “Why are you asking this question? They do that. That’s what they did.” It was just difficult to understand how even at the last minute, and even for someone that they promised security, this was — this would be the end, emaciated and tortured and killed, unfortunately.
AMY GOODMAN: Sarah, you spoke in Damascus to a US citizen, Travis Timmerman, who says he was imprisoned in Syria. This is a clip from an interview with Al Arabiya on Thursday in which he says he spent the last seven months in a prison cell in Damascus.
TRAVIS TIMMERMAN: My name is Travis.
REPORTER: Travis.
TRAVIS TIMMERMAN: Yes.
REPORTER: So, [speaking in Arabic]. Travis, Travis Timmerman.
TRAVIS TIMMERMAN: That’s right.
REPORTER: That’s right.
TRAVIS TIMMERMAN: But just Travis. Just call me Travis.
REPORTER: Call you Travis, OK. And where were you all this time?
TRAVIS TIMMERMAN: I was imprisoned in Damascus for the last seven months. … I was imprisoned in a cell by myself. And in the early morning of this Monday, or the Monday of this week, they took a hammer, and they broke my door down. … Well, the armed men just wanted to get me out of my cell. And then, really, the man who I stuck with was a Syrian man named Ely. He was also a prisoner that was just freed. And he took me by the side, by the arm, really. And he and a young woman that lives in Damascus, us three, exited the prison together.
SARAH EL DEEB: I spent quite a bit of time with Travis last night. And I think his experience was very different from what I was just describing. He was taken, he was detained for crossing illegally into Syria. And I think his description of his experience was it was OK. He was not mistreated.
He was fed well, I mean, especially when I compare it to what I heard from the Syrian prisoners in the secret prisons or in detention facilities. He would receive rice, potatoes, tomatoes. None of this was available to the Syrian detainees. He would go to the bathroom three times a day, although this was uncomfortable for him, because, of course, it was not whenever he wanted. But it was not something that other Syrian detainees would experience.
His experience also was that he heard a lot of beating. I think that’s what he described it as: beating from nearby cells. They were mostly Syrian detainees. For him, that was an implicit threat of the use of violence against him, but he did not get any — he was not beaten or tortured.
AMY GOODMAN: And, Sarah, if you could also —
SARAH EL DEEB: He also said his release was a “blessing.” Yeah.
AMY GOODMAN: If you could also talk about Austin Tice, the American freelance journalist? His family, his mother and father and brothers and sisters, seem to be repeatedly saying now that they believe he’s alive, held by the Syrian government, and they’re desperately looking for him or reaching out to people in Syria. What do you know?
SARAH EL DEEB: What we know is that people thought Travis was Tice when they first saw him. They found him in a house in a village outside of Damascus. And I think that’s what triggered — we didn’t know that Travis was in a Syrian prison, so I think that’s what everyone was going to check. They thought that this was Tice.
I think the search, the US administration, the family, they are looking and determined to look for Tice. The family believes that he was in Syrian government prison. He entered Syria in 2012. He is a journalist. But I think we have — his family seems to think that there were — he’s still in a Syrian government prison.
But I think, so far, we have not had any sign of Tice from all those released. But, mind you, the scenes of release from prisons were chaotic, from multiple prisons at the same time. And we’re still, day by day, finding out about new releases and people who were set free on that Sunday morning.
U.N. Calls on Israel to Stop Bombing Syria and Occupying Demilitarized Zone https://t.co/iHNIkKKOrs
I want to turn to Gaza. Tell us about the Palestinians searching for their family members who went missing during raids and arrests by Israeli soldiers in the Gaza Strip. And talk about the lack of accountability for these appearances. You begin your piece with Reem Ajour’s quest to find her missing husband and daughter.
SARAH EL DEEB: I talked to Reem Ajour for a long time. I mean, I think, like you said, this was a pivot, but the themes have been common across the Middle East, sadly. Reem Ajour last saw her family in March of 2024. Both her husband and her 5-year-old daughter were injured after an Israeli raid on their house during the chaotic scenes of the Israeli raids on the Shifa Hospital.
