It’s difficult to get a good complete picture of what transpired at the Summit which was conducted via video. Here’s the list of participants as provided by the Kremlin: Vladimir PUTIN, President of the Russian Federation Luiz Lula da Silva – President of the Federative Republic of Brazil
1967 borders? and what of the Syrian lands in the Golan Heights. Are these to be yielded in exchange for a Palestine State? The zionists and outlaw U$ empire will apply their rules based order logic and whine and whinge until they have totally sabotaged every peace deal. My preference is to stick to the original UN mandate and not one stolen by force of arms. Give Lebanon and Syria a break from these mendacious zionist neighbours.
Thanks karlof, it is interesting to see some vague semblance of Arab and Iranian unity but the frenetic machinations of the 'rules based order' thugs will be hard at work imo.
Nov 22, 2023·edited Nov 22, 2023Liked by Karl Sanchez
Excellent, thoughtful, insightful article.
BFO = Blinding Force of the Obvious
US lost recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan AND they didn't have external players involved (Pakistan was involved somewhat in Afghanistan.) Only one country involved.
Neither of these wars were existential for the US : US's existence was not threatened.
If the US, along with NATO, failed in Iraq and Afghanistan, can they prevail in the Gaza Genocide war?
There are many external players who could become involved in the Gaza genocide war and they are capable of delivering huge damage to Israel. And could strike a blow to the US by sinking a couple of Aircraft Carriers, i.e., floating targets.
The Gaza genocide is an existential war for several countries in the Middle East and is existential for the entire Middle East Region. They will fight for their existence.
It seems to me to be a BFO that Israel, US and UK will loose big time in this Genocide of Gaza war.
Response to Karl Sanchez' "BRICS+ Emergency Summit & Other Actions"
Alexander Mercouris believes that this movement will continue and influence the UN Security Council to pass a binding resolution against Israel. He says that this will take time but movement is there.
The problem with that, of course, is the previous Resolutions have been ignored by Israel and the US. And as long as the neocons run Washington, they will continue to be ignored. Therefore the probability is that the US will either veto or at best abstain from voting such a Resolution. What good is such a Resolution if the US is not willing to enforce it?
Mercouris, despite his sophisticated foreign policy knowledge, can be ridiculously naive at time. This is because he views the actions of the state as a "civilian" and "subject" to states. I as an anarchist can see states for what they are and can predict how they will behave.
There is the problem of actually implementing such a Resolution. As Karl has said in an earlier post, this can only be done with military force (or perhaps alternatively a severe economic blockade of Israel, which also amounts to an act of war.) The only actors in the region really capable of implementing such force are: 1) Hezbollah in Lebanon; 2) Turkey; 3) possibly Egypt in concert with other actors; 4) Iran.
The problem with THAT is that two of these entities are considered "terrorist" by the US and the EU, i.e., Hezbollah and Iran. And those are the two that really have the firepower to do damage to Israel from a distance (or very close in the case of Hezbollah.) Turkey also has the power but would have to move through Syria to get to Israel's borders.
The problem with either Hezbollah or Iran being involved is that the US neocons will attack either or both of them. Turkey is less likely to be attacked, being a NATO member, which would risk splitting NATO (not particularly a Bad Thing), but again, it would take some time to sort out the logistics and geopolitics of Turkey acting against Israel, whereas Hezbollah and Iran could immediately act.
There is another possibility: that Russia and China could present Israel with a fait accompli in the form of the threat of stand-off precision missile strikes on Israel's military, in particular Israel's nuclear arsenal. Russia's Kinzhal missiles could hit Israel from the Black Sea, and Russia undoubtedly knows where Israel's missile arsenal is hidden. Unless Israel has its missile arsenal organized in the same manner as Alastair Crooke discussed Iran's yesterday - scattered in independently operating units that could continue a war even if cut off from their HQ - Israel's threats to use nukes could be contained.
The problem with THAT is Israel's five German-designed diesel submarines which reportedly are armed with Popeye Turbo cruise missiles with 200-liloton nuclear warheads (how many per sub is unknown.) It is possible that Russia and China's attack subs could locate and neutralize those subs, but I suspect that is problematic.
And of course, the US response to such threats must be considered. Again, the neocons run the show. This is demonstrated by the fact that when the US claims to be "worried" that Israel is deliberately provoking Hezbollah to escalate the war, they send an Israeli-born, dual Israeli-US citizenship, low-level official to "discuss" the matter with Israel. I suspect they actually want Israel to escalate the northern conflict so the US can get involved and then extend the conflict to Iran. So the probability that the US will stand by as Russia and China threaten Israel is in my view next to nil.
This is a mess. The only option which does not almost immediately escalate to nuclear war is the economic blockade one. But even in that scenario, Israel could threaten it's "Samson Option" and threaten to nuke most of the major cities in the Middle East.
I see very few options which do not lead either immediately or within a relatively short time to WWIII.
Karl is right. The international community needs to condemn Israel explicitly as a genocidal terrorist state and directly compare the Zionist regime to the WWII Nazi Germany regime. Only then can sufficient amounts of force be directed against Israel.
