“Calling Donald Trump a fascist is an insult to democracy and to history. You are turning the graveyards of the 20th century into a playground to have out your political spats. Get a grip”
[ZeroHedge] Trump’s February 7 executive order “Addressing Egregious Actions Of The Republic Of South Africa” cuts off aid or assistance to the country and “promote[s] the resettlement of Afrikaner refugees.” The stated reasons for the administration’s actions are a new law that, according to White House, will “enable the government of South Africa to seize ethnic minority Afrikaners’ agricultural property without compensation. There are also “aggressive positions” towards the US and its allies, namely Israel, which the administration refers to with regards to South Africa’s genocide case at the International Court of Justice.
More broadly, the executive order states that South Africa is “undermining United States foreign policy, which poses national security threats to our Nation, our allies, our African partners, and our interests.”
While the charge of anti-white racism fits neatly with the empire’s new brand of identity politics, and the retribution for the ICC case against Israel is to be expected from any US administration,
…except the Biden-[Harris] administration, which quietly approved…
what of the other “undermining” of US foreign policy and “threats” to the US and its interests?
As the recent news surrounding the Panama Canal, Greenland, and other areas show, the US is doubling its efforts to control global shipping lanes — likely in preparation for a conflict with China — but this has gone unmentioned in connection to the pressure campaign against South Africa. I’ll explore that here after quickly looking at the plight of the Afrikaners.
#5
The vastly outnumbered of modern civlization simply could not compete. It really is all in the numbers (demographics) Israel is an excellent current-day example. If you are unwilling to fight to keep it, you are doomed.
* Not telling anyone here anything they don't already know.
Posted by: Herb Grerens1999 ||
02/20/2025 9:54 Comments ||
Top||
Direct Translation via Googler Translate. Edited. by Kirill Semenov
[REGNUM] The organization of the meeting of the Russian and American delegations in Riyadh is an absolute victory for the de facto leader of the kingdom, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. He demonstrated that the kingdom under his leadership is capable of successfully promoting “soft power” and being a key mediator in resolving the largest geopolitical crises.
And he beat out his rival, Turkey’s Sultan Recep Tayip Erdogan I “the much beloved”, which has to have felt really good.
The meeting of the Russian and US delegations in Saudi Arabia (KSA) is a bid for the summit of Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump to also take place in the kingdom. If its results lead to a suspension of hostilities in Ukraine, it will be possible to say that the world has truly changed towards multipolarity, and now the Middle Eastern Islamic states are becoming the main mediators in resolving crises in Europe.
Just recently everything was the other way around and it was very difficult to imagine such a turn of events.
It is significant that during the negotiations between the Russian and American delegations in Riyadh, Volodymyr Zelensky was nearby the entire time, in the UAE, also expecting to arrive in the Saudi capital the day after the end of the meeting.
However, local authorities apparently made it clear to him that his appearance in the kingdom was undesirable. MBS, as bin Salman is called, really wants to see the settlement process through to the end. And Zelensky's appearance at such a moment could spoil the entire game for the Saudis, especially in the context of Trump's statements about the need for elections in Ukraine and the money that disappeared there.
Thus, in Riyadh they do not consider Zelensky to be endowed with any subjectivity, but they see him as a factor capable of disrupting their deal.
LONG ROAD TO RIYADH
Saudi Arabia has been trying to play the role of mediator since the beginning of the Ukrainian crisis, and it is now clear that these efforts have begun to pay off.
Since the summer of 2022, reports have been leaking into the expert community about alleged contacts between representatives of Russia and Ukraine with Saudi mediation on the territory of the KSA.
The Saudi crown prince then played a key role in a prisoner exchange between Russia and Ukraine in September 2022. At that time, with the mediation of Mohammed bin Salman, Russia released 10 foreign mercenaries captured in Ukraine, including five Britons and two Americans. The move was made possible by the close ties that had developed between Prince Mohammed and the Russian president.
