#normalization of U.S.-Iran relations

[narrative-theory]

Iran's Reformist President – Scott Ritter

[mariacallous]

U.S. President Joe Biden’s approach to the Israel-Hamas war, especially his seemingly preternatural support for Israel, has been criticized across much of the U.S. political spectrum. An NBC News poll published Nov. 19 found that just 34 percent of registered voters approve of how Biden is handling the war. Many younger voters in particular are angry; and some Arab and Muslim Americans are telling pollsters they won’t vote for Biden in 2024 because of his stance.

The Democratic Party itself is deeply divided on the issue, with even some moderate Democrats urging Biden to do more to restrain Israel. And inside the administration, the president is seeing dissent from staff in the White House and State Department of a kind these two authors never witnessed during our government careers. Biden has even been accused of supporting “the genocide of the Palestinian people” by a member of his own party.

Yet given the president’s long and deep attachment to Israel, the brutality of the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, and the lack of policy alternatives in the first several weeks of the crisis, it’s doubtful that Biden could have followed another course that would have been more successful. Standing by Israel, deterring Hezbollah and Iran from escalating the conflict, and pursuing negotiations to secure the release of hostages as well as buy time and space to ameliorate—though admittedly not end—the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza have proven to be the right, though hardly perfect, choices.

Still, having tethered U.S. policy to Israel’s war aims—the eradication of Hamas—Biden now finds himself in a bind. The humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the exponential rise in the deaths and suffering of Gaza’s civilian population have undermined U.S. credibility at home, in the Arab and Muslim world, and in the international community. Going forward, the success or failure of U.S. policy may well rest on whether Biden can reshape Israel’s military campaign, alleviate the humanitarian situation, and engage Israel and other partners in coming up with a workable plan for post-war Gaza.

Like most of the world, the Biden administration was stunned by the timing and severity of the Hamas attack. But the potential damage to U.S. interests was clear from the get-go. The administration had previously concluded that a major effort to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian issue given the Netanyahu government’s priorities would be futile and had shifted focus instead on negotiating an Israeli-Saudi normalization accord. The Hamas attack, along with Israel’s punishing response and the rising death toll it has caused in Gaza, put that on hold, as did the increasing danger of a new front opening along the Israel-Lebanon border.

Preventing an escalation and widening of the war that could pull in the United States was now a key priority, as was trying to limit the damage to U.S. relations with the Arab and Muslim world as Israel’s military action claimed thousands of Palestinians lives. Securing the release of the estimated 240 hostages—including at least 10 Americans—kidnapped by Hamas also moved to the top of the administration’s priorities, both for moral reasons and to create humanitarian pauses in fighting in exchange for their release. In an effort to regain some ground with the Arab states and Palestinians, the administration began to talk about the importance of not going back to the Oct. 6 status quo, the U.S. commitment to a two-state solution, and the need to create a new post-conflict reality in Gaza.

For Biden, though, backing Israel wasn’t a hard choice; it was virtually guaranteed. His Oct. 10 speech—one of the most powerful of his presidency to date—set his frame: The United States would give Israel the time, space, and support to do what it believed it needed to do against Hamas. U.S. policy began to evolve as the deaths of Palestinians and destruction in Gaza began to rise. But despite growing opposition, that frame has remained remarkably consistent.

Biden faced an Israel that had already been moving sharply to the right and was now thoroughly traumatized by Hamas’s sadistic and indiscriminate killing of Israeli civilians on Oct. 7. An Israel, in other words, primed to respond with extreme violence and disinclined to worry too much about Palestinian civilians. Indeed, like Hamas, which doesn’t regard Israeli civilians as innocent, some Israelis—especially Netanyahu’s far-right political allies—consider Gaza’s population to be complicit in Hamas’s atrocities. The fact that Hamas uses civilians as shields against attack reinforces this attitude.

The Biden administration also faced an Israel that saw this moment as an opportunity to deal decisively with threats from Lebanon and Gaza that it has been living with, if uneasily, for years. And because Hamas’s rage was unleashed on Gaza’s border communities, which contained a disproportionate number of liberal Israelis who notably detest their current government and favor a two-state solution, it unified Israeli support on the right and left for a crushing response. Moreover, because the attack was made possible by Israel’s own blunders, the government felt that it needed to restore perceptions of power and its willingness to use it. This all pointed to a no-holds-barred counteroffensive.

Biden has dealt with these obstacles as well as anyone could.

To manage the risk of escalation, Biden did two things—one privately and the other publicly. Privately, he told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Israeli preemption against Hezbollah in Lebanon—a very real possibility early in the crisis—was a nonstarter. Washington would not support it, and for Israel to proceed would damage U.S. interests; not a good idea when Israel was isolated internationally. Biden then deployed two carrier strike groups—a total of 180 fighter bombers—to the Eastern Mediterranean and beefed-up U.S. military power in the Red Sea and Persian Gulf.

The message to Hezbollah and Iran was clear: Don’t start anything. Thus far, both adversaries have indicated publicly and privately that they got the message. Yes, Hezbollah-Israel exchanges have been at their heaviest since the 2006 war. But both parties have pushed but not exceeded the rules of the game. The threat of a regional war that could suck in the United States is, for the time being, in abeyance.

Through Biden’s visit to Israel, as well as U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s repeated trips and U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s visit, Biden made it impossible for Israel to launch its ground offensive in Gaza until the United States had at least weighed in and the Israeli fury had cooled somewhat. He bought time for Washington to influence the pace and scope of Israel’s campaign. The reason U.S. Marine Corps Lt. Gen. James Glynn, who commanded the U.S. forces that participated in the anti-Islamic State campaign in Raqqa, Syria, and Mosul, Iraq, was dispatched to Israel ahead of the planned ground offensive was to caution the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) against a scorched earth strategy and suggest ways they could meet their military objectives in Gaza without the kind of wholesale destruction the United States unleashed on Islamic State-occupied cities in Syria and Iraq.

Granted, there was no way this warning would influence the Israeli air campaign already underway in Gaza, especially in its initial phase—partly because the violence was expressive but also because Hamas had deliberately tunneled under heavily populated civilian areas, and the IDF had no good ideas about how to deal with the situation without bombing.

Biden was also successful in compelling Netanyahu to accept the need for humanitarian corridors and resume the flow of water and now fuel to Gaza. Without Biden’s intervention, it’s a safe bet that none of these Israeli concessions would have been forthcoming. Indeed, it’s unlikely the current humanitarian pause, which has allowed more aid into Gaza and significant hostage releases, would have happened without Biden’s personal effort and U.S. intervention. Israel on its own would not have gotten there until things were much worse, if ever.

Could the Biden administration have forced Israel to embrace a more permanent ceasefire, as many have urged Biden to do? What threats might it have used? A halt to U.S. military assistance would have sparked a firestorm in Washington, destroyed Biden’s demonstrated influence on Israel’s crisis response, and pushed Israel to rely on less precise weapons, leading to more civilian deaths—and all likely without changing Israel’s actions.

Imposing conditions on Israel’s use of U.S.-supplied weapons is another option being raised not just by progressive Democrats but by a few more centrist ones as well, though the latter group is so far just asking questions and requesting information rather than pressing for restrictions. Such an approach would have to involve looking at individual weapons: how they are deployed, what are legitimate military targets, and whether Israel has carefully calibrated the impact on civilians in the area. This seems almost impossible in the middle of an active warzone and in any event likely would not alter Israel’s operations.

Should the United States have withdrawn military support for Israel in other ways, such as by redeploying the carriers in the eastern Mediterranean, the U.S. destroyer in the Red Sea, and the U.S. X-band air defense radar installation in Israel’s Negev desert? Doing so would undermine the U.S. objective of deterring Hezbollah and Iran from escalating the conflict and likely trigger an Israeli preemptive war against Lebanon. Such a step would, in effect, play into Iranian hands and undermine, not strengthen, deterrence.

Recalling the U.S. Marine expeditionary force whose missions include embassy and country evacuations, hostage rescue, and other special operations would undermine U.S. readiness for any number of contingencies. Voting against Israel in the United Nations can be guaranteed not to move Israel’s needle one bit. The administration might have considered using U.S. forces to protect aid convoys entering Gaza against Israeli wishes, but this would pose risks that would truly be incalculable.

As the Israeli ground campaign now renews, so do the greatest challenges for the Biden administration’s policies. The United States cannot prevent Israel from resuming military action in northern Gaza or the more worrisome unfolding of a major military campaign to root out Hamas’s infrastructure and kill its leadership in the south. With nearly half of Gaza’s population displaced into the south and disease and lack of necessities taking their toll, a massive ground campaign in densely populated areas there would be disastrous. Indeed, when comparing pre-Oct. 7 Israel-Hamas conflicts with the appalling Palestinian death toll of the past month and a half, it’s clear that Israel is being far less discriminating this time around and has expanded its rules of engagement in attacking Hamas targets embedded in or near civilian areas.

