Connect with us

Middle East

Iranian border guards kill scores of Afghan migrants: US is responsible for this

Published

on

Recent reports reveal the killing of around 300 Afghan nationals in a border village of Seestan province of Iran. The incident occurred at the border village of Kalgan Sarwan of Seestan of Iran which is bordering also with Baluchistan province of Afghanistan. Further details are awaited but reports reveal that personnel of Iranian border security forces opened indiscriminate firing against these Afghan nationals while they were making an attempt to enter Iran. From onward Iran, almost these Afghan immigrants are struggling to land in Pakistan or any other part of the region not only for their livelihood but for their survival.

No one can exonerate the hardline Taliban who are governing war devastated Afghanistan of miseries, hardships and even killing/dying of Afghans not only by border personnel of Iran but throughout the world. Like Iran, Pakistan is also responsible for all happenings to Afghans. But most important, the main culprit is no other than the United State-which has engaged in experiment after experiment on the soil of Afghans for the last several decades. But unfortunately, not only common countries but even UN and EU like so called prestigious and effective global bodies are helpless before the US.

The US is behind the unstable situation in Afghanistan, but Washington wont stop here.

Whatever may be claims and justification on the part of the US but it and its powerful spy agencies had made a key role in surrendering Afghanistan for a term to Taliban. In fact, Taliban are not any new or strange force but it is the second generation of Afghan Mujahideen, manufactured and financed by the US, trained by Pakistan and religiously polished by Saudi Arabia. Now it is confirmed that the US agenda regarding South and Central Asia is yet to be accomplished and for this purpose, the Jihad against the former USSR is now converted into religious terrorism or Islamic extremism. The characters are not new in the second play being produced and carried out by US spy masters with collaboration of its paid and contributing partners or allies. 

All are considering Islamic Republic of Iran-a rival to the US in Islamic world. But on the issue of Afghanistan, Iraq and other regional countries both US and Iran are friends and have always assisted each other since the 70’s. Iran had not only backed the US led war (Jihad) against –ex USSR but had also backed the US in its aggressions against Iraq, Egypt’s Hussni Mobarak and Libya’s Col Gaddafi.  Whereas the position of Pakistan is very clear as its powerful effective military establishment is always proud of its what it called “relations and partnership” with the United States.

The US supported proxies instead of supporting the established government that caused the ordinary Afghans to face the circumstances.  

On the issue of Iran, both Pakistan and Iran had not only remained as forefront allies of the US led world but both on the other hand broke away all previous records of treating war affected Afghans like slaves, hostages and even criminals. Despite earning and receiving a lot from UNHCR and other global organs on the name of refugees, Iran had confined the Afghans to some camps and localities whereas Pakistan’s law enforcing agencies had camouflaged all sorts of its failures, inefficiencies and failure through Afghan refugees.

One was expecting a change after 9/11 when the US apparently suffered a lot at the hands of al-Qaeda and its affiliated militant groups including Tehrik Taliban Afghanistan. But the US despite extending much more help and contribution in restoration of a centralized authority and reconstruction process had douched its own installed democratic regimes of Afghanistan by re-establishing contacts with Pakistan based and Pakistan helped Taliban through Qatar instead of Saudi Kingdom some when in 2010 after 2009 second Presidential polls. Later the US had completely ignored the democratically elected government of Dr. Ashraf Ghani in the so-called Doha Accord 2020, ultimately helping Taliban militants in returning to power on August 15th 2021 last. Pakistan through its former ISI chief  Faiz Hameed had jubilated returning to power with a cup of tea at Serena Kabul.

It was hoped Pakistan and Iran would change their attitudes toward Afghanistan after the return of the Taliban, but in reality the relations are more fragile now.

One was expecting positive change in the attitude of both Pakistan and Iran after the empowering of Taliban but the situation is now different. Prior to this brutal incident, Iran and Pakistan have been forcibly deporting Afghans for the last two years. But the Afghans are reluctant to stay in the country.  Both the countries are leaving no stone unturned in further muscling its harsh acts and actions against the Afghans. Iran didn’t allow Afghans to cross over its territory either to land in Pakistan or any other country whereas Pakistan has fenced the whole of its border with Afghanistan. Ruling but cruel extremist Taliban have converted the whole of Afghanistan into a big prison where the people are treated like slaves and hostages. On the other UN, EU, OIC and US like forces are playing the role of silent spectator and enjoying miseries of war affected Afghans.

