#EU sanctions against Russia

[russianreader]

Vexations

Igor Levit performing Erik Satie’s “Vexations” (short edit) On 30 May 2020, Igor Levit performed all 840 repetitions of Vexations at the B-sharp Studio, Berlin. The performance streamed on Periscope, Twitter and other platforms, including on The New Yorker‘s website. Levit said the recital was in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, his reaction to which he characterised as a “silent scream”…

View On WordPress

#"The Changeling" (TV series) #"Vexations" (musical work) #"Vexations" (poetry collection) #Annelyse Gelman #COVID-19 #EU sanctions against Russia #Finnish-Russian relations #Igor Levit #Paul Goble #Russian anti-war movement #Russian vehicle ban

[niveditaabaidya]

Switzerland Condemns War, Pledges To Implement Sanctions Against Russia....

#youtube #Switzerland Condemns War Pledges To Implement Sanctions Against Russia. europe news eu norway sweden army Switzerland condemns the war in U

[timesofocean]

Gazprom to further cut gas supplies to Germany via Nord Stream

New Post has been published on https://www.timesofocean.com/gazprom-to-further-cut-gas-supplies-to-germany-via-nord-stream/

Gazprom to further cut gas supplies to Germany via Nord Stream

Moscow (The Times Groupe)- The Russian energy giant Gazprom said on Wednesday it would further reduce gas supplies through the Nord Stream 1 pipeline to 67 million cubic meters (2,366 million cubic feet) per day. germany

Gazprom said the halt would take effect at 01:30 a.m Moscow time on Thursday (2230 UTC on Wednesday) due to a “technical problem” at a compression station.

pic.twitter.com/Dh1nwjJg7f

— Gazprom (@GazpromEN) June 15, 2022

Tuesday, the company announced that it would cut supplies through the same undersea pipeline from 167 to up to 100 million cubic meters per day.

As a result of the delayed delivery of equipment to German company Siemens for repairs, Gazprom initially blamed this delay on the company.

Earlier this week, Siemens Energy said the delay in returning the equipment to Gazprom was due to the fact they were taken to Canada for a scheduled overhaul and have not been returned due to Ottawa’s sanctions against Russia.

Robert Habeck, Germany’s economy minister and Vice-Chancellor, said the move was intended to drive up prices.

“It is obviously a strategy to unsettle and drive up prices,” he said on Wednesday, adding, “We can currently buy the necessary quantities from the market, albeit at higher prices.”

Germany’s gas supplies are secure, according to the Greens politician. Nevertheless, he added, “the current situation also shows the need to conserve energy.”

Habeck said earlier on Wednesday the decision was clearly “politically motivated” rather than a result of technical difficulties.

Despite the war in Ukraine, the EU has been trying to reduce its dependence on Russian energy.

Despite a decline in demand for gas with the end of winter, Europe is racing to prepare for the next winter as prices soar and uncertainty grows.

Nord Stream 1 is the older of the two gas pipelines running from Russia to Germany. It is the main pipeline for Russian gas to Europe, especially since the Ukrainian transit of Russian gas has been reduced since the war.

In response to Russian aggression toward Ukraine, Germany has halted the launch of the newer pipeline, Nord Stream 2.

Over the past few weeks, Russia has cut off its gas deliveries to a number of European countries over a currency dispute. Russia wanted its “unfriendly countries” to pay in rubles, but European countries refused and imposed sanctions on Russia because of its war in Ukraine.

#economy news #energy crisis #eu energy crisis #eu energy shortages #eu gas crisis #eu-russia relations #Germany's gas supplies #Nord Stream 1 #nord stream 2 #Robert Habeck #Russia #Russia Ukraine War #Russian energy giant Gazprom #Russian gas to Europe #Sanctions Against Russia #Siemens Energy #The Times Groupe #Times Of Ocean #Ukraine #Unravel News #world energy crisis #Politics

[39dreams]

EU Gives Companies Go - Ahead To Buy Gas From Russia

EU Gives Companies Go – Ahead To Buy Gas From Russia

Union said companies can keep buying gas without breaching sanctions, as it softened its stance in a standoff with Moscow over energy supplies. The European Commission sent its revised guidelines to member states on Friday, a spokesperson said on Monday. In the updated recommendations, it said companies should make a clear statement that they consider their obligations fulfilled once they pay in…

View On WordPress

#EU #EU companies #Euro #European union #Gas supply to Europe #Germany #Poland #Rubles #Russian gas #Sanctions against Russia

[ms-boogie-man]

Yesterday, Joe Biden signed off on economic sanctions against the state of Texas disallowing that republic from exporting LNG (liquid natural gas)

The first act in a state of war is always sanctions

I know what you are thinking,

Angie, the Biden admin only put a temporary pause on the pending approvals of LNG exports

The Biden admin's move is designed to act as a sanction against Texas… make no mistake

HERE

The export of LNG from Texas would likely be bound for countries in the EU; Germany, for example. Guess where Germany will get their LNG from… Russia Why would Biden do such of a thingy? Think Hunter… think Burisma Holdings

The Constitution of the United States of America was put in place to protect us from people like Joe Biden, Barrack Hussein Obama, George H W Bush, Paul Ryan, James Comey, and the Clintons; just to name a few

Angie/Maddie🦇❥✝︎🇺🇸

#Texas #sanctions #Joe Biden #fjb #dictator #treason #solo roba di angie #non solo roba da angie #vampire #born a witch #here i am #2a #1a

[itsyveinthesky]

I am so tired fo this "but no one cares when it happens to Palestinians" thetoric. Who is "no one"? There is always a reaction when Israel commits atrocities against Palestinians. On social media as well as in politics unless you see the "West" really only as the US.

Look at the UN resocultions filed against Israel.

Is the situation in Gaza still absollutely horrible? Yes. But it's not like everyon stands around applauding Israel's actions. In the EU there is a ban on produce from the Jewish settlements.

The world didn't even sanction Russia when it invaded Ukraine in 2014 or Georgia before that. What kind of reaction do you want.

Anyone with half a brain and a bit of emotional distance knows that this situation is completely fucked for both sides and there is no solution that is going to be thrashed out in a tumblr comment.

Multiple peace conferences and governments have tried to mediate peace, but nah, tumblr nacho cheese fingers over here is going to convince you why either Israel of the Palestinians are justified in their actions.

If you try to justify the killing of innocents. The people being shot in airraid shelters. That boy whose throat was cut on camera.

The German women who visited the desert rave festival and was last seen desecrated on a pick up truck, people lining up to spit on her corpse while shouting "God is Great".

