Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

GOD IS UNDERWRITING ISRAEL’S GENOCIDE BOND

SO THE US SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION & GOLDMAN SACHS AGREE GENOCIDE IS NO SECTION 17(A) FRAUD ON BOND INVESTORS

By John Helmer | Dances with Bears | March 10, 2024

Last week it happened that God and the United States Treasury managed to underwrite a record issue of Israel Government bonds to continue the war against the Arabs in Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq – and Iran if necessary.

The war financing comprised $2 billion of five-year bonds, and $3 billion each of 10 and 30-year bonds.

The US Treasury guarantees bond holders that if Israel defaults on repayment of its obligations, the US will pay instead. Notwithstanding this, the Israelis were obliged to offer an extra 1.35%, 1.45%, and 1.75% more in interest over the going rate for US Treasury bonds for the same length of term.

The Reuters news agency headline on March 6 celebrated “Israel sells record $8 billion in bonds despite Oct 7 attacks, downgrade”. The propaganda agency based in New York quoted Israel’s Accountant-General as claiming the bond placement “results showed an “unprecedented expression of confidence in Israel’s economy by the world’s largest international investors”.*

In fact, according to well-informed bond trade sources in Europe, with the higher interest rates the market has just demanded from the Israelis, the spread between the Israel bonds and US Treasuries has never been wider, and the worse this spread will become for Israel. This is a vote of no-confidence from the market which the Israelis, the Americans, and their media are trying to keep secret.

The longer the war is protracted, the more obvious the costs of Israel Defence Forces’ (IDF) failure will become – and the deeper the negative bond sentiment will grow. By converting secrecy into money, the market is signalling that it has begun to turn against Israel – and profit at Israel’s expense.

Also unprecedented is the secrecy in which the “expression of confidence” has been managed by the US, French, and German banks acting as managers of the Israeli bond issue;  and of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which has had regulatory oversight of the process. The debt financing has been reported as a “private placement”; this has removed the requirement that the Israelis produce a public prospectus explaining how they think their war – plausibly genocide, according to the International Court of Justice in its ruling of January 26, 2024  – is going, and how long the IDF claim it will last.

This does not remove the legal requirement on the two US banks engaged in marketing the bonds to US investors, Bank of America and Goldman Sachs, to submit a formal application for SEC approval of what is called a letter of consent. However, asked to confirm the contents of the letter of consent application for the sale of the Israeli bonds, and its official approval, the SEC has refused to give any answer.

Goldman Sachs was asked the same questions. The bank also refuses to say.

Last October the chief executive of Goldman Sachs, David Solomon,*  issued a personal letter to the bank’s employees claiming the Hamas operation was a “violation of fundamental human values”: Solomon then proposed a $2 million gift of bank funds “to organizations providing critical support and humanitarian relief in Israel”; plus additional bank money, three bank dollars for every one contributed by bank staff making donations under $25, and one for one if the staff contribution was over $25. Asked how much money has been raised for Solomon’s gift to the Israelis, the bank is refusing to reply.

In other words, Israel’s public genocide is a private secret among Americans who are paying for it, and among US government officials responsible for regulating the scheme according to US law.

According to well-informed bond traders, this deal-making is worth in fees to the dealmakers, led by Goldman Sachs, about $100 million.

The following week, the downgrade by the Moody’s rating agency confirmed the inflection in market sentiment against Israel, with worse to come. 

A month ago, Bloomberg’s Israeli reporter Galit Altstein was assigned the job of printing all the  material he could find promoting the sale of the bonds. The headline of his report implied that Israel would be able to finance its war despite the Moody’s downgrade and the longer-term risks in the small print of the Moody’s report.

Source: https://origin.www.bloomberg.com/ — February 11, 2024.

According to Bloomberg, about $58 billion in new debt would be issued this year, up by a third from the prewar year. About 80% of that total is usually raised in the domestic Israeli market; but if Israeli investors lack the funds or are fleeing to safe havens for their money, a much larger percentage of the issue will have to be raised from international investors, most of them in the US. This, conceded Bloomberg’s Israeli informants, would require “private placements, which are typically bought by a few investors at most. Those have been arranged by banks such as Goldman Sachs  and Deutsche Bank.”

“Domestic issuance in the first two months of this year,” Altstein reported for Bloomberg, “is projected to total the equivalent of more than $9 billion, a 350 percent rise from the same period last year… The cost of insuring against an Israeli default — as measured by credit default swaps — is now higher than that for lower-rated sovereigns such as Mexico and Indonesia, indicating some investors are nervous.”

Israeli financial media reporting indicates that the $8 billion in bond sales completed this month were entirely placed outside Israel.

In the money markets, nervousness fetches a rising price; in the case of Israel’s genocide bonds the only way to keep that price rise secret is through private placements. They are operations run by banks like Goldman Sachs which avoid the requirements of issuing a prospectus; obtaining a credit rating from a ratings agency which evaluates the prospectus claims; and making a market with semi-public meetings with investors and answering their questions. What Goldman Sachs does instead, according to those familiar with the bank’s operations, is to “dump the issue in state or institutional pension funds which can be counted on to hold the issue until maturity, and ask no questions.”

But even passive pension fund managers have their fiduciary limits: Israel’s war began to trigger withdrawals from both Israeli state and corporate bonds by Norwegian pension funds last November; by Danish pension funds after the genocide ruling by the ICJ  in January.

An index tracking ten Israeli corporate bonds for the banking, telecommunication, pharmaceutical, and real estate sectors, shows market demand for Israeli debt issues fell in the first month of the war, but then began recovering above the pre-war levels.

ISRAEL BOND INDEX SHOWS RECOVERY FROM WAR STRIKE

Source: https://www.marketvector.com/

By opting for private placement, the Israelis, Goldman Sachs and Bank of America agreed to avoid having to issue prospectus claims about the war against the Arabs which, if truthful, might reveal how false Israeli government claims about the war have been so far; and if false, would create a legal liability for the Israelis and the banks to being charged with a Section 17(a) fraud.

In the US Securities Act, which the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) enforces, Section 17(a) “makes it unlawful to ‘employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud’, ‘obtain money or property’ by using material misstatements or omissions, or to ‘engage in any transaction, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon the purchaser.’ This provision is closely tracked by Section 10b of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5, which is used more widely by investors suing for fraud.”

The ICJ ruling against Israel in January has not stopped or even paused the IDF operations in Gaza, the West Bank, or on the northern front with Lebanon. However, the court has established a benchmark for “material misstatements and omissions” in what the Israel bond marketeers can say without running into Section 17(a) fraud litigation. This makes Israel’s war financing riskier and a bond prospectus impossible; it also makes the interest rate cost to the Israelis more expensive. For Goldman Sachs and the other banks engaged, that has meant more profit with higher fees.

Asked what the market was thinking about the private placement of the Israeli paper, a veteran European trader refused to reply. Other traders in Switzerland answered in generalities until  Israel’s bonds were mentioned; then there was stonewalling. “It’s certain there’s an omerta,” a trade source commented. “The Israeli finance ministry has claimed the bond offer drew 400 investors from 36 countries making bids totalling $38 billion. But there is no mention of how the bonds were actually allocated. I suspect there were many token offers and only a few selected buyers got most of the issues.”

The Israeli financial source Globes claims “demand for the issue was led by first-rate strategic investors such as pension funds, insurance companies, hedge funds, and institutions that have been holding Israeli securities for many years.”

A bond trade source at an international institution points out that “when issuing a bond, the lead manager charges a fee. The net proceeds are going to be obviously less. The question is how much is Goldman Sachs charging in fees? This is usually stated in a prospectus but we don’t have that in the Israeli case. If the issue is difficult to place, the lead manager will contract with other banks to share the burden. They will then use a portion of the fees to make a market for the issued instruments and stabilize the pricing. Again this should be disclosed.”