Saudi Arabia, along with its neighbor, the United Arab Emirates, has also successfully brokered other prisoner swaps between Ukraine and Russia. And the prince played a “major role,” as a Trump spokesman put it, in securing the release of American citizen Mark Fogel from Russian custody.
And back in February–March 2023, the kingdom’s Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan made shuttle visits to Ukraine and Russia in search of ways to resolve the conflict.
"Our main goal is to find a way to end the conflict. And I think everyone agrees that the only way this conflict will ultimately end is through negotiations," Prince Faisal said at the time. And the search for a solution was not in vain.
In August 2023, Saudi Arabia hosted consultations on ways to resolve the Ukrainian crisis. The consultations were attended by representatives of 30 countries, primarily from the Global South.
The country's officials viewed these talks not as support for Ukraine and a demonstration of agreement with the US position, but as evidence of their global influence. The talks were also seen as confirmation of the Saudis' desire to diversify their diplomatic partners and become the leading mediator and negotiator on the topic of Ukrainian settlement. This, of course, required Riyadh to maintain a high level of relations with Moscow.
The KSA also played a positive role, from Russia's point of view, at the so-called "peace summit" that took place in Switzerland in June 2024. Saudi Arabia tried to take into account the position of the Russian Federation, which has long been an important partner of the kingdom. Moscow and Riyadh have many common ties - from coordinating efforts within OPEC+ and pricing policy in the hydrocarbon sector to issues of regional security in the Middle East.
In order to maintain its political weight, Saudi Arabia needed to remain an equidistant intermediary and mediator in resolving the Ukrainian crisis and not be associated with direct support for one of the parties to the conflict.
And it should be noted that Riyadh succeeded in this despite the attempts of Zelensky, who visited the KSA as an invited person at the Arab League summit in May 2023 and on a working visit in February 2024, to dissuade Mohammed bin Salman.
Zelensky's visits to Saudi Arabia should be seen only as a certain compensation for other actions of the KSA in the international arena in order to maintain the necessary background of relations with the West.
Thus, his participation in the Arab League summit was supposed to smooth over the negative reaction of the United States and its allies to the presence there of the then Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
And the visit of the head of the Kyiv regime to Riyadh at the beginning of last year was supposed to somewhat balance in the eyes of the West the grandiose tour of Russian President Vladimir Putin in December 2023 to the UAE and Saudi Arabia, in terms of the level of reception. At that time, the presidential liner was accompanied by Russian Su-35 fighters as an honorary escort.
TRUMP'S CUNNING PLAN
Now, after the launch of Russian-American consultations, new prospects for participation in the resolution of other conflicts are opening up for the kingdom. And the points gained for organizing the talks on Tuesday give bin Salman the opportunity to act from a stronger position on the Palestinian and Iranian tracks.
On the other hand, Saudi Arabia as a place for Russian-American negotiations was not chosen by chance by the Americans. Trump probably wants to play on the ambitions of the House of Saud, as if confirming the effectiveness of Riyadh's previous efforts to find a solution to the Ukrainian crisis.
The next step will be to involve the kingdom, which has acquired a taste for it, in more active participation in the resolution of the crisis in Gaza in the direction that the US needs. And then, according to the Americans' plan, there should be a reconciliation between Israel and Saudi Arabia and the building of a new Middle Eastern anti-Iranian alliance headed by them.
American experts also note that Trump's plan for Gaza is primarily aimed at Saudi Arabia, in order to force the kingdom to pay for its reconstruction and resolve all issues with the presence of Hamas in the enclave. It looks something like this: "if you don't like my plan to evict the Palestinians and seize Gaza, offer something better or don't interfere."
A similar strategy was already tested by the Trump administration in the summer of 2020. Following the failure of the “deal of the century” during his first presidency, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly declared his intention to annex a significant part of the West Bank.