They lived in the neighborhood. So, it was chaotic. They [Israeli military] entered their home, and they were shooting in the air, or they were shooting — they were shooting, and the family ended up wounded.
But what was striking was that the Israeli soldiers made the mother leave the kid wounded in her house and forced her to leave to the south. I think this is not only Reem Ajour’s case. I think this is something we’ve seen quite a bit in Gaza. But the fact that this was a 5-year-old and the mom couldn’t take her with her was quite moving.
And I think what her case kind of symbolises is that during these raids and during these detentions at checkpoints, families are separated, and we don’t have any way of knowing how the Israeli military is actually documenting these detentions, these raids.
Where do they — how do they account for people who they detain and then they release briefly? The homes that they enter, can we find out what happened in these homes? We have no idea of holding — I think the Israeli court has also tried to get some information from the military, but so far very few cases have been resolved.
And we’re talking about not only 500 or 600 people; we’re talking about tens of thousands who have been separated, their homes raided, during what is now 15 months of war in Gaza.
AMY GOODMAN: Sarah El Deeb, we want to thank you for being with us, Associated Press investigative reporter based in the Middle East for two decades, now reporting from Damascus.
Next up, today is the 75th day of a hunger strike by Laila Soueif. She’s the mother of prominent British Egyptian political prisoner Alaa Abd El-Fattah. She’s calling on British officials to pressure Egypt for the release of her son. We’ll speak to the Cairo University mathematics professor in London, where she’s been standing outside the Foreign Office. Back in 20 seconds.
Tensions over executions and plans for petrol price rise and hijab law add to reversals in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria
The fall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, the latest in a string of foreign policy reversals for Iran including the weakening of its allies in Lebanon and Gaza, has coincided with growing domestic frustration over rising executions, planned increases in the price of petrol and a proposed law that imposes heavy fines and loss of access to public services to any woman not wearing the hijab.
The confluence of events is putting unprecedented pressure on Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, to demonstrate what reforms he has introduced since being elected in June. He is viewed domestically as a consensual figure and faces a conservative parliament, but his supporters are impatient for changes that will lift the economy.
Bashar al-Assad has finally fledSyria. Since 2011, he had dug in as a proxy war developed against him. But 2024 was the year when his luck ran out. And it’s a big victory for the US empire and its junior partner in Israel.
NATO’s second-biggest army, however, isn’t too happy about the situation. So Syria is unlikely to have a lasting peace any time soon.
Assad falls amid Israel’s Middle-East rampage and Russia’s quagmire in Ukraine
Russia cared about Syria mainly because of its two bases in the country. That’s why it helped Assad to fight back against his opponents from 2015 onwards. But in 2024, Russia’s priority is Ukraine, where another proxy war has it bogged down and left it unable to invest enough resources into protecting Assad.
Israel, meanwhile, took advantage of the complete impunity the US empire has given it during its genocide in Gaza to go further afield. It has killed Iranians and dealt severe blows to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Both Iran and Hezbollah were on the back foot. And that meant these two allies of Assad weren’t in a position to come to his aid either in the last week.
As Sky News defence analyst Michael Clarke said, Russia and Iran were only helping Assad with “very low-cost operations”, and they’d have to either “commit much more, or they were going to have to pull out”. In the end, he stressed:
Both of them decided they would throw Syria under the bus and pull out.
The US empire smiles over Syria today
Israel has always been an outpost, a station, a proxy, a tool, and a defender of the US empire’s interests in the Middle East. In particular, it helped to separate Arab territories that may well have united if there hadn’t been a divisive force between them. And specifically, that helped to ensure that a chunk of the region’s precious natural resources remained in friendly hands, and those that didn’t could become the target of covert or overt hostility.