In the results given by Israeli officials to Reuters on March 6,   it was reported that Israel sold $2 billion of five-year bonds, and $3 billion each of 10 and 30-year bonds. “This is unusual,”  the trade source comments. “If you need to restructure your economy you would expect most of the costs will be upfront, with payback from the higher efficiencies or higher profits reimbursing the borrowed funds later. This should not take ten or thirty years, so another calculation is in play.”

He believes the Israel government’s calculation is that the war on the military front is going to get worse, and the economic war for longer than can be acknowledged publicly. “So they are trying to lock in as much money for the long term as they can now, leaving less to pay back in the short term. They say they are aiming to raise $58 billion over this year, but we are already three months in — they have $50 billion still to go. At this rate of timing and at this pricing, they won’t make it.”

“As for the fees charged by a lead manager for an $8 billion debt issue, these can vary depending on several factors including the complexity of the issuance, prevailing market conditions, and negotiation between the government and the lead manager. Typically, lead managers charge a percentage fee based on the size of the offering, often from 0.5% to 2% of the total amount raised. Therefore, for an $8 billion issue, lead manager fees could range from $40 million to $160 million. However, these figures are indicative and could vary based on the specific terms of the deal.”

“I speculate that the fees will be around $100 million. The princes at Goldman Sachs are being rewarded handsomely. We will have to wait and see if they will regret it. The buyers should also be asking the fee question. If there is no answer, then these Israel bonds are not being bought or placed based on financial reasoning. It’s political, ideological, religious.”*

The SEC last published an Israel bond prospectus in June 2018. The amount of the placement is not recorded.

The US Government was identified as the guarantor of the debt paper. “The amount of guarantees that may be issued to Israel under the loan guarantee program may be reduced by an amount equal to the amount extended or estimated to have been extended by Israel for activities that the President of the United States determines are inconsistent with the objectives and understandings reached between the United States and Israel regarding the implementation of the loan guarantee program. Under the program, the United States issues guarantees with respect to all payments of principal and interest on certain bonds issued by Israel. The proceeds of the guaranteed loans may be used to refinance existing debt. Under the $9 billion loan guarantee program, between September 2003 and November 2004 Israel issued guaranteed notes totaling $4.1 billion face value. Israel has not issued any notes under the loan guarantee program since November 2004, and up to $3.8 billion of U.S. loan guarantees (subject to the reductions described above) remains available.”

There has never been a determination by the President that the guarantees should be suspended because of “activities… inconsistent with the objectives and understandings reached between the United States and Israel”. For the Biden Administration, genocide is not an “inconsistent activity”.

The map accompanying the 2018 prospectus shows the occupied West Bank and Golan Heights as subject “to agreements between the State of Israel (the “State” or “Israel”) and the Palestinian Liberation Organization”.  The Golan Heights are legally Syrian territory, and there is no agreement. Gaza is marked separately without explanation – and without an agreement with the Hamas administration of Gaza. According to the document, before the date of the prospectus, Israeli military operations against Hamas in Gaza “did not materially affect the Israeli economy.” To claim this now is not only propaganda, it would be a material misstatement — in SEC terminology, a Section 17(a) fraud.

Click to enlarge view on source: https://www.sec.gov/  — page D-1.

During the marketing of the $8 billion in bonds, there were highly confidential briefings for selected investors. According to Globes, “prior to the offering, Israel’s Accountant General Yali Rothenberg and his team led rounds of extensive meetings in Europe and the US.”

US bond trading sources believe it likely that Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, the two US banks identified as placing the bonds in the US market, sought to protect themselves from what Rothenberg and his Israeli officials said at these meetings, and from later reaction by bond buyers if the war goes longer and much worse for Israel than they were led to believe. A letter of consent seeking approval from the SEC is protective cover from Section 17(a) fraud liability in the absence of SEC review and approval of a prospectus.

Scott Schneider is head of public affairs and press spokesman at the SEC. He speaks for Gary Gensler, chairman of the SEC since 2021.* The SEC was asked by email whether “the widely publicized Israeli government bonds to be issued this year on a private placement basis are subject to SEC supervision to the extent of requiring a formal application for consent to the issues.” He was also asked to say what letters of consent have been approved by the SEC in relation to earlier Israeli issues.

Left to right, Yali Rothenburg, Israel’s Accountant General; Gary Gensler, SEC Chairman; Scott Schneider, SEC press spokesman.

There was no reply to the email, and no reply when the questions were repeated by telephone to the SEC press office in Washington.

When clarification of the letter of consent issue was then requested from Goldman Sachs, the press spokesman in New York, Jen Blackhall, promised a response, but none there came. The stonewalling by Goldman Sachs has also extended to the patsy question asked – how much in charity funds have been donated to Israel on CEO Solomon’s request to his staff last October.

Bond traders in London, Europe, and the US consulted for this story believe that the most reliable indicator that the money markets have begun to turn against Israel can be found in the spread between the interest rates (or yield-to-maturity**) of Israel’s bond issues compared with US Treasuries. For more details, click to read.

COMPARISON OF THE SPREAD BETWEEN 10-YEAR ISRAEL & US BONDS, MARCH 11, 2023-MARCH 11, 2024

Source: https://www.worldgovernmentbonds.com/

The positive-negative spread between Israel’s 10-year government bond yield and the United States’ 10-year Treasury yield indicates when Israel’s yield is lower or higher than that of the US Treasury at that particular point in time.

The source, Worldgovernmentbonds.com, explains: “In the case of government bonds, the yield spread also means credit spread. These countries usually differ regarding credit quality. A positive spread means that the percentage yearly return of one bond over another is higher. For example, if one bond is yielding 5% and another is yielding 3%, the spread is 2%, or 200 basis points (bp).”

What remains unclear is whether the private-placement Israel bonds are included in the charting; if they are excluded, this is an attempt to keep the political and military meaning of the spread from becoming obvious outside the bond market.

The international bond trade source explains: “Until the war, Israel was able to finance itself at a lower cost than the US government, if you look at the 10-year bond spread in basis points [percentage points] between them. Then at the start of the war the situation reverses itself. Israeli bonds lose their advantage. The Israeli government is now having to pay a premium in interest rate over US Treasuries in order to secure buyers. Last week’s reports show that Israel is committing to pay 135 basis points over comparable 5-year US Treasuries, 145 basis points over 10-year Treasuries and 175 basis points over US 30-year bonds.  For comparison, US 5-year bonds currently yield 4.15%, 10-year Treasuries are at 4.16%, and 30-year notes yield 4.30%.”

“Note that the chart is lagging behind the new $8 billion placement, and has not yet registered the widening of the spread against Israel. This is because the chart is based on all bonds which have a residual maturity of ten years, so it is showing an average. This average indicated that Israel’s 10- year residual maturity bonds were trading at a positive spread of 4.9 basis points (100 basis points = one percent) to the US equivalents. Worldgovernmentbonds.com does not provide a listing of the issues included in its calculations, but future charting can be expected to reveal the latest private placements will accelerate the widening of the spread. With $50 billion more in private placements still to go, the cost to the Israelis will become higher than ever before – and the spread will be pushed wider. That is if the private placements are included in the charting.”

“The outcome of the latest Israel government bond issue is nothing for them to cheer about. The previously favourable spread compared to their US Government guarantor has evaporated and now reversed itself. The same goes for the loss of money market confidence in Israel.”