It could have been a simple bluff. But the leader of the UAE, Mohammed bin Zayed, demanded that Netanyahu abandon his plans as a condition for recognizing Israel, although he was previously unwilling to take this step. Netanyahu agreed. After that, the UAE was able to claim that it saved the Palestinians from the threat of annexation of the West Bank.
Now, in response to the rejection of his own plan, Trump will push Saudi Arabia not only to invest in the reconstruction of Gaza, but also to recognize Israel without demanding the creation of a Palestinian state. In this case, Riyadh's step towards Tel Aviv will look like a necessary sacrifice to save the Palestinians from eviction and the "Trump plan", and will allow it to save face.
SAUDI ARABIA CONTINUES ITS GAME
However, whether the new White House administration will succeed in such a trick is a big question. Saudi Arabia has become much stronger and has learned to play its game with the Americans to the end, which it demonstrated during the presidency of Joe Biden, refusing any concessions to Washington.
Therefore, there is another point of view on the role of Riyadh in Russian-American negotiations: Saudi Arabia itself forced both Russia and the US to acknowledge its role and, in fact, became the only platform for dialogue, while relations between the US and Saudi Arabia are still far from ideal.
A possible hint of continuing tensions between the two countries may be the unusually short press releases from both sides about the negotiations between US and Saudi Arabian representatives, which were held in parallel with the Russian-American talks.
The State Department did not even mention Saudi Arabia's mediating role in the talks with Russia, and Saudi Arabia released only a short video of the conversation between the crown prince and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
According to Middle East Eye, the Trump administration is unhappy with Saudi Arabia for several reasons.
The kingdom ignored Trump’s call to increase oil production last month. If that call was “all hot air,” Saudi Arabia’s decision to continue to block US airstrikes against the Houthis in Yemen from Saudi air bases and through Saudi airspace is a particularly sore point in the relationship: Trump redesignated the Houthis as a foreign terrorist organization in January over their attacks on merchant ships.
The US said Rubio and the crown prince discussed “security in the Red Sea and freedom of navigation,” but Saudi Arabia again refused to support US plans for war against the Houthis and intends to continue peace talks with them.
On the other hand, Israel is increasingly lobbying the Trump administration to support strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. However, this issue also faces resistance from Riyadh.
Instead of using force on Iran, Saudi Arabia has already offered to act as a mediator to revive the “nuclear deal” and restore ties between Tehran and Washington. If bin Salman succeeds in this operation, he will further increase the kingdom’s international importance.
Of course, the KSA is concerned that Iran is moving closer to creating nuclear weapons after its proxies ceased to be a deterrent for the US and Israel. But Saudi Arabia believes that attacks on its nuclear infrastructure may ultimately not solve the problem, but only exacerbate it and lead to a major regional war. Moreover, military operations do not guarantee the complete destruction of all Iranian nuclear capabilities.
Riyadh is therefore looking to use its close ties with Trump to provide Tehran and the White House with a diplomatic path forward, underscoring Riyadh’s desire to cement its improved relationship with its former adversary, Iran, and secure a seat at the table for a potential new deal.
While Trump has said he might engage in dialogue, Iran’s position is ambiguous. Last week, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said that negotiations with the United States were “unwise.” However, it appears that Saudi Arabia may try to persuade Iran’s leadership.
Trump's stance could also help. The American president continues to hint that he remains interested in a deal with Iran and is open to diplomacy aimed at resolving all the difficult issues surrounding its nuclear program.
It is too early to talk about any clear American strategy regarding Iran, but it is obvious that Trump will seek ways to closely coordinate with all key partners in the Middle East, and not just with Israel, to resolve the accumulated problems.
***
Of course, Saudi Arabia will try to use its close relations with the Trump administration, but only to strengthen its own influence in the Middle East and the world as a whole. Riyadh is ready to make certain concessions to Washington, but expects no less significant reciprocal steps from the United States.