The question is whether Biden can, through pressure and persuasion, reshape Israel’s thinking and create the requisite time and space not just for safe zones but for reliable channels to deliver humanitarian assistance. Having had Israel’s back over the past 50-plus days, the U.S. president is in a position to wield influence over what may well be the most important juncture in Israel’s war against Hamas. Still, Biden must be realistic: Stopping Israel from dealing Hamas’s military capacity a death blow was never in the cards.

The other issue is how to bring the Israelis around on the elusive question of an endgame in Gaza. Privately, the Biden administration has been hammering the Israelis to think this through, though Netanyahu has been reluctant to engage largely because of the demands of his extreme right-wing coalition partners.

Blinken has already laid out publicly a number of “nos” for post-conflict Gaza, including no reduction in territory, no forced relocation of Gazans, and no use of Gaza as a platform for launching terror attacks. We still have no idea how Israel sees the future, other than the certainty of some Israeli presence and perhaps buffer zones until some new reality that can guarantee Israel’s security could be established. But who does Israel envision governing Gaza? And what will Gaza’s relationship to the West Bank be? Biden has called for renewed negotiations for a two-state solution. Both that issue and the future of Gaza will ultimately depend on whether and how the war reshapes Israeli and Palestinian politics.

Uncertainties abound—hardly an unusual state of affairs in the middle of a major Middle East conflict. Yet despite all of the criticism and the grim death toll among Palestinians and Israelis, and given the constraints and things beyond his control, Biden has fared pretty well so far in preserving U.S. interests and preventing matters from getting worse. For a crisis with so many moving parts, that is no small achievement.

[hero-israel]

Hi there! Could you please expand on the Qatari funds at US banks? I saw someone claim US had indirectly funded the terrorist regime that sponsored the 10/7 program — supposedly, the 6B that the US authorized into Iran because of the ransom transfer deal had not been reimbursed by that time and were strictly for humanitarian purposes, coincidentally said to “frozen at Qatar’s central bank” (I don’t know if this claim is legitimate, but that was reported by US officials), yet there’s also the claim that the fungibility of the money (knowing they had money coming) could have emboldened Iran into funding Hamas? How does this relate to the Qatari funds at US banks, and is there other ways the US (even if not Biden specifically*) has indirectly funded Hamas/Iran (aside from UNRWA, for instance, or US aid to Palestine —which I’m not sure if it belongs to a separate category)?

They don't relate, they are entirely separate issues. My suggestion was to freeze all Qatari assets currently involved with the U.S. banking system - no liquidity, no withdrawals - as we did with Japan in 1941. It would have gashed their economy, shocked and humiliated them, and almost certainly would have helped us get Ismail Haniyeh on a rope by Thanksgiving. (And no, Qatar is not 1940s Imperial Japan, it does not project military power - but if they felt like fucking around, sure, we'd let them find out.)

The Iranian funds released to Qatar were supposedly "frozen," I'd like to believe that is the case, but a lot of - I'm sorry to say this - Democrat State Department types are just hell-bent on rehabilitating and normalizing Iran. We saw this with Obama's deal mechanism, with Ben Rhodes hologramming newly-invented foreign policy groups into public discussions to sway opinion, with the overbearing notion that as long as you give Iran lots of money and good seats at the Davos Forum they won't be imperialist fundie assholes anymore. The same people who were sure they'd be able to control Iran were totally blindsided by Brexit and by Trump winning. Their words on paper were totally going to constrain the IRGC, but then Pennsylvania Republicans did something shocking and unfair that they couldn't deal with.

Highly educated Western atheists just do not comprehend violent religious fundamentalism and how it can give its practitioners wholly different priorities. To borrow a phrase, Iran really DOESN'T want to cure cancer, they want to turn people into dinosaurs.

[girlactionfigure]

*ISRAEL REALTIME* - "Connecting the World to Israel in Realtime"

▪️IDF ATTACKS SYRIA… (enemy reports) IDF attacked air defense systems that were deployed to several outposts in recent days and also attacked weapons depots of the pro-Iranian militias that included air defense missiles and drones.

▪️SHIPPING AND THE HOUTHIS… report of another ship attack this morning off the coast of Yemen / Red Sea.  Egypt has so far lost $100 million in revenue generated by the Suez Canal as a result of the Houthi activity.  The U.S. has moved up the Eisenhower aircraft carrier battle group.  20 million barrels of oil PER DAY pass the Yemen coast on the way to Europe.  The Houthis have upped their threats, threatening the U.S., the aircraft carrier, and Israel with “weapons you have never seen” and “deep attacks”.

▪️IDF TAKES OUT HEZBOLLAH “LARGE ROCKET” DEPOT…  IDF attacked the "Burkan" rocket depot in ​​the village of Yaron in southern Lebanon yesterday. Smoke mushrooms rising from the ground as a result of the explosion of dozens of heavy rockets. The "Burkan" rockets carry a 250 kg warhead (3x normal rockets), have been fired into Israeli territory during the war.

▪️IDF EMPHASIZING DIPLOMATIC SOLUTION FOR LEBANON… we are not sure why the IDF Chief of Staff is emphasizing the diplomatic solution and not being intimidating… “Until there is an effective solution in place that ensures the security of our people” and “Until and unless a diplomatic solution is found and implemented: We will continue making the necessary preparations to remove the threat from our border.”  

▪️4 HERO SOLDIERS FELL.

▪️HAMAS TERRORIST KILLED WEARING TZITZIT… on an army-green beged.  ???

▪️ATTACK PLANS CAPTURED, INVASION PLAN FROM 2015… (Ch. 13) The fighters in Gaza captured Hamas documents in Khan Yunis, which prove that the terrorist organization had been preparing for the murderous attack for at least 8 years. Among the classified papers, which originated in 2015, swere found photos of the then Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot, and current Defense Minister Yoav Galant.

▪️ISRAEL POLITICS… (1) Boogie Ya’alon ordered by the court to pay NIS 88,000 to Netanyahu’s former attorney after falsely accusing him as part of a group receiving bribes as part of the ‘submarine affair’.  In a related point, the submarines and navy ships that were part of that accusation are now the ones protecting Israel in the Red Sea and from marine attacks from Gaza and Lebanon.

(2) The police leaked that they transferred to the prosecutor's office the “Younet Credit case” in which, among other things, the former finance minister Moshe Kahalon is suspected of fraud, breach of trust and reporting offenses.  This leak comes a week after his name was mentioned as an option to bring into the National Unity party as a senior leader for next elections. 

▪️CAPTURED HAMAS LEADER’S HOME INCLUDES NIS 5 MILLION… in cash.  The IDF appreciates the contribution.

▪️CYBER OFFENSE…  Iran suffers a cyber attack shutting down gas stations nationwide.

[nicklloydnow]

On Today’s Episode of World War III

“On Tuesday, the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed our worst suspicions concerning the pace of Iran’s nuclear weaponization program. “Iran,” it concluded, “has increased the rate at which it is producing near weapons grade uranium in recent weeks, reversing a previous slowdown that started in the middle of this year.”

According to the IAEA, Iranian enrichment of Uranium-235 to near weapons-grade level had increased to an estimated 9 kilograms per month by the end of November. It takes just five times that amount of uranium, enriched to 90 percent, to sustain a nuclear chain reaction for one nuclear bomb.

Presently, it is believed that Iran has enriched at least 128.3 kilograms of Uranium-235 to 60 percent, and 567.1 kilograms to 20 percent. Do the math based on Iran Watch’s estimates of its current centrifuge capacity, and Iran is now capable of enriching sufficient mass to 90 percent for three nuclear bombs in less than one week. Tehran could have a fourth bomb in one to two weeks more, and a fifth within roughly one month’s time.

(…)

We are in a very different world now than when that deal was first made. Moscow and Beijing are actively engaged in the equivalent of an ideological World War III against the U.S. that is increasingly turning kinetic. Iran has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to undermine U.S. diplomacy and national security interests throughout the Middle East.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was behind the funding and planning of Hamas’s Oct. 7 terrorist attacks in Israel. Tehran’s plunging of Gaza into war undermined U.S. efforts to normalize relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel, and Iran-sponsored militias including Hezbollah and the Houthis are actively attacking U.S. military and naval forces in Iraq, Syria, Red Sea, and Gulf of Aden.

As his country nears a nuclear breakout, Khamenei is only becoming bolder. On Dec. 23, the Pentagon reported that the Chem Pluto, a chemical tanker sailing from Saudi Arabia to India, was struck in the Indian Ocean “by a drone launched from Iran.” Iranian threats against the West and Europe are also starting to come fast and furious. On Christmas Eve, Tehran threatened to close the Straits of Gibraltar and the Mediterranean Sea.

Iran will become bolder still if allowed to achieve nuclear status. We are on borrowed time now, rapidly approaching the point wherein a kinetic response will be the only option remaining.

(…)

On the Doomsday Clock, it is already five minutes and counting past midnight in Armageddon. Unless the White House acts now, Iran’s status as a nuclear power will be a fait accompli.”

“More than 100 people were killed and scores injured Wednesday in two blasts that struck the central Iranian city of Kerman, emergency services said. Thousands of mourners had gathered there to commemorate Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani on the fourth anniversary of his assassination in a U.S. drone strike in Iraq in 2020.

A spokesman for the country’s emergency department was quoted by Iran’s state-run news agency as saying 103 people were killed and 188 were injured.

The deputy governor of Kerman, the slain general’s hometown, said the incident was a “terrorist attack,” according to Iran’s official Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA). The explosions occurred about a half-mile from Soleimani’s burial place, on a road to the graveyard, the agency reported.

(…)

The blasts Wednesday came amid intensifying involvement by Iranian-backed militant groups in a confrontation with Israel and its principal backer, the United States, during Israel’s war in Gaza.”

“Hamas on Tuesday accused Israel of killing Saleh al-Arouri, a top leader of the group, along with two commanders from its armed wing, the Qassam Brigades. Mr. al-Arouri is the senior-most Hamas figure to be killed since Israel vowed to destroy the organization and eliminate its leadership after a deadly Hamas-led attack on Oct. 7.

Mr. al-Arouri was assassinated in an explosion in a suburb of Beirut, Lebanon’s capital, marking the first such assassination of a top Hamas official outside the West Bank and Gaza in recent years. It comes as officials across the region are worried about the war in Gaza igniting a wider conflagration.

(…)

“No one is safe if they had any hand in planning, raising money for or carrying out these attacks,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal discussions. Citing Israel’s vow to hunt down the perpetrators of the Oct. 7 attack wherever they are, the official added, “This is just the beginning, and it’ll go on for years.”

(…)

Mr. al-Arouri played a key role in Hamas’s relationships with its regional allies and in increasing Hamas’s military capabilities, according to regional and Western officials. A longtime Hamas operative, he was one of the founders of the group’s armed wing and was linked to a number of attacks on Israeli civilians, including the kidnapping and killing of three teenagers in the West Bank in 2014, which he called a “heroic operation.”

(…)

Mr. al-Arouri worked with Yahya Sinwar, Hamas’s chief in Gaza, in recent years to link the group’s military wing more closely to Iran, which, regional security officials say, most likely helped the group develop some of the capabilities it used in the Oct. 7 attack. Israel has accused Mr. Sinwar of helping to plot the assault, which officials say killed about 1,200 people and saw 240 others abducted to Gaza.

(…)

Israel for decades has made assassinations of its enemies in other countries a key part of its defense strategy. In the past two weeks, Iran has accused Israel of assassinating two Iranian generals in Iraq and Syria who liaised with the regional militant groups backed by Iran. Israel has also carried out high-profile assassinations of senior Iranian military commanders and nuclear scientists in Iran and Syria, including Iran’s top nuclear scientist, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, and Col. Sayad Khodayee, a commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps.”

[eretzyisrael]

by David Israel

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board on Thursday night published a scathing attack on President Biden’s Israel police, especially the way he’s been mistreating PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.

To remind you, last Tuesday, NY Times pundit Tom Friedman wrote (White House Urging Israelis to Play Nice, Tom Friedman Says US to Reassess Relationship with Israel): “US diplomats … find it hard to believe that Bibi would allow himself to be led around by the nose by people like Ben-Gvir, would be ready to risk Israel’s relations with America and with global investors, and WOULD BE READY TO RISK A CIVIL WAR IN ISRAEL (sic.) just to stay in power with a group of ciphers and ultranationalists.”

In its response to that and similar brazen attacks fueled by the administration, the WSJ editorial board (What Does Biden Have Against Israel? – The President treats the governing coalition in Jerusalem worse than he does Iran) asked: “Why does President Biden go out of his way to snub, criticize and give marching orders to the government of Israel? At least rhetorically, the President and his Administration treat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his governing coalition worse than they do the ruling mullahs in Iran.”

The WSJ is critical of Biden’s repeated declaration that he will not invite the Israeli PM to the White House, while US Ambassador to Jerusalem Tom Nides has been warning that Israel is “going off the rails,” and both men know that their statements provide shameless support to Netanyahu’s enemies.

“When Mr. Netanyahu was most vulnerable, in late March, Mr. Biden needlessly decreed that Israel ‘cannot continue down this road’ on judicial reform,” the WSJ editorial continued, noting that “the Prime Minister had already changed course and agreed to moderate the reforms—a domestic Israeli affair in which the US President has no business. Mr. Nides publicly instructed Mr. Netanyahu, as if with his chauffeur, to ‘pump the brakes.’”

“This is no way to treat a democratic ally,” argues the editorial, and suggested “the President’s Israel policy has been counterproductive. US aid to anti-Israel international bodies has resumed, and all of the West Bank and East Jerusalem is treated as ‘occupied territory.’ This is now a liberal article of faith, but how does it advance peace to indulge Palestinians in the belief that Jews are interlopers in Judea and at the Western Wall?”

The WSJ says Biden is undermining Israel’s democratically elected government while “Hamas and other Iranian proxies are gaining power in the West Bank, activating another front against Israel.”

The paper warns: “The new wave of terrorism against Jewish civilians will set back the Palestinian cause but advance Iran’s.”

The editorial also lists Biden’s other failures in the Middle East, including abandoning the Abraham Accords, one of his predecessor’s most brilliant achievements. Biden also failed to keep Saudi Arabia in the Western camp, driving it instead to deepen its relations with China. And the administration’s promises about a better nuclear deal with Iran are all gone.

Perhaps most disappointing has been the failure to extend the Trump-brokered Abraham Accords. The Saudis are the prize, but Mr. Biden’s open hostility drove them to hedge their bets by signing a Chinese-brokered deal with Iran instead. Normalization with Israel may have to wait for a U.S. President interested in rallying a coalition to contain Tehran.

“While Tehran escalates its proxy wars and whittles down US nuclear demands, Mr. Biden carries out diplomatic offensives against Saudi Arabia and Israel,” says the WSJ editorial.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

October 7, 2023

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

Early this morning, Eastern Daylight Time, Hamas militants broke out of the Gaza Strip, where approximately 2 million Palestinians live, largely unable to leave because of the extensive restrictions Israel has imposed. They pushed as far as 15 miles (about 24 kilometers) into Israel, taking over at least 22 towns and firing at least 2,500 rockets. They have killed at least 250 Israelis, wounded more than 1,500 others, and taken hostages. The attack was a surprise, having an effect on Israelis that observers are comparing to the effect of 9-11 on people in the U.S. 

Hamas is a group of Palestinian militants that make up one of the two major political parties in the Palestinian Territories, which consist of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Hamas was established in 1987 and gained control of the Gaza Strip in 2007. Since then, Hamas and the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have periodically exchanged fire. In May 2021 that tension turned into an 11-day conflict that has simmered along the security fence between Israel and Gaza ever since. 

In a video address to Israelis, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said: “We are at war and we will win it.” Israelis have killed at least 232 people and wounded more than 1,700 in retaliation for the attack. He promised the Israeli military will “take revenge for this black day” but that it “will take time.” He warned that Israel would turn “into ruins” the places where Hamas operates, and told residents of Gaza to “get out of there now,” although they have no way to leave. 

There are serious questions about how the Netanyahu government did not see this attack coming. It was either a spectacular intelligence failure or a security failure or both, and it strikes at the heart of the Netanyahu government’s promise to keep the country safe. At the same time, the attack is making Israelis rally together. The hundreds of thousands of Israelis who have been protesting Netanyahu’s strengthening hold on the government have said they would come together in this dangerous moment.  

A number of countries, including the U.S., have designated Hamas a terrorist organization. It is backed by Iran, which provides money and weapons, and last month high-level Iranian officials apparently met with Hamas leaders in Lebanon. Today Iran praised Hamas for the attack. Iran has opposed the recent talks between Saudi Arabia and Israel about normalizing relations. Since the decline of Iraq as an independent power, Iran has viewed the combination of Israel, its main enemy, with Saudi Arabia, its main rival for power, as the greatest threat to its security in the region. 

Iran and Russia are allies whose relationship has strengthened considerably as the Russian war against Ukraine has pushed the two increasingly isolated countries together to resist Western sanctions. Former Russian president and deputy chair of Russia’s Security Council Dmitry Medvedev said the attack was “expected,” and used it to accuse the U.S.

The Middle East, rather than Ukraine, was “what Washington and its allies should be busy with,” he said. “But instead of actively working at Palestinian-Israeli settlement,” he went on, “these morons have interfered with us, and are providing the neo-Nazis with full-scale aid, pitting the two closely related peoples against each other. What can stop America’s manic obsession to incite conflicts all over the planet?” 

Today’s assessment of the Russian offensive in Ukraine by the Institute for the Study of War said: “The Kremlin is already [exploiting] and will likely continue to exploit the Hamas attacks in Israel to advance several information operations intended to reduce US and Western support and attention to Ukraine.”

Both Saudi Arabia and Qatar have contextualized the attack by calling out Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian people but also are calling for restraint and for the violence to stop. 

India, too, has expressed solidarity with Israel. 

In the U.S., the administration suggested that it sees a larger hand behind this attack and is working with partners and allies to contain the violence. In a statement, President Biden said the United States “unequivocally condemns this appalling assault against Israel by Hamas terrorists from Gaza, and I made clear to Prime Minister Netanyahu that we stand ready to offer all appropriate means of support to the Government and people of Israel.” It went on with a warning—“The United States warns against any other party hostile to Israel seeking advantage in this situation”—and a threat: “My Administration’s support for Israel’s security is rock solid and unwavering.”

Biden told reporters that he has been in contact with the King of Jordan, has spoken with members of Congress, and is in close touch with Netanyahu. He says he has directed the national security team to engage with their Israeli counterparts—“military to military, intelligence to intelligence,...diplomat to diplomat—to make sure Israel has what it needs.” He has also directed his team “to remain in constant contact with leaders throughout the region, including Egypt, Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman, the UAE, as well as with our European partners and the Palestinian Authority.” 

Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke today with the presidents of Israel and the Palestinian Authority, which controls the West Bank, urging Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas to condemn the attack and to work to restore calm. He also spoke with the foreign ministers of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and Türkiye, as well as the European Union’s High Representative for foreign affairs. Blinken urged the EU, Türkiye, and the so-called Quint countries—France, Germany, Italy, the U.K., and the U.S.—to continue to engage on the issue, and he promised to stay in close contact with all the parties he talked to today.

In the United States, Republicans used the moment to attack President Biden. In an echo of a similar lie from Trump, who falsely claimed the Obama administration had paid $150 billion to Iran for a nuclear agreement, they took to social media in a flood to say that the U.S. had funded the attack on Israel because it had recently “paid” $6 billion to Iran. 

The statement was wrong across the board: the U.S did not pay Iran anything. It helped to ease restrictions on Iranian money that had been frozen in South Korea, enabling Qatar to take control of the money and use it for humanitarian aid. In any case, the money has not yet been transferred. Still, it was a surprising decision to attack the U.S. government at a time when the country would normally be united behind Israel.

Nonetheless, the attack has made the national implications of Republicans’ own troubles even more clear. In times of crisis, the executive branch briefs the so-called Gang of Eight on classified intelligence matters. The Gang of Eight is made up of the leaders of each party in the House and the Senate, and the leaders of each party in each chamber’s intelligence committee. But without a House Speaker, this leading intelligence group is missing a key member. It is not clear if the acting speaker, Representative Patrick McHenry (R-NC), who was tapped by former speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and not elected, can participate. 

The lack of a speaker is a problem. Although House committees can still meet, the House can’t do much. McHenry is responsible mostly for overseeing the election of a new speaker; he does not have the authority to bring bills or even resolutions to the floor. 

—

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[theculturedmarxist]

As of this writing, Biden has finally begun his retaliatory attacks, hitting targets in Syria and Iraq. But sources claim that almost every target was known in advance and evacuated, as we suspected would be the case.

But the most interesting development on this front is the following. Recall in the last update I indicated rumors that, amid a welter of secret talks, Israel was considering some kind of full ceasefire and, presumably, an end to the war.

Now there are new reports that the US has fully doubled down on the creation of a Palestinian state—in other words, the long-sought-after two-state solution:

The United States is actively pursuing the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with security guarantees for Israel and exploring options with partners in the region, the State Department spokesperson said on Wednesday.

Whitehouse Spokesman Matthew Miller confirmed:

He says the carrot is “security guarantees for Israel”. You have to understand how politi-speak works. In diplomatic/political terms, “security guarantees” is translated as: bribes. It effectively means, we’ll give you x amount of billions of dollars for weapons if you do what we say.

A new WaPo piece confirms these developments by adding that Blinken will soon head to the MidEast to try to finalize this deal by convincing Saudi Arabia to agree to normalize its relations with Israel on the express condition that Israel not only fully ends the Gaza conflict, but commits to creating a Palestinian state which includes Gaza and the West Bank.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken plans to travel to the Middle East soon. He’ll probably stop first in Saudi Arabia, where he hopes for a renewed pledge from Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to normalize relations with Israel if — and only if — Israel ends the Gaza conflict and commits to the eventual creation of a Palestinian state that includes Gaza and the West Bank.

It’s difficult not to be somewhat impressed by these developments. For all the corruption and evil of the US regime, we can almost give them credit for coming to reason—under great duress and social pressure, of course—and for once doing the just and honorable thing. What it further means is that the US realizes it has no choice remaining but to hardball an ‘end game’ against Israel, otherwise US risks being dragged into an Empire-ending war with Iran.

It does look more and more likely that such a deal can occur, and the war on Gaza will end. But: one must remember that from the perspective of diehard Likudniks and Israeli rightwingers, such a ‘premature’ cessation would effectively doom Israel for good. We’ve covered the angle at length before, but in essence, due to Israel’s demographic discrepancies with its Arab neighbors amongst other things, to allow a Palestinian state to grow on its borders, protected by a legitimate UN seat (rather than “observer” status), would mean the eventual total dissolution of Israel and the forfeiture of all prophecies of Moshiach’s return.

Thus, the radicals amongst them could never allow this—so it will have to come to a major head, and may get bloody. Israel’s internal situation and stability in many ways mirrors that of Ukraine and its ultra-radical faction.

The final biggest issue, which would be an immense thorn in Israel’s side, and a grave humiliation, is highlighted at the end of the WaPo article:

Then there is the problem of stopping settler violence and relocating as many as 200,000 Israelis from a future Palestinian state. Biden took a strong step Thursday by sanctioning four Israeli West Bank settlers who committed violence against Palestinians. That’s just a start, but it enhances U.S. credibility with Palestinians as peace broker.

Yes, you see, given that Israel has hundreds of thousands of illegal settlers occupying ostensibly Palestinian territory, the creation of a legitimate state would necessitate the total expulsion of all settlers, which would play like a sort of Israeli Nakhba on TV. Recall, the whole point of the illegal settlements was always about one thing only: keeping a Palestinian state from forming. So this would mean the end to a grand plan spanning many decades, and a historic failure of an age-old Zionist vision.

As a sidenote, new reports point to promising normalizations between KSA and Syria as well:

Saudi Arabia prepares to open embassy in Syria The process of normalizing relations between Saudi Arabia and the Assad regime is gaining momentum. According to a report by Al Watan, Saudi Chargé d'Affaires Abdullah al-Harith and some other diplomats will travel to Damascus on Saturday to resume Saudi consular services. According to the Saudi newspaper, Al-Harith will present his credentials to the Assad regime's foreign minister and begin work with his team at a hotel in the Syrian capital. Once restoration work is completed on the Saudi Arabian Embassy building in Damascus, the embassy will move into this building. The United Arab Emirates also sent an ambassador to Syria for the first time in 13 years. UAE Ambassador Hassan al-Shehhi took office on Tuesday, presenting his credentials to the Assad regime's foreign minister.

I tentatively propose that ‘things are looking up’.

[mightyflamethrower]

As Hamas goes, so with it go many of the following related Western pretensions.

The Passions of 9/11, Redux

It has been 22 years since we saw crowds throughout the Middle East celebrating the murder of 3,000 civilians—and since newspapers had daily “idiot watch” notices of American intellectuals defending radical Islamist mass murderers. And now the madness is back again, and we are witnessing the recrudescence of normalizing radical Islamic terrorists abroad.

I suppose the theory is that no one in America cares much about radical Islamists foaming at the mouth, whether abroad or here. And the result is that they are empowered and their defense of murder is growing—yet its hubris will earn an almost-certain response, an anger slowly but insidiously growing at radical Islam.

A Middle East Policy in Ruins 

The current Biden appeasement of Iran and gift of billions of dollars in aggregate to the West Bank and Gaza are now, by bipartisan consensus, unsustainable. The only supporters of that lethal madness left are the embarrassments of BLM, the Squad, the Democratic Socialists of America, and the campus crowd.

Their collective hatred of Jews and Israelis was manifested in their delight over the post mortem mutilations of murdered women and children. And why—even before Israel had responded with air attacks—were leftists and Islamists suddenly celebrating the news of the executions of more than 1,200 Jews? It was instinctual, a Pavlovian response.

Even some leftist Democrats were shocked by their own constituents, whom they had created. Biden still might cling to his past destructive Middle East policies (and I expect him to restrict the Israelis within days after they begin to go in full force into Gaza), but the idea of continuing aid to the West Bank and Gaza or of “normalizing” relations with theocratic Iran will now be rightly seen as a suicidal delusion.

Ukraine and Gaza

Most Americans support arms for Ukraine to repel Russian aggressors.

But something is becoming strange about these two respective wars.

Why did the State Department more or less put no restrictions on Ukrainian retaliation, including operations against the Russian Black Sea Fleet—but the Secretary of State almost immediately called for a “ceasefire” to prevent Israeli retaliation, a mortal sin if he had dared say that about Ukraine’s similar response to aggression? Would an American diplomat lecture Ukraine about ending the “cycle of violence?”

Why does the U.S. discount any possibility of a strategic response from Russia—which reportedly has some 6,000-7,000 nuclear weapons—to attacks on its homeland, but seems almost terrified about calling Iran to account for its central role in arming and funding terrorists to start a war with Israel by slaughtering 1,200 civilians?

Is the U.S., as professed, really able to fund a $120 billion—and counting—war in Ukraine, and to replenish Israeli stocks (300,000 artillery shells shipped from U.S. depots in Israel to Ukraine, a reportedly mere one-month supply for Kyiv), and to restore depleted existing U.S. munitions (note the billions of dollars of equipment abandoned in Kabul), and to ramp up our forces to deter China (while allowing 8 million illegal aliens to flow across an open border and $33 trillion in national debt) without going on a massive war footing?

There are likely somewhere between 600,000 and 800,000 total wounded and dead in Ukraine, in the most lethal conflict in Europe since 1945. Why is the U.S. so eager to call for a ceasefire after a fraction of those casualties in Gaza, but it is near-taboo to mention a breather amid the historical carnage, with no end in sight, in Ukraine?

The administration always says we can do everything simultaneously, but then we never do. Rhetoric is not the same thing as trebling our arms supply chain, and cutting the budget elsewhere to pay for it, and closing our border.

The Biden Open Border

Given the common denominator of Russian and Gazan invading forces crossing poorly fortified borders, why would we not secure our own—far longer and less secure than either?

The Biden border nihilism is now a losing proposition even for the leftists who helped promote it. Biden is eroding the very base of the Democratic Party, by alienating inner-city and border-district minorities. They are irate at the hordes of people stampeding into the country with the assumption that breaking our laws is their birthright.

Even the daily mendacity of Alejandro Mayorkas and Karine Jean-Pierre cannot hide the brazen contempt for the law. Every day that the border remains open and thousands more pour in unaudited, illegally, without skills, in non-diverse fashion, and with cartel fentanyl—to the cheers of the corrupt socialist President Obrador of Mexico—the more Joe Biden is destroying his own party.

The ruin in Gaza only reminds Americans that under present policies we will soon see thousands of America-hating, anti-Semitic Gazans seeking to pour into the United States illegally, eager to join the mass demonstrations cheering on Hamas death squads. It seems to take about a month for a radical Middle Eastern refugee, having arrived with gratitude toward his new American hosts, to take to the street on a “Day of Jihad” calling for the end of Israel (and often damning America).

Allies as Enemies

Abroad, we are finally accepting the long-suppressed reality that many of our “allies” are not neutrals but enemies. The U.S. bases in Qatar and Turkey, and our indifference to the pro-Hamas sentiments, if not outright aid, of both, have empowered terrorism.

Ever so slowly, the two anti-American nations are reminding Americans that we need to draw down our forces from these hostile landscapes, which in any global crisis would likely be hostile territory for our own troops.

Everyone knows Erdogan’s Turkey has no business in NATO—and everyone has no idea how to get them out. And so everyone puts an asterisk over Turkey as a NATO member. For now, the alliance’s only Islamist, non-democratic, and anti-Western nation is best simply avoided, since expelling Turkey appears to be more trouble than tolerating its toxic presence.

The Palestinian State Solution 

The Left’s shrill demand for a “two-state” solution, and tolerance of Palestinian tired and serial threats to drive Israel into the sea, are for now over. The glee with which Gazans and West Bankers met the news of mass murder, mutilation, hostage-taking, rape, and the desecration of bodies is proof enough that these dictatorial governments probably do represent the majority of their citizens.

Most Gazans were giddy on hearing of the macabre methods of Hamas, and only wished that there had been more opportunity to spit on hostages, poke captive women, kick corpses, and torment the child and female trophies brought back from Israel. The Gazan delight in the grotesque was reminiscent of some medieval pogrom, or the Roman triumphs of old with their files of enslaved captives. And perhaps the desire to take captives and pass them back through the killing fields to Gaza reminds of the Aztec practice of seeking to capture rather than just kill their enemies, in order to have plenty of bodies for the human sacrifices on Templo Major.

The old idea of Gaza—self-governed since 2005-2006 by “one man, one vote, once” Hamas—as a possible “Singapore” with Hyatt and Four Seasons beaches, flush with hundreds of billions of dollars from the Gulf, Europe, the U.S. and the UN, is finally revealed as the farce it always was. That fantasy was simply antithetical to the Hamas nihilist charter, the logical manifestation of which was the slaughter inside Israel of hundreds of civilians.

BLM

BLM was always a corrupt, disingenuous operation—the craftier successor to the Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton 1980s corporate shake-downs. But it is has finally jumped the shark with its sick support for Hamas murderers (note its recent posters glorifying Hamas’s hang-gliding butchery).

Its pro-death advocacy of Hamas is the pièce de résistance to the corruption and abdication of its leadership, the Kendi-con, and the lethal crime wave it helped spawn in major cities. Its racist agendas may linger for a while. But BLM is going the way of the 1960s Black Panthers—that is, one leading to general disgust, then to irrelevance, and finally to nothingness.

The still-remaining BLM murals in our major downtowns are already embarrassments and eroding reminders of the insanity that swept the country from 2020 to the present.

Campuses

Universities have now crossed the Rubicon in de facto condoning their crazed students cheering on mass death. They made the argument after George Floyd that the country must listen to their pseudo-moral lectures, and now they unashamedly broadcast what they have become—traitors to the idea of an enlightened free society, and kindred spirits to the anti-Semitism, intolerance, and fascism of 1930s German universities.

Degrees from Harvard, Yale, and Stanford will soon become, not resume badges, but either embarrassments or certifications of a mediocre education. Or both.

Universities all rushed to embrace “decolonization”, starting with empty and ahistorical virtue signals and ending up paralyzed, as thousands of their own students showed the world how ecstatic they were over news that babies were murdered and women raped.

In response, their invertebrate administrators and faculty sat frozen for days, calculating how best to issue “on the one hand…on the other hand” mush. The first serious politician who calls for the taxing of the huge incomes of their endowments, for yanking the government out of the student loan business and returning the moral hazard to the universities who impoverish their own students, will win overwhelming support.

The Gaza of Hamas is going down, but so are a lot of corrupt institutions and ideas that threw in with its lot.

I would recommend against the Nazi reference: the Nazis didn’t deny knowledge of atrocities until *after the war*, making them a bad contrast to current Palestinians.

[darkmaga-returns]

By Patrick Lawrence / Original to ScheerPost

Why have West Asian nations that long ago pledged their support to the Palestinian cause remained so silent amid Israel’s terrorizing assaults on Gaza, the West Bank, and now Lebanon? Where have the Russians and Chinese been? Is this not the time for a display of solidarity among non–Western nations? Can we not look to them as a counter to the inexcusable support the U.S. and its clients extend to the Zionist regime? What can we expect, looking forward, of the BRICS — Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa — whose members just concluded a summit in Kazan? 

These are my questions a year on from the events of Oct. 7, 2023. On the assumption others may ask them, too, I put these matters to Chas Freeman, the distinguished former ambassador with a long record in West Asian and other world affairs. Our extended exchange via email follows. —P.L.

PL: A German newspaper recently published an interview with the Egyptian foreign minister, Sameh Shoukry, who expressed his profound frustration with the Americans as Israel continues its assault in Gaza—and now the West Bank and Lebanon. You can’t work with the Americans, he complained in so many words. They say one thing, they rarely mean it, and typically do something else altogether.  

It prompts my first question in the context of the enlarging crisis in West Asia, please comment on the diplomatic positions of America’s allies in the region. What, generally, is going through their minds? Why haven’t they reacted more vigorously to the Israeli assault? Are they simply “bought,” in one or another way? Or is there more to it?

CF: The United States no longer has any “diplomatic allies” in the region. Popular anger at American support for the Israeli effort to rid Palestine of its Arab population and expand into Gaza and Lebanon makes alignment with Washington too politically costly for Arab rulers to risk.  

Israel’s depravity has ended any prospect of normalized relations by Arab states with it. Those that have normalized relations with Israel are now under popular pressure to suspend or reverse it. More importantly, the Gulf Arabs have declared that they will be neutral in any conflict between Iran, Israel, and the United States.  Israel’s genocide in Gaza has created a state of war between it and Yemen and fostered a rapprochement between previously estranged Egypt and Turkey.  

PL: It has been said that neighboring nations had more affinity with the PLO in times past than with Hamas now because the former was a secular organization, the latter not. Is this accurate, and if so, does the distinction matter now?

CF: Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist democratic movement. It came to power in Palestine by winning an election in 2006. Hamas’s leaders take the position that Arab societies should be governed by those with support at the ballot box rather than by princes, generals, dictators, or thugs. Arab rulers who fall into these authoritarian categories naturally find this position threatening.  

Religion is not a major factor in Arab and Muslim states’ relations with Hamas.  Like Arab rulers, Hamas is Sunni Muslim. The differences of Arab rulers with Hamas are far less than they were with the atheist leadership of the PLO. Iran, which is Shi`a, has been the main supporter of Hamas — not on religious grounds but in support of Palestinian self-determination. 

[lethimfertilise]

Last week, several sources reported that Iranian urea could potentially be supplied under the recent Indian tender, re-exported through China. I can’t recall the last time Indian urea was directly or indirectly supplied to India, but it looks to me like an interesting case, and there are some reasons for this possible “through-China re-export” deal.

The sanctions on Iranian urea were imposed as part of the broader U.S. sanctions on Iran's petrochemical sector. These sanctions were announced on 6 August 2018 and became effective on 4 November 2018. The sanctions targeted Iran's petrochemical exports, including urea, severely impacting its ability to trade freely in the global market.

India had been one of the main Iranian outlets, but the inability to accept and cash Letters of Credit, as well as make settlements in USD, forced the country to seek non-traditional markets and alternative trade routes. Countries like Turkey and Brazil became significant markets for Iranian urea, often using barter arrangements to bypass financial restrictions imposed by the sanctions. Switching the origin documents and loading port names also became normal practice. Over time, Iranian urea was also imported into the EU.

Recently, Iranian producers have started calling sale tenders, openly offering urea at the so-called “listed price”.

However, for the last couple of months, even with some production problems in Egypt, the flow of Iranian urea has stalled. Sales tenders were called and cancelled, and prices have been sliding down. Some sources say this may be related to the tightening of banking policies regarding transactions involving Iranian (and presumably Iranian) urea.

In this case, a potential re-export through China is well explained and understandable. There are not more than a couple of cargoes, but the night is young.

Have a great week, everyone.

#india #iran #urea #imstory #sanctions #fertilisers #fertilizers #tender #china #brazil #turkey #usa

[dertaglichedan]

Saudi Official: Iran ‘Engineered a War in Gaza’ to Ruin Saudi-Israel Relationship

Israel’s public broadcasting corporation, known colloquially as “Kan,” interviewed an unnamed Saudi royal official on Sunday who said Iran “engineered the war in Gaza to destroy the progress in relations” between Saudi Arabia and Israel.

“Iran’s behavior is irresponsible. We all know that Iran is a country that sponsors terrorism, and it should have been stopped a long time ago,” the Saudi official said.

Several other sources have made the same allegation, including U.S. President Joe Biden, who said two weeks after the October 7 atrocities that Hamas “moved on Israel” because “the Saudis wanted to recognize Israel.” Others have suggested Hamas also wanted to wreck Israel’s improving relations with other major Muslim countries, such as Indonesia.

Hamas’s bloody gambit seemed to work, at least temporarily, as Saudi Arabia froze relations with Israel on October 13 after Israel’s response to the atrocities commenced. Saudi sources said they would press for Israel to make more concessions to Palestinian statehood when and if normalization talks resumed, another indication that Hamas’s alleged terrorism strategy was successful.

The Saudi official who spoke to Kan on Sunday did not deny reports that Saudi Arabia assisted with intercepting the drones and missiles launched by Iran against Israel on Saturday night.

“Every suspicious object that enters Saudi airspace is intercepted. It is a sovereign matter,” he said.

[mariacallous]

The shocking Hamas assault on Israel has precipitated a beginning and an end for the Middle East. What has begun, almost inexorably, is the next war—one that will be bloody, costly, and agonizingly unpredictable in its course and outcome. What has ended, for anyone who cares to admit it, is the illusion that the United States can extricate itself from a region that has dominated the American national security agenda for the past half century.

One can hardly blame the Biden administration for trying to do just that. Twenty years of fighting terrorists, along with failed nation building in Afghanistan and Iraq, took a terrible toll on American society and politics and drained the U.S. budget. Having inherited the messy fallout from the Trump administration’s erratic approach to the region, President Joe Biden recognized that U.S. entanglements in the Middle East distracted from more urgent challenges posed by the rising great power of China and the recalcitrant fading power of Russia.

The White House devised a creative exit strategy, attempting to broker a new balance of power in the Middle East that would allow Washington to downsize its presence and attention while also ensuring that Beijing did not fill the void. A historic bid to normalize relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia promised to formally align Washington’s two most important regional partners against their common foe, Iran, and anchor the Saudis beyond the perimeter of China’s strategic orbit.

In tandem with this effort, the administration also sought to ease tensions with Iran, the most dangerous adversary the United States faces in the Middle East. Having tried and failed to resuscitate the 2015 nuclear deal with its elaborate web of restrictions and oversight of Iran’s nuclear program, Washington embraced a Plan B of payoffs and informal understandings. The hope was that, in exchange for modest economic rewards, Tehran could be persuaded to slow down its work on its nuclear programs and step back from its provocations around the region. Stage one came in September, with a deal that freed five unjustly detained Americans from Iranian prisons and gave Tehran access to $6 billion in previously frozen oil revenues. Both sides were poised for follow-on talks in Oman, with the wheels of diplomacy greased by record-level Iranian oil exports, made possible by Washington’s averting its gaze instead of enforcing its own sanctions.

As ambitious policy gambits go, this one had a lot to recommend it—in particular, the genuine confluence of interests among Israeli and Saudi leaders that has already generated tangible momentum toward more public-facing bilateral cooperation on security and economic matters. Had it succeeded, a new alignment among two of the region’s major players might have had a truly transformative impact on the security and economic environment in the broader Middle East.

WHAT WENT WRONG?

Unfortunately, that promise may have been its undoing. Biden’s attempt at a quick getaway from the Middle East had one fatal flaw: it wildly misperceived the incentives for Iran, the most disruptive actor on the stage. It was never plausible that informal understandings and a dribble of sanctions relief would be sufficient to pacify the Islamic Republic and its proxies, who have a keen and time-tested appreciation for the utility of escalation in advancing their strategic and economic interests. Iranian leaders had every incentive to try to block an Israeli-Saudi breakthrough, particularly one that would have extended American security guarantees to Riyadh and allowed the Saudis to develop a civilian nuclear energy program.

At this time, it is not known whether Iran had any specific role in the carnage in Israel. Earlier this week, The Wall Street Journal reported that Tehran was directly involved in planning the assault, citing unnamed senior members of Hamas and Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group. That report has not been confirmed by Israeli or U.S. officials, who have only gone so far as to suggest that Iran was “broadly complicit,” in the words of Jon Finer, the deputy national security adviser. At the very least, the operation “bore hallmarks of Iranian support,” as a report in The Washington Post put it, citing former and current senior Israeli and U.S. officials. And even if the Islamic Republic did not pull the trigger, its hands are hardly clean. Iran has funded, trained, and equipped Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups and has coordinated closely on strategy, as well as operations—especially during the past decade. It is inconceivable that Hamas undertook an attack of this magnitude and complexity without some foreknowledge and affirmative support from Iran’s leadership. And now Iranian officials and media are exulting in the brutality unleashed on Israeli civilians and embracing the expectation that the Hamas offensive will bring about Israel’s demise.

WHAT’S IN IT FOR TEHRAN?

At first glance, Iran’s posture might appear paradoxical. After all, with the Biden administration proffering economic incentives for cooperation, it might seem unwise for Iran to incite an eruption between the Israelis and the Palestinians that will no doubt scuttle any possibility of a thaw between Washington and Tehran. Since the Iranian Revolution in 1979, however, the Islamic Republic has used escalation as a policy tool of choice. When the regime is under pressure, the revolutionary playbook calls for a counterattack to unnerve its adversaries and achieve a tactical advantage. And the war in Gaza advances the long-cherished goal of the Islamic Republic’s leadership to cripple its most formidable regional foe. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has never wavered in his feverish antagonism toward Israel and the United States. He and those around him are profoundly convinced of American immorality, greed, and wickedness; they revile Israel and clamor for its destruction, as part of the ultimate triumph of the Islamic world over what they see as a declining West and an illegitimate “Zionist entity.”

In addition, in the Biden administration’s entreaties and conciliation, Tehran smelled weakness—Washington’s desperation to shed its 9/11-era baggage, even if the price was high. Domestic turmoil in both the United States and Israel likely also whet the appetites of Iranian leaders, who have long been convinced that the West was decaying from within. For this reason, Tehran has been committing more strongly to its relationships with China and Russia. Those links are primarily driven by opportunism and a shared resentment of Washington. But for Iran, there is a domestic political element as well: as more moderate segments of the Iranian elite have been pushed to the sidelines, the regime’s economic and diplomatic orientation has shifted to the East, as its power brokers no longer see the West as a preferable or even a viable source of economic and diplomatic opportunities. Closer bonds among China, Iran, and Russia have encouraged a more aggressive Iranian posture, since a crisis in the Middle East that distracts Washington and European capitals will produce some strategic and economic benefits for Moscow and Beijing.

Finally, the prospect of a public Israeli-Saudi entente surely provided an additional accelerant to Iran, as it would have shifted the regional balance firmly back in Washington’s favor. In a speech he delivered just days before the Hamas attack, Khamenei warned that “the firm view of the Islamic Republic is that the governments that are gambling on normalizing relations with the Zionist regime will suffer losses. Defeat awaits them. They are making a mistake.”

WHERE DOES IT GO FROM HERE?

As the Israeli ground campaign in Gaza gets underway, it is highly unlikely that the conflict will stay there; the only question is the scope and speed of the war’s expansion. For now, the Israelis are focused on the immediate threat and are disinclined to widen the conflict. But the choice may not be theirs. Hezbollah, Iran’s most important ally, has already taken part in an exchange of fire on Israel’s northern border, in which at least four of the group’s fighters died. For Hezbollah, the temptation to follow the shock of Hamas’s success by opening a second front will be high. But Hezbollah’s leaders have acknowledged that they failed to anticipate the heavy toll of their 2006 war with Israel, which left the group intact but also severely eroded its capabilities. They may be more circumspect this time around. Tehran also has an interest in keeping Hezbollah whole, as insurance against a potential future Israeli strike on the Iranian nuclear program.

For now, therefore, although the threat of a wider war remains real, that outcome is hardly inevitable. The Iranian government has made an art of avoiding direct conflict with Israel, and it suits Tehran’s purposes, as well as those of its regional proxies and patrons in Moscow, to light the fire but stand back from the flames. Some in Israel may advocate for hitting Iranian targets, if only to send a signal, but the country’s security forces have their hands full now, and senior officials seem determined to stay focused on the fight at hand. Most likely, as the conflict evolves, Israel will at some point hit Iranian assets in Syria, but not in Iran itself. To date, Tehran has absorbed such strikes in Syria without feeling the need to retaliate directly.

As oil markets react to the return of a Middle East risk premium, Tehran may be tempted to resume its attacks and harassment of shipping vessels in the Persian Gulf. U.S. General C. Q. Brown, the newly confirmed chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was right to warn Tehran to stay on the sidelines and “not to get involved.” But his choice of words unfortunately suggests a failure to appreciate that the Iranians are already deeply, inextricably involved.

For the Biden administration, it is long past time to shed the mindset that shaped prior diplomacy toward Iran: a conviction that the Islamic Republic could be persuaded to accept pragmatic compromises that served its country’s interests. Once upon a time, that may have been credible. But the Iranian regime has reverted to its foundational premise: a determination to upend the regional order by any means necessary. Washington should dispense with the illusions of a truce with Iran’s theocratic oligarchs.

On every other geopolitical challenge, Biden’s position has evolved considerably from the Obama-era approach. Only U.S. policy toward Iran remains mired in the outdated assumptions of a decade ago. In the current environment, American diplomatic engagement with Iranian officials in Gulf capitals will not produce durable restraint on Tehran’s part. Washington needs to deploy the same tough-minded realism toward Iran that has informed recent U.S. policy on Russia and China: building coalitions of the willing to ratchet up pressure and cripple Iran’s transnational terror network; reinstating meaningful enforcement of U.S. sanctions on the Iranian economy; and conveying clearly—through diplomacy, force posture, and actions to preempt or respond to Iranian provocations—that the United States is prepared to deter Iran’s regional aggression and nuclear advances. The Middle East has a way of forcing itself to the top of every president’s agenda; in the aftermath of this devastating attack, the White House must rise to the challenge.

[thxnews]

Blinken Reinforces U.S.-Israel Bonds in Aviv

Secretary Blinken's Visit to Israel Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken's recent visit to Israel marks his fifth trip to the region, emphasizing the importance of the U.S.-Israel partnership. Blinken's agenda focused on diplomatic efforts, humanitarian assistance, and addressing the critical issue of hostages in the region.   Hostage Crisis and Diplomatic Efforts During his visit, Secretary Blinken reiterated the U.S. commitment to resolving the hostage crisis. He expressed empathy for the families affected and emphasized ongoing efforts to bring the hostages home. Discussions with the Israeli Government centered on a proposal by the United States, Qatar, and Egypt, aimed at resolving this crisis.  

The United States Response to Regional Tensions

Blinken's discussions with Israeli officials included a thorough review of the military campaign against Hamas and strategies to prevent future conflicts. He also addressed the tension on Israel's northern border, advocating for de-escalation and the safe return of families to their homes.   Humanitarian Initiatives in Gaza A significant focus of Blinken's visit was the humanitarian situation in Gaza. He discussed the U.S.'s role as the largest donor of humanitarian aid to the Palestinians and the efforts made to provide relief, including the delivery of essential supplies. He urged Israel to enhance civilian protection and facilitate the flow of humanitarian aid, especially to northern Gaza.  

The U.S. Stance on Israel's Security and Civilian Protection

While recognizing Israel's right to defend itself against terrorism, Secretary Blinken also stressed the importance of minimizing civilian casualties. He highlighted the need for Israel to take concrete steps to ensure the effective delivery of humanitarian assistance to Gaza.   Condemnation of Terrorism and Support for Israel The Secretary condemned the actions of groups like Hamas that embed themselves among civilians and called for a just approach to dealing with the innocent majority in Gaza. He reaffirmed the U.S.'s unwavering support for Israel's security and its right to self-defense.  

Pursuing a Path to Peace

Secretary Blinken emphasized the U.S.'s dedication to a diplomatic solution that ensures peace and security for all in the region. He outlined a vision for Israel's integration into the region, including normal relations with key countries and a path towards a Palestinian state.   Steps Towards Lasting Peace In his discussions, Blinken highlighted the necessary steps for achieving lasting peace in the region. This includes reforms by the Palestinian Authority and addressing challenges posed by Iran and its proxies.  

U.S. Commitment to Israel's Future

In his visit, Secretary Blinken underscored the United States' profound commitment to Israel's security and prosperity. He emphasized the need for responsible actions and rhetoric that foster peace and stability. As a longstanding ally of Israel, the U.S. continues to provide guidance and support in navigating the path toward a peaceful future.   Sources: THX News & US Department of State. Read the full article

[biblenewsprophecy]

ABC: EU says creation of Palestinian state is the only way to peace

COGwriter

ABC reported the following:

EU says creation of Palestinian state is the only way to peace

January 22, 2024

BRUSSELS — European Union foreign ministers argued Monday that the creation of a Palestinian state is the only credible way to achieve peace in the Middle East, expressing concern about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s clear rejection of the idea.

“The declarations of Benjamin Netanyahu are worrying. There will be a need for a Palestinian state with security guarantees for all,” French Foreign Affairs Minister Stephane Sejourne told reporters in Brussels, where ministers met to discuss the war in Gaza.

Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz and Palestinian counterpart Riad Malki were also in Belgium’s capital for the talks. The issue of Gaza’s future has set Israel in opposition to the United States and its Arab allies who are trying to mediate an end to the fighting in the besieged Palestinian territory. …

The EU is the world’s top provider of aid to the Palestinians but holds little leverage over Israel, despite being its biggest trading partner. https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/eu-pushes-palestinian-statehood-rejecting-israeli-leaders-insistence-106559035

The EU has more credibility with the Palestinians than the USA does.

Various Arab nations, like Saudi Arabia have also made it clear that they want a “two-state solution”:

January 22, 2024

JERUSALEM (AP) — Saudi Arabia’s top diplomat said the kingdom will not normalize relations with Israel or contribute to Gaza’s reconstruction without a credible path to a Palestinian state — a nonstarter for Israel’s government. …

Before the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel that triggered the war, the U.S. had been trying to broker a landmark agreement in which Saudi Arabia would normalize relations with Israel in exchange for U.S. security guarantees, aid in establishing a civilian nuclear program and progress toward resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In September, Netanyahu had said Israel was on “the cusp” of such a deal.  https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/saudi-arabia-wont-normalize-israel-relations-without-palestinian-state-plan-top-diplomat-says

But that deal did not happen.

Regarding the Saudi Arabian – Israeli prospect for peace in the Middle East, about four weeks before Hamas’ attack, I warned that the talks between the USA and Saudi Arabia were:

interesting, though a regional war in the Middle East, probably also involving Syria and Iran may need to take place first (cf. Isaiah 22:6-9). (Thiel B. Is a Middle East peace deal brewing? COGwriter, September 11, 2023)

As it turns out, the Bible itself shows that the time will come when there will be a temporary ‘peace deal’ (see the article The ‘Peace Deal’ of Daniel 9:27).

The Bible shows that a European leader will be involved in confirming the coming, prophesied deal of Daniel 9:26-27, which states:

26 And the people of the prince who is to come Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, And till the end of the war desolations are determined. 27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate (Daniel 9:26-27).

The “prince” is a European leader who is later called the King of the North in Daniel 11:40. The ‘one week’ has generally been understood by prophecy watchers to mean a seven year deal, that is broken in the middle of it (after 3 1/2 years). This break is also confirmed in the following scripture:

31 And forces shall be mustered by him, and they shall defile the sanctuary fortress; then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation. (Daniel 11:31)

The “him” is the European King of the North–he was the one who was the prince who confirmed the deal.

One way to show Daniel is referring to a European kingdom is to realize that it was the people of the Roman Empire of the 1st century that fulfilled the portion of Daniel 9:26 as they destroyed the city (Jerusalem) in 70 A.D. Jewish sources, while not understanding all of this, also agree that it was Roman sources that destroyed the city and sanctuary as the following demonstrates:

“The people of the prince will come and destroy the city and the Sanctuary” Daniel 9:26, refers to the Roman legions of Vespasian and Titus, who destroyed Jerusalem. (Daniel 9 – A True Biblical Interpretation. Jews for Judaism. https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/answers/jewish-polemics/texts/daniel-9-a-true-biblical-interpretation/ accessed 07/30/16)

In the 21st century, the European Union includes much of the land and peoples that were part of the ancient Roman Empire. And it is the “prince” coming from that people that verse 27 of Daniel 9 is referring to. Thus, this prophecy tells us that a lower level European leader will somewhat officially start to rise up about 3 1/2 years before the great tribulation (and yes, according to Jesus, some “tribulation” does happen prior to the start of the Great Tribulation). Another is the fact that the “beast of the sea” of Revelation 13:1 fits with the beasts from the “great sea” of Daniel 7:2–and that sea is the Mediterranean Sea according to the Old Testament. Hence a power in Europe the only region that could have an empire geographically like the old Roman one (for more details, please see Europa, the Beast, and the Book of Revelation).

Now, regarding false peace, this same beast leader will be involved in that in several ways. Here are a couple of scriptures pointing to that:

25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand. (Daniel 8:25, KJV).

23 And after the league is made with him he shall act deceitfully, for he shall come up and become strong with a small number of people. 24 He shall enter peaceably, even into the richest places of the province; and he shall do what his fathers have not done, nor his forefathers: he shall disperse among them the plunder, spoil, and riches; and he shall devise his plans against the strongholds, but only for a time. (Daniel 11:23-24, NKJV)

So this leader gives people the impression that there will be “peace” and is involved in some type of deal. This is the same leader that confirms the covenant in Daniel 9:27. The term is translated as “peace” in Daniel 8:25 is from the Hebrew term shalvah and essentially means security. In other words, this leader will destroy “many” who are under the impression that they are secure because of some type of security and/or trade arrangement. Such arrangements are now commonly referred to as peace deals or treaties. Land swaps or changes to territories are likely.

He also will make a lying deal with an Arabic leader that the Bible calls the King of the South per Daniel 11:27.

Additionally, this leader will be the one who will lead the destruction of the USA and its British-descended allies.

Specifically, notice that the Bible shows that this King of the North will destroy those who are perceived to have the strongest military might and then somehow divide up their land:

39 Thus he shall act against the strongest fortresses with a foreign god, which he shall acknowledge, and advance its glory; and he shall cause them to rule over many, and divide the land for gain (Daniel 11:39).

Daniel 11:24 seems to parallel this as it teaches that the King of the North has plans against the strongholds and succeeds against the prosperous. The USA has the strongest perceived military and will be conquered according to Daniel 11:39 and other scriptures (cf. Isaiah 10:5-12).

Isaiah was inspired to write:

8 The way of peace they do not know … (Isaiah 59:8, ESV)

While the “two-state solution” is not going to bring lasting peace, something like that may happen with the coming peace deal.

Yet, notice also that the Bible says:

3 For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape. (1 Thessalonians 5:3)

So, yes, the current Hamas-Israel war looks to be a factor in the coming deal of Daniel 9:27, but I still believe that scripture supports the view that we will see an expanded regional war first.

Then, about 3 1/2 years after the deal of Daniel 9:27 is confirmed, it will be over for the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

Related Items:

The ‘Peace Deal’ of Daniel 9:27 This prophecy could give up to 3 1/2 years advance notice of the coming Great Tribulation. Will most ignore or misunderstand its fulfillment? Here is a link to a related sermon video Daniel 9:27 and the Start of the Great Tribulation.

USA in Prophecy: The Strongest Fortresses Can you point to scriptures, like Daniel 11:39, that point to the USA in the 21st century? This article does. Two related sermon are available: Identifying the USA and its Destruction in Prophecy and Do these 7 prophesies point to the end of the USA?

Who is the King of the West? Why is there no Final End-Time King of the West in Bible Prophecy? Is the United States the King of the West? Here is a version in the Spanish language: ¿Quién es el Rey del Occidente? ¿Por qué no hay un Rey del Occidente en la profecía del tiempo del fin? A related sermon is also available: The Bible, the USA, and the King of the West.

Who is the King of the North? Is there one? Do biblical and Roman Catholic prophecies for the Great Monarch point to the same leader? Should he be followed? Who will be the King of the North discussed in Daniel 11? Is a nuclear attack prophesied to happen to the English-speaking peoples of the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? When do the 1335 days, 1290 days, and 1260 days (the time, times, and half a time) of Daniel 12 begin? When does the Bible show that economic collapse will affect the United States? In the Spanish language check out ¿Quién es el Rey del Norte? Here are links to three related videos: The King of the North is Alive: What to Look Out For, The Future King of the North, and Rise of the Prophesied King of the North.

Europa, the Beast, and Revelation Where did Europe get its name? What might Europe have to do with the Book of Revelation? What about “the Beast”? Is an emerging European power “the daughter of Babylon”? What is ahead for Europe? Here is are links to related videos: European history and the Bible and Can You Prove that the Beast to Come is European?

Some Doctrines of Antichrist Are there any doctrines taught outside the Churches of God which can be considered as doctrines of antichrist? This article suggests at least three. It also provides information on 666 and the identity of “the false prophet.” Plus it shows that several Roman Catholic writers seem to warn about an ecumenical antipope that will support heresy. You can also watch a video titled What Does the Bible teach about the Antichrist?

Lost Tribes and Prophecies: What will happen to Australia, the British Isles, Canada, Europe, New Zealand and the United States of America? Where did those people come from? Can you totally rely on DNA? What about other peoples? Do you really know what will happen to Europe and the English-speaking peoples? What about Africa, Asia, South America, and the Islands? This free online book provides scriptural, scientific, historical references, and commentary to address those matters. Here are links to related sermons: Lost tribes, the Bible, and DNA; Lost tribes, prophecies, and identifications; 11 Tribes, 144,000, and Multitudes; Israel, Jeremiah, Tea Tephi, and British Royalty; Gentile European Beast; Royal Succession, Samaria, and Prophecies; Asia, Islands, Latin America, Africa, and Armageddon;  When Will the End of the Age Come?;  Rise of the Prophesied King of the North; Christian Persecution from the Beast; WWIII and the Coming New World Order; and Woes, WWIV, and the Good News of the Kingdom of God.

LATEST NEWS REPORTS

LATEST BIBLE PROPHECY INTERVIEWS

[sustainableyadayadayada]

a new "grand bargain" for the Middle East

When I first heard about a conceptual “grand bargain” under the Obama administration, the general idea was normalization of relations between the U.S., Iran, and Israel in exchange for Iran giving up its nuclear weapons program (maybe in exchange for a well monitored nuclear power program) and Israel allowing the creation of a Palestinian state. This obviously didn’t happen. Before these ideas,…