[*] When an international court of law determines that a religious organization like the state of Israel is plausibly genocidal, it is relevant to note the religious affiliations of organizations which may be assisting in the genocide with money or propaganda. For example, the Reuters executive responsible for ethics and standards is Alix Freedman, who is Jewish. The SEC Chairman since 2021 is Gary Gensler, who is Jewish.   The Goldman Sachs chief executive David Solomon is Jewish.
[**] The yield to maturity (YTM) of a government bond is a measure indicating the total return investors can expect to receive if they hold the bond until it matures, taking into account its current market price, the coupon payments, and the time remaining until maturity. For more details, click to read.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Down and out: How 5 months of genocidal war on Gaza paralyzed Israeli economy

Press TV – March 11, 2024

Last month, in what economic pundits saw as a death knell for the already-beleaguered Israeli economy,  a US credit rating agency downgraded the regime’s rating and outlook.

The downgrade from “stable” to “negative”, according to Moody’s, is the direct consequence of the Israeli regime’s genocidal war on the Gaza Strip and political instability inside the occupied territories marked by growing discontent and simmering protests.

A few weeks ago, the Israeli regime’s Central Bureau of Statistics released another damning report, according to which Tel Aviv’s economy shrank by nearly one-fifth in the last quarter of 2023.

Amid depleting consumer spending, trade and investment since October 7, Israel’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) recorded a 19.4 percent drop in its annual rate in the last three months of 2023.

Benjamin Netanyahu’s regime launched a devastating war on the coastal Palestinian territory on October 7, stung by the unprecedented Al-Aqsa Storm Operation led by Hamas.

In the last 156 days, more than 31,000 Palestinians, including over 14,000 children and nearly 9,000 women have been killed in Gaza. It has also spawned the worst humanitarian crisis in the territory.

According to observers, the indiscriminate bombings on Gaza have badly backfired on the regime amid both internal and external turmoil for the Netanyahu regime.

Hundreds of thousands of Israeli reservists have in recent months been forced to abandon their jobs while many more have fled in panic, due to which major industries have come to a grinding halt.

The labor shortage is acute as over 350,000 reservists have been pressed into military service, as per the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which says the law has caused a “pronounced slowdown” of the Israeli economy, which had grown about 3 percent before October 7.

Foreign investments have also virtually ended as investors are not willing to put their money on tinderbox – both due to the war in Gaza as well as the internal turmoil for the Netanyahu regime.

According to the data from the Israeli labor ministry in December, about 950,000 jobs were lost in the first three months of the war, which has increased manifolds now as the situation remains precarious and the war rages on – now into its sixth month.

Multi-national brands linked to the Israeli regime have also faced blanket boycotts in recent months, suffering enormous losses. Many companies have tried to distance themselves from the regime.

Domestic economy in tatters

Every sector of the Israeli economy – from high-tech to agriculture to tourism to various industries – has been irreparably dented by the raging war on Gaza, a problem exacerbated by the shortage of workforce and precarious situation.

Many businesses have suspended their operations while others have been forced to shut down their operations. Some workers have been forced to join military duty while many others have fled.

A Bloomberg survey last month said the Israeli economy suffered one of its worst-ever slumps after it launched the genocidal war on Palestinians in Gaza, with businesses coming to a screeching halt.

The regime’s GDP plummeted by 19.4 percent in the last quarter of 2023, which the report said was worse than every estimate in its survey of analysts.

“The release highlights the degree to which the Israeli economy has been affected by the conflict, particularly on the private activity side,” Goldman Sachs economists Tadas Gedminas and Kevin Daly were quoted as saying in the report.

Israeli newspaper Maariv, in a report earlier this week, also said the continuation of the Israeli war on Gaza has contributed to massive losses for the regime in both political and economic spheres.

It followed another report published by the Israeli website Walla, which cited the Director of the Israeli Tax Authority Shai Aharonovitz as saying that the damage caused by the Gaza war is “six times greater” than the Second Lebanon War (2006), and about half a million compensation claims have been filed by those who have suffered due to it.

According to analysts, the Israeli war on Gaza, which has failed in all its stated objectives, has resulted in a steep drop in the regime’s tax revenues, skyrocketing debt and economic recession.

The regime’s GDP has also taken a serious blow, as attested by Moody’s report in February, which cut the regime’s rating to ‘A2’ and described its credit outlook as ‘negative’.

It was the first time ever that the regime’s economic outlook was downgraded, pointing to the staggering costs of the war that is increasingly turning out to be an exercise in futility.

The war, according to analysts, has discouraged potential investors and disrupted the labor market, especially with hundreds of thousands of workers summoned for mandatory military duty.

In a report in November, the Bank of Israel said the absence of thousands of workers from their jobs was costing the Israeli economy an estimated $600 million a week, or about 6 percent of the weekly GDP.

That number, according to economic analysts, has surged dramatically in the past three months, to the tune of a few billion dollars every week.

The regime’s tourism industry has also been affected. Monthly figures announced by Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics revealed that in January only 500 single-day visits to the occupied territories were registered, compared to 14,000 in January 2023, marking a drastic decrease of 96 percent.

The travel industry used to make up nearly 3 percent of the regime’s GDP in 2019, before the pandemic. The figure fell to 1.1 percent in 2021 and has been virtually paralyzed since October 7.

The Israeli newspaper Calcalist reported in January that about 900,000 tourists were expected to visit the occupied territories in the three months after the start of the war. The number dropped to 190,000 because many of them opted out. That number has also sharply come down now.

“The war (on Gaza) was a huge breaking point for the (Israeli) economy which is still ongoing,” Professor Benjamin Bental from the Taub Center for Social Policy Studies was quoted as saying in December by The Median Line website.

“There are tremendous consequences that we still cannot estimate the end of.”

A RAND analysis in 2015 estimated that the financial impact of any conflict between the Israeli regime and Palestine in the next ten years would be to the tune of $400 billion.

Daniel Ege, the director of the Economics and National Security Initiative at the RAND Corporation, who authored that report, in an article published in November made a fresh assessment.

“For Israel, 90 percent of the economic shock will come from the indirect effects: reduced investment, a disrupted labor market, and slowed productivity growth. The specifics of this current crisis will, of course, differ from our model and the past,” he wrote.

Israeli ports hit the hardest

In the past five months, gas fields in the occupied territories have dried, airlines have become defunct, farms have been destroyed, major businesses have shut down and ports have been empty.

Colossal losses have been recorded at ports occupied by the Israeli regime, most notably the Port of Umm Al-Rashrash (Eilat), which recorded a 90 percent drop in traffic and $3 billion in direct losses.

“All cargoes arriving in Eilat through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait from the Far East, i.e. China, Japan, South Korea and India, are no longer transported because ships are afraid to pass through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait,” Gideon Golber, CEO of the Eilat port company, said late January.

Golber’s company deals primarily with the import of cars and export of potassium fertilizers, and before October 7, 50,000 new cars were stored at the port. Yemeni military’s actions in support of Gaza have virtually brought business activities at the bustling port to a grinding halt.

“If Yemeni operations in the Red Sea continue, we will reach a situation where there are no ships in the port,” he was quoted as saying by Reuters, referring to the repercussions of the Red Sea events.

Eilat Port has also been struck with missiles by both the Yemeni military and the Iraqi resistance groups, sending ripples of shock and fear among investors and shipowners there.

The two other major Israel-occupied international ports, Haifa and Ashdod, a third of whose transport depends on the Red Sea, have also recorded heavy losses, with a 70 percent drop in transshipment.

Yemeni military has carried out a string of operations against ships linked to the Israeli regime or its Western backers, mainly the US and the UK, in the Red Sea in solidarity with the people of Gaza.