The Americans themselves taught the Saudis to rely on their own strength and pushed them to build new regional alliances and networks without the participation of the United States. And now it will be very difficult for them to "tame" the KSA again, forcing it to play someone else's game.
The Kingdom will continue to pursue a course to consolidate its position as a leading regional power and gain the status of a new pole of a multipolar world, maintaining a high level of relations with Russia and China.
[KyivIndependent] After years of political isolation sparked by the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, U.S. and Russian officials will meet in Saudi Arabia this week to discuss how to bring an end to the war.
Neither Ukraine nor Europe has been invited to the main discussion, setting off alarm bells in Kyiv and capitals across the continent that U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin could reach an agreement without Ukraine and Europe’s involvement, and one that puts their future security in jeopardy.
Announcing that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov would lead their delegation, the Kremlin set an ambitious agenda for the talks.
"They are expected to hold a meeting with their American counterparts on Tuesday, which will focus primarily on restoring the entire complex of Russian-American relations," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Feb. 17.
The U.S. delegation will be led by State Secretary Marco Rubio, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.
Though the U.S. and Russia will meet without Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelensky will also head to Saudi Arabia this week. NBC reported that the intention is for the U.S. to host a bilateral meeting with Russia, followed by a bilateral meeting with Ukraine, and culminating with talks together.
Meanwhile, such is the sense of urgency in Europe over the course of events: European leaders are gathering in Paris on Feb. 17 for an emergency summit.
So what should we expect from the historic meeting in Saudi Arabia and is the direction of peace negotiations as alarming as many believe?
The Kyiv Independent asked co-chair of the BGR Group advisory board, Ambassador Kurt Volker, who served as the U.S. special representative for Ukraine negotiations in 2017-2019, and U.S. ambassador to NATO in 2008-2009, for his thoughts.
The Kyiv Independent: There has been a lot of panic in Ukraine and Europe about the possibility of the U.S. and Russia negotiating a peace agreement over their heads — is this justified?
Ambassador Kurt Volker: People were upset about (being excluded from the table) and I have to keep telling people there isn't a table.
There is (U.S.) President Trump picking up the phone, calling Putin, calling Zelensky, people having meetings at NATO, people having meetings in Munich. It's going to be like that. It's going to be a lot of consultation, a lot of conversations, but there's no single negotiation going on.
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Kamran Gasanov
[REGNUM] Recep Tayyip Erdogan shelters Volodymyr Zelensky from the rain in front of the Beshtepe presidential palace - this shot most vividly illustrates the trip of the head of the Kiev regime to Turkey on the day when Sergey Lavrov, Yuriy Ushakov, Marco Rubio and Steve Witkoff decided the fate of Ukraine in Riyadh, and helpless Europe was looking for its opportunities at the summit in Paris.
Three questions are of primary interest in the Ukrainian leader’s visit to Ankara: who initiated the meeting; why did it take place on February 18; why in Turkey?
Turkish media reports that Zelensky arrived at Erdogan's invitation. But this does not rule out bilateral interest in this rendezvous. For Turkey, the topic of Ukraine has become one of the key ones since the start of the NWO. In his New Year's address, Erdogan said that the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict remains a priority for him.
The wannabe neo-Ottoman sultan neeeeeeeds to be seen as an important mover and shaker on the international front, which is why he swans around the world, lavishly spending the charity his country was given to keep it from collapsing into long-delayed bankruptcy.
And this is no coincidence, since many important decisions in this process were made with the mediation of Ankara. These include the famous Istanbul talks in March 2022,
…which in the end accomplished nothing permanent…
the "grain deal", numerous prisoner exchanges, as well as the prisoner exchange between the West and Russia last summer.
Vladimir Putin, speaking about peace, often made reference to the Istanbul agreements as the most successful since the start of military actions. At the same time, Turkey's mediation has been called into question for about a year now.