(How do you justify storming a concert? How is that a legitimate target, how fucked up do you have to be.)

The Nepalese exchange students that were taken hostage and killed.

If you justify rape and the intentional killing of children as legitimate revenge then you are lost.

I don't want to interact with you ever again.

#israel palestine conflict #israel #palestine #tw: death #tw: violence

[mariacallous]

With the second anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion approaching in February and the European continent in the grip of deep winter, the Kremlin is redoubling its attacks against Ukraine on land and from the skies. While Russia appears to have regained the initiative along the ground front, its recent territorial gains remain minimal and have come at a terrible price in troops and materiel. Russia’s air campaign, however, has ramped up across Ukraine at levels not seen since last spring’s bombing offensive. Moscow is deploying massive, serial waves of drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles — an increasing number of which are supplied by Iran and North Korea.

However, unlike last year’s winter, when Russia was mostly assaulting Ukraine’s energy and heating infrastructure, it is now pursuing a double strategy of sowing terror by striking civilian housing and destroying high-value defense industrial targets. Ukraine’s air defenses used to reliably intercept most of Russia’s bombs, but they are now struggling in winter weather against much more sophisticated attacks designed to wear them out.

Having put the Russian economy on a war footing, increased its military budget and domestic weapons production, evaded sanctions, and cultivated talks with Pyongyang and Tehran to keep supplies of drones and missiles flowing, the Kremlin is clearly expecting to make its onslaught last past the U.S. elections in November. Hardly a day goes by without a senior Russian official or state media threatening the obliteration of Ukraine as a nation.

Meanwhile, Congress is holding up Biden’s $60 billion pledge of aid to Ukraine, and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is blocking a €50 billion (approximately $55 billion) support package promised by the European Union. NATO partners have struggled to fulfill their commitments to increase the production of ammunition so desperately needed by Ukraine; the EU has failed since the summer to agree on stocking up the European Peace Facility, a fund created to facilitate joint weapons acquisitions. Ukraine’s Western supporters also continue to fight over the legality of using Russia’s frozen central bank reserves to help Kyiv finance a battle for survival, which according to Berkeley economist Yuriy Gorodnichenko is costing it an estimated $1 billion to 1.5 billion per day.

Yet the news is by no means all bad. In December, the EU’s heads of government decided to open membership accession discussions with Kyiv. Germany and the United Kingdom have announced they will increase their funding, respectively, to $8.5 billion (doubling current funding by more than $4 billion) and $3 billion (an increase of $216 million over last year). The European External Action Service (the EU’s foreign ministry) will audit weapons deliveries by the bloc’s member states. Ahead of the second anniversary of the full-scale invasion and a European Council meeting on February 1, European leaders are readying new sanctions against Russia; EU officials are also hopeful that, to get an additional €50 billion in aid to Kyiv, they can either strike a deal with Orbán or deploy an off-budget plan to bypass his opposition.

The national security advisors of 83 countries attended a recent meeting that was hosted by neutral Switzerland in cooperation with Kyiv on a Ukrainian peace plan — including a significant number from the Global South, where numerous countries have been inclined to sympathize with Russia At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy received a warm reception from world leaders. U.S. President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, promised that the United States and its partners would continue to stand by Zelenskyy.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

March 29, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

MAR 30, 2024

On Wednesday the nonprofit, nonpartisan Institute for the Study of War published a long essay explaining that Russia’s only strategy for success in Ukraine is to win the disinformation war in which it is engaged. While the piece by Nataliya Bugayova and Frederick W. Kagan, with Katryna Stepanenko, focused on Russia’s war against Ukraine, the point it makes about Russia’s information operation against Western countries applies more widely.

The authors note that the countries allied behind Ukraine dwarf Russia, with relative gross domestic products of $63 trillion and $1.9 trillion, respectively, while those countries allied with Russia are not mobilizing to help Russian president Vladimir Putin. Russia cannot defeat Ukraine or the West, they write, if the West mobilizes its resources.

This means that the strategy that matters most for the Kremlin is not the military strategy, but rather the spread of disinformation that causes the West to back away and allow Russia to win. That disinformation operation echoes the Russian practice of getting a population to believe in a false reality so that voters will cast their ballots for the party of oligarchs. In this case, in addition to seeding the idea that Ukraine cannot win and that the Russian invasion was justified, the Kremlin is exploiting divisions already roiling U.S. politics. 

It is, for example, playing on the American opposition to sending our troops to fight “forever” wars, a dislike ingrained in the population since the Vietnam War. But the U.S. is not fighting in Ukraine. Ukrainians are asking only for money and matériel, and their war is not a proxy war—they are fighting for their own reasons—although their victory could well prevent U.S. engagement elsewhere in the future. The Kremlin is also playing on the idea that aid to Ukraine is too expensive as the U.S. faces large budget deficits, but the U.S. contribution to Ukraine’s war effort in 2023 was less than 0.5% of the defense budget. 

Russian propaganda is also changing key Western concepts of war, suggesting, for example, that Ukrainian surrender will bring peace when, in fact, the end of fighting will simply take away Ukrainians’ ability to protect themselves against Russian violence. The authors note that Russia is using Americans’ regard for peace, life, American interests, freedom of debate, and responsible foreign relations against the U.S.

The authors’ argument parallels that of political observers in the U.S. and elsewhere: Russian actors have amplified the power of a relatively small, aggressive country by leveraging disinformation. 

The European Union will hold parliamentary elections in June, and on Wednesday the Czech government sanctioned a news site called Voice of Europe, saying it was part of a pro-Russian propaganda operation. It also sanctioned the man running the site, Artyom Marchevsky, as well as Putin ally Viktor Medvedchuk, a Ukrainian oligarch, saying Medvedchuk was running a “Russian influence operation” through Voice of Europe.

The far right has been rising in Europe, and Nicholas Vinocur, Pieter Haeck, and Eddy Wax of Politico noted that “Voice of Europe’s YouTube page throws up a parade of EU lawmakers, many of them belonging to far-right, Euroskeptic parties, who line up to bash the Green Deal, predict the Union’s imminent collapse, or attack Ukraine.”

Belgian security services were in on the investigation, and on Thursday, Belgian prime minister Alexander De Croo added that Russian operatives had paid European Union lawmakers to parrot Russian propaganda. Intelligence sources told Czech media that Voice of Europe paid politicians from Belgium, France, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, and Poland to influence the upcoming E.U. elections. Germany’s Der Spiegel newspaper said the money was paid in cash or cryptocurrency. 

Czech prime minister Petr Fiala wrote on social media: “We have uncovered a pro-Russian network that was developing an operation to spread Russian influence and undermine security across Europe.” "This shows how great the risk of foreign influence is," Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte told journalists. "It's a threat to our democracy, to our free elections, to our freedom of speech, to everything."

There are reasons to think the same disinformation process is underway in the United States. Not only do MAGA Republicans, including House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), parrot Russian talking points about Ukraine, but Russian disinformation has also been a key part of the House Republicans’ attempt to impeach President Joe Biden. 

Republicans spent months touting Alexander Smirnov’s allegation that Biden had accepted foreign bribes, with Representative James Comer (R-KY) and Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) calling his evidence “verifiable” and “valuable.” In February the Department of Justice indicted Smirnov for creating a false record, days before revealing that he was in close contact with “Russian intelligence agencies” and was “actively peddling new lies that could impact U.S. elections.”  

On March 19, former Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas testified about the investigation into Biden’s alleged corruption before the House Oversight Committee at the request of the Democrats. Parnas was part of the attempt to create dirt on Biden before the 2020 election, and he explained how the process worked.  

“The only information ever pushed about the Bidens and Ukraine has come from Russia and Russian agents,” Parnas said, and was part of “a much larger plan for Russia to crush Ukraine by infiltrating the United States.” Politicians and right-wing media figures, including then-representative Devin Nunes (R-CA), Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), The Hill reporter John Solomon, Fox News Channel personality Sean Hannity, and other FNC hosts, knew the narrative was false, Parnas said, even as they echoed it. He suggested that they were permitting “Russia to use our government for malicious purposes, and to reward selfish people with ill-gotten gains.” 

The attempt to create a false reality—whether by foreign operatives or homegrown ones—seems increasingly obvious in perceptions of the 2024 election. There has been much chatter, for example, about polls showing Trump ahead of Biden. But the 2022 polls were badly skewed rightward by partisan actors, and Democrat Marilyn Lands’s overwhelming victory over her Republican opponent in an Alabama House election this week suggests those errors have not yet been fully addressed.

Real measures of political enthusiasm appear to favor Biden and the Democrats. On Wednesday, Molly Cook Escobar, Albert Sun, and Shane Goldmacher of the New York Times reported that since leaving office, Trump has spent more than $100 million on legal fees alone. He is badly in need of money, and his reordering of the funding priorities of the Republican National Committee to put himself first means that the party is badly in need of money, too.

Donors’ awareness that their cash will go to Trump before funding other Republican candidates might well slow fundraising. Certainly, small-donor contributions to Trump have dropped off significantly: Brian Schwartz of CNBC reported last week that “[i]n 2023, Trump’s reelection campaign raised 62.5% less money from small-dollar donors than it did in 2019, the year before the last presidential election.”  

Billionaires Liz and Dick Uihlein have recently said they will back Trump, and Alexandra Ulmer of Reuters reported on Tuesday that other billionaires had pooled the money to back Trump’s then–$454 million appeal bond before an appeals court reduced it. But Ulmer also noted that there might be a limit to such gifts, as they “could draw scrutiny from election regulators or federal prosecutors if the benefactors were to give Trump amounts exceeding campaign contribution limits. While the payment would not be a direct donation to Trump's campaign, federal laws broadly define political contributions as ‘anything of value’ provided to a campaign.”

Meanwhile, the fundraising of Biden and the Democrats is breaking records. Last night, in New York City, former presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama joined Biden onstage with television personality Stephen Colbert, along with event host Mindy Kaling and musical guests Queen Latifah, Lizzo, and Ben Platt. The 5,000-person event raised an eye-popping amount—more than $25 million—and the campaign noted that, unlike donations to Trump, every dollar raised would go to the campaign.

In his remarks, Biden said that the grassroots nature of the Democrats’ support showed in the number of people who have contributed so far to his campaign: 1.5 million in all, including 550,000 “brand-new contributors in the last couple of weeks.” Ninety-seven percent of the donations have been less than $200. 

Tonight, Adrienne Watson, the spokesperson for the National Security Council, the president’s primary forum for national security and foreign policy, pointed to Russia’s devastating recent attacks on Ukraine’s energy grid and called again for Speaker Johnson to bring up the bipartisan national security supplemental bill providing aid to Ukraine that the Senate passed in February. She warned: “Ukraine’s need is urgent, and we cannot afford any further delays.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#War in Ukraine #Russian disinformation #Heather Cox Richardson #Letters From An American #Russia #Putin #Mike Luckovich #National Security #propaganda wars #Right Wing propaganda

[warsofasoiaf]

Mearsheimer Realism

Do you have a take on the realist school of though seen from people like John Mearsheimer? Was listening to an interview he did that made some interesting points about ethics vs realism in foreign policy as well as the end of the unipolar world situation following the cold war. Boiled down to we need to concede on Ukraine and get Russia more aligned with the west to contain China, its not possible to do both and China is more of a threat. I can see the value of this kind of arguments but its very much at odds with some of the more morally informed view about the US opposing tyrants and smaller nations rights etc that you have at times expressed on the blog and I wanted to know if you had a take. 

In short: it’s wrong, and despite being named “realism” is grounded in fiction.

For one, the growing Russia-China alliance was always going to happen. As Russia declined further into geopolitical irrelevance, Putin’s choice was to either fade away or attempt to force a return to the past by acting as the champion of a bloc to resurrect the old Cold War. He opted for the latter, and given Russia’s anemic GDP, its only recourse was to act as a bully on the world stage. To hope for Russian support against China is a fantasy - China and Russia’s growing closeness grows out of a desire to push other countries out of what they see as their spheres of influence. Even a Russia that was downright hostile to China would demand US withdrawal from Eastern Europe. If the point of realism is that countries govern according to their national interests, power politics, and self-preservation, then Russia is always going to seek confrontation with the United States because the US, EU, and NATO emerged as a credible and desirable alternative to the Russian sphere of influence after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

For two, Russia has used a variety of coercive measures against its neighbors for decades, attempting to export instability and maintain a stranglehold on the near-abroad. Under the Mearsheimer model, Russia started to be provoked with the 2008 increased NATO dialogues with Ukraine (and Georgia), but Russia had already been meddling in Ukraine years earlier, attempting to rig the 2004-2005 elections or enacting energy sanctions against Kyiv for not showing enough deference to Moscow throughout the 1990′s and early 2000′s. From the get-go, Russia is a perennially paranoid, hostile world actor attempting to export instability as a means to preserve its own influence as opposed to a sober, rational actor that sought to preserve its own power. So to expect them to align themselves and act as a good-faith actor is a pipe dream.

So yeah, it’s not only wrong from an idealistic perspective, but from a practical one as well. Should someone like Ramaswamy (who also argues for this) get into power, Putin will laugh, take everything they’re willing to give away, and continue turning his nation into a Chinese client-state all out of a vain desire to recreate the old Cold War where Russia mattered.

Thanks for the question, Esq.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

#foreign policy #international relations #russia

[valtunk]

Putin support Trump, Trump support Netanyahu, and Hamas support Putin. That's because Hamas fighters are very naive. And that naiveness is the root cause of Gaza genocide.

Victor Orban, hungarian prime minister block any EU sanction against Russia and any military help for Ukraine. So he is obviously Putin's guy. But he also block any sanctions against israeli settlers in the West Bank. So Putin obviously support israeli side, not palestinian. He just use Hamas for his special purposes.

The only purpose of Hamas attack on October 7, 2023. was to give excuse to Netanyahu to make genocide in Gaza that is just going on.

[christiansinglebabes]

This genocide has started way before oct 7th, israel is an occupying force that's been oppressing Palestinians for at least 50 years.

The 20% Palestinian population living in israel is subjected to apartheid, police violence and displacement from their homes.

They are not recognized as citizens, the ppl in gaza and the westbank cannot vote in israeli elections despite israel controlling those regions.

Gaza has been under siege for 16 years now. They've been controlling who goes in and out, Palestinians have to ask for permission to leave their cities even if they want to access medical care that isnt provided in gaza due to sanctions by israel.

Why does the financial interest of israel and its ally's trump the right of palestinian freedom? When the money they are making from military technologie is tested on the palestinians? Whats worse is that bombing of gaza has not just taken 33.000 lives, it has also poisoned and destroyed the land that israel claims it has a spiritual right to!

A land already drenched in the blood of thousands of palestinians spilled during and since the inception of israel in 1948. It has poisoned their future and made sure gaza will have to depend on aid for years and maybe even decades to come.

That is why Palestinians need to be able to return to their stolen land and they have a right to return home, even beyond legality israel is an ethno state that guarantees citizenship to -anyone- of the jewish faith even if they have no connection to the land.

What is the point of the UN and EU if we dont use our power to protect human rights everywhere, members of the UN like germany, france, USA and Britain actively funding the bombing of civilians, while claiming solidarity with the victims.

All this talking behind the scenes is doing nothing! Rn netanyahu is pulling back his forces from the south of gaza so they can take a nap, see their families, have a little snack and then go into rafah and kill the remaining 2.2 million Palestinians they told to flee there.

I am ashamed to be paying taxes in germany when that money is used for destruction instead of for the german population and I'm sick of the hypocrisy of western powers who have been exploiting africa and the middle east for decades while simultaneously condemning any and all resistance by the ppl they've oppressed labeling them terrorists.

Is the german state not a terrorist organization? Isnt the USA? Isnt NATO? Why is it that only the people that fight back against their opression with the same violence they've been shown by you are labeled terrorists.

Why was it so easy for you to condemn Russia in its attack on ukraine but you cant condemn israel for this genocide? I can tell you why, because Russia is an enemy and israel is a friend of yours. You only condemn oppressive states when it serves you and when the victims are white.

And while Netanyahu is a tyrant that needs to be dethroned dont be fooled, the issue with Israel is not Netanjahu, racist israeli society is what allowed a monster like him to power. His opposition are zionists just like him that are gleefully watching gaza be turned to dust and are happy to take over once netanyahu steps down, blame only him for the genocide and return to the status quo of opression of the west bank and gaza. 70% of israelis think the military actions taken in gaza are justified and the reason for that is because the only way to rationalize the existence of israel in Palestinian land is by assuming every palestinian is a threat to jewish life, that way no amount of cruelty is unjustified and can be done in self defense.

Why is it so hard to call this a genocide when Israeli officials have clearly stated on multiple occasions that their plan is to eliminate the possiblity of a palestinian state by killing or displacing the Palestinians, idf soldiers are filming snuff films and gleefully parade around womens underwear they stole out of the homes of the dead. How can you support a country like that?

When that support is putting world peace in danger by signaling that all these international laws here to protect us are all just suggestions you can ignore if you have enough money and allies.

U ask us to condemn hamas when u wont condemn the anti-apartheid state of israel, when hamas wouldnt exist without opression of the palestinians by israel.

While u sit in government trying to placate us with useless discussions and pretty words , children are being blown to pieces or left completely orphaned and severely physically and mentally disabled. Do u understand the impact this will have on the palestinian ppl even after this genocide ends? Do u really think they wont grow up hateful and resentful towards Israel? And can u blame them when they do? Now noone is arguing that hamas shouldnt be prosecuted for the human rights violations on oct 7th, however this one sided war on terror that doesnt rightfully classify the acts of western powers and their extensions in the middle east and africa as terror is hypocritical and an insult to our intelligence. This is not an equal struggle between israel and hamas, it is an ethnic cleansing of palestinians.

And to the media and politicians bastardizing the meaning of antisemitism, Criticizing Israel is not antisemitic, and saying that israel and jews are one and the same is what actually promotes antisemitism. Israel is a country and like every country it has to abide by international law,

Israel has been lying to its visitors and citizens since its inception, the jews who come to visit and the jewish israelis have been made to believe by zionists that israel is the only place they can be safe from antisemitism. But that couldnt be further from the truth, by israel declaring itself synonymous with the jewish ppl and their struggle while committing atrocities they are putting the global jewish community at risk and feeds the antisemitic conspiracy theories of a jewish opressive elite. We dont need an ethno state that pretends all jews are homogeneous, what we need is to make sure that jewish ppl are safe worldwide

Europe made this world unsafe for jews, Arabs and jews are not enemies,we are allies, my father grew up in a jewish neighboorhood in morroco and my best friend is jewish, she is my heart and she is my soul and I will not allow israel to drag her name and the name of jews through the mud!

A permanent ceasefire is not an end of what we demand and what the palestinians deserve, it is the bare minimum. And we will not allow the world to quietly reinstate support for israel after this genocide is over, we want an end to apartheid an end to occupation! We want palestinian freedom, from the river to the sea. We want right of return from the river to the sea, and we want a palestine where israelis and Palestinians have equal rights, from the river to the sea!

#gaza #palestine #thoughts #all eyes on rafah #free palestine #free gaza

[nicklloydnow]

“When we spoke this week, she made clear that the decision of whether Ukraine wins or loses is now on us — almost entirely. As Congress debates how much more money to authorize for Ukraine’s assistance amid growing Republican opposition, she says that what we are really debating is our own future. Do we want to live in the kind of world that will result if Ukraine loses?

Hill is clear about her answer. A world in which Putin chalks up a win in Ukraine is one where the U.S.’s standing in the world is diminished, where Iran and North Korea are emboldened, where China dominates the Indo-Pacific, where the Middle East becomes more unstable and where nuclear proliferation takes off, among allies as well as enemies.

“Ukraine has become a battlefield now for America and America’s own future — whether we see it or not — for our own defensive posture and preparedness, for our reputation and our leadership,” she told me. “For Putin, Ukraine is a proxy war against the United States, to remove the United States from the world stage.”

(…)

“The problem is that many members of Congress don’t want to see President Biden win on any front,” she said. “People are incapable now of separating off ‘giving Biden a win’ from actually allowing Ukraine to win. They are thinking less about U.S. national security, European security, international security and foreign policy, and much more about how they can humiliate Biden.”

“In that regard,” she continued, “whether they like it or not, members of Congress are doing exactly the same thing as Vladimir Putin. They hate that. They want to refute that. But Vladimir Putin wants Biden to lose, and they want Biden to be seen to lose as well.”

(…)

Ukraine has succeeded so far because of massive military support from European allies and other partners. So in that regard, we’ve now reached a tipping point between whether Ukraine continues to win in terms of having sufficient fighting power to stave Russia off, or whether it actually starts to lose because it doesn’t have the equipment, the heavy weaponry, the ammunition. That external support is going to be determinative.

(…)

It’s a question of whether Ukraine has enough resources, financial resources, not just to keep going on the battlefield, but also to keep the country together at home. And up until now you’re still seeing a lot of European countries stepping up. Not just you know, the United States, but definitely the EU, Japan, South Korea and others. Japan recently made an offer of additional major financial support. The Germans have said that they’ll make sure that the Ukrainian economy will continue to not just survive, but thrive, and over the longer term, they’ll help rebuild. This is still somewhat positive.

On the political side, however, we’ve got the problems of the policy battlefields on the domestic front. Ukraine has now become a domestic political issue in a whole range of countries, not just here in the United States, but in countries like Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Germany and many more. And that’s an issue where it’s going to be very hard for Ukraine to win. Because when you get into the transactional issues of domestic politics, and you’re no longer thinking about national security, or these larger imperatives, then Ukraine dies a thousand deaths from all of the transactional efforts that domestic politicians engage in. Most political constituents, no matter the country, can’t really see beyond their own narrow interests.

(…)

One thing that we need to bear in mind here is that Putin turned for assistance to two countries that should give Americans and members of Congress pause — Iran and North Korea. Russia has had significant shortfalls of ammunition and sophisticated technology because of sanctions and other constraints. Ammunition has come from North Korea, which continues to provide Russia with all kinds of rounds for shells, and Iran has stepped up with the production of drones. Iran and North Korea both see this as a kind of international opening for them. If Russia prevails on the battlefield, you can be sure that Iran and North Korea will get benefits from this. We already see Russia shifting its position on the Iranian nuclear front, and we also see Russia making a major shift in its relationship with Israel. Putin has gone from being a major supporter of Israel, to now an opponent, and has switched from what was always very careful public rhetoric about Israel to pretty antisemitic statements. Putin never denigrated Jews in the past. On the contrary, he presented himself as a supporter of the Jewish population. This is a dramatic shift and clearly because of Iran. Now, whether Iran asked Putin to do this, I honestly can’t say, but we can all see this deepening relationship between Russia and Iran. That is a real problem for the administration and for others who are now looking at the Middle East and trying to figure out how to stop a broader war with Lebanon, with the Houthis in Yemen, and all of the Iranian proxies, because Iran and Russia have become fused together now in two conflicts.

(…)

But it’s not just China and Russia who are learning from this war. So are we. We’ve seen the impact of drone warfare and we’re thinking about how we deal with this ourselves. We’ve been kind of shocked to see how much wars like this take up ammunition stocks — this is not the type of war that we’ve fought for a very long time. When we’re thinking about our own defense, our own national security, we need to be looking very carefully at this conflict. The way that Putin has played with the idea of using tactical nuclear weapons, the use of drones on the battlefield, the use of mines, the use of ships and blockades in the Black Sea, the difficulty of pushing forward in a counteroffensive against these deep entrenchments, how various military systems including defensive equipment actually perform in real time and conditions. We can see how effective our ATACMS were, for example, our Patriot batteries. This is, in a way, a proving ground for our own equipment.

(…)

Well, there’ll be multiple ways he will define it, one of which is defeating the United States, politically, psychologically and symbolically. If the United States doesn’t pass the supplemental [bill to approve aid to Ukraine], and we get this chorus of members of Congress calling for the United States to pull away from Ukraine, Putin will be able to switch this around and say, “There you go. The United States is an unreliable ally. The United States is not a world leader.” And there will be a chilling effect for all our other allies. In the past, Putin has actually, for example, approached the Japanese and said, “Look, we can be your interlocutor with China. The United States is not going to be there to assist you in a crunch.” And that’s certainly what this is going to look like. The Japanese, the South Koreans, the Vietnamese, others that we have bilateral treaties with, are going to wonder, “OK, the United States made such a push here to support Ukraine, along with other European members of NATO, and now they’ve just walked away from it.” And you put that on top of Afghanistan and the withdrawal, also the withdrawal from Iraq, withdrawal from Syria, and the whole fraught history of United States interventions in the last two decades, and Putin will be able to present a pretty potent narrative about the United States’ inability to maintain its commitments and forfeiting its role as an international leader. So that that becomes a major political win.

(…)

We’ll be at each others’ throats. There’ll be no way in which this is going to turn out well. There’ll be a lot of frustration on the part of people who thought that this was the easier option when we reel from crisis to crisis. There’ll also be the shame, frankly, and the disgrace of having let the Ukrainians down. I think it would create a firestorm of recrimination. And it will also embolden so many other actors to take their own steps.

One key challenge is going to be the nuclear front. There’s several different ways in which we can look at the nuclear front. There’s the moral imperative. We pushed Ukraine to give up the nuclear weapons that it had inherited from the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. And we gave assurances along with the United Kingdom, that Ukraine would not end up in the situation that it is in now. We guaranteed its territorial integrity and sovereignty and independence and also assured Ukraine that we would step up to help. This opens up a whole can of worms related first to the moral jeopardy of this, that we obviously don’t stick to our word.

But also in terms of nuclear weapons, we could face proliferation issues with Japan, South Korea, other countries — even NATO countries who currently see themselves covered under the U.S. nuclear umbrella. They will start to worry about how much we would actually support them when they needed it, and how vulnerable they are to pressure or attack by another nuclear power. Think about the dynamics between India and Pakistan, for example, or China and India, or China and South Korea and Japan; and the predicament of leaders in other countries who will be thinking right now that, “I’m going to be extremely vulnerable — so perhaps I should be getting my own nuclear weapon.” You’re hearing talk about this in Germany, for example. You hear it all the time in places like Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, we know that they have nuclear aspirations. So this opens up a whole set of different discussions.

(…)

That it’s actually being spent at home! That’s the irony. Because every time you send a weapon to the Ukrainians, it’s an American weapon. You’re not buying somebody else’s weapons to go to Ukraine. It’s also a fraction of our defense budget.

It’s really a circular process here. We are providing weapons to Ukraine, we’re buying them from major manufacturers of defense systems here in the United States, which are obviously providing jobs for the people who are making them. And then we’re going back and we’re ordering more because we’re replenishing and upgrading our own weapons stocks. This is all part of our own system. These defense manufacturers account for huge numbers of jobs across the whole of the United States, so arming Ukraine means significant job creation and retention across the United States and also in Europe and elsewhere.

People in Congress know that, it’s just that they’re playing a different game. They want to play up this issue of “it should be spent at home” because of the transactional nature of congressional supplemental bills.

Let’s just put it frankly — this is all about the upcoming presidential election. It’s less about Ukraine and it’s more about the fact that we have an election coming up next year. The problem is that many members of Congress don’t want to see President Biden win on any front. People are incapable now of separating off “giving Biden a win” from actually allowing Ukraine to win. They are thinking less about U.S. national security, European security, international security and foreign policy, and much more about how they can humiliate Biden.

In that regard, whether they like it or not, members of Congress are doing exactly the same thing as Vladimir Putin. They hate that. They want to refute that. But Vladimir Putin wants Biden to lose, and they want Biden to be seen to lose as well.

For Vladimir Putin now Ukraine has become a proxy war. It’s not a proxy war by the United States against Russia. We’re trying to get Russia out of Ukraine, period. But for Putin, Ukraine is a proxy war against the United States, to remove the United States from the world stage. He’s trying to use Gaza, and Israel like that now, as well. He’s trying to whip up anti-United States sentiment wherever he can. I’ve just come back from Europe and from a whole host of conferences where there’s just so much rage and grievance about the United States and Putin is fanning the flames.

Putin sees Biden as a major opponent. He is an obstacle for Putin to be able to win on the battlefield of Ukraine. So Putin wants Biden to fail. Putin would be thrilled if Trump would come back to power because he also anticipates that Trump will pull the United States out of NATO, that Trump will rupture the U.S. alliance system, and that Trump will hand over Ukraine. So right at this particular moment, Putin sees an awful lot that he can get out of undermining Biden’s position.

Now, the problem, of course, is that currently many members of Congress and others are thinking about whether they want to run to be vice president for Trump, and what they should perhaps do now to support Trump and pave the way for his presidency. So the idea of giving Biden anything that could positively affect the election is just a bridge too far.

(…)

We’re not doing anything to put Putin in political jeopardy. We’re just fighting with ourselves all the time. And we can’t see past that. Biden’s got to try to help Ukraine, but can he get enough people to see past the election and also see the jeopardy we are in? We are in peril. We don’t see it. There’s such an anti-American wave that’s out there in the world. People want to see America fail and pulled down to size.

Ukraine has become a battlefield now, for America and America’s own future — whether we see it or not — for our own defensive posture and preparedness, for our reputation and our leadership.

American leadership is still very important. But other countries are starting to make plans for a world without us at this particular point. And you can be sure that Vladimir Putin, and President Xi and many others will be pretty ecstatic if we give up on Ukraine. And that could happen just as soon as December or January, because if Congress goes home for the holidays without passing the supplemental, and everyone’s back in their constituencies, there’s a lot of stuff that can happen in their absence, in that vacuum, that void that we have created. Everybody else in the rest of the world would be wondering, not just, “Where is America?” but, “What on earth has happened to America?” And if President Trump thinks that he’s going to be the leader of the free world when he comes back into office — well, think again. There won’t be a free world to be leading at all. And that’s not an overstatement. That’s just a fact.

(…)

So the best case scenario is, of course, one in which Ukraine continues to be able to hold its own and if we helped build it up militarily, where it can make another push or another series of pushes. If we think about World War Two and other wars, there were multiple offensive efforts, counteroffensives, and you just kept on trying until you succeeded. It will be very difficult to have an absolute victory over Russia. But what you want to have is Ukraine in a position to have a negotiation, a diplomatic solution, on its terms, not on Russia’s terms. A solution in which Ukraine is recognized as the party in the right, as the aggrieved party by the whole of the international community, and where Ukraine is, if not completely in territory, but materially and in every other way possible, made whole.

Another aspect of having this war resolved on Ukraine’s terms is that Russia is going to have to pay for or contribute to the reconstruction of Ukraine in some fashion. That is another major reason why Putin would see the U.S. and its allies stepping back as a major win, because then there’d be no leverage whatsoever or pressure put on Russia for rebuilding Ukraine. Russia could just step back, wash its hands of all of this and let everybody else fix what it broke.

So the best possible outcome here, beyond Ukraine being able to prevail on the battlefield, is a negotiated settlement that is in Ukraine’s favor, that leads to commitments to its security and reconstruction, and leads to some soul searching in Russia. That’s not going to happen under these current circumstances. The only way that that happens is when Russia believes that everybody else has the fortitude and staying power for this conflict. And right now, that’s not what we’re displaying at all. Actually, we’re looking pretty pathetic, I can’t think of any other way to describe it. And for Putin, this is just such a gift. This is such a gift.

(…)

He’s about to, and it’s on us. We’re at the point where it’s on us. If we leave the field, then he will win. His calculation is that our domestic politics and our own interests override everything, and that we no longer have a sense of national security, or of our role in international affairs. This is a moment for him to get rid of not just Pax Americana, but America as a major global player.

(…)

The decision is ours, this decision is entirely ours. We’re just falling all over ourselves to engage in self-harm at the moment. Ukraine shouldn’t be a partisan issue. I just hope that people are going to be able to dig deep, and realize the moment that they’re in.”