The operations have forced major shipping companies doing trade with the Israeli regime to avoid the strategic waterway in recent months, incurring staggering losses for the regime.

Amid the continuation of the Yemeni military’s operations against ships trading with the Israeli regime in the Red Sea, it is to be expected that the losses will continue to pile up.

The Islamic Resistance in Iraq has also carried out attacks on the Israeli-occupied ports, including Haifa and Ashdod, as well as the natural reserves in the Mediterranean Sea.

Haifa Port (situated on the Mediterranean) is believed to store about 90 percent of essential commodities destined for the occupied Palestinian territories.

The operations of the strategic port were taken over by Indian business conglomerate Adani Group in February, months after a consortium of Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone and Israel’s Gadot Group won the tender to privatize it for a mammoth USD 1.18 billion.

Only days after the Palestinian resistance launched its unprecedented operation against the occupying regime on October 7, Adani shares fell by 4.5 percent, triggering alarm and anxiety among investors.

According to informed sources, the Indian company has suffered staggering losses in the past five months and speculation has been rife about ending the contract given the high costs.

Ashdod port, close to Gaza’s border with occupied territories, handles about 40 percent of the Israeli regime’s total maritime-bound trade, including imports and exports, according to the Israeli media.

Equipped with the Iron Dome military system, Ashdod port has been severely hit amid the war on Gaza, with most cargo diverted to other Israeli-occupied ports, which have also been deserted lately.

One of the first ships to divert from Hashdod to Haida in October last year was a Taiwanese container ship Evergreen Line, which cited a “persistent unsafe situation” amid the war on Gaza. Since many, virtually all ships have avoided the port, turning it into a desolate and barren island.

According to analysts, the total damage to the Israeli economy varies by estimate and reaches over $100 billion, with a minimum of ten years estimated for full recovery, which looks very unlikely.

Military and arms boycott

The Israeli regime’s economy has always been heavily dependent on trade and imports, especially military equipment, which makes the regime’s much-hyped military vulnerable to foreign boycott.

Israel’s beleaguered military industry is experiencing serious problems with imports as civil society, lawmakers and courts in many countries want to prevent arms exports to the regime.

The decisions have been partly influenced by the interim ruling issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague in early February, ordering the Israeli regime to halt its genocide in Gaza.

The UN experts also issued a statement late last month, saying any transfer of weapons or ammunition to Israel that would be used in Gaza would “violate international humanitarian law.”

The impact of the ICJ ruling was clearly visible. A court in the Netherlands ordered the Dutch government on February 12 to halt the export of F-35 jet fighter parts to the Netanyahu regime.

The Hague Court of Appeal found that there was “a clear risk” that the F-35 jets used by the Israeli regime, some components of which are exported by the Netherlands, would enable to commit “serious violations of humanitarian law” against the Palestinians in Gaza.

The judges considered that “Israel does not take sufficient account of the consequences for the Gaza Strip civilian population when conducting its attacks.”

Israel’s attacks have caused a disproportionate number of civilian casualties, including thousands of children,” the Dutch judges concluded.

Britain, one of the Israeli regime’s biggest arms exporters, which manufactures 15 percent of F-35 parts, has resisted calls from rights groups to end the exports. The High Court in London also greenlighted the arms shipments last week by dismissing a case filed by some human rights groups.

Italy, however, has already announced the end of its arms sales to the Israeli regime.

Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani announced in January that his country had halted all exports of military equipment to Tel Aviv. Spain’s foreign minister also claimed that his country has not sold any arms to Israel since the events of October 7, and added that an arms embargo is in place now.

European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, otherwise a staunch supporter of Israel, has also in recent months raised concerns over arms sales to the Tel Aviv regime, even taking potshots at US President Joe Biden for his administration’s approval of $14 billion worth arms to Israel.

“Well, if you believe that too many people are being killed, maybe you should provide fewer arms in order to prevent so many people being killed,” Borrell told reporters last month.

Itochu, one of Japan’s largest trading firms, also announced that it was ending its partnership with Elbit Systems, the Israeli regime’s largest arms manufacturer, due to the genocide in Gaza.

Itochu Chief Financial Officer Tsuyoshi Hachimura cited the top UN court’s order on January 26 as the reason for terminating the memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed between Itochu, Elbit and Nippon Aircraft Supply in March last year.

Elbit is the largest military contractor owned by the Tel Aviv regime with a share of 85% in the production of ground equipment and drones, and Japan is one of the world’s largest arms importers.

The company has already gained notoriety for testing new weapons on Palestinian civilians, as well as for cases of bribery around the world, multiple failures of their systems in tests aboard, etc.

Due to boycott activism, Elbit has lost hundreds of millions of dollars worth of international contracts in recent years, particularly since October 7 of last year. Many of its factories have been either shut down or disrupted by pro-Palestine activists in the US and the UK.

Since the outbreak of the genocidal war on Gaza, a major collaboration deal with Elbit has also been terminated by the Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul.

Boycott of big brands

In November of last year, the Press TV website published an investigation on global companies with close ties to the Israeli regime facing boycott amid the regime’s genocidal war on Gaza.

Worldwide campaigns have been launched during this period calling for the boycott of Israeli and international companies and brands directly or indirectly complicit in the Gaza genocide.

The companies that have faced boycott include Siemens, which is complicit in the regime’s settler-colonialism project through its EuroAsia Interconnector; Hewlett Packard, which helps the regime run biometric systems used to monitor and restrict the movement of Palestinians; AXA Divest, one of the largest investors in Israeli regime-run banks; Puma, a footwear giant that sponsors Israeli football.

Food and beverage giants such as McDonalds and Starbucks have also recorded huge losses.

Starbucks, the multinational chain of coffeehouses and roasteries headquartered in Seattle, has seen losses worth billions of dollars due to the global boycott campaign, which gathered momentum after the company took action against workers’ unions over its pro-Palestine stance.

Starbucks’ longtime CEO Howard Schultz is known to be an ardent supporter of the Israeli regime. Schultz has in the past boasted of being an active Zionist and worked closely with Israeli Premier Benjamin Netanyahu and radical Zionist settler groups, for which he even received awards.

Back in December 2013, around $11 billion in losses were reported, and it is estimated that the figure has now surged to $15 billion as the boycott campaign intensifies.

Last week, retail giant AlShaya Group, which owns the rights to operate Starbucks in West Asia, announced staff downsizing, citing “challenging trading conditions over the last six months.”

McDonald’s also has been hit by the boycott campaign. The US-headquartered company last month reported its first quarterly sales miss in nearly four years, sending the company’s shares down about 4 percent.

The company admitted that the losses were the reflection of “the impact of the war” in Gaza, where the Israeli regime has been carrying out relentless bombings since October 7.

“So long as this conflict, this war is going on, we’re not making any plans, we’re not expecting to see any significant improvement in this,” McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinski told investors.

“It’s a human tragedy what’s going on, and I think that that does weigh on brands like ours.”

Ian Borden, the company’s chief financial officer, also noted that the war had meaningfully impacted the fast food giant’s bottom line in the region during the last quarter of 2023.

The campaigns against McDonald’s, Starbucks and other multinational brands have significantly expanded in recent months, including in regional countries such as Jordan, Kuwait and Morocco.

Workers at American tech giants Google and Amazon have also stepped up pressure on their companies to snap ties with the Israeli regime, with Google workers also urging an end to Project Nimbus, under which the tech company supplies technology to the Israeli military for surveillance purposes.