The Russian president, listing the mediators (Brazil, India, China), does not mention Ankara. The president's press secretary Dmitry Peskov once said directly that "Turkey is not a mediator."
And, apparently, the reason for the loss of such a role is connected with the pro-Western tilt of Erdogan's new cabinet. In order to overcome the lira crisis, the economic bloc of the Turkish government began to take steps to get closer to the US and the EU - which, by the way, Putin drew attention to.
The date of February 18th made the topic of the country's loss of its special role on the shores of the Bosphorus even more relevant. Erdogan had high hopes for Donald Trump, who had promised to resolve the Ukrainian conflict even before winning the election. Apparently, the Turks hoped that the White House chief would look to them as mediators. Especially since Trump praised Erdogan, and Turkey demonstrated more than anyone else its readiness to reconcile the conflicting parties.
But no. Like a cold shower, the news poured on Erdogan's head that the first personal meeting of representatives of the Russian and American authorities would take place in Saudi Arabia.
The poor darling.
What to do in this situation? Türkiye could not tolerate such humiliation.
Erdogan decides to take a small revenge. As compensation, he invites Zelensky. On the one hand, it seems to be not the same scale. There, in Riyadh, are the USA and Russia, and here is some president of a losing Ukraine, and, moreover, according to both Trump and Putin, an illegitimate one. But, nevertheless, at least it is something.
War is at least a bilateral thing, and therefore, even if we approach it purely formally, peace must be signed in the presence and with the participation of Ukraine. By inviting Zelensky, Erdogan wants to show that he is “in” and has influence on one of the parties to the conflict. And, therefore, on its settlement.
Zelensky had no less motivation to go to some important country on February 18. If he had been invited to the meeting between Lavrov and Rubio, he would certainly have been there, even if he says he did not plan to go there. After all, Zelensky is offended by the fact that the fate of Ukraine is being decided behind his back by the United States and Russia.
The most obvious alternative is Europe: Emmanuel Macron is holding a second summit in a row in Paris with the participation of European leaders. However, does it make sense for Zelensky to come to Europe now, if there is complete discord there on sending troops to Ukraine? And even countries ready for this, such as Great Britain, do not allow their presence without the support of the United States? Therefore, for Zelensky, the only option was Erdogan.
The meeting in Ankara was in many ways a kind of response from Zelensky and Erdogan to Russia, the US and Europe. Ukraine secured the support of the second army in NATO, and Erdogan showed Trump and Europe that he is now much closer to Zelensky than they are.
But is there any practical result in this summit? This is a subject for discussion.
Donald Trump himself and through his team members made it clear that a return to the borders of 2014 and even 2022 is impossible, and Ukraine should not be in NATO. Europe supports the integrity of Ukraine, but cannot do anything without the consent of the United States. But Erdogan, in fact speaking out against the United States and Russia, tells Zelensky: “Turkey has always been very principled on the issue of Ukraine’s territorial integrity.”
Such words, especially today, are pleasing to Zelensky's ear, but does Erdogan really mean it? Or is it just a stock phrase aimed at strengthening his negotiating position as "Ukraine's patron"?
There is a persistent feeling that it is more likely the latter. After all, just a few months ago, the head of the Turkish Foreign Ministry, Hakan Fidan, spoke about freezing the conflict, which de facto means that it is impossible to return the territories to Ukraine.
It was important for Erdogan to demonstrate that he would not accept Saudi Arabia as the mediator without a fight. “Our country will be the ideal venue for negotiations between Russia, Ukraine and America in the course of our active diplomacy over the past three years,” he said, promising “comprehensive support” for the talks.
In theory, the Turkish leader can still claim to be a mediator. He has good relations with Trump so far, and the Gaza issue has not been able to spoil them, thanks to the peace deal. Erdogan has not officially quarreled with Putin either, and Turkey became a BRICS partner country in the fall. And Zelensky is much closer to Ankara than to Riyadh.