The problem with THAT is geopolitics and diplomacy are not conducted in such language. So the international community will fritter about spending months trying to get a UN Resolution which will be ignored by both Israel and the US. The war will widen, Israel will begin to lose and then threaten its Samson Option.
It's going to be a major mess no matter what happens unless somehow the Israeli regime is forced from power internally, which, according to Crooke, is doubtful as support for Palestinian genocide is now rampant in the Israeli population.
Someone offer an alternative to this scenario. I can't see one.
Yes, it's already a major mess and it's going to get even bigger which is why action must be taken now rather than later. As I wrote at MoA, either the Chaos makers are stopped permanently or the Chaos will continue and humanity will never know world peace.
I would hope that among the one million Russian Jews there, there are a few saboteurs (double agents if you will) that have installed bugs in the software of the ashkeNAZI subs.
It's early morning where I am and maybe I'm dreaming too much. It's a comforting, if not practical, thought though.
The response is going to be slow, generally, and boils down to exhausting the West to the point that they can no longer keep projecting military and financial force. Direct kinetic confrontation can prevent direct kinetic encroachment - as with the Ukraine siege - but it cannot solve underlying issues.
First, 'they' need to have the ability to conceive of a two state solution including both specific borders.
Second, they must be able to enforce such conception, probably with a joint security force comprised of their various militaries in significant numbers for several decades.
Third, since the UN is hopelessly compromised by US intransigence in eternal obeisance to Israel, they will have to set up some sort of Authority to do the above. BRICS isn't it but could be the basis; what has been clearly missing from the dynamic since the 1920 is the full participation of the Regional Powers which have been in 'divided and conquered' mode this whole time - many of the territories drawn up on British table napkins.
These things take time, though I suspect once Russia takes over BRICS and I believe China is chairing the UNSC next year there might be faster movement.
However, the single greatest factor achieving a solution here will be internal political turmoil in the West, especially in UK, France, Germany and the US. Perhaps - but probably not - coincidentally, turmoil is about the only thing which can confidently be predicted in those States in 2024.
In that context, the steadier the Regional Powers hold themselves along with Russian and Chinese sponsorship, the more the perception of the world, including within the Western States, will change as it becomes increasingly obvious that the latter indeed represents a step backward in human affairs, an arc of chaos, violence and instability, and other alignments and approaches offer a better way forward.
This is called winning at the moral level, which is always superior to the physical-kinetic-military level.
Finally, they cannot control the Israeli addiction to self-serving eschatological designs in their region. However, they can control their own Region much better. This cannot be done by Great Powers on the outside since it relegates them to a dependent, and therefore not responsible, status. (Why the best way to change Israel would be to cut off their funding so they have to grow up and make it on their own.) So they have to step up and resume responsibility for their own civilizational region and create their own facts on the ground in so doing rather than waiting for others to do this essential work for them.
"First, 'they' need to have the ability to conceive of a two state solution including both specific borders."
There is no "two-state solution" - not while Zionists reside in Palestine. Nor should there be. There needs to be a bi-national state. This is the only way "legitimate" Jews - or Zionists without any power - can continue to reside in Palestine. As Crooke mentions, even the Palestinians are now coming to believe that it will be impossible to live with the Israelis presently in Israel. I am not sure about that, but I do know that a two-state solution is not workable.
Netanyahu already referred to Israel being "attacked by the Palestinian State". This comment was no doubt deliberate and intended to make it plan that any action by an Palestinian state, now or in the future, would be reacted to by Israel as an attack by a STATE - not an occupied people. This will remove Israel from being responsible for its reaction because it will not longer be the "occupier".
I reiterate - the only solution is a bi-national one. This has to be imposed on the Palestinians and Israelis from outside, by the UN.
"Second, they must be able to enforce such conception, probably with a joint security force comprised of their various militaries in significant numbers for several decades."
That is likely to be true, regardless of whether a two-state or bi-national state solution is chosen, unless those Zionists who have influence and power in Israel are drive out. The same likely applies to the more radical Palestinian extremists.
Setting up an alternative "authority" to the UN isn't going to work. What needs to happen is that the UN Security Council needs to be revamped to include members from outside the West.
Currently the members are: Permanent members: China France Russia United Kingdom United States Non-permanent members: Albania Brazil Ecuador Gabon Ghana Japan Malta Mozambique Switzerland United Arab Emirates.
The Council should be revamped by removing France and Great Britain as Permanent Members and substituting large developing countries such as India, Brazil, and Indonesia, representing the main areas of the world. The Non-Permanent Members must also be rotated with each representing a specific region of the world.
The Council voting procedure should eliminate the "one vote vetos the measure" and revert to simple majority vote. This eliminates the US dominant role.
As for relying on internal political turmoil to resolve the situation, we could be in nuclear war long before then. "Winning at the moral level" does nothing if it can't produce a favorable result on the ground.
Yes, they can control the Zionist addiction to fascism and terrorism. It's called applying overwhelming military force. Cutting off their economy might also work, as both of us have suggested. But in the end, only credible military and economic threats will work to force the Israeli population to get rid of the Zionist crazies. And right now, the only people who can do that are the countries I listed: Russia, China, Hezbollah, Iran, and Turkey. They are the ones who need to step up and confront the Zionist regime.
Well, this is a long argument ongoing for decades. My personal opinion is that as long as there are ardent Zionists there is no viable One-State option. They will not honour any deal made and will find ways to keep killing. You can't willingly join with such criminal mentality.
Plus, as the piece Karl recommends argues, Palestine deserves their own State. Full Stop. And they do. Everything for too long has been framed by Israel, by her greed and paranoia. The biggest argument against a Palestine State is that they will have a military and be able to attack Israel therefore Israel has been preemptively terrorizing them for almost a century. It's a BS argument but nobody is there to counter it. Meanwhile, the needs of the Palestinians has never entered the picture. It's wrong and high time to rectify it.
In K's piece: "The West is so weak that we are an unplanned spark away from a Palestinian state." This was my argument in the earlier comment. The bigger game is the exhaustion of the West to the point they can no longer interfere. As you point out, they are still very strong. This is going to take time.
The only way to have One State is if all Zionists are forced to leave the area and the State of Palestine is established without them. The only way. Realistically, the Jews aren't leaving therefore they need to be contained, much like those in Gaza are now contained. That's going to take more stones than the Region has yet mustered. Indeed, ultimately it is their weakness which has enabled this mess for so long.
With the best will in the world, the BRICS side is going to have a devil of a time establishing borders since Israel refuses any such. They are going to have to muster some serious muscle to project Authority with Enforcement. They are a long way from that, though things are moving fast these days so who knows what 2024 will bring.
OK, I read it. He didn't say anything I haven't said here.
However, he completely ignores the elephant in the room: How do you deal with the US military power run by neocons? Ranting about how "the West is weak" doesn't change the facts that:
1) The US still has nuclear weapons.
2) The US is run by neocons who, as Martyanov says literally ever day, do not understand real war and thus are prepared to commit the US to suicide against Russia and China and Iran.
So assuming that his scenario of Israel attacks this and that entity and this and that entity attacks Israel - and he completely ignores the US attacking each of those entities - how does this prevent WWIII?
He also thinks a two-state solution is fine because the Palestinians allegedly want it. I think he's delusional. As Crooke said, even the Palestinians have given up trying to live with Zionists. And as I've repeatedly said, without driving all the Zionists out, a two-state solution is merely an invitation to another "war", with Israel stomping on the Palestinian "State" all over again.
Yes, the Palestinians can get a state out of this mess. But we could also get WWIII. THAT'S THE PROBLEM - which he ignores.
You'll have noted I didn't agree. Different POVs are essential to arriving at a critical judgement and resulting opinion. And I don't agree 100% with Martyanov either. Try this: Is a nuclear war real war?
Nuclear war could be real war. Depends on what happens. Generally speaking, however, what Martyanov refers to as "real war" is large-scale industrial war of the sort happening in Ukraine. Localized conflicts like Iraq or Afghanistan are not "real war", they are the US beating up weak militaries with no air defense.
The conflict in the Middle East will not be "real war", either, if it only involves Israel, Hezbollah and Iran throwing missiles at each other, and a certain amount of ground war between Hamas/Hezbollah and Israel. Hamas is just conducting mostly guerrilla war. Hezbollah at the moment is mostly doing "missile war".
It will be "real war" only if the Arab armies directly engage Israel on the ground. Pretty much the only country that can do that is Turkey. I'm not familiar with the level of Egypt's, Jordan's or Syria's current military capabilities to comment on them, but I suspect they would only be effective if they all jumped on Israel together. When you have brigades and divisions conducting large-scale warfare (either attrition or maneuver), that is "real war".
But the main issue is the US. The US can't fight a ground war in Lebanon - but they might try. They can't fight a ground war in Syria - but they might try. They can't fight a ground war in Iran - but they might try. The same everywhere else.
What the US can do is pound the infrastructure and military assets of any Middle Eastern country from the air - at least until they run out of bombs, cruise missiles and shells. Can they do that to all of them? Probably not - but they might try.
The problem with "they might try" is precisely what Martyanov is talking about. The western leaders do not "get it". They do not understand their limitations in a "real war". So they push past their capabilities, and it is this that causes the danger that once they start losing they will resort to "tactical nukes". Israel has already talked about doing so, albeit unofficially.
If any of the heavy hitters - Turkey, Russia or China - get involved, then we're looking at either "real war" or nuclear war. The problem is that any "real war" can escalate to nuclear war. Throw in Zionist crazies with nukes and perhaps you can see the problem.
Every country on earth with a conscience needs to put a trade embargo on Israel. Else they might be next, especially if they do not have the deterrence of deliverable nuclear weapons. Yellow actions like "condemnation", "closing embassies", "expelling diplomats" and other "strong language" do not cut it anymore. This is akin to to Nazi Germany invading Czechoslovakia in 1939 setting the stage for a much bigger conflict. But, of course, nobody really cares about the brown Palestinian people. Now, if these were blond, blue-eyed folks things might be different.
