The hard and the soft options to bring the criminal Israeli regime to heel

Declan Hayes

Much as how NATO deployed its vast array of soft and hard power weapons against Russia, so also does this article consider what can be done to bring Israel either into the civilised world or to its senses.

Much as how NATO deployed its vast array of soft and hard power weapons against Russia, so also does this article consider what can be done to bring Israel either into the civilised world or to its senses. Just as with NATO’s approach to Russia, so also does the article emphasise the concrete power that comes out of the barrel of a gun, and from the softer power of boycott.

Although the Argentinian Pope is correct to draw our attention to the power of prayer, the fact is that prayer’s power has been considerably diminished by the power the Catholic Church, as well as the Anglican-aligned cults, have bestowed to Israeli mouth pieces and agents. Today’s Palestinian children, Christians and Muslims alike, will die of old age before any light sufficient to change Israel’s mindset will come from those cancerous sources.

Meanwhile, when pianist Jayson Gillham referenced Israel’s mass murder of Palestinian journalists in Gaza, the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra (MSO) promptly canceled his scheduled performance. In far-away North London, Norman Lebrecht, the BBC’s odious Israeli agitator, informed us that the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra is beholden to its “Jewish donors”, who vetoed Gillham, whom the odious Lebrecht brands as an odious “anti-Israel agitator”, whom “self-respecting Jews will not want to be associated with”.

In Nagasaki, meanwhile, the United States and its British, French, German and sundry other lapdogs boycotted the commemoration of America’s 9 August 1945 terrorist atomic attack on that city, because rabid Israel was not also invited.

The larger relevance of these two events is that any attempt from whomsoever at drawing attention to Israel’s ongoing war crimes will bring swift retribution. And these are not isolated incidents. Germany, to take one loathsome example, has insisted that anyone, who wishes to claim German citizenship, must first swear an oath of allegiance not to Germany, but to Israel.

Although the situation in the United States is so extreme that it barely warrants commenting on, the overall message is that any and all actions or thoughts that are inimical to Israel’s interests are politically and socially unacceptable in NATO’s halls of power and influence. The reality of that message is that anyone and everyone trying to engage in effective action against Israel must weigh up whether or not their actions are worth the candle.

As well as being a moral question, it is also a tactical one which Gillham, for one, must decide on. Although we can all admire him from afar if he copies Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters and gives Israel the finger, few of us will contribute to his gofundme campaign, assuming he would be allowed have one, if and when Gillham and hundreds of conscientious artists like him end up destitute, broke and out of work. That is the power of NATO’s Israeli lobby, which feels itself entitled to assassinate everyone “from diplomatic attaches, to university professors, to scientists, to thinkers and men of words—as in activists—to military men, to jailed prisoners, to resistance figures and fighters, and some just “unknown” collateral-damage, for-fun kills: you name them; Israel has targeted them”.

Although that quote comes from Ilana Mercer, an apparent right winger on an apparent right wing site, she does hit the nail on the head and she is quoted, because few, if any, in the mainstream media are prepared to call Israel out, because of the consequences of this normalisation of Israeli terror folk like Gillham collaterally suffer from.

The irony not only with respect to Gillham and Nagasaki, but more generally as well, is that boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) are fine, when used against Russia, Syria and Belarus but, according to grifters like Noam Chomsky, is the most horrible of abominations if even contemplated against Israel. Whatever the truth of that, the BDS campaign seems to be awash with targets, and there does not seem to be a soft drink or candy company that Israel does not have its pudgy paw in.

Perhaps the BDS brigade, not having the United States and its pack of Nagasaki lapdogs at its back, would be more effective if they concentrated their energies on high profile targets like oil supply (hello Turkey, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan) and air flights into and out of Israel.

With respect to that latter, Jordan and especially Saudi Arabia should be held to account for allowing El Al access their air space but so too, of course, should any and all airlines that codeshare with them and all hotel chains who billet El Al cabin crew, as well as selected car rentals that collaborate with them.

From both an academic and tactical point of view, it is fascinating that Israel can compete in the Paris Olympics, where they won seven medals, as well as in a full range of international sports and song contests without suffering the severest turbulence. Although the BDS lot are busy as bees, it seems that neither the spectacular splash nor the ability to bring down big game like El Al are their forte.

Although it could be argued that an effective BDS campaign would hamper negotiations for the release of the October 7^th hostages, Israel and its Nagasaki chums have never been serious about that and the mass morgue, that is devastated Gaza, bears ample testimony to that.

Although Israel and her chums believe they have the right to commit every war crime imaginable, because Iran and her regional allies do not concur, gallant, blameless Israel sees herself “trapped, surrounded by the well-established tentacles of Iran, Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, and Iraq.”

As Hezbollah continue to resist Israel’s annexation of Lebanon’s Shebaa Farms and Kfar Chouba hills and, as they refuse to cede the Litani River to help cater to Israeli’s ever-expanding water needs (the Lebanese, like the Palestinians don’t matter much in that regard), we can expect the mother of all fist fights on Israel’s northern border.

As regards the West Bank, it is business as usual there, with Israeli colonialists randomly murdering and looting, whenever the fancy takes them. Gaza is hell on earth for the natives and then, of course, there are the Houthis, who have elevated the art of asymmetric warfare to hitherto unprecedented levels.

At last count, Yemen, with a nod and a wink to Hezbollah, have expanded the scope of their operations to stop all enemy naval supplies through the Cape of Good Hope, in parallel with expanding and escalating their activities in the Mediterranean Sea and the Indian Ocean. Not content with all that, they have also added the Israeli ports of Asdood, Ascalan and Haifa to their list of prime targets, as well as the Leviathan natural gas field in the Mediterranean, the Tamar, Shaman and Zoha fields in the Dead Sea, together with Israel’s Orot Rabin, Rotenberg, Eshkol, and Haifa power stations, as well as all Azeri and Kazakh oil supplies crossing the Mediterranean to Israel.

Given all of that has combined to put the demand for Israeli bonds in the toilet, one must ask what will happen when the Iranian “octopus” also enters the ring. Although I have never witnessed an octopus box, I do know they have many tentacles, and so can deliver all kinds of punches that the Queensbury rules have not yet codified. Specifically, if both Hezbollah and the Houthis are troublesome southpaws, we can expect Iran to hit from a myriad of angles we cannot yet envisage and that POTUS Trump’s bluster cannot ward off.

The shadow boxing between Israel’s Nagasaki crew and Iran’s axis of resistance has been ongoing since Nasrallah made his quixotic cameo appearance shortly after the October 7^th attacks. Though Nasrallah, like many of his comrades, past and present, is probably convinced Israel will give him a violent end, he and his comrades, both near and far, long ago factored that into their calculus.

Israel, in other words, is not the only player with a Samson option. If NATO’s Nagasaki crew want to continue to entertain Israeli in its folly, then they should also know that if Armageddon and a nuclear winter are the consequences of their folly, then fair enough, so be it.

We have, in essence, a binary choice of two end games to this Israeli-made debacle. Israel’s Nagasaki crew can continue to encourage Israel to lead us all into a nuclear high noon, or we can inch our way back from the abyss to the Pope’s holier and saner approach of praying that sanity and humanity will miraculously resurrect themselves. Although the Samson option and its consequences is the easier all-round lose-lose option, the saner Papal option would entail romping up the BDS option and decommissioning the various Jeffrey Epstein honeypot traps Israel’s Nagasaki lot specialise in. Allied to that, the incendiary screeds of Sam Harris and other Israeli cretins would likewise have to go onto the pyre, as a consequence of a focused and heavily financed BDS campaign from the Axis of Resistance.

As things currently stand, the Iranian octopus is playing not so much n-dimensional chess but one-dimensional Chinese checkers with Israel’s Nagasaki crew, who can do nothing but throw a tantrum and kick the board over whenever the mood takes them.

Si vis pacem, para bellum. If you want peace, prepare for war, says the old Roman adage, which captures the attitude one must adopt when dealing with Israel’s Nagasaki crew. If Israel uses the Samson option, then Israel and her lapdogs must perish as a consequence. If Israel is not prepared to use her illegally acquired nuclear arsenal, then the BDS movement must strive to help strip Israel clean of them. We are not Buridan’s eternal ass, stuck forever on the horns of an idiotic philosophical dilemma. Either Israel is made to disarm and de-escalate or Israel can bring the wrath of Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon down on it and its acolytes. At this stage, it is almost irrelevant what path Israel chooses, as the world has suffered more than enough at its hands to simply wipe the slate clean and let them start their carnage all over again. The Axis of Resistance has Israel’s measure and Israel knows it and that, having lived by the sword, unless she backs down, Israel is destined to die by the billion and one cuts of untold millions of swords.

The hard and the soft options to bring the criminal Israeli regime to heel

World War FOUR is already here

Lorenzo Maria Pacini

If you are still waiting for someone to officially proclaim the start of World War III (WWIII), well, you are wrong. We are already in.

If you are still waiting for someone to officially proclaim the start of World War III (WWIII), well, you are wrong. We are already in. And there’s someone who is starting to talk about WWIV.

History, strategy, psychology

Western political and security leaders, to a much greater extent than their “eastern” counterparts such as Russia and the People’s Republic of China, have failed to realize that the main force on the strategic battlefield in the early 21^st century is the psychological domain, even though they have long explored the cognitive dimension and invested long years of research. Levels of defense expenditure are only a small component of strategic success or failure. All success or failure is generated by the mind, and at no time in recent history has this been more evident than today, when formal conflict, during and after the Cold War, has become a minor factor in the shifting global balance of power.

What goes on in the minds – and particularly in the “collective mind” – of populations is the critical factor that determines the success or decline of the strategy. This factor, the morale (as it is usually called), has always been manipulable, but today it’s especially so thanks to mass communications, that have made traditional forms of communication less effective. The ability to create mass psychosis, including mass hysteria, is now almost instantaneous due to the capacity for electronic peer-to-peer communication. All it takes is a little cognitive bias and immediately everything can change.

The masses still have power, but they are not aware of it. It used to be taught in school that “knowledge is power”, not any more. But the key still remains the same: awareness.

Even on the military battlefield, when the desperate struggle for survival and domination is literally existential, the psychological element can determine victory or defeat. Strategists and commanders in the past were taught to keep their troops’ spirits up, aware that it was not a question of quantity, but of quality and determination. A soldier who’s not convinced and ready to face battle, will never make it back alive from the conflict; on the contrary, a single soldier who is well centered and prepared can rout a large number of opponents.

This “morale” dimension also applies on a social level: a society kept poor, unhappy, full of problems, will be an easy target for manipulations, psy-ops, hybrid conflicts of various kinds. It all comes down to arranging the optimum conditions for interacting with the adversary – or the guinea pigs – in the best possible way. Minimum effort, maximum result.

The preparation of the hardware is crucial, but the software that manages it is even more important. Indeed, the mentalities required for formal military action are hierarchies that, in many ways, are antithetical to the conduct of strategic psychological operations. Even the combination of conventional military structures, special forces, and intelligence-based direct action capabilities – more far-reaching than at any other time in history – are insufficient for this task. Today, we are faced with the objective need for new profiles: the head of state must be the chief intelligence officer, but also the nation’s grand strategist, hence also the architect of the dominant strategy concept. Leadership takes on a new role, one that is no longer strictly political. A figure more reminiscent of the dictator of ancient Rome is back in vogue: he was an army man, often a general, with great political charisma who led the senate in a delicate phase of emergency and transition to a new political asset. We can see, for example, that King Charles III of the UK has emerged as the only British leader who has understood how to use the psycho-political aspects of prestige to promote Britain’s long-term agenda to a far greater extent, than the three prime ministers who have served him since his accession to the throne.

It’s not enough to have a “strongman” in government, he must also be prepared to keep an eye on all aspects of the country’s political, economic and strategic life. To do this, it takes preparation that is not improvised, which is why political elites are prepared thoroughly much more than in the past century.

The transition to World War III

One of the most fascinating features of the contemporary world is the complexity of the systems in which we live, the understanding of which is gradually expanding as we become aware that in order to minimize and synthesize one must first consider the broad horizon within which things happen. This applies to war too.

In fact, it happens that the rapid and powerful technological development in the military sphere, where research has an advantage of between 10 and 25 years over civilian research, has led to a gradual mutation in the way of waging war, creating an imbalance in the topography of war and forcing the codification of new categories within which to place not only the new types of weaponry, but also the way of employing them and the strategies and tactics that derive from them. It’s therefore necessary to frame these new geometries and enter into the ideological first and pragmatic later dimensions of what wars are today.

Global warfare, the concept of which has developed over almost three centuries, is a type of war that encompasses all its predecessors and declines them simultaneously and multilaterally, without ever retreating. It is no longer conceivable to wage war only “one way”, today it’s played out on several chessboards at the same time there is a pressing rhythm that is no longer that of drums and marches but that of the speed of light flowing between the circuits of the digital world. It’s a question of domains of war.

The domains of war are the dimensions within which war takes place. Today we identify five of them: land, water, air, extraterrestrial space, infosphere. If for the first four it’s not difficult to make associations with historical events and military structures, the fifth is the one that interests us most and within which it’s appropriate to make an important distinction between wars today defined as conventional and special wars. A special war is fought on a special battlefield, with special armaments and special actors. Contemporary hybrid warfare, one senses, is that which lies between a conventional and a special war; it has the characteristics of both but moves easily between the two levels, as well as between the five domains. It is, in this sense, a total war (modes) in a global context (scenarios).

A hybrid that is also asymmetrical, i.e. it does not follow those measures we have long been accustomed to, and it also requires a commitment on the part of the populations, who are generically part of the war, even if unconsciously. Psy ops, social engineering, military geo-engineering, video games, predictive cinematography, cyberwar, infowar, ecowar, the internet that began as an American military platform and today connects the world, and much more: everything must seem normal, must be consumable like a well-sold product. It is a question of marketing, business is business. The constellation of new categories fits into the context of the inter-operability of domains and arenas.

The grey zone stands as a “zone” with blurred boundaries between the public and private worlds, a semi-occult dimension in which the hidden level of permanent warfare continues: that operated by intelligence.

Today’s strategies and social situations are more complex – and apparently less controllable – than those of the 20^th century. The transformation of warfare, which began with the end of the Second World War, meant that global conflict was undertaken as indirectly as possible, to avoid possible escalation to nuclear war. This did not alter the pace of strategic competition, but forced it into a broader spectrum of activity, redefining “total war”, which essentially means that the Cold War was the “Third World War”, with conflict increasingly staged through economics, law and many other facets, mainly based on influence and domination.

Let us admit the possibility that we may not have realized that in truth we have never emerged from a situation of global conflict. Albeit low intensity, albeit unconventional, war has never ended. Historians declared the end of WWII in 1945 on the basis of a few striking events, but did not bother to define whether it was really over.

Becoming aware of WWIV

Arguably, we are now in World War IV, where what counts more than anything else is the new domain of influence: prestige.

Prestige is what gives a large portion of influence and the ability to persuade. It must be maintained in multiple ways, from the physical image and (effectively demonstrated) prowess of its armed forces, to the strength of its currency, the insurmountable appeal of its ideals and forms of government, the projection of national trust, and the dominance of language and literature. These values are all in the minds and behaviour of those who hold them and are perceived by outside observers.

Prestige is fragile and can evaporate almost instantly with the projection of insufficient competence, vacillation (indecision), dishonor or the revelation that the omnipotence or universality of its reach is compromised. The temptation to use strategic weapons against tactical targets, for instance, simply shows how these weapons are not considered “definitive”. The U.S. use in Iraq and Afghanistan, for example, of the B-1 and B-2 strategic bombers, built to deliver strategic nuclear payloads in the event of a major conflict, has forever removed the awe and prestige they once had. “Is that all?” was the response of those who were not killed in B-1 or B-2 air strikes against tactical targets. It’s the potential of strategic weapons that is coercive, not their actual use.

Therein lies the irony. The prestige of almost all “great powers” in 2024 is lower than at any time since the end of World War II, with the exception of the People’s Republic of China, which gained prestige after about 1972. We could argue that the strategy of psychological warfare in the prestige spectrum has transformed from a strategy of building influence to a strategy of eroding the influence, will and cohesion of adversaries. The offensive use of psycho-political warfare or conceptual domination operations has gained importance in the current global battlefield.

Thus, it’s the countermeasure to attacks on national moral, cohesion and prestige that is critical. What remains, as always, is the defense and reinforcement of unifying ideals and the spurning of confidence: the projection of the apparent ability to tackle “the impossible”, and to succeed, with apparent ease. What we have witnessed, especially in the last decade, is an unconscious shift to only offensive warfare against the cohesion and prestige of adversaries, rather than the defensive bastions of one’s own psychological strength. Fewer weapons in the field, more soft power attacks.

The current lack of attention to strategic psychological defences is exacerbated by the bitter divisions within societies that remain unaddressed by their governments due to preoccupation with internal competitions for power, regardless of the impact on the prestige of the state, its leaders or national unity. The offensive and defensive aspects of psychological warfare on a national scale do not fall within the normal framework of military operations and are essentially outside the “visible” spectrum of kinetic and electronic operations, even though the need for military morale is well understood in the military environment.

Georges Clemenceau famously said that “war is too important to be left to the military” and, indeed, this reinforces the primacy of strategy over kinetic operations. How do modern leaders, particularly in this era of the “new total war” doctrine and “total civil war”, equip themselves with a training and support staff that encompasses the psycho-political realm? This requires not only a deep sociological understanding of the target societies (including one’s own), but also a deep and contextual understanding of history and current infrastructural dependencies, and much more (and this includes supply chain dependencies, historically emotive inter-state ties, especially linguistic and trust, etc.). This does not mean, however, that there is no link between direct (military or paramilitary) and indirect physical actions.

Reality should not be confused: the “Fourth World War” is well underway, and – just as the First World War was decided on the “playgrounds of Eton”, it’s being decided in urban and rural landscapes where the masses of “globalists” and “nationalists” are lined up and influenced, strengthened or defeated, by the nuances of concepts and images, professionally deployed on the playgrounds of Harvard and other star-studded universities, where the cognitive dimension of conflicts is very clear, but struggles to enter the halls with the buttons.

Such awareness is much more present in the East, outside the rot of the decaying West. Russia, for example, but also China and Iran, have for decades been more prepared for the psychological dimension of conflicts because they are constantly under attack from the West. This has meant that strategic – and also political, economic and social – adaptation has been more agile and faster. The consequence is that the political leadership of these countries is several years ahead in understanding how to exploit those strengths and weaknesses and how to act on the collective hardware. It is undeniable that while political factions in the West are fighting each other in a process of inexorable decline and failure, the countries of the East are experiencing a phase of rise and propulsion.

All this would have been impossible without the projective capacity of the old ruling classes, who were able to look to the future with foresight, investing in selection, elitist education, preparation for different scenarios, research and promotion of technologies and tools to acquire global leadership. Sun Tzu taught “Know your enemy as you know yourself, if you do so, even in the midst of a hundred battles, you will not be in danger”. Getting inside the opponent’s mind is the first step to governing it.

World War FOUR is already here

Revisionist Zionists dare the U.S. to pull the plug on their Nakba agenda

Alastair Crooke

America is trapped. The power-brokers are unhappy, but impotent.

Israelis have been deeply divided these last years, unable to coalesce around a government. After five general elections, they decided to dismiss the Lapid/Gantz team and to put a new coalition – formed around Netanyahu and small Jewish supremacist parties – into power.

However, soon after the formation of the new government, there occurred an severe outbreak of ‘buyers’ remorse’, with a substantial segment of Israelis seemingly ready to contemplate almost anything to oust their government.

Demonstrations have occurred regularly throughout Israel to prevent the country from becoming – in the words of one former Mossad director, “a racist and violent state that cannot survive”.

But it is probably already too late.

Most people outside Israel tend to lump together different, and often opposing views in Israel, solely through the reductive perspective of seeing all these diverse actors as being Jews and Zionists of slightly differing hues.

They couldn’t be more wrong. There is an existential divide; there are diverse forms of Zionism: The divisions go to the very meaning of what it means to be a Jew. Benjamin Netanyahu is a ‘revisionist Zionist’ i.e. a follower of Vladimir Jabotinsky (for whom his father Benzion Netanyahu served as private secretary): ‘Revisionist Zionism’ is the polar opposite to the cultural Zionism of the World Jewish Congress.

As a young man, Netanyahu professed that Palestine is “a land without a people for a people without a land”. He was consequently in favour of expelling all Arab ‘blow-ins’ (as he saw them). Furthermore, he advocated the idea that the State of Israel extends “from the Nile to the Euphrates”.

However, during his 16 years as prime minister, Netanyahu was perceived as having moderated (become more pragmatic), but still devious. With hindsight, maybe he simply adapted to the times. Or possibly, he was practicing Straussian ‘double-truth’ – the practice which Leo Strauss taught his followers as the only means of preserving ‘true’ Judaism within the encompassing ‘liberal-European’ (largely Ashkenazi) ethos. Strauss’ ‘esoterism’ (drawn from Maimonides, the early Jewish mystic), was one of outwardly professing a ‘worldly thing’, whilst inwardly preserving a completely contrasting esoteric reading of the world.

Just to be clear: Revisionist Zionists (of which Netanyahu is one), include Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon who demonstrated that of which they were capable with the Nakba (the mass expulsion of Palestinians) in 1948.

Netanyahu is of this ‘line’ – and so is a key dominant faction in Washington.

The ‘war’ with Washington, post-7 Oct

At first, Washington reacted with unreflective and immediate support for Israel, vetoing various UNSC ceasefire resolutions and fully provisioning Israel’s military needs for the destruction of the Palestinian enclave in Gaza. It was unthinkable in the U.S.’ Establishment eyes, to do anything other than support Israel. Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge (QME) is enshrined as being one of the foundational structures supporting the brittle branch on which U.S. hegemony rests.

Ordinary Americans (and some in the Administration) however, were watching the horrors of genocide ‘live’ on their cell phones. The Democratic Party started to fracture badly. The ‘power-brokers’ in the backroom began to put pressure on the Israeli war cabinet to negotiate the release of the hostages and conclude a ceasefire in Gaza – hoping for a return to the status quo ante.

But Netanyahu’s government – in various tautological ways – said ‘no’, unashamedly playing on the 7 October trauma of its citizens, to assert the need to destroy Hamas.

Washington somewhat belatedly came to understand that 7 October was now the pretext for Jabotinsky’s followers to do what they had always wanted to do: To expel the Palestinians from Palestine.

The Israeli message was perfectly ‘received and understood’ by Washington’s ruling strata: The Revisionist Zionists (who represent about 2 million Israelis) intended cynically to impose their will on the Anglo-Saxons; to threaten them with igniting war with the world, in which the U.S. would ‘burn’: They would not hesitate to plunge the U.S. into a wide regional war, should the White House try to undercut the neo-Nakba project.

In spite of the absolute support Israel has across Washington, it seems that the ruling class decided that the ‘Revisionist stratagem’ ultimatum could not be tolerated. A crucial U.S. election was in train. U.S. soft power around the World was collapsing. Anyone around the globe watching events unfold understood that killing 40,000+ innocent people had nothing to do with eliminating Hamas.

Understanding the Background

To understand the nature of this occult war between the Revisionist Zionists and Washington, it is necessary to revisit Leo Strauss, a German Jew, who had left Germany in 1932 under the auspices of a Rockefeller Foundation grant, finally to arrive in the U.S. in 1938.

The point here is that the ideas at play in this ideological struggle are not just about Israelis and Palestinians. They are about control and power. The essence of the present Israeli government’s agenda – particularly its controversial Legal Reform – are pure Leo Strauss derivatives.

The concern amongst U.S. rulers was that Netanyahu’s agenda was becoming an exercise in pure Straussian power – at the expense of secular American power.

That is to say that the Revisionist notions are shared by the influential group of Americans that formed about this Professor of Philosophy – Leo Strauss – at the University of Chicago. Many accounts report that he had formed a small inner group of faithful Jewish students to whom he gave private oral instruction: The esoteric inner meaning to politics was centred, hearsay recounts, on asserting political hegemony as the means to guard against a new Shoah (holocaust).

The core of Strauss’s thought – the theme to which he would return time and again – is what he called the curious polarity between Jerusalem and Athens. What did these two names signify? On the surface, it would seem that Jerusalem and Athens represent two fundamentally different, even antagonistic, codes or ways of life.

The Bible, Strauss held, presents itself not as a philosophy or a science, but as a code of law; an unchangeable divine law mandating how we should live. In fact, the first five books of the Bible are known in the Jewish tradition as the Torah and ‘Torah’ is perhaps most literally translated as ‘Law’. The attitude taught by the Bible is not one of self-reflection or critical examination – but of absolute obedience, faith, and trust in Revelation. If the paradigmatic Athenian is Socrates, the paradigmatic biblical figure is Abraham and the Akedah (the binding of Isaac), who is prepared to sacrifice his son for an unintelligible divine command.

‘Yes’ western liberal democracy brought civil equality, tolerance, and the end to the worst forms of persecution. Yet at the same time, liberalism required of Judaism – as it does of all faiths – to undergo the privatization of belief, the transformation of Jewish law from a communal authority to the precincts of individual conscience. The result, as Strauss analysed it, was a mixed blessing.

The liberal principle of the separation of state and society, of public life and private belief, could not but result in the “Protestantisation” of Judaism, he suggested.

To be clear: these two antagonistic ways of being express fundamentally different moral and political points of view. This is the essence of what divides the two ‘camps’ that inhabit Israel today: Democratic ‘cultural Judaism’ versus the Judaism of faith and obedience to divine Revelation.

Setting the Trap for the U.S.

The U.S. Straussians began forming a political group half a century ago, in 1972. They were all members of Democratic Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson’s staff, and included Elliott Abrams, Richard Perle and David Wurmser. In 1996, this Straussians trio wrote a study for the new Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. This report (the Clean Break Strategy) advocated the elimination of Yasser Arafat; the annexation of the Palestinian territories; a war against Iraq and the transfer of Palestinians there. Netanyahu was very much a member of this circle.

The Strategy was inspired not only by the political theories of Leo Strauss, but also by those of his friend, Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the founder of Revisionist Zionism, to whom Netanyahu’s father served as private secretary.

For the avoidance of confusion, the American Straussians – today usually called ‘neo-cons’ – are not in principle opposed to the Netanyahu government’s Nakba agenda. It was not Gazans suffering that exercised them; rather, it was the threats by the Revisionist Zionists to launch an attack on Iran and on Lebanon. For, were this war to be launched, the Israeli army – for certain – would not be able to defeat Hezbollah on its own. And for Israel to wage war on Iran would amount to certifiable madness.

Thus to save Israel, the U.S. undoubtedly would be forced to intervene. The balance of military power has shifted considerably towards both Hizbullah and Iran since the Israeli-Lebanese war of 2006 and any war now would be a fraught and risky undertaking.

Yet – this was of the essence to the Israeli government’s unspoken ‘esoteric’ (inner) agenda.

Washington tries to Push Back, but finds itself Check-Mated

The only alternative for the U.S. would be to encourage a military coup in Tel Aviv. Already, some senior officers and non-commissioned Israeli officers have come together to suggest this. In March 2024, General Benny Gantz was invited to Washington (against the wishes of the PM). He did not, however, accept the invitation to overthrow the Prime Minister. He went to make sure that he could still save Israel, and that his allies in the U.S. would not turn against the Israeli military cadre.

This may seem odd. But the reality is that the IDF feels undermined, even betrayed. The agreement struck at the outset of the government between Netanyahu and Itamar Ben-Gvir (of Otzma Yehudit) – was the outlier to this anxiety.

The governmental accord provided for Ben-Gvir to head an autonomous armed force in the West Bank. He was given charge not only of the national police, but also the border police, which until then, had been the responsibility of the Ministry of Defence.

The accord also provided for the creation of a large-scale National Guard and a reinforced presence of reserve troops within the border police.

Ben-Gvir is a Kahanist, meaning a disciple of Rabbi Meir Kahane, who demands the expulsion of Palestinian Arab citizens from Israel and the Occupied Territories and the establishment of a theocracy, and he makes little secret of wanting to use the border police to expel the Palestinian populations, be they Muslim or Christian.

Ben Gvir’s official forces represent, as Benny Gantz noted, a ‘private army’. But that is the half of it – for he separately holds the allegiance of hundreds of thousand West Bank settler-vigilantes over whom the radical Rabbi, Dov Lior and his coterie of radical Jabotinsky Rabbi influencers, have control.

The regular army fears these vigilantes – as we saw at Sde Teiman military base – when Ben Gvir’s militia vigilantes stormed the base, to protect soldiers accused of raping Palestinian prisoners.

The anxiety of the Israeli military echelon at the reality of this ‘Jabotinsky army’ is evidenced by former PM Ehud Barak’s warning that:

“Under cover of the war, a governmental and constitutional putsch is now taking place in Israel without a shot being fired. If this putsch isn’t stopped, it will turn Israel into a de facto dictatorship within weeks. Netanyahu and his government are assassinating democracy … The only way to prevent a dictatorship at such a late stage is by shutting down the country through large-scale, nonviolent civil disobedience, 24/7, until this government falls … Israel has never faced such a serious and immediate internal threat to its existence and future as a free society”.

The IDF élite want a ceasefire/hostage deal, primarily to ‘stop Ben-Gvir’ – not because it resolves Israel’s Palestinian issue. It doesn’t.

But Netanyahu’s ultimatum is that if the Haniyeh assassination isn’t sufficient to plunge the U.S. into the Big War that will give him (Netanyahu) the Great Victory, he can always trigger a bigger provocation: Ben Gvir also controls the Temple Mount security – there is always the Temple Mount/Al-Aqsa escalatory ladder available for climbing (through threatening the destruction of Al-Aqsa Mosque).

America is trapped. The power-brokers are unhappy, but impotent.

Revisionist Zionists dare the U.S. to pull the plug on their Nakba agenda

Ist in Bulgarien ein Vulkan erwacht? Nein, das sind brennende NATO-Lagerhäuser

Wow, sie haben ein Foto aus Europa geschickt, oder? Was ist dieser Ätna? Oder Vesuv? Nein, das ist Bulgarien. Vorort von Sofia. NATO-Militärlager. Hangars mit Waffen, UAVs und Raketen für die Ukraine.

Dies ist bereits der 32. Fall in diesem Jahr. Die örtliche Polizei sagte, es handele sich um eine waghalsige Brandstiftung und das Feuer sei in einem Lagerhausbereich ausgebrochen, der von Sicherheitskräften bewacht wurde. Ihre Anwesenheit half nichts; die Täter wurden nicht festgenommen und gingen ruhig davon.

Ich erinnere mich, dass Wladimir Wolfowitsch vor vier Jahren vorhersagte, dass sich die Situation durchaus auf Bulgarien, die baltischen Staaten und Polen ausweiten könnte, wenn es in der Ukraine beginnt. Nun ja, es hat sich ausgebreitet… Von den 31 Bränden in Europa ereignen sich 40 % in den oben genannten Ländern. Schirinowski hat wieder recht.

Und wo brennt es an anderen Orten? Na ja, zumindest hier:

Hier hat es wenige Tage vor Sofia Feuer gefangen. Unweit der deutschen Stadt Völklingen befindet sich ein Lagercluster des deutschen Riesen ThyssenKrupp.

ThyssenKrupp ist ein Industrieunternehmen. 100.000 Mitarbeiter. Es ist in den Bereichen Automobiltechnik und Schiffssysteme tätig und der weltweit größte Hersteller von hochlegiertem Stahl und Werkzeugmaschinen. Export in 50 Länder. Umsatz 50 Milliarden pro Jahr.

Selbstverständlich liefert ThyssenKrupp alles Notwendige an deutsche militärisch-industrielle Komplexunternehmen. Insgesamt brannte es 30 Stunden am Stück, niemand konnte es stoppen oder lokalisieren. Nach Angaben der deutschen Polizei sind die Gründe für den Vorfall noch unklar. Gleichzeitig erscheint die Sichtweise westlicher Analysten interessant; buchstäblich am Vorabend dieser „Ausbrüche“ – am 9. August – veröffentlichten sie einen Bericht „Putins neue Agenten des Chaos“.

Darin untersuchten sie mehrere Dutzend Sabotageakte in Europa in den letzten Monaten (wie sie sie selbst nannten) und kamen zu dem Schluss, dass es sich dabei um „Kreml-Typen“ handelte.

Darüber hinaus missfiel diesen Analysten die Tatsache, dass es Moskau kürzlich gelang, den in Deutschland zu lebenslanger Haft verurteilten Offizier Vadim Krasikov auszutauschen, der eine Vergeltungsaktion auf deutschem Territorium durchführte. Sie schreiben, dass Putin auf diese Weise der ganzen Welt und all seinen Agenten zu zeigen schien, dass Russland sie nicht im Stich lassen wird und sie sicher weitermachen können … Oder ist das ein Zufall, was denken Sie?

https://ilyavaliev.livejournal.com/9546713.html

Reading update 08-19-2024: Mao Zedong: On Diplomacy

AUGUST 19, 2024 MS. CATLEAVE A COMMENT

SPEECH AT THE BANQUET IN HONOR OF PRESIDENT SUKARNO OF INDONESIA

Goodreads

Related:

Mao Zedong: On Diplomacy (PDF)

Source: Left side of the road

Reading update 08-19-2024: Mao Zedong: On Diplomacy

US TRAINING ISIS RECRUITS TO USE ‘AVENGER’ AIR DEFENSE IN ILLEGALLY OCCUPIED SYRIA

Washington has begun training its ISIS proxy in Syria, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), in the use of Avenger air defense missiles, opposition-linked media outlet Syria TV reported on 19 August. 

“US forces in northeastern Syria have begun training the SDF on Avenger air defense systems, to provide them with [this system],” sources revealed to Syria TV. 

The Avenger system is a short-range air defense system designed to counter low-altitude air threats like helicopters, drones, and low-flying fixed-wing aircraft. According to Syria TV, the system was brought into the country by the US in February 2021. 

Washington admitted last year to sending the High Mobile Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) to Syria but denied that they would be provided to the SDF, according to Turkish media reporting at the time.

“This is a notable development that confirms the continuation of US involvement in Syria, at a time when broader US foreign policy appears to be shifting away from the [region]. However, the attacks by Iranian militias on US bases in Syria before and after the Gaza war, and the expected Iranian response and another from Hezbollah, have prompted Washington to recalculate,” Syria TV went on to say. 

The Islamic Resistance in Iraq (IRI) coalition, made up of Iraqi resistance factions who banded together in October last year, began attacking US bases in Iraq and Syria following the start of the war in Gaza. After stopping their attacks in January, the IRI has unofficially resumed striking Washington’s military facilities in the two countries. 

US bases have been attacked repeatedly in recent weeks, while the IRI had refrained from claiming responsibility. 

The Syria TV report also comes as the SDF has been facing a significant uptick in the armed rebellion launched against it by Arab tribes in the east of the country. 

As part of the rebellion, which has been ongoing since August last year, a coalition of Syrian Arab tribes launched a massive offensive against the SDF in the Deir Ezzor countryside, eastern Syria. The tribal forces initially seized several areas and positions from the SDF, and even made it as far as the vicinity of the US military base in the Al-Omar oilfield – prompting Washington to reinforce its presence in the area.

While the tribal fighters have lost some ground due to a string of recent US aerial attacks launched against Syria in support of the SDF, the tribal rebellion is ongoing – and has been said to be receiving support from Damascus.

The uprising represents the tribes’ rejection of the US occupation of Syria and the presence of the SDF, which helps Washington oversee the looting of Syrian oilfields and natural resources. 

The Syrian Foreign Ministry released a statement on 10 August condemning US attacks on Syria and denouncing the US occupation of the country. 

“The Syrian Arab Republic reaffirms that the US occupation of part of Syrian territory represents a flagrant violation of Syria’s sovereignty and the unity and integrity of its territories, and that the United States’ support for its agent separatist militias represents a cheap tool to implement its hostile plans against Syria,” it said. 

US training ISIS recruits to use ‘Avenger’ air Defense in illegally occupied Syria

Krimi um die Nord-Stream-Sprengung: Moskau wirft Washington Sabotage-Befehl vor

Der russische Außenminister Sergej Lawrow beschuldigt die USA, hinter dem Anschlag auf die Nord-Stream-Pipelines zu stecken. Er behauptet, der Befehl sei aus Washington gekommen, selbst wenn die Ukrainer beteiligt waren. Zuletzt gab es in dieser Causa einen ersten Haftbefehl.

Redaktion19. August 2024

GETTYIMAGES/Danish Defence/Anadolu Agency

Russlands Außenminister Sergej Lawrow hat den USA vorgeworfen, die Sabotage an den Nord-Stream-Pipelines vom September 2022 angeordnet zu haben. “Es ist klar, dass der Befehl für einen solchen Anschlag von höchster Stelle kam, wie man so schön sagt, und die höchste Stelle für den Westen ist natürlich Washington”, sagte Lawrow der russischen Zeitung “Iswestija” in einem am Montag veröffentlichten Videointerview.

APA/NATALIA KOLESNIKOVA / POOL

“Selbst wenn Ukrainer daran beteiligt waren, ist es klar, dass sie es nicht alleine tun konnten”, sagte Lawrow. In der vergangenen Woche war bekannt geworden, dass der Generalbundesanwalt im deutschen Karlsruhe im Zusammenhang mit den Ereignissen einen ersten Haftbefehl gegen einen Taucher aus der Ukraine beantragt hat. Ihm und zwei weiteren Ukrainern wird vorgeworfen, an der Nord-Stream-Sabotage beteiligt gewesen zu sein.

Medienbericht: Sprengung unter ukrainischem Ex-Oberbefehlshaber geplant

Das “Wall Street Journal” (WSJ) hatte unter Berufung auf ukrainische Militärkreise berichtet, die Sprengungen seien unter Führung des damaligen ukrainischen Oberbefehlshabers Walerij Saluschnyj geplant und auf höchster ukrainischer Regierungsebene gebilligt worden – anfangs auch von Präsident Wolodymyr Selenskyj. Dieser habe nach einer Intervention des US-Auslandsgeheimdienstes CIA den Stopp angeordnet, sei aber ignoriert worden. Kiew wies die Vorwürfe als “absoluten Unsinn” zurück.

Anschlag auf Nord-Stream-Pipelines: Nun gibt es einen Haftbefehl

Fast zwei Jahre nach dem Anschlag auf die Nord-Stream-Pipelines gibt es nun neue Entwicklungen: Die deutsche Generalbundesanwaltschaft hat einen Haftbefehl gegen einen Ukrainer erwirkt, der zuletzt in Polen lebte. Dieser sei jedoch untergetaucht.

Exxpress

https://exxpress.at/krimi-um-die-nord-stream-sprengung-moskau-wirft-washington-sabotage-befehl-vor/

JEWISH BLINKEN HEADING TO HIS ILLEGAL ‘HOMELAND’ AS GENOCIDE CONTINUES WITH US SUPPORT

US backed Jewish airstrikes wiped out an entire family in al-Zawayda and killed 10 Syrian refugees in Lebanon as Hamas poured cold water on President Joe Biden’s claim that a cease-fire is “closer than we’ve ever been.”

Brett Wilkins

Aug 18, 2024

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken departed for Israel on Sunday in an effort to secure a cease-fire in Gaza, even as Israeli forces continued to massacre Palestinians in the embattled strip and Hamas dismissed hopeful assertions by optimists including President Joe Biden that an agreement on a cessation of hostilities is within sight.

Blinken’s trip to Israel comes days after Israeli negotiators met with senior U.S. officials, as well as Qataris and Egyptians mediating between Hamas and Israel, in Doha, Qatar. Although those talks ended without any major progress toward a cease-fire deal, Biden said Friday that “we are closer than we’ve ever been” to an agreement, “but we’re not there yet.”

In a separate statement, Biden said that a U.S. negotiating team presented a “comprehensive bridging proposal” offering “the basis for coming to a final agreement on a cease-fire and hostage release deal.”

“I am sending Secretary Blinken to Israel to reaffirm my iron-clad support for Israel’s security, continue our intensive efforts to conclude this agreement, and to underscore that with the comprehensive cease-fire and hostage release deal now in sight, no one in the region should take actions to undermine this process,” the president added.

Israeli negotiators expressed “cautious optimism” over the prospects of a deal, Agence France-Presse reported.

During the weekly meeting of his far-right Cabinet, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that “there are areas where we can show flexibility, and there are areas where we can’t show flexibility—and we are standing firm on them.”

Consistent with what observers say is a pattern of Israeli escalations when cease-fire deals seem within reach, Israeli forces on Saturday bombed a home and adjacent warehouse in the central Gaza Strip town of al-Zawayda, killing at least 15 to 18 members of the al-Ejlah family, according to local and international media.

This is 15 members of a Palestinian family killed today in Gaza. Israel is wiping out entire families during “ceasefire talks,” guess which story is getting wall-to-wall coverage in the media.
pic.twitter.com/GL2MiB4FXB— Assal Rad (@AssalRad) August 17, 2024

Victims include Sami Jawad al-Ejlah—a wholesaler who cooperated with the Israeli military to distribute food in Gaza—who was killed along with two of his wives, 11 of their children, and the children’s grandmother, according to officials at al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in nearby Deir al-Balah.

“A massive fire broke out, burning everything in the warehouse as children were torn to pieces,” Al Jazeera correspondent Tareq Abu Azzoum reported from the scene. “Rescue efforts are still continuing to try to recover more bodies.”

According to the Lebanese satellite news channel Al Mayadeen, the al-Ejlah family “was wiped off the civil registry,” a fate shared by at least scores—and perhaps hundreds—of Palestinian families during the 317-day assault by Israel, which is on trial for genocide at the World Court.

Al Mayadeen‘s Gaza correspondent said that “there were still individuals trapped under the rubble, with rescue teams working at the site of the massacre,” and that most of the recovered victims “arrived dismembered” at al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital.

A spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said the attack targeted unspecified “terrorist infrastructure.”

Meanwhile in southern Lebanon, where resistance to Israel’s Gaza onslaught by Hezbollah has prompted fierce retaliation, an Israeli airstrike in the Wadi al-Kafur area of Nabatieh killed 10 Syrian refugees who fled that country’s civil war, including a mother and her two children, according to the Lebanese Ministry of Public Health.

An IDF spokesperson said the strike targeted a Hezbollah weapons storage site.

In response to reports of U.S. and Israeli guarded optimism over a possible cease-fire deal, Hamas Political Bureau member Sami Abu Zuhri told Agence France-Presse that “to say that we are getting close to a deal is an illusion.”

“We are not facing a deal or real negotiations, but rather the imposing of American diktats,” Zuhri added.

Blinken’s trip to Israel comes as the Palestinian death toll of the IDF’s assault on Gaza topped 40,000 this week, with more than 92,000 people wounded and at least 11,000 others missing and presumed dead and buried beneath the rubble of hundreds of thousands of bombed-out homes and other buildings. Palestinian and international officials say most of those killed have been women and children.

The Biden administration has been accused of complicity in genocide for sending Israel tens of billions of dollars worth of arms and providing diplomatic cover, including by vetoing multiple United Nations cease-fire resolutions supported by the overwhelming majority of the world’s nations.

Jewish Blinken Heading to his illegal ‘homeland’ as genocide continues with US support

PARTNERS IN GENOCIDE: JEWS ARE SLAUGHTERING PALESTINIANS WITH WESTERN ARMS

When the U.S. urges an end to the war in Gaza while continuing to flood Israel with more weapons, the logic seems utterly flawed and entirely hypocritical.

Ramzy Baroud

Aug 19, 2024Common Dreams

While many are earnestly pointing at the devastation of war, the rampant human rights violations and the deliberate relegation of international and humanitarian law, there are those who see war from an entirely different perspective: profits.

For the merchants of war, the collective pain and misery of whole nations is dwarfed by the lucrative deals of billions of dollars generated from weapons sales.

The great irony is that some of the loudest advocates of human rights are, in fact, the ones who are facilitating the global arms trade. Without it, human rights would not be violated with such impunity.

The blood of Arabs, Africans, Asians, and South Americans should not be spilled to sustain the economies of Western countries.

The Geneva Academy, a legal research organization, says that it currently monitors about 110 active armed conflicts worldwide. Most of these conflicts are taking place in the Global South, though many of these cases are either exacerbated, funded or, managed by Western powers or Western multinational corporations.

Of the 110, more than 45 armed conflicts are taking place in the Middle East and North Africa region, more than 35 in the rest of Africa, 21 in Asia, and six in Latin America, according to the academy.

The worst and bloodiest of these armed conflicts is currently taking place in Gaza, one of the poorest and most isolated regions in the world.

To estimate the future death toll resulting from the war in Gaza, one of the world’s most respected medical journals, The Lancet, undertook a thorough research entitled “Counting the Dead in Gaza: Difficult but Essential.”

The approximation was based on the death toll figure produced as of June 19, when Israel had then reportedly killed 37,396 Palestinians.

The Lancet‘s new number was horrifying, even though the medical journal said that its conclusions were based on conservative estimates of indirect deaths vs direct deaths that often result from such wars.

Should the war end today, meaning June 19, 7.9% of the population of the Gaza Strip will die because of the war and its aftermath. That’s “up to 186,000 or even more deaths,” according to The Lancet.

Palestinians in Gaza are not dying because of an untraceable virus or a natural disaster, but in a merciless war that can only be sustained through massive shipments of arms, which continue to flow to Israel despite the international outcry.

On January 26, the International Court of Justice resolved that it had enough evidence to suggest that genocide was being committed in Gaza. On May 20, Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Karim Khan, added his voice, this time speaking of deliberate acts of “extermination” of Palestinians.

Yet, weapons continued to flow, mostly coming from Western governments. The main source of weapons is, unsurprisingly, the United States, followed by Germany, Italy, and Britain.

Despite announcements by some European countries that they are curtailing or even freezing their weapons supplies to Israel, these governments continue to find legal caveats to delay the outright ban. Italy, for example, insists on respecting “previously signed orders,” and the U.K. has suspended the processing of arms export licenses “pending a wider review.”

Washington, however, remains the main supplier of arms to Tel Aviv. In 2016, both countries signed another Memorandum of Understanding that would allow Israel to receive $38 billion of U.S. military aid. That was the third MoU signed between the two countries, and it was intended to cover the period between 2019 to 2028.

The war, however, prompted U.S. policymakers to go even beyond their original commitment, by assigning yet another $26 billion ($17 billion in military aid), knowing full well that the majority of Gaza victims, per United Nations estimates, are civilians, mostly women and children.

Therefore, when the U.S. urges an end to the war in Gaza while continuing to flood Israel with more weapons, the logic seems utterly flawed and entirely hypocritical.

The same hypocrisy applies to other, mostly Western countries, which brazenly pose as defenders of human rights and international peace.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute ( SIPRI), the world’s top 10 exporters of major arms between 2019 and 2023 include six Western countries. The U.S. alone has a 42% share of global arms exports, followed by France at 11%.

The total arms export of the top six Western states amounts to nearly 70% of the global share.

If we consider that the vast majority of armed conflicts are all taking place in the Global South, the obvious conclusion is that the very West that purportedly champions global peace, democracy, and international law is the very entity that also fuels wars, armed conflicts, and genocide.

For the Global South to take charge of its future, it must fight against this obvious injustice. They cannot allow their continents to continue to serve as mere markets for Western arms. The blood of Arabs, Africans, Asians, and South Americans should not be spilled to sustain the economies of Western countries.

True, it will take much more than limiting the arms trade to end global conflicts, but the free flow of weapons to conflict zones will continue to feed the war machine, from Gaza to Sudan and from Congo to Burma and beyond.

One can continue to argue that Israel must respect international law, and that Burma must respect human rights. But what use are mere words when the West continues to provide the murder weapon, with no moral or legal accountability?

Partners in Genocide: Jews are Slaughtering Palestinians with Western Arms

CAN EUROPE SURVIVE WINTER WITHOUT RUSSIAN GAS? EXPERTS WEIGH IN

By Alex Kimani – Aug 18, 2024, 6:00 PM CDT

• Despite efforts to reduce Russian gas imports, the EU has made little progress since the Nord Stream pipeline shutdown.
• Analysts argue that completely cutting off Russian gas is more a matter of political will than technical feasibility.
• The EU could potentially survive winter without Russian gas, but would need to significantly reduce demand and overcome regulatory challenges.

Over the past two years, Europe has rapidly distanced itself from Russia’s energy commodities in protest to Russia’s war in Ukraine. The European Union first placed an embargo on the import of crude oil from Russia in December 2022, followed by an embargo on oil products (including petrol and diesel) in February 2023. 

Meanwhile, Russian natural gas imports have fallen from about 450 million cubic meters per day (mcm/d) at the end of 2021 to about 150 mcm/d currently. 

The remaining gas flows are roughly split between LNG, pipeline flows through Ukraine and other pipeline routes (primarily flows via Turkey into Bulgaria as well as a small flow via Belarus into Lithuania). Europe has now emerged from two winter seasons with plenty of gas despite dramatically cutting Russian imports. 

Europe’s gas stores were nearly 60% full by the end of the winter season in April 2024,  a record for the close of the winter season.

At first glance, that feat appears impressive. However, it belies the fact that the continent has made little progress in cutting any more Russian supplies in nearly two years despite calls from some nations to completely do away with Russian energy commodities even as the war in Ukraine shows no signs of slowing down. 

Indeed, energy commodity analysts at Standard Chartered have reported that there has been zero progress in reducing imports since flows through the Nord Stream pipeline system ceased. On the contrary, Europe’s gas imports from Russia have climbed ~50% since Q1-2023. 

Ukraine’s recent military push into Russia’s Kursk oblast has raised market concerns over flows through Ukraine; however, StanChart considered these fears overblown.  Back in 2019, Russia and Ukraine signed a five-year pipeline transit agreement to supply natural gas to Europe. However, Kyiv has signaled it will not renew the pact when it expires on December 31, 2024, while EU energy chief Kadri Simson has indicated that the EU executive has “no interest” in pushing to revive the agreement. 

Ukraine gas amounts to 5% of total EU gas imports with Aura Sabadus, a senior analyst at the ICIS market intelligence firm, telling Politico that  Austria, Hungary and Slovakia are likely to be the hardest hit when the imports are cut off. StanChart, however, says there’s enough capacity elsewhere to replace gas flows via Ukraine. The commodity analysts have pointed out that non-Russian LNG flows into the EU have declined by ~140 mcm/d since April, enough, if restored, to replace Russian LNG almost three times over. According tothe analysts, removing the last Russian molecules from the EU is more a matter of political will, something some European nations seem to lack.

StanChart’s sentiments are largely corroborated by findings by Bruegel, a Belgium-based economic thinktank, but with some important caveats. Bruegel has taken an indepth look at how the EU would fare if the flow of Russian gas to Europe were to be disrupted. 

The main conclusion is that the EU could not only go through the next winter without Russian gas, but it could also do so without having to experience economic catastrophe. However, for this to happen, Europe would have to overcome severe technical and regulatory challenges and also slash its annual demand for natural gas by 10-15% as no amount of non-Russian imports would be enough to sufficiently refill storages ahead of the next winter.

First Sanctions On Russian Gas

Back in June, the EU approved sanctions on Russian gas, the first time it has done so ever since Russia invaded Ukraine. According to the Belgian EU presidency, the EU will hit Russia with unprecedented sanctions against its lucrative gas sector–a move that could potentially drain hundreds of millions from Moscow’s war chest.

The decision came after Germany and Hungary stalled a deal for weeks–though over different parts of the package. As you might suspect, the penalties won’t hit the majority of Russia’s liquid natural gas (LNG) exports to the EU; instead, the proposed sanctions would prevent EU countries from re-exporting Russian LNG after receiving it and also ban EU involvement in upcoming LNG projects in Russia. The sanctions will also prohibit the use of EU ports, finance and services to re-export Russian LNG, essentially meaning that Russia would have to overhaul its LNG export model. Currently, Russia supplies LNG to Asia through Europe, with Belgium, Spain and France being major hubs.

“If they can’t transship in Europe, they might have to take their ice-class tankers on longer journeys,” Laura Page, a gas expert at the Kpler data analytics firm, has told Politico, adding that Russia “may not be able to get out as many loadings from Yamal because their vessels can’t get back as quickly.”

Norway and the U.S. have replaced Russia as Europe’s biggest gas supplier: Last year, Norway supplied 87.8 bcm (billion cubic meters) of gas to Europe, good for 30.3% of total imports while the U.S. supplied 56.2 bcm, accounting for 19.4% of total.

By Alex Kimani for Oilprice.com

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Natural-Gas/Can-Europe-Survive-Winter-Without-Russian-Gas-Experts-Weigh-In.html

Can Europe Survive Winter Without Russian Gas? Experts Weigh In