The potential for the expansion of the boycott campaign remains high, as proved by recent large-scale protests in countries considered key trade partners of Israel, as well as public opinion in those countries.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Biden’s ‘Nighttime in America’ State of the Union

By Ron Paul | Institute for Peace and Prosperity | March 11, 2024

Last week President Biden delivered a dark and angry speech meant to convince the low percentage of Americans who still feel positive about his presidency that everything is fine and will only get better if he is re-elected for a second term.

Unfortunately we have come a long way from the optimism of a Ronald Reagan, who won a second term partially on the popularity of his “Morning in America” campaign commercials. Reagan was far from a perfect president, but it was that sense of optimism in otherwise difficult times that resulted in a record re-election victory. Biden’s speech, by contrast, was dark and angry, attacking not only his political opponents but even seeming to threaten the Supreme Court!

As constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley observed recently, “In some ways, the State of the Union speech may have died when former Speaker Nancy Pelosi ripped up the address of former President Donald Trump… While many in the media celebrated her lack of decorum and respect, she tore up something far more important than a speech. She shredded decades of tradition of civility and any remaining residue of restraint in our politics.”

We seem to be becoming a nation that would rather scream at each other than listen to each other.

The message of Biden’s speech was that if you do not support the re-election of Joe Biden, you are an insurrectionist and hate America and democracy. Seven years after the launch of the “Russiagate” hoax against then-candidate Donald Trump, it becomes clearer that the line “our democracy” means it’s only democratic when their side gets elected.

It is understandable that Biden is so angry. Despite all the lying with statistics about the economy, Americans can clearly see for themselves how inflation is undermining the standard of living. Of course this is not all Biden’s fault – Republicans in control of the House show little interest in cutting spending – but people generally blame the president for the state of the economy.

We are no better off on foreign policy either. President Biden started his speech by comparing Russian President Vladimir Putin with Hitler, claiming that Putin is “on the march” in Europe just as Hitler was in 1941, and that just as in those days, if he is not stopped in Ukraine he will continue to rampage through the continent. It was blatant fearmongering, based on no evidence. In fact, as Putin told Tucker Carlson just weeks ago, he has no interest in taking the war beyond Ukraine. But Biden is determined to spend another $61 billion on the failed proxy war in Ukraine and he is willing to say whatever he feels necessary to get that money.

Biden also introduced a bizarre plan to build a temporary pier on the shores of Gaza so that the US could deliver aid to starving Palestinians. Considering the billions of dollars and tens of thousands of missiles we have shipped to Israel, wouldn’t it just be easier to inform the Israeli prime minister that we would either be delivering aid to Palestinians over land, or else?

In all, Biden’s final State of the Union before the election reveals a president and administration that is out of gas and out of ideas. It also reveals a country deep in bankruptcy – both moral and economic. It is high time for a nationwide movement toward liberty.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics | | Leave a comment

Iranian firms turn the page with $20 billion gas deals

Press TV – March 11, 2024

Iranian companies have signed contracts worth $20 billion to boost gas pressure at the giant South Pars (SP) field in the Persian Gulf, in a plan which is expected to generate $900 billion in revenue.

This is the most strategic project in the history of Iran’s oil and gas industry and its long-sought empowerment of domestic entities, under which 90 trillion cubic feet of gas and two billion barrels of gas condensates will be available for use.

Top Iranian companies Petropars, Oil Industries Engineering and Construction (OIEC), Khatam al-Anbiya Construction Headquarters, MAPNA Group, and a consulting company are the contractors of the megaproject.

They inked the contracts in Tehran on Sunday in a ceremony attended by Minister of Petroleum Javad Owji and National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) Managing Director Mohsen Khojastehmehr.

The world’s biggest gas field is shared between Iran and Qatar which is also installing platforms to boost pressure in the field.

The massive project has created an opportunity to kickstart economic prosperity and employment in the face of sanctions. It has also allowed Iranian producers and companies to proactively engage in the economic growth and industrial development of the country and neutralize the sanctions.

Inattention to domestic companies in various sectors in the past and overreliance on foreign expertise and knowhow undermined their growth and expansion, but the accruing exponential costs on a macro level cascaded on the country which found itself in the lurch for the execution of major projects as foreign firms withdrew in the face of sanctions.

This is while the Iranian companies had always proven their mettle through shouldering grave responsibilities in the most difficult times from eight years of the war on Iran in the 1980s to unfair Western sanctions imposed intermittently since the Islamic Revolution in 1970.

If domestic companies are trusted and engaged in industrial projects, not only will it provide an opportunity to take advantage of their power, capacity and experience, but it will also protect and generate jobs and help achieve the high economic goals of the country.

Every project ceded to domestic companies means providing employment for a number of young people and professionals in the country. This is especially important in provinces such as Khuzestan, where employment does not match the capacities and facilities available in the region.

Therefore, supporting domestic companies – which, of course, does not mean financial support, but giving them a share in industrial projects – will have an irreplaceable effect in the country’s economic growth, job creation, national production jump, economic prosperity and neutralization of sanctions.

Domestic companies, if supported and trusted, can dispense us from the need to foreign firms and provide for their growth and expansion, enabling them to undertake projects overseas and win honor for the region.

While sanctions have forced the governing bodies to change their attitude towards domestic companies and entrust them with tasks which normally they would have not, it should be noted that Iranian producers are not perennial supporters of sanctions. Rather, they would like to interact and acquire world-class technologies from foreign companies to empower themselves.

In sum, many Iranian companies have the ability to produce the equipment needed for projects with the lowest cost and the highest quality and provide it to the applicants, provided that officials continue to put their trust in their capabilities both during the times of sanctions and in their absence.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

Imperial Assisted Suicide

By John Weeks | The Libertarian Institute | March 11, 2024

The United States Imperial Government (USIG) claims to be keeping the peace, underwriting the liberal, rules-based international order and safeguarding the global security architecture. This is not true. What the USIG is actually doing is killing people, helping get lots of people killed, and assisting foreign states as they commit corporate suicide. Israel’s ongoing, “plausibly genocidal” slaughter in Gaza and the West Bank is the latest example of this.

The United States is an empire and empire is murder-suicide. Since 9/11, U.S. soldiers have directly killed more than 400,000 civilians and indirectly contributed to the deaths of more than four million civilians. Meanwhile, more soldiers who served in the U.S. government’s Global War On Terror have committed suicide than have been killed in combat. Four times more.

The American People have not escaped suffering as the USIG and its empire have dished out catastrophic devastation in Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Pakistan, Egypt, Yemen, Libya, Syria, and Mali. The cost of living has exploded. Our infrastructure is in shambles. Public trust in government has collapsed. The military’s “recruitment landscape” is in free fall. And things are so bad at home the government has found a new job: attacking “tent cities” filled with “under-sheltered” people. Murder-suicide.

Then there are the vassal or “client” states. In the propaganda, the empire defends these states from…whatever. But in reality, it helps these states murder people all while creating the conditions for these states to kill themselves. This has been demonstrated recently in Afghanistan (state committed suicide), Ukraine (state is trying to commit suicide) and Israel (state is thinking about committing suicide).

In October, 2001, the USIG invaded Afghanistan and smashed the Taliban-controlled state. In its place was installed a new state with a new military, which Libertarian Institute Director Scott Horton describes:

“The new regime was also largely a coalition government of ethnic minorities, the Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Hazaras, being leveraged against the 40 percent plurality Pashtuns, dominant in the east and south of the country where the Taliban are from.”

This coalition regime could not exist without billions of U.S. dollars in its coffers, U.S. boots on the ground, and U.S. air power in the sky. As predicted by Horton, as soon as U.S. forces began their withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Afghan state (along with its military) immediately killed itself. The Taliban resurrected their state which the U.S. had smashed almost twenty years earlier.