It must be all of the above. Of course, we know Hitlerian Germany could've been stopped well before 1938, but as with now no action was taken to enforce the mandates; Germany was allowed to do as it pleased. The same happened with the Minsk Accords--the mandates were not enforced. There are too many intelligent people who know genuine history but have allowed the same occurrence to happen a second and third time--they can't be blamed for WW2 as they weren't present, but what's happening now is partly their fault for not demanding action, instead of requesting it. And that's where we're at now--requesting rather than demanding.
Nov 21, 2023·edited Nov 21, 2023Liked by Karl Sanchez
The Russians cared (eventually) and DID give a shit (to borrow your vernacular). Which is why this is being resolved as we type. But more to your point: Nobody in the West knew about the Ukr civil war (by design), hence no one (in the West) cared. The West only reports what suits its narrative, unless forced otherwise.
It's unfortunate and yet highly expected. This is probably as good as it gets.
While Iran is calling for the right things they have no power to make it happen. They already have zero diplomatic contacts and trade with Israel. Russia and China are just pathetic. The Arabs have always been losers on this matter.
it's good while I don't agree with the two-state solution fantasy. That's dead. Has been for almost 30 years but at least now it's more obvious that both sides reject it - and by that I believe the majority of the people accept there is no alternative now (irrespective of the leadership says on either side. )
Either Israel or the new State of Palestine instead - one or the other but not both - I'm for Palestine myself.
The Global Majority has the means to prevent Israel from carrying out its genocidal plans. If they don't ACT, and soon, they will become accomplices and this will sadly demonstrate that all their fine talk of respect for international law and cooperation between nations is still nothing but hot air.
After the anticipated de-nazification is completed, Israelis might do well to consider an “exodus” back to the Ashkenazi homelands in Ukraine. Many were immigrants from Russia to begin with. Mizrahi Jews that renounce Zionism could hopefully reach an understanding with their Muslim neighbors - they all have ancestral ties to Greater Palestine. “You can say I’m a dreamer.....but I’m not the only one”
Nov 22, 2023·edited Nov 22, 2023Liked by Karl Sanchez
Bernie Sanders comes around, maybe. Article published in NYT today.
Early on Bernie was full on support if the Zionists because of the "terror" attack on Oct 7
I sent him a note saying that I am outraged and will no longer support him and to remove my name from his list of supporters. But little old me is not a big deal. There were many others including a long video by Norman Finklestein who called Bernie a MORAL MONSTER. Finklestein went through war by war, assignation by assignation, lies, etc. to educate Bernie. He also said that he was possibly the oldest volunteer for Bernie as he went out of state to ring doorbells for his campaign.
This morning I got a good note from Bernie containing his NY article because I have been on his list of supporters for years.
Bernie restates Zionists propaganda of 1200 dead and other pieces of propaganda which fortunately the media blitz by the Zionists is not working this time. He is then harsh on the Zionist. There must be an immediate cease fire. And from the letter "The last year saw record Israeli settlement growth in the West Bank, where more than 700,000 Israelis now live in areas that the United Nations and the United States agree are occupied territories. They have used state violence to back up this de facto annexation. "
Does this indicate a sea change in the US congress away from being coagents of genocide?
Bernie's article was published in NYT 6 hours ago and is not yet up on his website. I can paste it into this substack if anyone is interested.
"Bernie Sanders: Justice for the Palestinians and Security for Israel"
... and then to try and dominate global access to all fossil fuels whilst they rapidly depletes over the next few decades, whilst people begin to realize an electric only economy is impossible.
A jihad of cleansing (removal) the zionest threat was proclaimed some decades ago all well written and documented by various Clerics and Arabic writers and students. Today we witness this ongoing struggle and its axis of resistance amplified many times over in Hamas and Houthi and Hezbollah. There can be no peace until such threat and the desecration of Muslim holy sites including neocolonial interference of muslim orthodoxy is defeated.
The titanic geopolitical shifts we are discussing are not merely the result of horrifying images being seen the world over of martyrdom with the Palestinian, but the explications and very real threat this movement poses onward for any peace initiatives let alone continued neocolonial expansion.
Iran understands this very well and again and again has warned of such a coming eventually would coalesce and climaxing in the removal of the zionest entity. Saudi Arabia in particular along with the gulf and normalization states also take notice how susceptible neocolonial trade oil and shipping as does the Houthi and axis resistance. Its no coincidence that China Russia or any serious geostrategic examination of the vulnerability the resistance now hold with advancements in telecommunications and missile technology in respect for regional negotiations in affairs effecting Muslim peoples now in Palestine.
1967 borders? and what of the Syrian lands in the Golan Heights. Are these to be yielded in exchange for a Palestine State? The zionists and outlaw U$ empire will apply their rules based order logic and whine and whinge until they have totally sabotaged every peace deal. My preference is to stick to the original UN mandate and not one stolen by force of arms. Give Lebanon and Syria a break from these mendacious zionist neighbours.
Thanks karlof, it is interesting to see some vague semblance of Arab and Iranian unity but the frenetic machinations of the 'rules based order' thugs will be hard at work imo.
I just finished https://raminmazaheri.substack.com/p/why-we-are-just-one-half-revolution
Highly suggested!
Excellent, thoughtful, insightful article.
BFO = Blinding Force of the Obvious
US lost recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan AND they didn't have external players involved (Pakistan was involved somewhat in Afghanistan.) Only one country involved.
Neither of these wars were existential for the US : US's existence was not threatened.
If the US, along with NATO, failed in Iraq and Afghanistan, can they prevail in the Gaza Genocide war?
There are many external players who could become involved in the Gaza genocide war and they are capable of delivering huge damage to Israel. And could strike a blow to the US by sinking a couple of Aircraft Carriers, i.e., floating targets.
The Gaza genocide is an existential war for several countries in the Middle East and is existential for the entire Middle East Region. They will fight for their existence.
It seems to me to be a BFO that Israel, US and UK will loose big time in this Genocide of Gaza war.
Good advice, thank you.
Response to Karl Sanchez' "BRICS+ Emergency Summit & Other Actions"
Alexander Mercouris believes that this movement will continue and influence the UN Security Council to pass a binding resolution against Israel. He says that this will take time but movement is there.
The problem with that, of course, is the previous Resolutions have been ignored by Israel and the US. And as long as the neocons run Washington, they will continue to be ignored. Therefore the probability is that the US will either veto or at best abstain from voting such a Resolution. What good is such a Resolution if the US is not willing to enforce it?
Mercouris, despite his sophisticated foreign policy knowledge, can be ridiculously naive at time. This is because he views the actions of the state as a "civilian" and "subject" to states. I as an anarchist can see states for what they are and can predict how they will behave.
There is the problem of actually implementing such a Resolution. As Karl has said in an earlier post, this can only be done with military force (or perhaps alternatively a severe economic blockade of Israel, which also amounts to an act of war.) The only actors in the region really capable of implementing such force are: 1) Hezbollah in Lebanon; 2) Turkey; 3) possibly Egypt in concert with other actors; 4) Iran.
The problem with THAT is that two of these entities are considered "terrorist" by the US and the EU, i.e., Hezbollah and Iran. And those are the two that really have the firepower to do damage to Israel from a distance (or very close in the case of Hezbollah.) Turkey also has the power but would have to move through Syria to get to Israel's borders.
The problem with either Hezbollah or Iran being involved is that the US neocons will attack either or both of them. Turkey is less likely to be attacked, being a NATO member, which would risk splitting NATO (not particularly a Bad Thing), but again, it would take some time to sort out the logistics and geopolitics of Turkey acting against Israel, whereas Hezbollah and Iran could immediately act.
There is another possibility: that Russia and China could present Israel with a fait accompli in the form of the threat of stand-off precision missile strikes on Israel's military, in particular Israel's nuclear arsenal. Russia's Kinzhal missiles could hit Israel from the Black Sea, and Russia undoubtedly knows where Israel's missile arsenal is hidden. Unless Israel has its missile arsenal organized in the same manner as Alastair Crooke discussed Iran's yesterday - scattered in independently operating units that could continue a war even if cut off from their HQ - Israel's threats to use nukes could be contained.
The problem with THAT is Israel's five German-designed diesel submarines which reportedly are armed with Popeye Turbo cruise missiles with 200-liloton nuclear warheads (how many per sub is unknown.) It is possible that Russia and China's attack subs could locate and neutralize those subs, but I suspect that is problematic.
And of course, the US response to such threats must be considered. Again, the neocons run the show. This is demonstrated by the fact that when the US claims to be "worried" that Israel is deliberately provoking Hezbollah to escalate the war, they send an Israeli-born, dual Israeli-US citizenship, low-level official to "discuss" the matter with Israel. I suspect they actually want Israel to escalate the northern conflict so the US can get involved and then extend the conflict to Iran. So the probability that the US will stand by as Russia and China threaten Israel is in my view next to nil.
This is a mess. The only option which does not almost immediately escalate to nuclear war is the economic blockade one. But even in that scenario, Israel could threaten it's "Samson Option" and threaten to nuke most of the major cities in the Middle East.
I see very few options which do not lead either immediately or within a relatively short time to WWIII.
Karl is right. The international community needs to condemn Israel explicitly as a genocidal terrorist state and directly compare the Zionist regime to the WWII Nazi Germany regime. Only then can sufficient amounts of force be directed against Israel.
The problem with THAT is geopolitics and diplomacy are not conducted in such language. So the international community will fritter about spending months trying to get a UN Resolution which will be ignored by both Israel and the US. The war will widen, Israel will begin to lose and then threaten its Samson Option.
It's going to be a major mess no matter what happens unless somehow the Israeli regime is forced from power internally, which, according to Crooke, is doubtful as support for Palestinian genocide is now rampant in the Israeli population.
Someone offer an alternative to this scenario. I can't see one.
Yes, it's already a major mess and it's going to get even bigger which is why action must be taken now rather than later. As I wrote at MoA, either the Chaos makers are stopped permanently or the Chaos will continue and humanity will never know world peace.
I would hope that among the one million Russian Jews there, there are a few saboteurs (double agents if you will) that have installed bugs in the software of the ashkeNAZI subs.
It's early morning where I am and maybe I'm dreaming too much. It's a comforting, if not practical, thought though.
Turning back the clock is my dream, but it needs to be reset to 1934 if not earlier.
The response is going to be slow, generally, and boils down to exhausting the West to the point that they can no longer keep projecting military and financial force. Direct kinetic confrontation can prevent direct kinetic encroachment - as with the Ukraine siege - but it cannot solve underlying issues.
First, 'they' need to have the ability to conceive of a two state solution including both specific borders.
Second, they must be able to enforce such conception, probably with a joint security force comprised of their various militaries in significant numbers for several decades.
Third, since the UN is hopelessly compromised by US intransigence in eternal obeisance to Israel, they will have to set up some sort of Authority to do the above. BRICS isn't it but could be the basis; what has been clearly missing from the dynamic since the 1920 is the full participation of the Regional Powers which have been in 'divided and conquered' mode this whole time - many of the territories drawn up on British table napkins.
These things take time, though I suspect once Russia takes over BRICS and I believe China is chairing the UNSC next year there might be faster movement.
However, the single greatest factor achieving a solution here will be internal political turmoil in the West, especially in UK, France, Germany and the US. Perhaps - but probably not - coincidentally, turmoil is about the only thing which can confidently be predicted in those States in 2024.
In that context, the steadier the Regional Powers hold themselves along with Russian and Chinese sponsorship, the more the perception of the world, including within the Western States, will change as it becomes increasingly obvious that the latter indeed represents a step backward in human affairs, an arc of chaos, violence and instability, and other alignments and approaches offer a better way forward.
This is called winning at the moral level, which is always superior to the physical-kinetic-military level.
Finally, they cannot control the Israeli addiction to self-serving eschatological designs in their region. However, they can control their own Region much better. This cannot be done by Great Powers on the outside since it relegates them to a dependent, and therefore not responsible, status. (Why the best way to change Israel would be to cut off their funding so they have to grow up and make it on their own.) So they have to step up and resume responsibility for their own civilizational region and create their own facts on the ground in so doing rather than waiting for others to do this essential work for them.
I just finished https://raminmazaheri.substack.com/p/why-we-are-just-one-half-revolution
I suggest it be read before further commenting.
"First, 'they' need to have the ability to conceive of a two state solution including both specific borders."
There is no "two-state solution" - not while Zionists reside in Palestine. Nor should there be. There needs to be a bi-national state. This is the only way "legitimate" Jews - or Zionists without any power - can continue to reside in Palestine. As Crooke mentions, even the Palestinians are now coming to believe that it will be impossible to live with the Israelis presently in Israel. I am not sure about that, but I do know that a two-state solution is not workable.
Netanyahu already referred to Israel being "attacked by the Palestinian State". This comment was no doubt deliberate and intended to make it plan that any action by an Palestinian state, now or in the future, would be reacted to by Israel as an attack by a STATE - not an occupied people. This will remove Israel from being responsible for its reaction because it will not longer be the "occupier".
I reiterate - the only solution is a bi-national one. This has to be imposed on the Palestinians and Israelis from outside, by the UN.
"Second, they must be able to enforce such conception, probably with a joint security force comprised of their various militaries in significant numbers for several decades."
That is likely to be true, regardless of whether a two-state or bi-national state solution is chosen, unless those Zionists who have influence and power in Israel are drive out. The same likely applies to the more radical Palestinian extremists.
Setting up an alternative "authority" to the UN isn't going to work. What needs to happen is that the UN Security Council needs to be revamped to include members from outside the West.
Currently the members are: Permanent members: China France Russia United Kingdom United States Non-permanent members: Albania Brazil Ecuador Gabon Ghana Japan Malta Mozambique Switzerland United Arab Emirates.
The Council should be revamped by removing France and Great Britain as Permanent Members and substituting large developing countries such as India, Brazil, and Indonesia, representing the main areas of the world. The Non-Permanent Members must also be rotated with each representing a specific region of the world.
The Council voting procedure should eliminate the "one vote vetos the measure" and revert to simple majority vote. This eliminates the US dominant role.
As for relying on internal political turmoil to resolve the situation, we could be in nuclear war long before then. "Winning at the moral level" does nothing if it can't produce a favorable result on the ground.
Yes, they can control the Zionist addiction to fascism and terrorism. It's called applying overwhelming military force. Cutting off their economy might also work, as both of us have suggested. But in the end, only credible military and economic threats will work to force the Israeli population to get rid of the Zionist crazies. And right now, the only people who can do that are the countries I listed: Russia, China, Hezbollah, Iran, and Turkey. They are the ones who need to step up and confront the Zionist regime.
Well, this is a long argument ongoing for decades. My personal opinion is that as long as there are ardent Zionists there is no viable One-State option. They will not honour any deal made and will find ways to keep killing. You can't willingly join with such criminal mentality.
Plus, as the piece Karl recommends argues, Palestine deserves their own State. Full Stop. And they do. Everything for too long has been framed by Israel, by her greed and paranoia. The biggest argument against a Palestine State is that they will have a military and be able to attack Israel therefore Israel has been preemptively terrorizing them for almost a century. It's a BS argument but nobody is there to counter it. Meanwhile, the needs of the Palestinians has never entered the picture. It's wrong and high time to rectify it.
In K's piece: "The West is so weak that we are an unplanned spark away from a Palestinian state." This was my argument in the earlier comment. The bigger game is the exhaustion of the West to the point they can no longer interfere. As you point out, they are still very strong. This is going to take time.
The only way to have One State is if all Zionists are forced to leave the area and the State of Palestine is established without them. The only way. Realistically, the Jews aren't leaving therefore they need to be contained, much like those in Gaza are now contained. That's going to take more stones than the Region has yet mustered. Indeed, ultimately it is their weakness which has enabled this mess for so long.
With the best will in the world, the BRICS side is going to have a devil of a time establishing borders since Israel refuses any such. They are going to have to muster some serious muscle to project Authority with Enforcement. They are a long way from that, though things are moving fast these days so who knows what 2024 will bring.
I repeat what I said to Scorpion, I just finished https://raminmazaheri.substack.com/p/why-we-are-just-one-half-revolution
I suggest it be read before further commenting.
OK, I read it. He didn't say anything I haven't said here.
However, he completely ignores the elephant in the room: How do you deal with the US military power run by neocons? Ranting about how "the West is weak" doesn't change the facts that:
1) The US still has nuclear weapons.
2) The US is run by neocons who, as Martyanov says literally ever day, do not understand real war and thus are prepared to commit the US to suicide against Russia and China and Iran.
So assuming that his scenario of Israel attacks this and that entity and this and that entity attacks Israel - and he completely ignores the US attacking each of those entities - how does this prevent WWIII?
He also thinks a two-state solution is fine because the Palestinians allegedly want it. I think he's delusional. As Crooke said, even the Palestinians have given up trying to live with Zionists. And as I've repeatedly said, without driving all the Zionists out, a two-state solution is merely an invitation to another "war", with Israel stomping on the Palestinian "State" all over again.
Yes, the Palestinians can get a state out of this mess. But we could also get WWIII. THAT'S THE PROBLEM - which he ignores.
You'll have noted I didn't agree. Different POVs are essential to arriving at a critical judgement and resulting opinion. And I don't agree 100% with Martyanov either. Try this: Is a nuclear war real war?
Nuclear war could be real war. Depends on what happens. Generally speaking, however, what Martyanov refers to as "real war" is large-scale industrial war of the sort happening in Ukraine. Localized conflicts like Iraq or Afghanistan are not "real war", they are the US beating up weak militaries with no air defense.
The conflict in the Middle East will not be "real war", either, if it only involves Israel, Hezbollah and Iran throwing missiles at each other, and a certain amount of ground war between Hamas/Hezbollah and Israel. Hamas is just conducting mostly guerrilla war. Hezbollah at the moment is mostly doing "missile war".
It will be "real war" only if the Arab armies directly engage Israel on the ground. Pretty much the only country that can do that is Turkey. I'm not familiar with the level of Egypt's, Jordan's or Syria's current military capabilities to comment on them, but I suspect they would only be effective if they all jumped on Israel together. When you have brigades and divisions conducting large-scale warfare (either attrition or maneuver), that is "real war".
But the main issue is the US. The US can't fight a ground war in Lebanon - but they might try. They can't fight a ground war in Syria - but they might try. They can't fight a ground war in Iran - but they might try. The same everywhere else.
What the US can do is pound the infrastructure and military assets of any Middle Eastern country from the air - at least until they run out of bombs, cruise missiles and shells. Can they do that to all of them? Probably not - but they might try.
The problem with "they might try" is precisely what Martyanov is talking about. The western leaders do not "get it". They do not understand their limitations in a "real war". So they push past their capabilities, and it is this that causes the danger that once they start losing they will resort to "tactical nukes". Israel has already talked about doing so, albeit unofficially.
If any of the heavy hitters - Turkey, Russia or China - get involved, then we're looking at either "real war" or nuclear war. The problem is that any "real war" can escalate to nuclear war. Throw in Zionist crazies with nukes and perhaps you can see the problem.
Great job! Thank you!
Every country on earth with a conscience needs to put a trade embargo on Israel. Else they might be next, especially if they do not have the deterrence of deliverable nuclear weapons. Yellow actions like "condemnation", "closing embassies", "expelling diplomats" and other "strong language" do not cut it anymore. This is akin to to Nazi Germany invading Czechoslovakia in 1939 setting the stage for a much bigger conflict. But, of course, nobody really cares about the brown Palestinian people. Now, if these were blond, blue-eyed folks things might be different.
It must be all of the above. Of course, we know Hitlerian Germany could've been stopped well before 1938, but as with now no action was taken to enforce the mandates; Germany was allowed to do as it pleased. The same happened with the Minsk Accords--the mandates were not enforced. There are too many intelligent people who know genuine history but have allowed the same occurrence to happen a second and third time--they can't be blamed for WW2 as they weren't present, but what's happening now is partly their fault for not demanding action, instead of requesting it. And that's where we're at now--requesting rather than demanding.
Blond blue eyed folks like in the Donbass since 2014? As I recall,no one gave a shit about them either, so clearly this isn't a skin color issue
The Russians cared (eventually) and DID give a shit (to borrow your vernacular). Which is why this is being resolved as we type. But more to your point: Nobody in the West knew about the Ukr civil war (by design), hence no one (in the West) cared. The West only reports what suits its narrative, unless forced otherwise.
It's unfortunate and yet highly expected. This is probably as good as it gets.
While Iran is calling for the right things they have no power to make it happen. They already have zero diplomatic contacts and trade with Israel. Russia and China are just pathetic. The Arabs have always been losers on this matter.
A ray of hope if anything in this article can come to pass ... https://raminmazaheri.substack.com/p/why-we-are-just-one-half-revolution
it's good while I don't agree with the two-state solution fantasy. That's dead. Has been for almost 30 years but at least now it's more obvious that both sides reject it - and by that I believe the majority of the people accept there is no alternative now (irrespective of the leadership says on either side. )
Either Israel or the new State of Palestine instead - one or the other but not both - I'm for Palestine myself.
The Global Majority has the means to prevent Israel from carrying out its genocidal plans. If they don't ACT, and soon, they will become accomplices and this will sadly demonstrate that all their fine talk of respect for international law and cooperation between nations is still nothing but hot air.
Yes, the requirement is to act. We're into the 7th week.
After the anticipated de-nazification is completed, Israelis might do well to consider an “exodus” back to the Ashkenazi homelands in Ukraine. Many were immigrants from Russia to begin with. Mizrahi Jews that renounce Zionism could hopefully reach an understanding with their Muslim neighbors - they all have ancestral ties to Greater Palestine. “You can say I’m a dreamer.....but I’m not the only one”
Bernie Sanders comes around, maybe. Article published in NYT today.
Early on Bernie was full on support if the Zionists because of the "terror" attack on Oct 7
I sent him a note saying that I am outraged and will no longer support him and to remove my name from his list of supporters. But little old me is not a big deal. There were many others including a long video by Norman Finklestein who called Bernie a MORAL MONSTER. Finklestein went through war by war, assignation by assignation, lies, etc. to educate Bernie. He also said that he was possibly the oldest volunteer for Bernie as he went out of state to ring doorbells for his campaign.
This morning I got a good note from Bernie containing his NY article because I have been on his list of supporters for years.
Bernie restates Zionists propaganda of 1200 dead and other pieces of propaganda which fortunately the media blitz by the Zionists is not working this time. He is then harsh on the Zionist. There must be an immediate cease fire. And from the letter "The last year saw record Israeli settlement growth in the West Bank, where more than 700,000 Israelis now live in areas that the United Nations and the United States agree are occupied territories. They have used state violence to back up this de facto annexation. "
Does this indicate a sea change in the US congress away from being coagents of genocide?
Bernie's article was published in NYT 6 hours ago and is not yet up on his website. I can paste it into this substack if anyone is interested.
"Bernie Sanders: Justice for the Palestinians and Security for Israel"
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/22/opinion/bernie-sanders-israel-gaza.html
A "sea change"? No as many more Barkers would need to reverse their Bark. Remember what this is really all about: Control of the Oil Lands.
... and then to try and dominate global access to all fossil fuels whilst they rapidly depletes over the next few decades, whilst people begin to realize an electric only economy is impossible.
A jihad of cleansing (removal) the zionest threat was proclaimed some decades ago all well written and documented by various Clerics and Arabic writers and students. Today we witness this ongoing struggle and its axis of resistance amplified many times over in Hamas and Houthi and Hezbollah. There can be no peace until such threat and the desecration of Muslim holy sites including neocolonial interference of muslim orthodoxy is defeated.
The titanic geopolitical shifts we are discussing are not merely the result of horrifying images being seen the world over of martyrdom with the Palestinian, but the explications and very real threat this movement poses onward for any peace initiatives let alone continued neocolonial expansion.
Iran understands this very well and again and again has warned of such a coming eventually would coalesce and climaxing in the removal of the zionest entity. Saudi Arabia in particular along with the gulf and normalization states also take notice how susceptible neocolonial trade oil and shipping as does the Houthi and axis resistance. Its no coincidence that China Russia or any serious geostrategic examination of the vulnerability the resistance now hold with advancements in telecommunications and missile technology in respect for regional negotiations in affairs effecting Muslim peoples now in Palestine.