“The skeptics are correct that our recent counteroffensive did not achieve the lightning-fast liberation of occupied land, as the Ukrainian military managed in the fall of 2022 in the Kharkiv region and the city of Kherson. Observers, including some in Ukraine, anticipated similar results over the past several months, and when immediate success did not materialize, many succumbed to doom and gloom. But pessimism is unwarranted, and it would be a mistake to let defeatism shape our policy decisions going forward. Instead, policymakers in Washington and other capitals should keep the big picture in mind and stay on track. A Ukrainian victory will require strategic endurance and vision—as with our recent counteroffensive, the liberation of every square mile of territory requires enormous sacrifice by our soldiers—but there is no question that victory is attainable.

(…)

The current phase of the war is not easy for Ukraine or for our partners. Everyone wants quick, Hollywood-style breakthroughs on the battlefield that will bring a quick collapse of Russia’s occupation. Although our objectives will not be reached overnight, continued international support for Ukraine will, over time, ensure that local counteroffensives achieve tangible results on the frontlines, gradually destroying Russian forces and thwarting Putin’s plans for a protracted war.

Some skeptics counter that although such goals are just, they simply aren’t achievable. In fact, our objectives will remain militarily feasible as long as three factors are in place: adequate military aid, including jets, drones, air defense, artillery rounds, and long-range capabilities that allow us to strike deep behind enemy lines; the rapid development of industrial capacity in the United States and Europe as well as in Ukraine, both to cover Ukraine’s military needs and to replenish U.S. and European defense stocks; and a principled and realistic approach to the prospect of negotiations with Russia.

With these elements in place, our effort will bring marked progress on the frontlines. Yet that requires not veering off course and concluding that the fight is hopeless simply because one stage has fallen short of some observers’ expectations. Even with significant challenges, Ukraine has achieved notable results in recent months. We won the battle for the Black Sea and thereby restored a steady flow of maritime exports, benefiting both our economy and global food security. We’ve made gains on the southern front, recently securing a bridgehead on the eastern bank of the Dnieper River. And elsewhere, we have held off enormous Russian assaults and inflicted major losses on Russian forces, including by thwarting their attempts on Avdiivka and Kupiansk. Despite their gargantuan effort, Russian troops failed to secure any gains on the ground.

(…)

The problem is not just that a cease-fire now would reward Russian aggression. Instead of ending the war, a cease-fire would simply pause the fighting until Russia is ready to make another push inland. In the meantime, it would allow Russian occupying troops to reinforce their positions with concrete and minefields, making it nearly impossible to drive them away in the future and condemning millions of Ukrainians to decades of repression under occupation. Russia’s 2024 budget for the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, amounting to 3.2 trillion Russian rubles (around $35 billion), is clear evidence of Moscow’s plan to dig in for the long haul and suppress resistance to Russian occupation authorities.

Moreover, whatever the arguments that such a scenario would be less costly for Ukraine and its partners, the reality is that such a negotiated cease-fire is not even on the table. Between 2014 and 2022, we endured approximately 200 rounds of negotiations with Russia in various formats, as well as 20 attempts to establish a cease-fire in the smaller war that followed Russia’s 2014 illegal annexation of Crimea and occupation of Ukraine’s east. Our partners pressed Moscow to be constructive, and when they ran into the Kremlin’s diplomatic wall, they insisted that Ukraine had to take the “first step,” if only to demonstrate that Russia was the problem. Following this flawed logic, Ukraine made some painful concessions. Where did it lead? To Russia's full-scale attack on February 24, 2022. Declaring yet again that Ukraine must take the first step is both immoral and naive.

(…)

Skeptics also argue that supporting Ukraine’s fight for freedom is too expensive and cannot be sustained indefinitely. We in Ukraine are fully aware of the amounts of assistance that we have received from the United States, European countries, and other allies, and we are immensely grateful to the governments, legislators, and individuals who have extended a helping hand to our country at war. We manage the support in the most transparent and accountable way: U.S. inspectors of military aid to Ukraine have found no evidence of significant waste, fraud, or abuse.

This support is not, and never has been, charity. Every dollar invested in Ukraine’s defense returns clear security dividends for its supporters. It has enabled Ukraine to successfully rebuff Russian aggression and avert a disastrous escalation in Europe. And Ukraine has done all this with American assistance totaling roughly three percent of the annual U.S. defense budget. What is more, most of this money has in fact been spent in the United States, funding the U.S. defense industry, supporting the development of cutting-edge technology, and creating American jobs—a reason that some local business leaders in the United States have publicly opposed withholding or cutting military aid to Ukraine.

Moreover, while the United States is Ukraine’s top defense partner—and Washington’s leadership in rallying support for Ukraine has been exemplary and essential—the United States has hardly borne the burden alone. As NATO’s secretary-general, Jens Stoltenberg, recently noted, other NATO members, including European countries and Canada, account for more than half of Ukraine’s military aid. A number of countries have provided more support as a percentage of GDP than the United States has: the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovakia, and the United Kingdom. Germany's assistance continues to grow, making it Ukraine's largest European supporter in absolute terms.

Attempts by some skeptics to brand Ukraine’s fight for freedom as just another futile “forever war” ignore these facts. Ukraine has never asked for American boots on the ground. The deal is fair: our partners provide us with what we need to win, and we do the rest of the job ourselves, defending not only our borders but also the borders of global democracy.

The United States has spent decades, and hundreds of billions of dollars, building and protecting an international order that could sustain and protect democracy and market economies, thus ensuring security and prosperity for Americans. It would be foolish to give up on that investment now. If democracy is allowed to fall in Ukraine, adversaries of the United States will perceive weakness and understand that aggression pays. The price tag for defending U.S. national security against such threats would be many times higher than the one for supporting Ukraine and could spark decades of global turbulence with an uncertain outcome.

(…)

At the end of last month, I attended a NATO ministerial meeting in Brussels. What struck me most was the disparity between the mood inside the chamber and the mood outside it. On the sidelines, reporters opened their questions by asserting that the war had reached a “stalemate” and that “war fatigue” would cripple support, before wondering why Ukraine wouldn’t offer to trade territory for peace. Yet such defeatist narratives were absent in the official discussions, with ministers making a firm commitment to additional military aid and sustained support.

However prevalent a false narrative of attrition becomes, we should not allow it to set policymaking and our shared strategy on a disastrous course. Nor should we be duped into believing that Moscow is ready for a fair negotiated solution. Opting to accept Putin’s territorial demands and reward his aggression would be an admission of failure, which would be costly for Ukraine, for the United States and its allies, and for the entire global security architecture. Staying the course is a difficult task. But we know how to win, and we will.”

#fiona hill #dmytro kuleba #putin #trump #biden #russia #ukraine #war #nato

[rvps2001]

Russia-Ukraine Daily Briefing

🇷🇺 🇺🇦 Wednesday Briefing:

- Russia recruits Serbs in drive to replenish military forces in Ukraine - Satellite images show Russia increasing nuclear capability in Belarus ----------------------------------------------------------------- - Ukraine uses US long-range missiles to strike Moscow-occupied territories - Biden expected to ask Congress for $100B package that includes aid to Israel and Ukraine - Kakhovka dam destruction inflicted $14B damage and loss on Ukraine - Hungary calls Bulgaria levy on Russia gas transit ‘hostile step’ - EU parliament backs €50B for Ukraine’s recovery - Lithuania repairing Leopard tanks damaged in Ukraine - Canada announces additional sanctions against Russian collaborators in Moldova - Russian Duma takes first step to revoke ratification of nuclear test ban treaty - All 31 Abrams tanks in Ukraine, US military confirms

📨 More news in a daily newsletter: https://russia-ukraine-newsletter.beehiiv.com/subscribe

💬 My socials: https://linktr.ee/rvps2001

#russia ukraine war #ukraine russia war #ukraine war #russian army #russian war crimes #news #newsletter #russia #ukraine

[mariacallous]

France to propose EU-wide sanctions on Russian companies

France will propose EU-wide level sanctions on Russain companies spreading ‘disinformation,’ said French foreign affairs minister, Stephane Sejourne, announced on Tuesday.

“I will propose putting forward a sanctions regime against those who support a regime of disinformation,” said Sejourne, as he held a news conference in Paris with US secretary of state Antony Blinken.

[limelocked]

the more i read about the 2006 palestinian elections via wiki page rabbit holes the more i think the language surrounding it is so EXTREMLY weird considering where we are now with a divided palestinian government where theres not been legislative or presidential elections for soon 18 years even tho the attempt has been made at Least twice and has been embraced by both hamas and fatah in 2021 only for the scheduled election in may the same year to be suspended indefinitely by soon 18 year president abbas whos term was supposed to end 2009

from what im reading hamas and fatah got a ye old american split in 2006 where hamas got 44% of votes and fatah 41% which was a shock for israel and usa who favored fatah, this in itself would have not been a problem if not for

SURPRISE! PEOPLE GETTING INVOLVED THAT HAVE NO RIGHT GETTING INVOLVED!

the quartet on the middle east is a group of the usa, russia, the un, and the eu which for some reason was in charge of mediating between israel and palestine (please observe the usa bush administration in the room with us as well as the marked lack of middle eastern representation within the mediating parties)

the quartet said that the election was free and fair but

where youd fucking think it was the non-violence part that hamas had problems with or the recognizing israel part and maybe it was but im reading the wiki page for the Road Map of peace which is what this is talking about and good fucking god dude its so bad but if you insist on not reading the article which you should its terrible just know that famous war criminal george bush of 9/11 fame and a hardline israeli president (who as defense minister was found by an official israeli enquiry to bear personal responsibility for the Sabra and Shatila massacre) was calling a lot of the shots and being dicks about how palestines parliament should look like and who should get to do all the violence (israel, against palestinians)

so yeah the quartet was kinda asking for a lot and hamas which had branded itself on reform and change to the at the time kinda pathetic government (re: Road Map from 2000-2004 holy shit) said we're not gonna do all that to which fatah said well then were not forming a unity government to which hamas went well were gonna form a government anyways and they did which was followed by a year of tension and conflict between hamas and fatah, international sanctions levied against the palestinian government, and the blockade of gaza (which hamas had not yet taken over)

in 2007 a unity government was created. according to leaked documents authenticated by the guardian and published together with al jazeera; abbas and the PLO conspired to form this government and if it didnt meet the quartets conditions abbas would dissolve government and set up an emergency government, which happened when hamas allied forced and fatah allied forces clashed in gaza, believed by IISS to have started over suspicion by hamas that the fatah allied presidential guard (loyal to abbas and expanded by the us) was going to take over gaza

concluding statements: the way the media talks about this time is either that gaza exclusively voted for hamas without mentioning that hamas won the majority in all of occupied palestine, or its talked about as a coup done for shits and giggles with no contributing factors. whats almost never talked about is the external involvements prior to and after the election

abbas has the constitutional power to call an election as the president, he could just do it still, thats a thing he could do

#palestine #rambles #this is all wiki stuff so some sources may be wack #but from what im reading like... fatah isnt looking good politically #then again theyve had 14 fraudulent fraudulent years to be better so who knows #i decided to have a look at the papers in question and the fact that abbas went with the percieved Worse option of the emergency #government is kinda telling to me now in hindsight what with the lack of elections #they say in the papers that it would be in the national interest to form a government that ''adheres to the quartettes principles'' #but like didnt they preform a coup and then refuse to hold elections? #feels kinda wild to read like surely fatah wasnt planning a coup which led to the event which the western world calls a hamas coup?

[warsofasoiaf]

Do you have a take on the Nagorno-Karabakh situation? Seems to me like N-A and Armenia are up shit creek without a paddle. Their protector, Russia, is kind of... busy... and the West is too far away, too occupied, and (at least with the EU) too invested in Azerbaijani natural gas to do anything substantial. Also, technically allied to Turkey, who supports Azerbaijan. Iran might be interested in making life difficult for Azerbaijan and Turkey, but are unlikely to do anything short term. Thoughts?

Russia actually helped negotiate a ceasefire to surrender Artsakh, so their protector is actively promoting the cession of territory (that they helped them take earlier). Technically, that region is internationally recognized as Azeri territory, so defensive obligations regarding CSTO are a little murkier than they would be if Azerbaijan initiated a full-blown war against Armenia and attempted to invade Yerevan. I doubt that will happen, it'd be a political shitshow and the sanctions would crush the Azerbaijan export-driven economy. So in that sense, we probably won't see the outbreak of a full-blown war in Central Asia.

The entire Nagorno-Karabakh situation is a shitshow, the legacy of Stalin setting up borders and moving populations to divide them against each other and prevent any sort of consolidated resistance against Soviet imperial rule. The legacy of the states left behind following imperial collapse lingers still.

What I'm worried about is without a solid plan in place and means to enforce it, it could quickly devolve into ethnic cleansing.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

#modern politics #armenia #azerbaijan #nagorno karabakh