In February 2014, the USIG backed a violent, neo-Nazi led coup in Ukraine. Instead of smashing the entire state, the coup overthrew President Viktor Yanukovych’s administration. Unlike Afghanistan’s anti-Taliban government in a box, the Ukrainian government under new management was capable of existing without a massive U.S. military presence. It was not, however, capable of winning a war with Russia. It took eight years, but the USIG managed to provoke a war with Russia.

Ukraine has been defeated but the imperial wizards in DC refuse to admit this truth and seek peace. There could have been a peace deal two years ago, when it was still fashionable for Americans to fly the Ukrainian flag outside their front doors, but the USIG crushed it. The Ukrainian state is bleeding out and continuing the war at this point puts the entire Ukrainian nation at risk. Russia could seize all of Ukraine and downgrade it from sovereign nation to a Russian aircraft carrier.

Israel has been fortunate to never have its state murdered or regime changed by the USIG. Quite the opposite; Israel has intervened in USIG affairs to a shocking extent. The Israel lobby wields massive influence in Washington DC, so much so that President Joe Biden is risking his re-election chances by refusing to stop producing Israel’s “plausibly genocidal” mass killing spree in Gaza.

This gleeful and live streamed spree of sadism has not been good for Israel. Its state is provoking the global community to view it as a deranged pariah, including the great powers of Russia and China. Even within America, the people want a ceasefire. We want it to stop.

Meanwhile, Israeli society is cracking. Approximately 200,000 Israelis have been displaced from their homes in the south and north of the country. The IDF has suffered thousands of casualties, the economy is destabilized, and fear has blanketed the land.

And now Israel is planning an invasion of southern Lebanon. Such an invasion would be a hoped for but unexpected gift to Hamas. Experts such as Col. Douglas Macgregor, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Lt. Col Daniel Davis, Alastair Crooke, John Mearsheimer and Robert Pape have all warned against the invasion. They have argued that Israel risks catastrophic fallout from such a move, from mass causalities to provoking a regional war and even suffering strategic defeat.

Israel supporters seem confident in its security state, despite its massive failure on October 7. Tel Aviv appears to be operating with the assurance that the U.S. military will step in with strike packages and boots on the ground if and when needed. And yes, DC will let American cities die while it views Israel as too big to fail.

But the empire is beset by incompetence and anyone who paid attention to the self-immolation of the Afghan state and the slow suicide of the Ukrainian state knows this isn’t going to end well.

Taiwan, watch your six.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Musk comments on US attempt to weaken Russia

RT | March 11, 2024

Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, has agreed with investor David Sacks’ view that Washington’s attempts to weaken Russia have “come true in reverse” and in reality only made it stronger.

Sharing his opinion on the Ukraine conflict in an interview posted on X on Sunday, Sacks called it “Biden’s big backfire.”

“We’ve made the Russian military stronger, it’s larger than it was before, it produces far more weapons, the industrial base is ramped up. Plus it’s now battle-tested and battle-hardened, especially against Western weapons,” he said.

Musk appeared to agree with Sacks, commenting on the post on X: “Unfortunately, this is true.”

Citing the size of Russia’s army compared to Ukraine’s, Sacks stated that Biden has “created” a much more “formidable” Russian military. Meanwhile, it’s the US that has seen its stockpiles “depleted and hollowed out,” he argued.

The economic sanctions on Russia have become another major miscalculation of Biden’s policies, according to Sacks. He believes that the idea to “crush” Russia with sanctions was delusional as the country’s economy stabilized and even outperformed G7 economies in 2023.

“The Russian economy is growing faster than any of the G7 economies. It’s really booming and it’s our European allies’ economies that have been crushed by the sanctions,” he noted.

But it is Ukraine that has been suffering the most from US involvement in the conflict, he argued. He attacked Biden who claimed that the US would “help ease the suffering of the Ukrainians” but in fact, Washington’s support “of this proxy war and our willingness to fight to the last Ukrainian” has led to a “humanitarian catastrophe.”

This is not the first time the two men have been in alignment on such issues. Earlier this month, Musk agreed with Sacks’ statement on X that NATO “faced an existential crisis” after the collapse of the Soviet Union and decided to embark on an expansion spree to fill the void.

The US has been Ukraine’s primary backer and has provided over $111 billion in military and financial assistance. However, in recent months, US aid has subsided drastically as the administration of President Joe Biden has struggled to overcome Republican resistance to its efforts to push through another $60 billion for Ukraine.

Meanwhile, Moscow has said that the US and its allies who continue to arm Ukraine cannot prevent Russia from achieving its goals and are only prolonging the suffering of Ukrainians.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | 2 Comments

Moldova about to escalate tensions with Russia

By Lucas Leiroz | March 11, 2024

Tensions in the post-Soviet space are escalating. Moldova recently signed an important military cooperation agreement with France, which tends to generate serious consequences for the stability of regional security, considering Paris’ interest in fomenting war against Moscow. In this context, many analysts fear that new violence could emerge in the pro-Russian separatist region of Transnistria, as Russia would be forced to intervene in such a conflict.

On March 7, Moldovan President Maia Sandu signed a military pact with France during a visit to Paris. On the occasion, French President Emmanuel Macron promised “unwavering support” on security and defense issues. Both sides agree that increased defense cooperation is a necessary step to confront what they call the “Russian advance.” According to them, if Moscow is not contained in Ukraine, the Russian government will launch new military actions in neighboring countries to gain more territories and zones of influence. In this sense, increasing French military cooperation would be a way of ensuring that the war “does not spread” towards Moldova.

The agreement establishes military cooperation in several sectors, mainly in arms supply contracts. Furthermore, French troops are expected to train the Moldovan armed forces. Moldovan officials have said recently that the country needs immediate help to reform its military structure to be ready for a possible conflict. Alone, Moldova is unable to overcome its current military weakness, which is why it is seeking Western help.

In parallel to this, Macron’s France has been marked by the constant attempt to further militarize the post-Soviet space and foment destabilization in the Russian strategic environment. Paris has been the main agent of disruption in Russian-Western relations recently, mobilizing “war preparation” efforts against Moscow in Europe. This is part of President Macron’s personal project to designate himself internationally as a “leader of all of Europe”, but it is also a reflection of the strategic irrationality that has today become a central aspect of Western foreign policy.

Previously, France had already started a similar project to fuel conflict in the post-Soviet space through Armenia. Paris has been endorsing the Pashinyan regime and stimulating anti-Russian sentiments in the Caucasus. The French government is playing a fundamental role in NATO’s plan to control both sides of the Armenia-Azerbaijan crisis, creating both an alliance between the US, EU and Yerevan and an alliance between Turkey and Baku. The aim of all this is simply to increase NATO’s presence in the Caucasus and generate military pressure on the Russian strategic environment.

Now, by encouraging Moldova to militarize, France is taking a step further in its anti-Russian destabilization project. Moldova has an extremely fragile domestic security architecture, as since 1992 the country has faced a separatist problem in the Transnistria region. Civil conflict has been frozen for decades – largely due to the presence of Russian peacekeepers in the region, dissuading the Moldovan government from launching a military offensive. However, like any other frozen conflict, hostilities could resume at any time if relations between the sides continue to deteriorate.

Moscow never recognized Transnistria as an independent country. For the Russians, it belongs to Moldovan territory, but both sides are required to reach a common agreement. As a region with a strong presence of ethnic Russians and Ukrainians, where the Russian language is considered native by citizens, the region deserves a special status in Moldovan politics, as well as autonomy rights must be created for the local people. Moscow has already stated that if such peace conditions are established, Russian troops will leave the region. More than that, Russia has also made it clear that it is even willing to destroy the Soviet-era weapons depots that remain in Transnistria, advancing regional demilitarization.

However, instead of seeking demilitarization, pro-Western sectors in Moldova prefer to increase ties with NATO and create even more problems with Russia. For Moldovan elites, Russia is an enemy country that must be approached with hostility. For this reason, since 2022, the West has tacitly encouraged Moldova to seek a military solution in Transnistria. The calculation is simple: the hope is to force Moscow to send troops to protect the Transnistrian people, creating a new proxy conflict and opening yet another flank for Russia.

There has been an internal balance in Moldova. Some political sectors continue to object to considering Russia and Transnistria as “threats”, but the rapprochement with France indicates that pro-war groups are gaining momentum in national politics. It is important for Moldovans to remember that they are not part of NATO, and are therefore not protected by the American military umbrella – which means that, if there really is a conflict, they will be abandoned by the West and used as mere cannon fodder, precisely as happened with Ukraine.

Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | 1 Comment

UK-made tank mired during Ukrainian demo for media

RT | March 11, 2024

A Ukrainian tank crew got their UK-donated Challenger 2 stuck in a bog during a special demonstration for a British tabloid, the newspaper has reported.

The incident happened during an exercise The Sun described as being “close to the front line” and within view of plumes of smoke emanating from Russian airstrikes. With its crew atop the turret, the British-made tank attempted to drive through a gully, only becoming stuck at its deepest point.

Images shared by the newspaper showed the vehicle stuck in mud deep enough to fully cover its tracks. The incident confirmed that the British tank’s weight is an issue, The Sun said. An experienced squadron commander “blasted the rookie crew for going too slowly through the gully.”

The newspaper added that the tank team leader “turned the mishap into a training exercise” by calling in a second tank to haul the first one out of the mud.

The report noted Ukrainian praise for the tank’s main gun, but added that the conflict had not given the British military hardware a chance to demonstrate its ability in a classic tank-on-tank battle. Ukraine has been using the armor to target bunkers from a long distance and for charges on Russian trenches.

The maneuvers are a bluff, according to the tabloid, because the tanks “did not have the right type of ammunition for attacking infantry.”

While the British tank is superior to Soviet-made T-80s in many respects, Ukrainian crews told the outlet that they weigh some 20 tons more and have a 30% lower power-to-weight ratio, which limits their maneuverability.

German-made Leopard 2 tanks, which have a similar weight, have also reportedly become stuck in soft ground, according to images shared online.

The Challenger 2s are not only being bogged down, but are breaking down. Five of the 14 tanks donated by the UK are not operational because spare parts can take months to arrive, and Kiev lacks skilled mechanics to maintain them. With battle-damaged tanks accounted for, only half of the UK-donated squadron remain fit for battle.

The British tabloid also reported manpower shortages on the conflict frontline, meaning trained tank crews are forced to dig trenches. Nevertheless, the Ukrainians expressed gratitude to the British government for the tanks and, via the tabloid, asked London to “send more.”

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

German FM Open to UK’s Taurus Swap Proposal as ‘Option’

By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 11.03.2024

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has repeatedly opposed the idea of supplying Ukraine with missiles capable of striking deep into Russian territory. However, recently UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron expressed London’s readiness to assist Berlin in overcoming any obstacles preventing the delivery of Taurus long-range missiles to the Kiev regime.

Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock is open to her British colleague David Cameron’s suggestion of a swap of long-range cruise missiles for their further transfer to Ukraine, Der Spiegel reported.

In particular, Germany could supply Taurus cruise missiles to the United Kingdom, and in return the British side would transfer Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine. Thus, Berlin would formally be relieved of responsibility for providing cruise missiles to the Kiev regime, the outlet stated.

“That would be an option,” Baerbock was quoted as saying regarding the proposed exchange on ARD’s program Caren Miosga.

The German minister on Sunday pointed out that exchanges of a similar nature had already taken place with respect to other material. This, according to the outlet, was a nod at Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s previous use of indirect military aid to Ukraine, when he was reluctant to send Leopard 2 main battle tanks to the conflict zone. In January, 2023, Berlin announced it would send its Leopard 2A6 main battle tanks to Ukraine, also agreeing to provide re-export licenses for other countries wanting to supply these German-made armored vehicles. Within weeks of their arrival on the battlefield, Russian forces began hunting the tanks down with missiles and kamikaze drones.

UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron recently came up with a potential way to persuade Germany to supply Ukraine with Taurus missiles. During a recent interview with German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung, he stated that London was ready to help Berlin solve problems preventing the delivery of the cruise missiles to Kiev, or consider the option of buying German missiles and then transferring British Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine. Cameron did not discount the possibility of imposing certain restrictions before supplying the weaponry to Kiev.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has repeatedly dismissed the idea of providing Ukraine with missiles capable of striking deep into Russian territory, as such support would come dangerously close to direct German participation in the conflict.

If the swap scheme of Britain procuring Taurus missiles from Germany in exchange for supplying Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine comes to pass, Kiev would likely get the long-range missiles eventually, pundits told Sputnik.

The issue of Taurus transfers made the headlines in the wake of a leaked conversation between German military officials discussing a potential attack on the Crimea Bridge.

On March 1, Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of RT and Rossiya Segodnya, Sputnik’s parent media group, published the text of a conversation involving four Bundeswehr representatives discussing a potential attack on the Crimean Bridge with Taurus missiles. The talk, which took place on February 19, involved Inspector of the German Air Force Ingo Gerhartz, Brig. Gen. Frank Graefe, head of the Operations and Exercises Department at the Air Force Command in Berlin, and two employees of the air operations center of the Bundeswehr Space Command.

After the intercepted war talk, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz once again ruled out supplying the missiles to Ukraine since it could require the presence of German troops on the ground to help deploy them. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said that long-range Taurus missiles would not be decisive for the conflict in Ukraine and would only help in certain areas, but that Germany does not intend to cross this line.

“We have always emphasized that such long-range missiles will not solve this [crisis],” Pistorius said at a joint press conference with Finnish Defense Minister Antti Hakkanen.

The Kremlin reiterated that the contents of leaked conversations between German officials proved “the direct involvement of the collective West in the conflict in Ukraine.”

In the wake of Ukraine’s bungled counteroffensive, the Zelensky regime has been pressing Germany for the delivery of the missiles, which have a range of 500 kilometers (311 miles) and could strike deep inside Russian territory.

Moscow has repeatedly underscored that Western arms shipments to Kiev and the training of Ukrainian servicemen only prolong the conflict and will be unable to alter the situation at the battlefield.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Polish embassy in US calls warning by Polish-US communities not to engage in ‘unwinnable’ Ukraine war the ‘Kremlin’s rhetoric’

POLSATNEWS | March 11, 2024

Representatives from several Polish-American communities in the United States have sent a letter to the president and prime minister of Poland ahead of their joint visit to the White House, in which they opposed the “deeper involvement of Poland in the war” in Ukraine.

The letter to Prime Minister Donald Tusk and President Andrzej Duda expressed communities’ “firm opposition” to Poland’s further involvement in the conflict and urged Warsaw not to engage in an unwinnable war.

The authors appealed for NATO to remain a defensive alliance, not a “tool for fulfilling the geopolitical ambitions of its dominant members.” They argued that “Poland should not be drawn into or forced into military engagement beyond its borders unless it is first attacked.”

The strong stance against Polish involvement in Ukraine prompted a significant response from the Polish embassy in Washington.

“We are concerned about the content and tone of statements reflecting the Kremlin’s rhetoric,” stated Poland’s Ambassador to the U.S. Marek Magierowski.

The embassy emphasized that “the only way to ensure a peaceful future for Europe and the transatlantic community is by ensuring Russia’s strategic defeat in its war.”

Furthermore, the Polish diaspora was urged to “advocate for our interests, which include further assistance for Ukraine in its defense against Russian aggression.” The embassy also expressed gratitude for the contributions of millions of Poles towards Poland’s integration with NATO.

Andrzej Duda and Donald Tusk are due to visit Washington on March 12.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Trump has plan to end Ukraine conflict – Orban

RT | March 11, 2024

Donald Trump intends to end the Ukraine conflict, if reelected as US president, and has a “detailed plan” to do so, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban told local media, after meeting the presumed Republican nominee.

The former US leader repeatedly claimed on his campaign trail that, if he had remained in the White House for a second term, there would be no hostilities between Moscow and Kiev. If voted back in, he promises to end the conflict “in 24 hours” by applying pressure on stakeholders.

Orban, who spoke with Trump at the Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida on Friday, did not explain how exactly the American would do that, but said that cutting the flow of US aid was a crucial part of the plan.

”If the US will not provide the money, Europeans on their own will not be able to finance this war, and then the war will end,” Orban said in an interview with M1 broadcaster on Sunday.

During his presidency, Trump had shown himself to be “a man of peace,” the Hungarian leader claimed. That stance puts him in alignment with Hungary, unlike the administration of US President Joe Biden and many members of the EU, he added.

”The American Democratic government and the leadership of the EU, as well as the leadership of the largest EU member states are pro-war governments. Donald Trump is pro-peace, Hungary is pro-peace. At the bottom of everything lies this difference,” Orban declared.

The Kremlin declined to weigh in on the remarks, with spokesman Dmitry Peskov saying on Monday that Orban’s account of Trump’s intentions was too vague for any specific commentary.

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky previously expressed skepticism about Trump’s ability to deliver on the promise. He said if the plan was feasible, the American politician should share it with the public, or at least with Kiev. The Ukrainian government claims that a “just peace” requires a military victory over Russia and that it would agree to nothing short of that.

Moscow has said that its strategic goals in the military operation against Kiev will be achieved one way or another. The US and its allies, who continue to arm Ukraine, cannot change that outcome and are only prolonging the suffering of the country’s people, Russian officials have stated.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Missiles near Russia, F-35s with thermonuclear bombs… Is NATO ready for war?

By Drago Bosnic | March 11, 2024

NATO’s never-ending encroachment on Russia’s borders is breaking world records in mere days. Just last week, a new major airbase was opened in Albania, despite the fact that Tirana effectively has no air force. NATO was also given full exterritoriality rights, meaning that Albania officially gave up on its already highly dubious “sovereignty”. Deployment of major ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) and strike platforms in the area can certainly bolster the belligerent alliance’s highly destabilizing presence in both Southeastern and Eastern Europe. And yet, this is not enough. Namely, on March 7, Lithuanian Defense Minister Arvydas Anusauskas confirmed that NATO would also station “Patriot” SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems in his country. While Lithuania doesn’t border mainland Russia, it has an extensive border with Belarus and Moscow’s Kaliningrad oblast (region).

“This year, the rotational air defense system will finally become operational, at least partially,” Anusauskas stated at a press conference in Vilnius, adding: “Our goal is to have a rotation similar to the air policing mission… This principle would not be a one-off thing for several months but would cover all of our calendar months and significantly increase our air defense capabilities.”

While the “Patriot” has been intentionally overhyped by the mainstream propaganda machine, particularly with laughable claims of shooting down “half of the Russian Aerospace Forces in a week”, the move can certainly be considered highly destabilizing. It’s not yet clear how many of these systems could be deployed, but given the much smaller distances that it needs to cover than in Ukraine, deploying the “Patriot” in any of the Baltic states can certainly be more consequential. Namely, the detection range of its AN/MPQ-65 radar (officially 150 km) could provide coverage into the airspace of both Belarus and the Kaliningrad oblast. In addition, Finland is acquiring similar, albeit more advanced air defense assets, including the Israeli “David’s Sling”, which has a significantly longer maximum engagement range. Amassing such SAM systems so close to Russia’s northwest is deeply destabilizing and antagonistic.

While other NATO member states in the relative vicinity of Russia’s borders also operate “Patriot” SAM systems, most notably Romania and (soon) Poland, both of these are far enough not to make the air defense system a strategic issue. On the other hand, other much longer-range weapons, such as the “Aegis Ashore” ABM (anti-ballistic missile) systems, are set to become fully operational in Poland in 2024, while another is already active in Romania (since at least 2016). It’s part of the wider ship-borne “Aegis” system that provides a level of strategic depth that neither the “Patriot” nor “David’s Sling” could. And while the system’s capabilities and effectiveness are certainly up for debate (particularly against Russian hypersonic missiles), the massive increase in their presence is of quantitative importance, which could at least partially ameliorate their qualitative shortcomings and other deficiencies.

And yet, this certainly isn’t the end of NATO’s highly destabilizing activities in Europe. Namely, its vassals and satellite states such as Finland are acquiring the F-35s, while also making it possible to accommodate other jets of the same type from the United States and other NATO member states. The forward presence of USAF F-35s in Eastern and Central Europe keeps expanding and getting ever closer to Russia. Apart from Finland, it now includes Germany, Czechia and Poland, while the Dutch, Belgian and Italian F-35s will also be forward deployed to the area around the Baltic Sea. Worse yet, the jet has been certified to carry thermonuclear weapons, specifically the B61-12 bomb, with several NATO members having the ability to use them through nuclear sharing agreements with the US. This includes the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Italy, all of whom either operate F-35s or have them on order.

Namely, on March 9, the F-35 was confirmed to be certified to carry B61-12 thermonuclear gravity bombs. Although this refers only to the conventional F-35A, with F-35B and F-35C variants still lacking such capabilities, the latter two are deployed in much smaller numbers. The conventional F-35A is the most common version used by the USAF and other NATO air forces. The possibility of their large-scale deployment in Finland and the Baltic states gives the US premier strike capabilities, far greater than Russia ever had in Cuba 60 years ago.

What’s more, both high-ranking officials in Moscow and independent experts regularly warn about the development of new thermonuclear weapons in America, including the so-called “nuclear super-fuse” technology that the US has been testing for decades, particularly under the Obama administration. Investigative historian Eric Zuesse wrote extensively on the topic.

He has repeatedly been warning that the sole purpose of this controversial technology is to exponentially amplify the effectiveness of America’s first-strike capabilities. And while some might discard Zuesse’s warnings and even decry them as “doom and gloom fantasy” or the mythical “Russian disinformation”, recent developments only reinforce his already sound hypothesis. What’s more, NATO is directly involved in these plans. Back in October last year, the belligerent alliance concluded the “Steadfast Noon” nuclear exercise involving approximately 60 aircraft, including nuclear-capable F-16s and B-52 strategic bombers simulating strikes with B61-12 bombs. It should be noted that these bombs will also be augmented by the upcoming B61-13 variant. And although the nature of this upgrade is classified, it’s safe to assume that they will also include the aforementioned “nuclear super-fuse” technology.

The Pentagon already announced that these new thermonuclear bombs will be comparable to the B61-7 version that can have a yield of up to 340 kt (roughly equivalent to 22-23 Hiroshima bombs). Faced with such escalation, Russia doesn’t exactly have a lot of choice but to be prepared. This is precisely why Russia has been conducting nationwide drills simulating an all-out nuclear attack, as well as its own retaliatory strikes on the aggressors. Earlier, the US FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) conducted similar warning exercises.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

March 11, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries