While advocates of peace and a multipolar world order welcomed Friday’s China-brokered agreement reestablishing diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, U.S. press, pundits, and politicians expressed what one observer called “imperial anxieties” over the deal and growing Chinese influence in a region dominated by the United States for decades. The deal struck between the two countries…
We have seen much recently about the Ukraine war anniversary. But this is also the anniversary of other wars: March marks the 8th anniversary of the war on Yemen and the 20th on Iraq. Members of Congress, including Senator Bernie Sanders, should introduce a Yemen War Powers Resolution before this war enters a 9th year.
On March 1st activists in 10 cities across the United States protested at congressional offices and beyond, calling on their lawmakers to bring the harmful U.S. role in the Yemen war to a rapid and final end. Over 70 organizations called for and supported the protests.
During Wednesday’s protests, activists called on Sanders and other federal lawmakers to introduce a new Yemen War Powers Resolution this month. If brought to the floor for a vote, Congress could order the president to end U.S. participation in the catastrophic conflict, which the U.S. has enabled for eight years. Sanders sponsored last year’s bill, but when he moved to bring the resolution to a floor vote in December, he was shut down by the Biden administration.
In December, Sanders pledged to return to the Senate floor with a new Yemen War Powers Resolution if he and the administration were unable to agree to “strong and effective” action that would achieve his goals.
Without meaningful public action from Biden at this point, the time is now for Sen. Sanders to make good on his pledge. For over 10 months, Saudi Arabia has not dropped any bombs on Yemen. However, this could change anytime. If the United States continues to support the war, it will be implicated in Saudi aggression if, and likely when, the conflict escalates.
Without meaningful public action from Biden at this point, the time is now for Sen. Sanders to make good on his pledge.
Approximately two–thirds of the Royal Saudi Air Force receive direct support from U.S. military contracts in the form of spare parts and maintenance. TheSaudi-led coalition has relied on this support to carry out these offensive strikes in Yemen. The United States has no sufficient compelling interest in Yemen that justifies implication in one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises.
Since March 2015, the Saudi Arabia and /UAE)-led bombing and blockade of Yemen have killed hundreds of thousands of people and wreaked havoc on the country, creating one of the largest humanitarian crises in the world. 17 million people in Yemen are food insecure and 500,000 children are experiencing severe wasting, also known as severe acute malnutrition.
For years virtually no containerized goods have been allowed to enter Hodeida, Yemen’s principal Red Sea port Hodeida. Containerized goods include essentially everything other than food and fuel. This has helped cripple the economy and prevented critical life-saving medicine and medical equipment from reaching people in need.
This humanitarian crisis has worsened since President Biden took office. Admittedly this is not entirely his fault. The Biden administration took some initial good steps forward, including reversing the Trump administration’s policy to designate the Houthis as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, and reversing an arms transfer in the works when Biden took office. The war in Ukraine and global wheat shortage have hit Yemen hard; the country relies heavily on imports. Climate disasters have also exacerbated the effects of the conflict in Yemen. But the Biden administration does bear partial responsibility for the continued suffering in Yemen.
Despite President Biden’s February 2021 commitment to end participation in Saudi offensive operations in Yemen, the U.S. has continued support for the war. The U.S. has continued to provide spare parts and maintenance for the Saudi air force, which increased the frequency of airstrikes on Yemen in 2021 and early 2022 – after Biden took office.
Without a negotiated settlement, nothing prevents Saudi Arabia from restarting airstrikes in Yemen. With apparent never-ending and unconditional U.S. military support, Saudi Arabia lacks an incentive to once and for all completely lift its blockade of Yemen and withdraw from Yemen.
In 2018 Saudi dictator Mohammed Bin Salman ordered the murder of a U.S. journalist and then lied about it. Just last year Saudi Arabia manipulated global energy markets to raise fuel prices and empower Russia in its immoral and illegal invasion of Ukraine. These are just a couple recent demonstrations of a history of destructive activity by Saudi Arabia that is harmful to the United States and its allies. The Biden administration was correct in October when it called for a re-evaluation of the US-Saudi relationship, urging Congress to propose measures to hold Saudi Arabia accountable. Passing the Yemen War Powers Resolution is a chance to do exactly that.
Organizations that signed the call to protest the war March 1st included the Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation, the Yemeni Alliance Committee, About Face: Veterans Against War, Veterans for Peace, Progressive Democrats of America, the Libertarian Institute, Avaaz, CODEPINK, Peace Action, United for Peace and Justice, Democratic Socialists of America International Committee, Women’s League for International Peace and Freedom – US Section, among over 70 organizations. Over 100 national organizations – humanitarian, veterans’, libertarian, and others – wrote to Congress as recently as December urging their passage of the Yemen War Powers Resolution. Bernie Sanders should re-introduce his resolution.
Under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, the power to raise and support armies is reserved for Congress. No Congressional authorization for the use of military force (AUMF) has been issued for Yemen. The War Powers Resolution empowers Congress to invoke its constitutional war powers authority to end unconstitutional U.S. participation in wars like the war in Yemen.
The bill prevents a resumption of offensive Saudi airstrikes in Yemen by prohibiting U.S. involvement in them. This legislation can promote a negotiated settlement and long-term, lasting peace between the warring parties.
Saturday, March 25 will mark the eighth anniversary of the beginning of the Saudi-led coalition’s bombing of Yemen. To mark the occasion, US and international groups will hold an online rally to inspire and enhance education and activism to end the war in Yemen. Join grassroots organizers on March 25th at 12pm Eastern. Register now.
This post was originally published on Common Dreams.
Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, will be remembered as the reckless politician who gave Itamar Ben-Gvir the green light to set a fire that will consume Palestine and cause death and destruction, the scale of which has never been seen before, writes Miko Peled.
Chanting “Free, free Palestine” and “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free”, 70 protesters gathered in the Murray St Mall to protest the January 26 slaughter of Palestinian refugees by the Israeli state.
Speakers pointed out that US and Australian politicians were quick to condemn the killing of seven Jewish civilians in Jerusalem on January 28 but were silent about the killing of Palestinians by Israeli forces two days earlier.
While Israeli soldiers stormed Jenin and killed 10 Palestinians, members of Israeli registered professional cycling teams were training on roads in and around Geelong, writes Lisa Gleeson.
How can we prevail on Labor to admit that realpolitik is obscene as a frame for its Israel relations? How can we force it to see the Israeli colonising project as unacceptable in today’s world, asks Ken Blackman?
A large march took place in Paris, on January 7, to demand justice for three Kurdish female activists assassinated by a Turkish gunman in that city 10 years ago. Peter Boyle spoke to Kurdish solidarity activist and writer Sarah Glynn who participated in the march.
On January 3, Israel’s new National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir of the fascist Jewish Power party visited the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount, in an attempt to stir controversy. He succeeded.
The United Nations Security Council called an urgent meeting on Thursday to discuss this incident, after many countries voiced their outrage. Even the United States had some mild criticism of Israel over this. State Department spokesperson Ned Price said:
“The United States stands firmly for the preservation of the historic status quo with respect to the holy sites in Jerusalem. We oppose any unilateral actions that undercut the historic status quo, they are unacceptable…We took note of the fact that Netanyahu’s governing platform calls for the preservation of the historic status quo with relation to the holy places. We expect him to follow through with that commitment… in word and in practice, that is what we will be watching for.”
The U.K., France, Turkey, Jordan, Russia and other countries also criticized Israel for this provocation. But perhaps most noteworthy was the fact that, joining China, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority in calling for the Security Council meeting was none other than the United Arab Emirates, Israel’s new BFF in the Persian Gulf.
Straining the Abraham Accords
This shouldn’t have taken anyone by surprise. While the UAE has tried to embrace even this radically right wing government, their foreign minister also warned Benjamin Netanyahu back in September that a government this brazenly devoted to apartheid and overt, violent racism could make it difficult for the Emiratis to maintain their détente with Israel.
The UAE’s statement on Tuesday objecting to Ben Gvir’s action was strongly worded, stating that they “strongly condemned the storming of Al-Aqsa Mosque courtyard.” it also hinted that the Emiratis were determined to hold on to the Abraham Accords if they could, stating that they “stressed the need to support all regional and international efforts to advance the Middle East Peace Process.”
But this was far from the only stress on the Accords. Oman, which many analysts had thought might be the next Arab state to establish normal relations with Israel, instead passed a new law criminalizing all contacts with Israel. This not only dashed hopes in Jerusalem and Washington that Oman would join the Abraham Accords, it signaled a sharp reversal in policy for the Gulf sultanate.
While Oman has never officially established normal relations with Israel, it became the first Gulf country to allow a visit from an Israeli prime minister when Yitzhak Rabin visited in 1994. It later hosted Shimon Peres and Netanyahu, the latter as recently as 2018. While Oman cut off communication with Israel in 2000 due to the second intifada, unofficial contacts continued.
Sometimes referred to as the Switzerland of the Middle East, Oman has long played the role of mediator, and, as a result, has worked to maintain lines of communications between adversaries in the Middle East. While it is close to its fellow Arab states in the Gulf, it also shares a crucial, and large, natural gas field with Iran. Last year, Iran and Oman agreed to jointly develop the field and this strengthened Oman’s strong desire to maintain good relations with Iran as well as with adversaries of the Islamic Republic. While that includes Israel, the value of Omani-Israeli relations to the sultanate pales before its relationship with both Iran and the Arab Gulf states.
While the vote in Muscat coincided with Ben Gvir’s appearance at the Temple Mount, it had been in the works for several weeks, prompted by a desire “to distinguish [Oman] from the UAE and Bahrain,” although Oman also recently declared its continued support for a two-state solution in Palestine.
Meanwhile, Morocco has been threatening to back off of its pledge to open an embassy in Israel if Israel does not recognize Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara. The previous Israeli government walked a fine line, hinting at support for Morocco’s illegal occupation of Western Sahara, (which has been under Moroccan occupation since 1975) and maintaining the international consensus on the issue, stating that it supported Morocco’s “autonomy plan,” which has never been accepted by the Sahrawi people of Western Sahara.
The new government seems very likely to recognize Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, but the dispute demonstrates the pitfalls of the transactional nature of the Abraham Accords. Arab states must constantly weigh the benefits of normalization with Israel against the costs of betraying the Palestinians and thereby drawing the ire of their own populations and most of the Arab world.
All of this occurs in the wake of U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s discussion with new Israeli Foreign Minister Eli Cohen regarding how the U.S. might help expand the Accords. This seems to be another example of the detachment from reality that has characterized Blinken’s and Joe Biden’s approach to Palestine and Israel from the start of their administration.
The political winds are blowing against the idea of expanding the Accords. The ongoing protests in Iran continue to occupy the attention of the Islamic Republic’s leaders, and, contrary to the view of some western analysts, Iran does not have a history of trying to solve its domestic problems by launching attacks against other countries. That means that, at least for the moment, Iran is less of a concern for Gulf Arab states. That diminishes the incentive to expand cooperation with Israel.
With Ben Gvir wasting no time in aggravating the one issue — the Haram al Sharif/Temple Mount — that is not only a sore point for the Palestinians but raises personal and direct concerns for people throughout the Middle East, and with it becoming clear that the existence of normalization agreements does not deter the Israeli radicals from taking such actions, there is even less reason for Arab states to cooperate with Washington in normalizing relations with Israel. To the contrary, these increasingly arrogant and provocative actions by Israel don’t merely raise serious concerns for the UAE and other Abraham Accords participants; it also raises worries anew in Egypt and, especially, Jordan. Both countries have maintained long term peace accords with Israel, against the wishes of the vast majority of their citizens.
Biden will still have an opportunity to prevail upon his “good friend,” Netanyahu to rein in Ben Gvir and the other overt Kahanists in the Israeli government. But even if he’s willing to cooperate on that point, that’s not Netanyahu’s priority right now as he seeks to cripple the Israeli judiciary that is still trying to convict him for some of his crimes and harden Israel’s iron fist over the Palestinians.
The future of the Accords
In the end, this current crisis is likely to pass. Oman will continue to communicate with Israel clandestinely, and the UAE will try to get back to business as usual. But this new government, filled with characters, even beyond Ben Gvir and Smotrich, who delight in provoking violence and publicly expressing their racism, bigotry, and hate has made it clear it will continue doing what they love so much.
There will be no shortage of actions which will make it more difficult for the Abraham Accords to survive, let alone for them to expand. This demonstrates that the Accords are not related to peace, to improved relations in the region, or to stability. They can’t possibly have those goals in mind when they depend entirely on the Palestinians doing what they have never done: acquiescing to Israeli domination.
A new report reveals United States military officials knew that an August 2021 drone strike in Kabul likely killed Afghan civilians including children, but lied about it, writes Brett Wilkins.
An underreported news development from November/December last year is the election of Benjamin Netanyahu’s new government in Israel, reports Rupen Savoulian.
Dubai: In an apparent move to bolster its status as the Middle East’s leading business and tourism hub, Dubai kicked off the new year by scrapping a 30% tax on alcohol sales and making liquor licenses free.
The sudden New Year’s Day announcement, made by Dubai’s two state-linked alcohol retailers, came apparently from a government decree from its ruling Al Maktoum family.
However, government officials did not immediately acknowledge the decision and did not respond to questions from The Associated Press.
Tourism is a key plank of the emirate’s economy, but it’s been geared predominantly toward the luxury segment.
The latest move will leave Dubai better-positioned to cater to wider swathes of the market, according to Bloomberg.
Liquor is widely available in Dubai, but a pint of beer can cost more than $15 at restaurants and bottles of wine can start at more than $100. That’s prompted many residents to drive to other emirates like Umm Al Quwain, about 80 kilometers (50 miles) from Dubai, where prices are much cheaper.
The suspension of the tax will last for a year, until December 31, 2023, as it is described as a trial period.
It means bars, pubs, clubs, restaurants and hotels will make savings when they buy their stock and Dubai’s government reportedly expects that to be passed on to customers, according to Timeout.com.
According to Al Arabia News, Alcohol sales have long served as a major barometer of the economy of Dubai, a top travel destination in the UAE, home to the long-haul carrier Emirates.
During the recent World Cup in nearby Qatar, Dubai’s many bars drew commuting football fans.
However, a pint of beer easily can cost over $10 at a bar, with other drinks running even higher. It wasn’t immediately clear if this would cause a price drop at alcohol-serving establishments or if it only would affect those buying it from retailers.
Alcohol distributor Maritime and Mercantile International, which is part of the wider Emirates Group, made the announcement in a statement.
It’s been an extraordinary year in foreign policy, dominated by an ongoing, brutal war following the February Russian invasion of Ukraine. NATO, struggling with its mission before 2022, appearsmore emboldened and unified than ever.
Meanwhile, tensions have continued to roil between the U.S. and China on a number of fronts, not the least, the fate of Taiwan.
In the Middle East, Biden’s post-Russian outreach to Saudi Arabia and inabilityto stop assistance to Riyadh in the Yemen war underscores the problematic nature of Washington’s relations with despotic governments there, while trying to maintain an“autocracies vs. democracies” approach to geopolitics in other parts of the world.
After two years in office, the Iran nuclear deal looks“dead,” while the U.S. slaps more sanctions on Tehran in the wake of crackdowns on protesters and reported drone transfers to Russia.
Phew.
With so much going on, we asked our own Quincy Institute experts to weigh in on the following prompt: what needs to happen almost immediately in 2023 for U.S foreign policy to start out on the right foot for the year? Why?
The Biden administration should start the year by stemming the tide of ever rising Pentagon budgets. The current budget is one of the highest since World War II, and the increase from FY2022 to FY2023 alone is higher than the entire military budget of every other country in the world except China.Large portions of these funds are wasted on price gouging, cost overruns, and weapons that aren’t useful for the current challenges we face. We can provide a more effective defense for less by cutting waste, eliminating dysfunctional and unnecessary weapons programs, and pursuing a more restrained, non-interventionist foreign policy that truly puts diplomacy first.
Congress and the president must, finally, enact meaningful reforms to curb foreign influence in the U.S. Behind most U.S. foreign policy decisions are agents working on behalf of foreign powers—in both illicit and legal influence operations—that often push U.S. foreign policy in a decidedly more interventionist and militarized direction. This is usually in theinterests of these foreign governments, not the U.S. national interest.
To thwart this malign influence or, at the very least, to increase the public’s awareness of it, a number of reforms are needed. This includes improvements to the Foreign Agents Registration Act, requiring think tanks to disclose all foreign funding (particularly when those think tank’s scholars are testifying before Congress), and providing more resources to the Department of Justice and other government agencies investigating illicit election interference operations like those launched by Russia and the UAE.
The first priority for the Biden administration in 2023 should be to seek a ceasefire in Ukraine, leading to peace negotiations. The longer the war continues, the greater the damage to the world economy and to key U.S. allies in Europe.
Ukraine has preserved its independence and saved or reconquered the great majority of its lands and has little more of real importance to gain in this war. Further major Ukrainian advances would threaten Russian control of Crimea and risk nuclear war. They would also take Ukraine into territories whose populations are in fact loyal to Russia.
In the meantime, Russian bombardments are causing great harm to the Ukrainian population and economy, and the exigencies of wartime are increasing authoritarianism in Ukraine. Only when the fighting ends can Ukraine begin the process of reconstruction, political reform, and moves to join the European Union.
While continuing to support Ukraine in its fight against Russian aggression, the Biden Administration, with the help of the international community, must start encouraging a feasible end to the war through the use of diplomacy. Concomitantly, a long-term security agreement for the future of Europe should be reached to ensure lasting peace on the continent. Through the use of political pragmatism, Washington must help open a path to a peace that would ensure Ukrainian sovereignty, end the ongoing suffering, uphold international law, create lasting peace in Europe, and ease current ripple effects on the world economy
The United States should do two things to start off the new year. First, return, through concrete actions, to the One China policy that has been a solid foundation for peace and stability in Asia for decades. Thecurrent drip-drip undermining of this policy is a dangerous, slippery slope that is generating a major risk of great power war. Second, discard counterproductive tropes that stretch credibility such as “democracy v. autocracy” and “rules-based order”when engaging the Global South. Instead, begin the hard work of finding intersections of interests and fashioning new bargains that retain or expand non-militarized U.S. influence in the region.
The Biden administration should end all U.S. support for Saudi military actions in Yemen. If the administration fails to take action,Senator Bernie Sanders should reintroduce the Yemen War Powers Resolution to end U.S. involvement in that devastating conflict. Biden could transform U.S. policy towards the Middle East overall by rethinking America’s support for dictators by reducing arms sales to these governments, and instead prioritize partnership in the realms of economic development, education, and technology.
The U.S. should declare a renewed focus on climate change and international public health challenges, especially early warning systems; schedule a major address on the administration’s trade and diplomatic initiatives, especially in Asia and Africa. A policy is emerging but a statement would be useful for Congress and in foreign capitals. In the State of the Union address in January, broach the topic of a national security budget that would allocate resources to agencies and departments outside of the Pentagon; and, hearkening back to days of old, declare a renewed commitment to science education and research funded out of DoD resources.
In Asia, the United States needs to discard any remaining aspirations for regional dominance, listen more closely and respond more realistically to the concerns and needs of the middle powers, including key U.S. allies such as South Korea and Japan. Most of these powers want to work with both the U.S. and China to develop a more economically-oriented, inclusive, and positive-sum set of policy objectives that reverse the polarization of the region, lessen the securitization of virtually every policy sphere, and provide a revised set of regional norms and standards that most countries can support, including China. Many of these nations also want the Taiwan situation stabilized on the basis of a revived commitment by the U.S. and China to One China and peaceful unification, respectfully.
The U.S. could start this process by framing these efforts as a search, in consultation with other Asian nations, of a model for constructive, beneficial forms of peaceful coexistence among all political systems.
This is broad and aspirational, but as a first step, requires serious listening and the dropping of the usual political slogans.
Washington needs to recalibrate its engagement in parts of the world where U.S. military intervention and its side-effects dictated relations for decades, such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and the greater Middle East. Drawdowns and reductions in U.S. troops should not spell diplomatic and economic disengagement. Military cooperation and force are occasionally useful tools to augment diplomacy, but for too long they have eclipsed it altogether. Traditional diplomacy was relegated to putting out fires for failed U.S. military interventions in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. Our generals became reckless, while our diplomats grew risk averse.
Now what is needed is a creative rethink of how diplomacy, aid, and economic engagement is conducted. These tools are less blunt than military intervention, but their results are inherently more sustainable. Washington must possess the humility to accept the conditions it cannot positively influence, strategic patience and foresight to tackle what it can, and self-awareness to know the difference.
The Biden administration should prepare a hard pivot to U.S.–China cooperation on issues of global significance, to launch at Blinken’s upcoming visit to Beijing. The administration devoted its first two years to organizing the most powerful countries in the world against China, from steady condemnation of China’s system and its foreign policy, to initiatives countering China’s overseas endeavors and cutting off its economy from advanced technology, as well as increasing saber-rattling around Taiwan.
The Biden record signals that China cannot survive and prosper in the world the U.S. seeks to shape. If the administration devoted as much energy and resources to working with China on the truly existential threats facing humanity—including necessary revision of some of the most hostile and coercive policies of the last two years—then the relationship could be diverted from the current path of destructive conflict toward constructive coexistence.
This post was originally published on Common Dreams.
Dr Saeed Zeydabadi-Nejad, a Research Associate with SOAS University of London and associate editor of The British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies spoke with Farooq Sulehria about the significance of the revolutionary movement in Iran.
Thousands marched through Sydney streets on December 10 (International Human Rights Day) demanding democracy in Iran and justice for Jina Mahsa Amini and the growing number of democracy protesters who have been killed, arrested and tortured by the dictatorial regime in Iran.
On December 8, Mohsen Shekari became the first democracy protester to be executed. At least 475 protesters have been killed by security forces and 18,240 others have been detained, according to the Human Rights Activists’ News Agency (HRANA).
As western countries are floating the theory that Russia could escalate its conflict with Ukraine to a nuclear war, many western governments continue to turn a blind eye to Israel’s own nuclear weapons capabilities. Luckily, many countries around the world do not subscribe to this endemic western hypocrisy.
‘The Conference on the Establishment of a Middle East Zone Free of Nuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction’ was held between November 14-18, with the sole purpose of creating new standards of accountability that, as should have always been the case, be applied equally to all Middle Eastern countries.
The debate regarding nuclear weapons in the Middle East could not possibly be any more pertinent or urgent. International observers rightly note that the period following the Russia-Ukraine war is likely to accelerate the quest for nuclear weapons throughout the world. Considering the seemingly perpetual state of conflict in the Middle East, the region is likely to witness nuclear rivalry as well.
For years, Arab and other countries attempted to raise the issue that accountability regarding the development and acquisition of nuclear weapons cannot be confined to states that are perceived to be enemies of Israel and the West.
The latest of these efforts was a United Nations resolution that called on Israel to dispose of its nuclear weapons, and to place its nuclear facilities under the monitoring of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Resolution number A/C.1/77/L.2, which was drafted by Egypt with the support of other Arab countries, passed with an initial vote of 152-5. Unsurprisingly, among the five countries that voted against the draft were the United States, Canada and, of course, Israel itself.
US and Canadian blind support of Tel Aviv notwithstanding, what compels Washington and Ottawa to vote against a draft entitled: “The risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East”? Keeping in mind the successive right-wing extremist governments that have ruled over Israel for many years,Washington must understand that the risk of using nuclear weapons under the guise of fending off an ‘existential threat’ is a real possibility.
Since its inception, Israel has resorted to and utilized the phrase ‘existential threat’ countless times. Various Arab governments, later Iran and even individual Palestinian resistance movements were accused of endangering Israel’s very existence. Even the non-violent Palestinian civil society-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement was accused by then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2015 of being an existential threat to Israel. Netanyahu claimed that the boycott movement was “not connected to our actions; it is connected to our very existence.”
This should worry everyone, not just in the Middle East, but the whole world. A country with such hyped sensitivity about imagined ‘existential threats’ should not be allowed to acquire the kind of weapons that could destroy the entire Middle East, several times over.
Some may argue that Israel’s nuclear arsenal was intrinsically linked to real fears resulting from its historical conflict with the Arabs. However, this is not the case. As soon as Israel finalized its ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their historic homeland, and long before any serious Arab or Palestinian resistance was carried out in response, Israel was already on the lookout for nuclear weapons.
As early as 1949, the Israeli army had found uranium deposits in the Negev Desert, leading to the establishment, in 1952, of the very secretive Israel Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC).
In 1955, the US government sold Israel a nuclear research reactor. But that was not enough. Eager to become a full nuclear power, Tel Aviv resorted to Paris in 1957. The latter became a major partner in Israel’s sinister nuclear activities when it helped the Israeli government construct a clandestine nuclear reactor near Dimona in the Negev Desert.
The father of the Israeli nuclear program at the time was none other than Shimon Peres who, ironically, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994. The Dimona Nuclear Reactor is now named ‘Shimon Peres Nuclear Research Center-Negev’.
With no international monitoring whatsoever, thus with zero legal accountability, Israel’s nuclear quest continues until this day. In 1963, Israel purchased 100 tons of uranium ore from Argentina, and it is strongly believed that during the October 1973 Israel-Arab war, Israel “came close to making a nuclear preemptive strike”, according to Richard Sale, writing in United Press International (UPI).
Currently, Israel is believed to have “enough fissionable material to fabricate 60-300 nuclear weapons,” according to former US Army Officer Edwin S. Cochran.
Estimates vary, but the facts about Israel’s weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) are hardly contested. Israel itself practices what is known as ‘deliberate ambiguity’, as to send a message to its enemies of its lethal power, without revealing anything that may hold it accountable to international inspection.
What we know about Israel’s nuclear weapons has been made possible partly because of the bravery of a former Israeli nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu, a whistleblower who was held in solitary confinement for a decade due to his courage in exposing Israel’s darkest secrets.
Still, Israel refuses to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), endorsed by 191 countries.
Israeli leaders adhere to what is known as the ‘Begin Doctrine’, in reference to Menachem Begin, the right-wing Israeli prime minister who invaded Lebanon in 1982, resulting in the killing of thousands. The doctrine is formulated around the idea that, while Israel gives itself the right to own nuclear weapons, its enemies in the Middle East must not. This belief continues to direct Israeli actions to this day.
The US support for Israel is not confined to ensuring the latter has ‘military edge’ over its neighbors in terms of traditional weapons, but to also ensure Israel remains the region’s only superpower, even if that entails escaping international accountability for the development of WMDs.
The collective efforts by Arab and other countries at the UNGA to create a Middle East Zone Free of Nuclear Weapons are welcomed initiatives. It behooves everyone, Washington included, to join the rest of the world in finally forcing Israel to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, a first but critical step towards long-delayed accountability.
Turkey has struck more than 90 villages and towns in North East Syria since November 19, reports Susan Price. Meanwhile, international voices of condemnation are growing.
The International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People was marked by Justice for Palestine Meanjin – Brisbane with a giant flag drop from the Goodwill Bridge over the Meanjin (Brisbane River).
The pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic Party (HDP) in Turkey has called for immediate action against Turkey’s cross-border attacks on North East Syria and Northern Iraq to prevent another humanitarian catastrophe, reports Susan Price.
The Socialist Alliance (Australia) released the following statement in response to Turkey’s genocidal attacks on North East Syria and Northern Iraq and attacks on Kurdish populations inside Iran.
The situation in Iran is “critical” as authorities tighten their crackdown on the continuing anti-government protests after the September death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini in the custody of the so-called morality police. United Nations human rights officials report Iranian security forces in Kurdish cities killed dozens of protesters this week alone, with each funeral turning into a mass rally against the central government. “The defiance has been astounding,” says Middle East studies professor Nahid Siamdoust, who reported for years from Iran, including during the 2009 Green Movement, and calls the protests a “nationwide revolution.”
TRANSCRIPT
NERMEENSHAIKH:We’re broadcasting live from downtown Cairo in Egypt with the Nile River flowing behind us.
We begin today’s show in Iran, where human rights authorities say the situation has become critical, with reports of dozens of children being killed, injured and detained at recent anti-government demonstrations. The Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights said Tuesday that worsening repression by Iranian security forces has led to a rising number of deaths, especially in Kurdish cities. This is spokesperson Jeremy Laurence.
JEREMYLAURENCE:Since the nationwide protests began on the 16th of September, over 300 people have been killed, including more than 40 children. Two 16-year-old boys were among six killed over the weekend. Protesters have been killed in 25 of Iran’s 31 provinces, including more than 100 in Sistan and Balochistan. Iranian official sources have also reported that a number of security forces have been killed since the start of the protests. …
We call on the authorities to release all those detained in relation to the exercise of their rights, including the right to peaceful assembly, and to drop the charges against them. Our office also calls on the Iranian authorities to immediately impose a moratorium on the death penalty and to revoke death sentences issued for crimes not qualifying as the most serious crimes under international law.
NERMEENSHAIKH:This comes as theBBCreportsauthorities have not been releasing protesters’ bodies unless their families remain silent. Some say they were pressured by security officials to go along with state media reports that their loved ones were killed by, quote, “rioters.”
On Monday, Iran’s national soccer team declined to sing the national anthem before their opening World Cup match in a sign of support for the protests.
AMYGOODMAN:Meanwhile, on Sunday, two of Iran’s most prominent actresses were arrested after they voiced support for anti-government protests and appeared in public without wearing a hijab, as required by law. Ahead of her arrest on Sunday, Hengameh Ghaziani wrote, “whatever happens, know that as always I will stand with the people of Iran. This may be my last post,” she wrote. Katayoun Riahi was also arrested and accused of acting against Iran’s authorities.
CNNreportsIran’s security forces are using sexual assaults of male and female activists to quell the protests.
This week, the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva is set to hold a session on the protests with witnesses and victims in attendance and will discuss a proposal to establish a fact-finding mission on the crackdown in Iran. Evidence of abuses could later be used in court.
For more, we’re joined by Nahid Siamdoust, assistant professor in Middle East and media studies at University of Texas in Austin, former journalist who has reported across the Middle East, including Iran.
Welcome back toDemocracy Now!, Professor. If you could start off by talking about the critical situation in Iran right now and also the escalating attacks by the Iranian government on Kurdish areas?
NAHIDSIAMDOUST:Yes. In recent weeks, we’ve seen, especially within the Kurdish areas, Mahabad most recently, but Bukan, Sanandaj, Saqqez, in all these cities, the Kurdish people have risen up. And the people have risen up all over Iran. And the authorities are going very harshly against protesters. We see photo after photo on social media of people with, you know, tens, sometimes hundreds, of pellets in their bodies. Some of these people do not survive those shots.
And as you already mentioned in your report, many of the people, of the protesters who are killed, are children. They’re teenagers. They’re teenagers who have taken their lives into their hands and gone into the streets to protest their living conditions, you know, the bleak future that they’re looking into, and really asking for a different future.
NERMEENSHAIKH:And could you explain specifically what is it, the relationship between Iran’s central government and Kurdistan? So many of the protests, as you’ve pointed out, too, the epicenter has been in the Kurdish region. Could you explain what the relationship between the state, following the revolution, and Kurdistan has been?
NAHIDSIAMDOUST:Sure. So, Kurdistan — Iran is a system of governorates, so 30 governorates and states, so to speak. And so, each state, including the Kurdish region, will have their own governors. So, the central system controls these regions via the governors that they have in these areas, and they’re oftentimes — you know, they’re always approved, of course, by the central state.
But the people have risen up, and their religious leaders and sheikhs have spoken up in their defense. So, you know, we’ve seen one of the sheikhs in Kurdistan joining the sheikh in Balochistan in asking for an independent international body to oversee a referendum in Iran.
And so, you know, the forces that we see, the sepahis that we see, the plainclothes officers and militia that we see in Kurdistan suppressing the uprising or the revolution there, they come from all kinds of different backgrounds, all supported by the central state, of course. And Kurdistan is very much, you know, part of Iran, and this is something that the Kurdish leaders in that region have also stated. So, you know, we have to be — when you talk about the central state and the Kurdish region, we have to be careful not to play into the regime’s own discourse of this being a separatist movement.
NERMEENSHAIKH:No, absolutely, you’re right about that. And I wanted to say also — if you could comment, in addition, to the reports that we are seeing now, and that we said a bit in our introduction, of the systematic use of sexual violence against prisoners, principally women protesters but also men? What are you hearing about this on the ground? There have been reports, widely publicized, of attacks by security forces in public, but this is the first that we’re hearing of attacks on prisoners, protesters who have been imprisoned.
NAHIDSIAMDOUST:Right. So, a couple of weeks ago, there was a video published of a woman sort of open in public being, you know, sort of touched absolutely inappropriately, and that set off conversations about what is actually happening in terms of the sexual abuse of these prisoners. And more recently, a couple days ago, there was a report byCNNwith, you know, sort of women and others alleging that they’ve been sexually abused in these interrogation rooms. And we’ve seen other reports coming through on social media.
The parents and the families of these detainees are very much pressured to keep silent, and so we don’t really have a full account of what is happening in these interrogations. And we know they are abused physically, but the nature of the sexual abuse is something that still needs to really be narrated and come to the fore.
AMYGOODMAN:Can you talk about the defiance of the Iranian people, the women who are leading these protests, and the significance of what’s happening right now in Qatar with the Iranian soccer team refusing to sing the national anthem of Iran before the game?
NAHIDSIAMDOUST:Right. We’ve seen, you know, Iranians across the board, all over the nation. As you mentioned, people in 25 out of 30 states have been — have been killed. And so, this is really a nationwide revolution. And the defiance has been astounding. The courage with which people have gone into the streets week after week, despite the killings that are happening, despite the, you know, also severe injuries — it doesn’t just have to be deaths — people losing their eyes, people losing their limbs — despite all of that, they’ve risen up and are continuing to protest. And now they’ve been joined, as you mentioned in your report, by actresses, by athletes, by teachers’ unions and professors’ unions and so on.
The Iran national team at the World Cup refused to sing the national anthem. However, they have not been fully supported by Iranians at large. It’s a very contested field. There are some among Iranians who are supporting their national team, but there are many who are not, because the national team had a visit with the conservative president, Ebrahim Raisi, right before their departure, and Iranians did not like to see their national team sort of bowing and being friendly with a president whom they see as being at the head of, you know, the repressive government — not the state, that would be the supreme leader, but leading the charge against women, not least because since he took office, he promised to bring morality to the streets. And this wave of protests that we see was not least caused by a year long of the morality police sort of upping the ante against women in public spaces. And so, the national team meeting the president did not sit well with many Iranians. And, you know, they had a historical defeat at the World Cup, losing to England.
NERMEENSHAIKH:And, Professor Siamdoust, you, among others, have pointed out, of course, that there have been many protests in recent years in Iran, starting, of course, with the 2009 protest, which is the time that we spoke to you onDemocracy Now!But there is something, as you’ve said, qualitatively different about the protests that are now ongoing. Could you talk about what those differences are and how you see this playing out? Do you think, despite the brutality of the state response, that these protests will go on?
NAHIDSIAMDOUST:Right. In 2009, which was the biggest protest movement since the 1979 revolution, we saw masses of people coming into the streets. You know, in one of the biggest, there was perhaps 2 or 3 million people at once. But the nature of the slogans was still very much about reforming the system from within. We saw people engaging with the Islamic discourse of the government — right? — going to their rooftops and calling “Allahu akbar,” calling God to sort of bring forth that kind of Islamic morality and decency, to bring the government into a motion of reforms.
That is no longer the case. The revolution that we see now — and there’s a lot of contestation around language, as well. There are people who say we should no longer be calling this an “uprising,” this should definitely be called a “revolution.” It’s not just a matter of semantics, I think.
In the nature of the slogans that we see, this movement is no longer at all engaging with government discourse. There’s no reference whatsoever to Islamic, you know, sort of slogans or phrases that people had been using and the government itself had been using. People are calling for a new system. In the 2009 Green Uprising, for example, people would band together and say, “Natarsin, natarsin, ma hameh ba ham hastim!,” “Don’t be afraid. We’re all together.” And now it’s kind of filtered down to people saying, “Betarsid, betarsid, ma hameh ba ham hastim!,” “You should be afraid. You should be afraid, because we are altogether.”
And then, when we look at the slogans, you know, the harshness of it, sort of there’s — all notion of Persian politeness or any sense of respect for authority or any of that is completely out the window. And we see this in the cuss words that are used against the supreme leader, against the Sepah. They’re ferocious. The slogans are ferocious. The movement is ferocious.
And it’s of a different nature, because, you know, this movement is leaderless. And so, there are groups of people all across Iran popping up here and there, but there are no leaders to be put down. So the regime can’t, just like in 2009, go after the leaders of the movement and try to quell the movement through its leaders. It’s a leaderless movement. It’s a very smart movement that is sort of coming together and dissolving, and really sort of playing this strategic game, a very sort of organic strategic game against the forces.
NERMEENSHAIKH:Thank you so much, Professor Nahid Siamdoust, assistant professor in Middle East and media studies at the University of Texas at Austin. She’s a former journalist who has reported across the Middle East, including in Iran.
Calls are growing louder for charges to be dropped against ADF whistleblower David McBride, who will face a criminal court next year, reports Pip Hinman.
After Turkey carried out intense air strikes on North and East Syria and Northern Iraq in the early hours of November 20, protests took place in several different European cities.
The Kurdistan National Congress (KNK) released the following statement condemning Turkey’s air strikes on cities in North and East Syria and Northern Iraq, which began on November 20.
Nilüfer Koç, spokesperson for the Commission on Foreign Relations of the Kurdistan National Congress, spoke at the Brisbane session of Ecosocialism 2022. In the Q&A after her presentation, she answered questions on Ukraine, Iran and Rojava.
Nilüfer Koç from the Kurdish National Congress spoke at the Ecosocialism 2022 conference about the popular uprising in Iran, war in Ukraine and Rojava Revolution. Alex Bainbridge and Susan Price report.
The number of malnourished children in North East Syria has increased by 150% in the past six months, and poverty rates have increased by 90%, reports Medya News.