The Assad dynasty in Syria was in the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence, and then Russia’s. It also showed solidarity with the Palestinian cause, which put Washington’s junior imperialist partner in Israel at risk. All of that made it a target for US meddling. It wasn’t the fact that the Assads were bastards, because plenty of US allies are. It was the fact that they weren’t under the control of the US empire.
What is happening is certainly to the benefit of the Israeli military, of the Israeli government… They are getting what they have said they have wanted all along: weaker neighbours, so that they can push their regional agenda.
So although it’s an Al-Qaeda jihadist group the US considers to be terrorists which has led the final offensive against Assad’s regime, the empire is happy today.
NATO superpower Turkey, however, always cared more about crushing Kurds than Assad
Wars that don’t end in negotiations tend to go on for a long time, until conditions lead to one side clearly having the upper hand. And NATO superpower Turkey has its own war going on – but not against Assad.
The left-wing, Kurdish-led Rojava revolution emerged in northern Syria at the start of country’s conflict. Assad’s forces had retreated, and the local multi-ethnic (but largely-Kurdish) communities had to defend themselves from jihadist attacks. Turkey had long repressed its own Kurdish population, so it couldn’t accept an independent Kurdish-led revolution on its border. It thus ended its own negotiations and restarted its anti-Kurdish war, increasing its efforts to suppress the movement at home and abroad. In doing so, it committed numerous war crimes.
Turkey has long sought to demonise its opponents by calling them terrorists, but the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) has actually been the victim of a Turkish terror campaign that has caused a humanitarian crisis there. This was part of a long campaign of ethnic cleansing and illegal occupation in northern Syria.
And it very much seems that Turkey isn’t going to stop its anti-Kurdish war in northern Syria any time soon:
Well there you have it. Without a miraculous change in Turkish priorities, the first act of the creation of the new Syria may be Efrîn-style ethnic cleansing of the Kurdish cities and communities that remain. https://t.co/Gd7HkTTHHq
There is collective amnesia about what Turkey's been doing in Syria. TR took over the FSA (SNA now), put nationalist Turkmen in charge, ethnically cleansed Afrin, invaded Tel Abyad/Ras al-Ain, sent SNA to Libya and Karabakh. Is still fighting SDF.
A jihadist victory against Assad is like replacing one ill for another. The AANES, on the other hand, is the closest thing to a left-wing government in the entire Middle East. And if there was any cause the international left should now get behind, especially in Syria, that would be it.
“Joe Biden and the neo-cons in his administration have been constantly escalating war… What they’re trying to do is start a war that Donald Trump can’t stop,” warns Dore about a potential WWIII.
“The only hope we have is that Putin shows restraint, that he is the only adult in the room and that he can hold off somehow until Donald Trump becomes president,” Dore opined in an interview with Going Underground host Afshin Rattansi.
Is that the only hope? One can certainly come up with many other hopes. For example, a mass mobilization by US citizenry in Washington, DC. A general strike carried out by Americans, Canadians, and Europeans repulsed by their neocon-affiliated politicians. Or that Pentagon generals speak out vociferously and publicly against such dangerous provocations against Russia. Or that people charged with inputting the coordinates for missiles targeting Russia refuse to do so.
Far-fetched? Maybe so, but isn’t that what a hope is — something far outside of the realm of a certainty?
Or is Trump the only feasible hope? And can Trump be trusted? How many promises did he fail to come through on during his first term as president?
Dore asserts that “Trump is not a warmonger” and that he “got elected on ending our foreign regime-change interventionist wars.”
Trump may very well have been elected on the basis of ending foreign interventions by the US. However, that does not excuse him from being a warmonger.
Early in the first Trump presidency, he sent in US fighters who killed dozens of Yemeni civilians, including children. Trump was now a war criminal.
Did Trump end the US war on Syria? No. In fact, Trump said the troops would remain because “We’re keeping the [Syrian] oil.”