Former diplomat Gulru Gezer is also optimistic about Ankara's chances : "Turkey maintains ties with both Ukraine and Russia - it has not broken off relations with either side and positions itself as a neutral mediator. This makes it a unique country that can facilitate negotiations."
However, the final word on this issue does not belong to Ukraine, which sympathizes with Turkey, but to the United States and Russia. Erdogan’s words about territorial integrity certainly do not increase his chances of becoming the organizer of the meeting between Putin and Trump.
In addition to the topic of mediation, the Turkish army could become another lever of influence on the Ukrainian settlement process that has begun.
After the meeting in Ankara, the aHaber TV channel gave the following headline: “Did Zelensky ask Erdogan for help?”
And the question is not really out of nowhere. During the negotiations with his Turkish counterpart, the Ukrainian president was concerned about who would ensure Ukraine's security after the peace deal. In what form would this be implemented?
Zelensky complained to Erdogan that Ukraine "does not hear such support from the EU." He said that Europe does not support Ukraine's membership in NATO. And for Ukraine's security, strong Ukrainian Armed Forces and the deployment of foreign troops are needed. "We also talked about this with Mr. Erdogan," Zelensky hinted at a discussion of the Turkish presence.
The question of the appearance of NATO forces along the demarcation line or beyond it is the main obstacle in the peace process that has begun. Russia is categorically against it, Trump does not object to sending Europeans to Ukraine, but they are afraid to go it alone.
Can Türkiye play any role here?
Ankara is unlikely to object to the presence of its peacekeepers. However, in the absence of consent from Russia and the US, there is a risk of not only spoiling relations with an important energy partner in Moscow, but also disrupting the peace process launched by Trump, thereby spoiling relations with the US.
Turkey, despite its determination, military and geopolitical advantages, which have increased since the fall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, still objectively has more chances to have influence in Ukraine in the field of diplomacy.
Although Trump is conducting a dialogue about resolving the conflict behind the backs of Europe and Ukraine, he recently admitted that the Ukrainians will still be involved in the process. It was not for nothing that his special envoy Keith Kellogg arrived in Kyiv the day after the meeting in Riyadh.
If the US does introduce Zelensky into the peace process, of course, having first instructed him on adequate demands, then Türkiye could also enter the settlement on his shoulders.
In Ankara, Zelensky said: "If these negotiations are honest and Ukraine, America and Europe are at this table, then these guarantees will be developed with the participation of all these countries. Of course, Turkey is among these countries."
Despite Erdogan’s high ambitions, his fairly serious ties to the Kremlin and the White House, and the “critical summit” (as Turkish media called the meeting with Zelensky), there are not many chances for Turkish mediation on Ukraine.
The ideal moment for Turkey was March 2022, but then everything was ruined by Erdogan’s strategic partner, Great Britain, led by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
For now, Türkiye can content itself with merely being an active observer and hoping that its proposals will be appreciated in Washington and Moscow. Influence on Zelensky, who is no longer taken seriously either in the Kremlin or in the Oval Office, is not enough.
The Nefes newspaper notes with disappointment that “Turkey, which until now has played a prominent role in mediating between Ukraine and Russia, has now been pushed into the background by the United States.”
However, Erdogan is an experienced fighter, and he will not give up the palm to his brothers in faith without a fight.
My thoughts highlighted, ZH’s can be read at the link.
[ZeroHedge] Donald Trump's recent bold and unconventional geopolitical proposals have ignited a firestorm of speculation. Ideas like annexing Canada, the path of Ukraine/Russia peace, and his Gaza plans seem like jackhammer strikes when compared to business as usual in Washington. Opinions remain divided over whether his approach reflects strategic insight or risky overreach, especially given the complex dynamics between Ukraine, Russia, and the broader international community.
The world is uncertain with Donald Trump's presidency reshaping the global stage. Depending on perspective, it's either a bold new chapter or a more troubling extension of past dynamics. Trump's rapid-fire domestic and foreign policy decisions have many countries on edge, fueling widespread speculation. Among the more striking are Trump's idea for Canada as the 51st state, talks of purchasing Greenland, transforming Gaza into a luxury resort rivalling Mar-a-Lago, and even throwing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky under the proverbial bus. From the calculated to the chaotic, each idea sparks debates about its brilliance or recklessness. Here's an analysis of whether these actions could represent strategic brilliance or reckless unpredictability.
Hey! What About Saskatchewan?
Canada has ten provinces. But what President Trump really wants, as he’s stated, is for Canada to properly guard their southern border, catching illegal immigrants and smugglers from crossing into the U.S. instead of waving them through. Also, it would be good for all involved were Canada to mine more petroleum and useful minerals to replace China.
A Palestinian Buyout
A maximalist challenge to the world to come up with a realistic solution.
The Inevitable Split
There are no good answers for Ukraine and Russia now, only more or less bad ones. But the demographic crash has been accelerated for both countries, no matter how happy President Putin might be about his Pyrrhic victory.
Problematic Europe - Always
Germany’s election approaches. Whether the winner actually carries out current promises being made about Europe’s Moslem colonists is the critical question, it seems to me.
The level of double thinking is astounding. Even as the Biden-[Harris] administration was publicly browbeating Israel to surrender to Hamas, which had only just invaded, tortured, raped, killed over 1200 Israelis and foreigners, and carried off hundreds — both living and corpses — they were also slow-walking weapons shipments to Israel and throwing literal billions of dollars at Iran, Lebanon, and Hamas with no strings attached as a reward.
[IsraelTimes] After Mideast czar’s defense of administration’s policy, Ilan Goldenberg suggests Biden should have tried leveraging post-Oct. 7 popularity in Israel to push for deal much sooner
No. Even to suggest such a thing is evil. Thank God Bibi Netanyahu is strong and clever enough to to have held them off.
A former senior staffer of former US president Joe Biden argued Tuesday that his former boss may have had a chance to secure a hostage deal already at the end of 2023, offering one of the first public reckonings from the previous administration regarding its handling of the Israel-Hamas war.
Still trying to undercut PM Netanyahu at home and abroad. Fortunately, the Biden-Harris administration no longer has the power nor the discretionary funds to enforce their vicious ideas.
In a post on his personal blog, Ilan Goldenberg — who served in several high-level positions at the White House and the Pentagon since 2021 — argued that Biden had an opportunity just several months into the war, when his popularity among Israelis was at an all-time high
…they mistook the purchased love of the Israeli labour socialist left for the entirety of Israeli society, as they did the same in America, discounting the conservative section as meaningless. A fatal error, as it turned out…
for his full-throttled defense
…he means full-throated defense, though fully throttled is indeed what it actually was — the bruises are still metaphorically visible on the Israeli throat…
of the Jewish state in the aftermath of Hamas’s October 7, 2023, onslaught, and when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s popularity was still at a particularly low point, with much of the public viewing him as responsible for the failures that allowed the attack to take place.
Goldenberg maintains that at this unique moment, Biden could have given a speech directly to the Israeli public presenting them with a choice between two paths.
The first would begin with a ceasefire and hostage release deal that would require Israel to grant the Palestinian Authority a foothold in Gaza,
…not just no but Hell, no. The PA couldn’t hold Gaza against a much weaker Hamas in 2007 or so. There’s no way they could have held it after Hamas had been been trained, armed, and funded while digging in for two decades in Gaza. At the current moment I would not be surprised if even though Hamas is likely to lose Gaza, they go on to take the West Bank from the weak, corrupt, and highly disliked national socialist Palestinian Authority after Mahmoud Abbas dies in office….
which would unlock the sought-after support of Arab allies in rebuilding and restabilizing Gaza.
Rebuilding, yes, as they’ve done before for Hamas. Restabilizing, however, would only last until the next 10/7, as Hamas has promised repeatedly. Not something that Israel should desire.
Such a deal would have involved a ceasefire in Lebanon and allowed for the advancement of a Saudi normalization deal.
That would be a possibly fatal Pyrrhic victory for Israel, just what the Biden-[Harris] administration — as the third term of Barack Obama’s presidency — was working toward with malice aforethought, while posturing as Israel’s friend and protector.
The second path offered a continuation of the war for an indefinite period during which more hostages and Israeli soldiers would die, Jerusalem would be increasingly isolated in the region, and Hamas would remain in control of Gaza.
And yet here we are. And would have got to this point sooner, had not the Biden-Harris administration been full-throttling Israel with both hands.
Goldenberg acknowledged that a then-still-unpopular Netanyahu
…so unpopular that he kept getting elected for a quarter century, despite the heavy thumbs of European and Democratic American governments on the scales…
could still have rejected the effort to get Israel on the first path,
…ya think??
with the premier’s hard-right base rallying behind him, and the former Biden aide admitted that Hamas could well have played spoiler.
They never, ever miss an opportunity, etc…
“We will never know how things might have gone. What we do know is where we did end up. The war dragged on for a year with great suffering in Gaza and hostages continuing to die,” Goldenberg wrote.
Or you lot could have stepped out of the way and let the IDF work their plan to finish off the war in six months. I know which I think more likely.
“The disagreements between Netanyahu and Biden surfaced piecemeal and incoherently, with Netanyahu using every opportunity to create distance between himself and Biden, and weaken Biden’s standing with the Israeli public eventually eroding his leverage,” he added.
”And we would have got away with it, if it weren’t for that meddling Bibi!”
The reflection offered a different take on the Biden administration’s handling of the war after former White House Middle East czar Brett McGurk presented an unapologetic defense of the former president’s policy in a Washington Post op-ed last week.
In the latter account, McGurk framed Hamas as the only obstacle in hostage negotiations that dragged on for over a year between the first and second agreements.
The more senior McGurk largely vindicated Netanyahu — who retweeted the op-ed — while arguing that US support for Israel allowed for the weakening of Iran and its proxies in late 2024
..uh huh. Sure. Though we can clearly see why Mr. Goldenberg was not the senior partner in the hierarchy — he completely lacks the vision thing…
and that this led an isolated Hamas to finally compromise and agree to a hostage deal last month.
Last year, The Times of Israel revealed that the Biden administration had again weighed having the president give the “moment of reckoning” speech in May, but ultimately shelved the idea in favor of a different address during which the president revealed the components of what was then the latest Israeli hostage deal offer and called Hamas to get on board.
Shelving that speech was probably one of the smartest things the Biden-etc administration did during their time in office. Making the other speech was back to the pathetic level that was the administration's normal level of cleverness.
By then, Netanyahu’s polling numbers had begun to recover, while Biden’s favorables among Israelis had nosedived over his intensifying alarm over the humanitarian situation in Gaza and his decision to withhold a shipment of 2,000 lbs bombs that he feared would lead to the deaths of too many civilians.
Again overtly favouring Hamas and the entire Iran-controlled cabal.
At the end of 2023, though, IDF operations had already struck significant blows to Hamas to the point where it could not carry out another October 7-like attack, according to Goldenberg. But already then, Netanyahu had made clear that he wasn’t interested in advancing a viable alternative to the terror group, which massively increased the chances that Israel would be bogged down in Gaza indefinitely, the former Biden aide maintained.
Given Mr. Goldenberg’s overall level of perspicacity, his maintenance of any point can be taken as proof it is wrong.
#1
"That would require Israel to grant the Palestinian Authority a foothold in Gaza."
If I recall correctly, PLO lost the elections to Hamas. So with the globalists, if your democracy does not meet global marxists standards, your democracy will be arrived at via global marxist decrees.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
