Facing the gleaming Doha skyline on a Persian Gulf winter carries the merit of a panoramic perspective. Most nations around it are going into melt down and the remaining ones – with the exception of Iran – exhibit neither the political leadership nor the economic and institutional infrastructure to do anything other than to meekly accept whatever tsunami hits their shores. They are nothing but scared spectators. The Empire of Chaos has enough warmongering hardware pre-positioned within spitting distance to turn the whole of Southwest Asia into ashes – as a gaggle of usual suspects in the Beltway, neocon or neoliberalcon, still can’t find a cure to their itching to «really win the next war» in a sort of exponential Shock and Awe.
Category: Head Stories
Chinese President Xi Jinping’s first official visit to the Middle East next week is a signal of Beijing’s intention to be a major player in Mid East affairs. Against the background of extremely intensive international contacts since the assumption of the Chinese presidency in March 2013, Xi Jinping’s first Middle East tour from Jan. 19 to Jan. 23 will include Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Iran. The Chinese leader has chosen the Middle East to be his first foreign destination of the year 2016 – a status generally used to indicate China’s focus on a particular region or country. The preparations for the visit started about a year before the Saudi-Arabia-Iran spat and many things have happened since then. The Iran nuclear talks ended up in agreement, Russia launched its military operations in Syria and the Sunni-Shia stand-off exacerbated.
The latest Barack Obama’s speech in front of members of Congress was his last State of the Union Address in his capacity as the president. Yet, according to numerous analysts, this speech did little to raise his popularity both in the US and abroad. In his speech Obama made several key statements that, in his opinion, would demonstrate to the world “the incredible might” of the United States which was largely achieved under his “wise management of the country.” What he however didn’t mention was the fact that he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his “peaceful policies” in the Middle East, therefore the world should be thanking him for the mass exodus of refugees heading to Europe to escape bitter hunger and poverty imposed by the White House on the countries they used to live in. And the words that the sitting US President said while leaving the hall of the House of Representatives, when he looked back and said: “Alright let me look at this thing one last time” seem somewhat appropriate in this case.
More than 2000 nuclear explosions have occurred since 1945 as part of nuclear weapons’ testing. Officially only two nuclear bombs (Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 6 and 9, August 1945) have been used in an act of war. The media consensus is that a nuclear holocaust is an impossibility. Should we be concerned? Publicly available military documents confirm that nuclear war is still on the drawing board of the Pentagon. Compared to the 1950s, however, today’s nuclear weapons are far more advanced. The delivery system is more precise. In addition to China and Russia, Iran, Syria and North Korea are targets for a first strike pre-emptive nuclear attack. Let us be under no illusions, the Pentagon’s plan to blow up the planet using advanced nuclear weapons is still on the books.
Unique among the countries on earth, the US government insists that its laws and dictates take precedence over the sovereignty of nations. Washington asserts the power of US courts over foreign nationals and claims extra-territorial jurisdiction of US courts over foreign activities of which Washington or American interest groups disapprove. Perhaps the worst results of Washington’s disregard for the sovereignty of countries is the power Washington has exercised over foreign nationals solely on the basis of terrorism charges devoid of any evidence. Consider a few examples. Washington first forced the Swiss government to violate its own banking laws. Then Washington forced Switzerland to repeal its bank secrecy laws. Allegedly, Switzerland is a democracy, but the country’s laws are determined in Washington by people not elected by the Swiss to represent them.
We have seen it before, more often than we can guess, manipulated events, phony confrontations, false flag terrorism, staged mass killings and a cast of characters, financial “titans,” sleazy Washington types along with admirals and generals festooned and bespeckled with phony decorations for imaginary chair bound bravery. The war began between the holidays, Christmas and New Year. It wasn’t found on a battlefield, not all of it anyway, it was found in boardrooms, the public restrooms where business is done secretly in Washington, and in the Straits of Hormuz. Here is what happened:
The Saudi execution of senior Shiite cleric Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr is but the latest in a series of provocations towards regional rival Iran. The furious reaction from Shiite Iran to the beheading of Nimr – a renowned Islamic scholar – and the severance of diplomatic ties between the two countries appears to be a calculated winding up of tensions by the Sunni Saudi rulers. But the real objective for Saudi Arabia is more likely to embroil its political patron in Washington in a sharper regional conflict – a conflict that would also lead to a conflagration with Russia. The reaction of Washington to the execution of Saudi-born cleric Nimr al-Nimr was one of «surprise», according to the New York Times.
“North Korea … Allowed to develop in peace, unimpeded by military pressure and economic warfare, it might become an inspiration for other countries to follow.” … Is North Korea’s recent nuclear test to be welcomed, lamented or condemned? It depends on your perspective. If you believe that a people should be able to organize their affairs free from foreign domination and interference; that the United States and its client government in Seoul have denied Koreans in the south that right and seek to deny Koreans in the north the same right; and that the best chance that Koreans in the north have for preserving their sovereignty is to build nuclear weapons to deter a US military conquest, then the test is to be welcomed. If you’re a liberal, you might believe that the United States should offer the DPRK (the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, North Korea’s official name) security guarantees in return for Pyongyang completely, permanently and verifiably eliminating its nuclear weapons program.
Pyongyang, January 6 (KCNA) — The DPRK government issued the following statement Wednesday: There took place a world startling event to be specially recorded in the national history spanning 5 000 years in the exciting period when all service personnel and people of the DPRK are making a giant stride, performing eye-catching miracles and exploits day by day after turning out as one in the all-out charge to bring earlier the final victory of the revolutionary cause of Juche, true to the militant appeal of the Workers’ Party of Korea (WPK). The first H-bomb test was successfully conducted in Juche Korea at 10:00 on Wednesday, Juche 105 (2016), pursuant to the strategic determination of the WPK. Through the test conducted with indigenous wisdom, technology and efforts the DPRK fully proved that the technological specifications of the newly developed H-bomb for the purpose of test were accurate and scientifically verified the power of smaller H-bomb.
Ever since the first rumors began to circulate about an impending Russian military intervention in Syria the Internet and the media have been flooded with all sorts of silly rumors, myths and outright lies about what could/would happen. These rumors, myths and outright lies are still being spread today, and not only by pro-US interest groups, but even by supposedly pro-Russian “analysts”. All this nonsense completely obfuscates the reality of the Russian intervention in Syria (but maybe that was the goal all along?) and tries to paint the Russian operation as a failure. After three months of Russian air and missile strikes in Syria, it is a good time to ask the question of whether the Russians have achieved some tangible results or whether, as some are suggesting, this has basically been a big PR operation.