Middle East

US envoy says Syria interim leader Sharaa seeks Israel normalization

Published

on

US Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack stated that Syria’s interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, wants to normalize relations with Israel.

At the same time, he called for an end to Israel’s military operations in Syria and questioned whether Washington should intervene to halt them.

Speaking at the Global Security Forum held in Doha, Qatar, Barrack said Sharaa had managed difficult circumstances well and was trying to reassure Israel that his government poses no threat.

“I think President Sharaa has done a very good job under very difficult circumstances,” Barrack said, describing the message he believes the Syrian leader is conveying to Israel: “I am not aggressive, I have no problem with Israel, I want relations with Israel to normalize.”

Barrack also urged Israel to stop its operations in Syria, while voicing uncertainty over whether the US should step in to end them:

“It’s time to stop this [Israel’s actions in Syria]. I don’t know if it’s time for the US to intervene to stop it.”

Israel intensified its military operations in Syria following the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad on 8 December 2024. Israeli forces entered the demilitarized “buffer zone” along the Golan Heights and took up positions on the Syrian side of Mount Hermon (Jabal al-Shaykh), with Israel describing the deployment as a temporary security measure.

Israeli air strikes have also targeted military facilities and weapons depots across the country.

Barrack pointed to Syria’s political transition as an example of how groups once viewed as adversaries could be incorporated into new political and security structures.

“You can take Nusra, which was once designated a foreign terrorist organization; following the transformation that took place on December 8, many people today evaluate this example as ‘here is a model,'” the US diplomat said.

The Nusra Front was a jihadist group that emerged during the Syrian civil war and, after pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda, announced its departure from the network. The organization was designated as “terrorist” by several countries and bodies, primarily the US and the UN.

The group’s leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa (Abu Mohammad al-Julani), subsequently headed Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which led the offensive that ousted Assad.

Barrack also highlighted the integration of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) into the Syrian national army as an outcome many had previously considered unlikely.

“Nobody thought you could reintegrate this Kurdish entity, the SDF, into a national army, but it happened,” the US official said.

Damascus and the Kurdish-led forces signed an agreement on 10 March 2025 to integrate the SDF’s military and civilian institutions into the Syrian state.

However, delays occurred in the implementation of the agreement due to disputes over integration terms and the future of self-administration in the region.

Barrack nevertheless expressed doubts about the effectiveness of earlier US interventions in the Middle East, citing Washington’s involvement in what he characterized as “23 regime changes” across the wider region.

“Whenever we have tried to intervene, to change a person or a regime, it seems to have been a mistake,” Barrack said, while also questioning the value of US intervention in Yemen, describing it as apparently “senseless.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

US and Israel weigh Iran strikes after midterm vote, reports say

Published

on

The US and Israeli defence ministries have drawn up plans for a fresh assault on Iran, with the envisioned offensive under consideration to launch after the US Congressional midterm elections on 3 November.

Citing sources, The New York Times reported that the blueprint anticipates a brief but intense campaign.

As military units step up their drills, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth discussed prospective strike options with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The list of targets encompasses Iran’s nuclear sites, its energy infrastructure, and its arsenals of missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles.

Several officials who spoke to the newspaper argued that a new wave of attacks could deal a heavy blow to the Iranian economy, forcing the leadership in Tehran into concessions.

Conversely, other sources doubt whether a resumption of fighting would prove any more successful than the earlier campaign conducted between February and April.

That previous offensive drove energy prices higher and drained US stockpiles of interceptor missiles.

It remains unclear whether US President Donald Trump will authorise the operation.

Domestic political calculations in Israel could also influence the trajectory of the plans, given that the country faces general elections on 27 October.

While some experts speaking to the newspaper contended that Netanyahu could leverage the threat of war to form a national unity government, others pointed to the opposition’s distrust of the prime minister.

Washington fears regional spillover

The US administration also harbours concerns that the fighting could engulf the wider region. On Wednesday, the US State Department ordered non-essential government personnel and their family members to leave Saudi Arabia following attacks by the Iran-backed Houthis.

A US military build-up, comprising three aircraft carriers, fighter aircraft, and special forces units, is slated to be fully deployed to the region by early November.

The targets under review include the deep underground nuclear facility code-named “Pickaxe”. Trump suggested that the high-yield GBU-43/B bomb, known as the “mother of all bombs”, could be deployed against the site, though experts doubt whether the ordnance can destroy a complex buried so deeply.