Did Trump seek peaceful relations with Iran? No. In fact, Trump pulled the US out of the JCPOA which was designed to halt Iran’s potential for becoming a nuclear-armed state. Trump’s strategy has set the stage for further nuclear proliferation. And if that was not enough, Trump ordered the assassination of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani.
However woeful the Biden presidency has been, one ought not to forget the first Trump presidency. Trump has a track record. It seems prudent to remove the rose-colored glasses and take into consideration that track record.
But Trump was pressured by those around him. Trump had mistakenly saddled himself with warmongering neocons in his previous administration like Nikki Haley, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, etc. But is he different now?
Trump’s new for Director of national security policy in the White House,Sebastian Gorka, exhibited his diplomatic decorum by referring to Russian president Vladimir Putin as a “murderous former KGB colonel, that thug.” According to Gorka, Trump is going to threaten Putin by telling him: “You will negotiate now or the aid that we have given to Ukraine thus far will look like peanuts.” Which serious-minded observers believe that Putin is now shaking in his pants?
Does this inspire hope in Trump?
Finally, does anyone have an iota of hope that Trump will do right in the Middle East when it comes to Israel?
Of the many countries of the Global South that maintain cordial ties with Russia, Iran happens to be one of the few outliers where the public doesn’t hold predominantly positive views of the Eurasian heavyweight. Anti-Russia sentiments have snowballed in Iran since the start of the Ukraine war, and as reflected in an October 2022 Cambridge University study, unfavorable perceptions of Russia are…
It’s a Saturday morning in Ballarat, 100km west of Melbourne. A group of about 60 people are gathering at a local primary school, enjoying a potluck breakfast spread of eggs, bacon, bread, cereals and freshly cooked dishes served up by local teenagers.
They’re all ages, from all cultures and faith backgrounds. Soon, they’ll break off into a series of activities aimed at promoting unity and encouraging them to give back to their neighbourhood – through raising funds for the local soup kitchen, planting trees at a nearby farm, teaching children music or working at a community garden.
A boy sits in rubble in Gaza. Photo Credit: UNICEF
When Donald Trump takes office on January 20, all his campaign promises to end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours and almost as quickly end Israel’s war on its neighbors will be put to the test. The choices he has made for his incoming administration so far, from Marco Rubio as Secretary of State to Mike Waltz as National Security Advisor, Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense and Elise Stefanik as UN Ambassador make for a rogues gallery of saber-rattlers.
The only conflict where peace negotiations seem to be on the agenda is Ukraine. In April, both Vice President-elect JD Vance and Senator Marco Rubio voted against a $95 billion military aid bill that included $61 billion for Ukraine.
Rubio recently appeared on NBC’s Today Show saying, “I think the Ukrainians have been incredibly brave and strong when standing up to Russia. But at the end of the day, what we’re funding here is a stalemate war, and it needs to be brought to a conclusion… I think there has to be some common sense here.”
On the campaign trail, Vance made a controversial suggestion that the best way to end the war was for Ukraine to cede the land Russia has seized, for a demilitarized zone to be established, and for Ukraine to become neutral, i.e. not enter NATO. He was roundly criticized by both Republicans and Democrats who argue that backing Ukraine is vitally important to U.S. security since it weakens Russia, which is closely allied with China.
Any attempt by Trump to stop U.S. military support for Ukraine will undoubtedly face fierce opposition from the pro-war forces in his own party, particularly in Congress, as well as perhaps the entirety of the Democratic party. Two years ago, 30 progressive Democrats in Congress wrote a letter to President Biden asking him to consider promoting negotiations. The party higher ups were so incensed by their lack of party discipline that they came down on the progressives like a ton of bricks. Within 24 hours, the group had cried uncle and rescinded the letter. They have since all voted for money for Ukraine and have not uttered another word about negotiations.
So a Trump effort to cut funds to Ukraine could run up against a bipartisan congressional effort to keep the war going. And let’s not forget the efforts by European countries, and NATO, to keep the U.S. in the fight. Still, Trump could stand up to all these forces and push for a rational policy that would restart the talking and stop the killing.
The Middle East, however, is a more difficult situation. In his first term, Trump showed his pro-Israel cards when he brokered the Abraham accords between several Arab countries and Israel; moved the U.S. embassy to a location in Jerusalem that is partly on occupied land outside Israel’s internationally recognized borders; and recognized the occupied Golan Heights in Syria as part of Israel. Such unprecedented signals of unconditional U.S. support for Israel’s illegal occupation and settlements helped set the stage for the current crisis.
Trump seems as unlikely as Biden to cut U.S. weapons to Israel, despite public opinion polls favoring such a halt and a recent UN human rights report showing that 70% of the people killed by those U.S. weapons are women and children.
Meanwhile, the wily Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is already busy getting ready for a second Trump presidency. On the very day of the U.S. election, Netanyahu fired his defense minister, Yoav Gallant, who opposed a lasting Israeli military occupation of Gaza and had at times argued for prioritizing the lives of the Israeli hostages over killing more Palestinians.
Israel Katz, the new defense minister and former foreign minister, is more hawkish than Gallant, and has led a campaign to falsely blame Iran for the smuggling of weapons from Jordan into the West Bank.
Other powerful voices, national security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, who is also a “minister in the Defense Ministry,” represent extreme Zionist parties that are publicly committed to territorial expansion, annexation and ethnic cleansing. They both live in illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.
So Netanyahu has deliberately surrounded himself with allies who back his ever-escalating war. They are surely developing a war plan to exploit Trump’s support for Israel, but will first use the unique opportunity of the U.S. transition of power to create facts on the ground that will limit Trump’s options when he takes office.
The Israelis will doubtless redouble their efforts to drive Palestinians out of as much of Gaza as possible, confronting President Trump with a catastrophic humanitarian crisis in which Gaza’s surviving population is crammed into an impossibly small area, with next to no food, no shelter for many, disease running rampant, and no access to needed medical care for tens of thousands of horribly wounded and dying people.
The Israelis will count on Trump to accept whatever final solution they propose, most likely to drive Palestinians out of Gaza, into the West Bank, Jordan, Egypt and farther afield.
Israel threatened all along to do to Lebanon the same as they have done to Gaza. Israeli forces have met fierce resistance, taken heavy casualties, and have not advanced far into Lebanon. But, as in Gaza, they are using bombing and artillery to destroy villages and towns, kill or drive people north and hope to effectively annex the part of Lebanon south of the Litani river as a so-called “buffer zone.” When Trump takes office, they may ask for greater U.S. involvement to help them “finish the job.”
The big wild card is Iran. Trump’s first term in office was marked by a policy of “maximum pressure” against Tehran. He unilaterally withdrew America from the Iran nuclear deal, imposed severe sanctions that devastated the economy, and ordered the killing of the country’s top general. Trump did not support a war on Iran in his first term, but had to be talked out of attacking Iran in his final days in office by General Mark Milley and the Pentagon.
Colin Powell’s former chief of staff, retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, recently described to Chris Hedges just how catastrophic a war with Iran would be, based on U.S.military wargames he was involved in.
Wilkerson predicts that a U.S. war on Iran could last for ten years, cost $10 trillion and still fail to conquer Iran. Airstrikes alone would not destroy all of Iran’s civilian nuclear program and ballistic missile stockpiles. So, once unleashed, the war would very likely escalate into a regime change war involving U.S. ground forces, in a country with three or four times the territory and population of Iraq, more mountainous terrain and a thousand mile long coastline bristling with missiles that can sink U.S. warships.
But Netanyahu and his extreme Zionist allies believe that they must sooner or later fight an existential war with Iran if they are to realize their vision of a dominant Greater Israel. And they believe that the destruction they have wreaked on the Palestinians in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, including the assassination of their senior leaders, has given them a military advantage and a favorable opportunity for a showdown with Iran.
By November 10, Trump and Netanyahu had reportedly spoken on the phone three times since the election, and Netanyahu said that they see “eye to eye on the Iranian threat.” Trump has already hired Iran hawk Brian Hook, who helped him sabotage the JCPOA nuclear agreement with Iran in 2018, to coordinate the formation of his foreign policy team.
So far, the team that Trump and Hook have assembled seems to offer hope for peace in Ukraine, but little to none for peace in the Middle East and a rising danger of a U.S.-Israeli war on Iran.
Trump’s expected National Security Advisor Mike Waltz is best known as a China hawk. He has voted against military aid to Ukraine in Congress, but he recently tweeted that Israel should bomb Iran’s nuclear and oil facilities, the most certain path to a full-scale war.
Trump’s new UN ambassador, Elise Stefanik, has led moves in Congress to equate criticism of Israel with anti-semitism, and she led the aggressive questioning of American university presidents at an anti-semitism hearing in Congress, after which the presidents of Harvard and Penn resigned.
So, while Trump will have some advisors who support his desire to end the war in Ukraine, there will be few voices in his inner circle urging caution over Netanyahu’s genocidal ambitions in Palestine and his determination to cripple Iran.
If he wanted to, President Biden could use his final two months in office to de-escalate the conflicts in the Middle East. He could impose an embargo on offensive weapons for Israel, push for serious ceasefire negotiations in both Gaza and Lebanon, and work through U.S. partners in the Gulf to de-escalate tensions with Iran.
But Biden is unlikely to do any of that. When his own administration sent a letter to Israel last month, threatening a cut in military aid if Israel did not allow a surge of humanitarian aid into Gaza in the next 30 days, Israel responded by doing just the opposite–actually cutting the number of trucks allowed in. The State Department claimed Israel was taking “steps in the right direction” and Biden refused to take any action.
We will soon see if Trump is able to make progress in moving the Ukraine war towards negotiations, potentially saving the lives of many thousands of Ukrainians and Russians. But between the catastrophe that Trump will inherit and the warhawks he is picking for his cabinet, peace in the Middle East seems more distant than ever.
Amid growing concerns about what U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s return to the White House will mean for Washington’s rocky relationship with Tehran, the Department of Justice on Friday announced charges against an Afghan national accused of plotting to assassinate the Republican at the direction of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Though Trump survived two shooting attempts…
Despite being appalled at my government, I winced as a New Zealander to hear my country described as part of the “Axis of Genocide”. With increasing frequency I hear commentators on West Asia/Middle East news sites hold the collective West responsible for the genocide.
It’s a big come-down from the Global Labrador Puppy status New Zealand enjoyed recently.
Australia too has a record of being viewed as a country with soft-power influence, albeit while a stalwart deputy to the US in this part of the world. That is over.
Professor Mohammad Seyed Marandi talks to Piers Morgan Uncensored. Video: Middle East Eye
Regrettably, Australia and New Zealand have sent troops to support US-Israel in the Red Sea (killing Yemeni people), failed to join the International Court of Justice (ICJ) case against Israel, shared intelligence with the Israelis, trained with their forces, provided R&R to soldiers fresh from the killing fields of Gaza while blocking Palestinian refugees, and extended valuable diplomatic support to Israel at the UN.
British planes overfly Gaza to provide data, a German freighter arrived in Alexandria this week laden with hundreds of thousands of kilograms of explosives to kill yet more Palestinian civilians.
Genocide is a collective effort of the Collective West.
Australia and New Zealand, along with the rest of the West, “will stand by the Israeli regime until they exterminate the last Palestinian”, says Professor Mohammad Seyed Marandi, an American-Iranian academic. What our governments do is at best “light condemnation” he says, but when it counts they will be silent.
‘They will allow extermination’
“They will allow the extermination of the people of Gaza. And then if the Israelis go after the West Bank, they will allow for that to happen as well. Under no circumstances do I see the West blocking extermination,” Marandi says.
Looking at our performance over the past seven decades and what is happening today, it is an assessment I would not argue against.
But why should we listen to someone from the Islamic Republic of Iran, you might ask. Who are they to preach at us?
I see things differently. In our dystopian, tightly-curated mainstream mediascape it is rare to hear an Iranian voice. We need to listen to more people, not fewer.
I’m definitely not a cheerleader for Iran or any state and I most certainly don’t agree with everything Professor Marandi says but he gives me richer insights than me just drowning in the endless propaganda of Tier One war criminals like Joe Biden, Benjamin Netanyahu, Antony Blinken and their spokespeople.
Dr Marandi, professor of English literature and orientalism at the University of Tehran, is a former member of Iran’s negotiating team that brokered the break-through JCPOA nuclear agreement (later reneged on by the Trump and Biden administrations).
He is no shrinking violet. He has that fierceness of someone who has been shot at multiple times. A veteran of the Iran-Iraq War, Marandi was wounded four times, including twice with chemical weapons, key components of which were likely supplied by the US to their erstwhile ally Saddam Hussein.
Killed people he knew
Dr Marandi was in South Beirut a few weeks ago when the US-Israelis dropped dozens of bombs on residential buildings killing hundreds of civilians to get at the leader of Hezbollah (a textbook war crime that will never be prosecuted). It killed people he knew. To a BBC reporter who said, yes, but they were targeting Hezbollah, he replied:
“That’s like saying of 7/7 [the terror bombings in London]: ‘They bombed a British regime stronghold.’ How would that sound to people in the UK?”
Part of what people find discomforting about Dr Marandi is that he tears down the thin curtain that separates the centres of power from the major news outlets that repeat their talking points (“Israel has a legitimate right to self-defence” etc).
The more our leaders and media prattle on about Israel’s right to defend itself, the more we sound like the Germany that terrorised Europe in the 1930s and 40s. And the rest of the world has noticed.
As TS Eliot said: “Nothing dies harder than the desire to think well of oneself.”
Not a man to mince words when it comes to war crimes.
Masterful over pointing out racism
Dr Marandi has been masterful at pointing out the racism inherent in the Western worldview, the chauvinism that allows Western minds to treasure white lives but discount as worthless hundreds of thousands of Muslim lives taken in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen and elsewhere.
“There is no reason to expect that a declining and desperate empire will conduct itself in a civilised manner. Iran is prepared for the worst,” he says.
“In this great moral struggle, in the world that we live in today — meaning the holocaust in Gaza — who is defending the people of Gaza and who is supporting the holocaust? Iran with its small group of allies is alone against the West,” he told Nima Alkhorshid from Dialogue Works recently.
The Collective West shares collective responsibility.
Dr Marandi draws a sharp distinction between our governments and our populations. He is entirely right in pointing out that the younger people are, in countries like Australia and New Zealand, the more likely they are to oppose the genocide — as do growing numbers of young Jewish Americans who have rejected the Zionist project.
“All people within the whole of Palestine must be equal — Jews, Muslims and Christians. The Islamic Republic of Iran will not allow the US, EU, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the Zionist regime to exterminate the Palestinians of Gaza.”
I heard Mohammad Seyed Marandi extend an interesting invitation to us all in a recent interview. He said the “Axis of Resistance” should be thought of as open to all people who oppose the genocide in Gaza and who are opposed to continued Western militarism in West Asia.
I would never sign up to the policies of Iran, especially on issues like women’s rights, but I do find the invitation to a broad coalition clarifying: the Axis of Genocide versus The Axis of Resistance. Whose side are you on?
Eugene Doyle is a community organiser and activist in Wellington, New Zealand. He received an Absolutely Positively Wellingtonian award in 2023 for community service. His first demonstration was at the age of 12 against the Vietnam War. This article was first published at his public policy website Solidarity and is republished here with permission.