For its part, Tehran is preparing for a potential escalation, threatening to broaden its target list. Retaliatory options under consideration by Iran reportedly include data centres and subsea internet cables, in addition to shipping and energy facilities.

Mehdi Mohammadi, an adviser to an Iranian negotiator, dismissed US hopes of wrapping up a new campaign within 72 hours as a “fantasy”. Mohammadi warned that Tehran’s response would be more severe and unpredictable.

The Financial Times previously reported that an Israeli strike on Iran set for 10 October had been called off because the US president was unwilling to risk a broader conflict ahead of the Congressional midterms.

According to that report, the Israeli military had prepared a multi-day assault on nuclear sites, Iranian government targets, power plants, and civilian infrastructure on Netanyahu’s orders. The strikes had been designed to exceed the intensity of the campaign begun in February.

Washington seeks to secure an agreement from Tehran covering both the Strait of Hormuz and its nuclear programme.

“It will either be a deal or a strike,” one source told the Financial Times, adding that an operation could get under way in the coming weeks.

Another official who spoke to the paper suggested that Israeli preparations might serve as leverage to squeeze Iran in negotiations.

Axios also reported that the Pentagon had issued orders to prepare for renewed strikes, though the directive contained no specific date and Trump has yet to take a final decision.

The US and Israel launched their offensive against Iran on 28 February. Iran hit back by targeting US and Israeli assets across the region and curbing vessel transit through the Strait of Hormuz.

Although both sides signed a memorandum of understanding in June that provided for a ceasefire and talks to lift the blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, reciprocal attacks between the US and Iran have persisted.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu trails Eisenkot in Israeli polls despite Trump backing

Published

on

As general elections scheduled for 27 October approach in Israel, the opposition camp led by former Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot continues to lead Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in public opinion polls.

Survey data published in the Israeli press on 19 and 20 October reveal that the governing coalition has failed to catch the opposition, despite explicit backing from US President Donald Trump.

However, the current distribution of votes documents that neither wing can reach a governing majority on its own.

Neither bloc reaches the 61 seats needed to form a government

According to a survey conducted by Channel 13, if an election were held today, Eisenkot’s bloc would win 51 seats, while the Netanyahu coalition would take 50.

A Channel 12 poll indicates that the gap has widened slightly, projecting 55 seats for Eisenkot’s alliance and 51 for the governing bloc. A minimum of 61 seats is required to form a government in the Knesset, Israel’s 120-seat parliament.

A key factor deadlocking the political arithmetic is the refusal by both sides to form a coalition with parties representing Palestinian citizens of Israel. This stance stands as the most tangible obstacle to securing a parliamentary majority after the election.

Channel 12 data shows that overall voter turnout is expected to remain at 72%. The inclination to head to the ballot box climbs to 81% among opposition voters, compared with 74% measured among Netanyahu supporters.

The same poll notes that Eisenkot has widened his lead over Netanyahu by two further points in prime ministerial preferences.

Yashar party climbs after Gantz bows out

A survey published on the Walla news site shows that the balance shifted after Benny Gantz decided to withdraw his Blue and White party from the race. Following that move, Eisenkot’s Yashar party increased its projected tally to 23 seats, while Netanyahu’s Likud dropped by one seat to 19.

Eisenkot’s party and the “Zionist Opposition” bloc it anchors have remained atop the polls for several months.

In an earlier message of support, Trump praised Netanyahu as “a great fighting prime minister and an even greater partner for peace.” Public opinion polls document that this diplomatic and political backing has not proved sufficient to tip the preferences of the Israeli electorate in favour of the incumbent government.

Support for Ben Gvir rises among young voters

Although Netanyahu’s alliance trails in overall strength, far-right figures within the coalition appear to be expanding their grassroots base. Gauged interest in the Jewish Power party of Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir is climbing, particularly among younger voters.

Speaking to a study conducted by Agam Labs, affiliated with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, an 18-year-old student described his shifting preference: “I used to think he was a bit crazy, but then I actually looked at what he was saying, and it all made sense.”

Another Israeli citizen stated that Ben Gvir’s push to arm West Bank settlers gave them “room to breathe.”

Ben Gvir is known for leading settler incursions into the Al-Aqsa compound and distributing military-grade rifles to tens of thousands of settlers since 7 October 2023.

Criticized for escalating violence against Palestinians, Ben Gvir has called for starving Gaza, maintaining military operations in Lebanon, and bombing Beirut. The far-right minister’s militaristic stances also find a political constituency across several opposition parties in Israel.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey