Connect with us

Middle East

The worse consequence of regional tensions

Published

on

Afghanistan cannot be exempted from the positive and negative consequences of current tensions in other parts of the world. The war in Eastern Europe and the Middle East has negative consequences for Afghanistan, but not for the Taliban, because they are making efforts to extend their government as much as they can by using the turbulent situation.

In Afghanistan, eyes are focused on the decision of the world, especially the great powers, to open a way to overcome the current impasse. But the countries involved in the Afghanistan conflict have forgotten this country and have defined more important missions for themselves in other parts of the world.

After the Taliban returned to power, the war in Ukraine broke out, where the world has reverted its attention from the Afghanistan crisis, and the war in Ukraine turned into the main topic and agenda of the world leaders.

In the war in Ukraine, not only Russia, but also the United States and the European Union were involved, the two major blocks, and if they want they can end the Afghan crisis.

Now that more than two years have passed since the war in Ukraine, not only is there no news of the end of the crisis, but more costs and resources are pouring in from all sides to sustain the war. Even some security experts admit that the war in Ukraine may last for years.

Before finding a way out of the Ukraine crisis, the Gaza war broke out — the war that has turned the Middle East into a “powder keg” and so far no way to overcome this situation has been found.

The regional and global actors have failed to manage the situation, or even break a deal for a short-term ceasefire to help reduce civilian casualties in Gaza.

The US is not only involved in the war in Ukraine, but also in the war in Gaza — the factor that has caused Washington to think only about the survival and security of Israel and not care about the problem of Afghanistan.

Unfortunately if Tehran and Tel Aviv enter into a cycle of extensive conflict, the war in the Middle East will take on a regional nature

Instead of ending the Gaza war, it became the cause of another war in Lebanon. What is happening in Lebanon these days is the result of the Gaza war and the most annoying is that civilians are again the target.

For the USA, not only the war in Ukraine and Gaza, but also the war in Lebanon is a big concern. Likewise, France, as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, is involved in the Lebanon war.

Iran, as a neighbor of Afghanistan and a regional power, finds itself stuck in the battle of Lebanon. The Lebanese crisis is also a concern of Saudi Arabia. The aid that Riyadh has sent to Lebanon in the last few months has not been sent to Afghanistan in the last three years.

Like the other two crises, the prospect of the end of the Lebanon war looks dark, at least in the short term. It is not unlikely that a bigger crisis will be born from it — the war between Israel and Iran.

Not long ago, Tehran launched nearly two hundred ballistic missiles towards Israel, to which Tel Aviv has not yet responded. For three weeks, the eyes of the world’s inhabitants have been focused on Israel’s possible response — an answer that is unlikely to light the fire of a full-scale war between the two sides.

Obviously, when Tehran and Tel Aviv enter into a cycle of extensive conflict, the war in the Middle East will take on a regional nature. When Gaza, Lebanon, Israel, Iran, etc. are involved in war, what is happening in the Middle East can be called a regional war. In that case, the allied militias of Iran from Yemen, Iraq, etc. will also shoot at Israel, and there will be no doubt that the war is regional.

Fortunately, war in Afghanistan has ended

In the meantime, among other crises and conflicts, the Afghanistan crisis would be forgotten. Whereas, if it were not for the above crises, the presence of the Taliban in Afghanistan, especially the rights of women to work and girls to education would be on top agenda of the world leaders.

Now, compared to other crises, the situation in Afghanistan is not described as a crisis. It is true that Afghanistan is suffering from statelessness, but according to many, the war has ended there. If terrorism is active in Afghanistan, it has not seriously and directly threatened the interests of other countries. In case if there is any threat it is nothing in the eyes of the world compared to other current crises.

Even if the economic crisis is rampant in Afghanistan, in the eyes of the world, the image of the refugees and famine victims of Gaza and Lebanon will be better than the hungry people of Afghanistan. This is the image created in the world’s mind of the Afghanistan crisis. The big regional and global actors are looking for their interests in the end of other crises than the Afghan crisis.

The big regional and global actors are looking for their interests in the end of every war

In the last few months, only organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, etc., publish statements describing the situation in Afghanistan as dangerous and calling for the serious attention of the world.

Or the World Food Program and other humanitarian agencies write about the increase in hunger and the spread of diseases such as tuberculosis, etc. that even for that cause, there are no eyes to see and no ears to listen. The rest of the world’s effective institutions and powers involved in Afghanistan are silent and are watching what is happening in Gaza, Lebanon, and Ukraine.

Summarizing the challenges of stateless Afghanistan to seasonal diseases shows that this country has disappeared from the eyes of the world at least for now.

More importantly, ignoring the bad situation of the Afghan media indicates the lack of importance of the country’s crisis in the eyes of the world.

Recently, the media has been subjected to repression and censorship more than before. According to some sources, TVs will be blocked or turned into radios. So far, no serious voice has been raised in support of the media from Western institutions and countries against this decision of the Taliban. 

Only the “Afghanistan Journalists Support Organization” and some other organizations raise their voices, but that would bear no result.

The US presidential elections, which were a source of hope for many, cannot be hoped for too much now because if Democratic Party’s nominee, Kamala Harris wins, she will follow the footstep of Joe Biden regarding policies with Afghanistan. And if Republican Party’s candidate Donald Trump wins, assuming he intends to end the war, and will prioritize the crisis in Ukraine, Gaza, Lebanon and Iran, not Afghanistan under Taliban rule. In this case, it still takes a lot of time to resolve the crisis in Afghanistan.

Middle East

Iran resumes ballistic missile assembly using stockpiled parts

Published

on

Iran has resumed ballistic missile production in underground facilities, despite statements by Israeli and US authorities asserting that this capacity had been completely eliminated.

According to a report by The Wall Street Journal citing US and Middle Eastern officials, the Tehran administration is utilizing pre-stockpiled components in the manufacturing process.

Officials report that despite strikes on missile sites and industrial installations at the beginning of the war, Iran continues the assembly of both solid- and liquid-fuelled missiles.

Intelligence data indicates activity at numerous underground centres, including the Khojir complex in the southeast of the country, along with efforts to establish additional underground assembly points to protect against new air strikes.

Current assembly operations are being maintained at lower volumes compared with pre-war levels, as US and Israeli operations destroyed several facilities and a naval blockade has impeded the import of components and solid-fuel ingredients.

Assessing the process, Tal Inbar, a senior analyst at the US-based Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, stressed that damaged infrastructure can be repaired during periods when facilities are not targeted, and parts procured from other countries can be stored there.

Inbar noted that it would be naive to believe Iran is not rebuilding its missile production capacity.

Arguing that the facilities were destroyed and Tehran has suffered severe losses, the official stated that Iran remains weaker than ever before, and US President Donald Trump will never permit the country to acquire nuclear weapons.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell stated that the US has destroyed up to 90% of Iran’s drone, ballistic missile, and naval industrial infrastructure, severely degrading Tehran’s ability to launch missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles.

Another US government official pointed out that the Tehran administration may have revived production, albeit on a low scale, following preliminary talks conducted in mid-June with the Trump administration regarding the opening of the Strait of Hormuz and ending the war. The official noted that existing stockpiles are sufficient to assemble at least two hundred missiles.

A CNN report in late May indicated that the Tehran administration was attempting to reopen underground missile shelters, struck by the US and Israel with costly munitions, using bulldozers and dump trucks.

Excavation activities accelerated after the April ceasefire decision; out of 69 tunnel entrances struck across 18 distinct locations, 50 have been made accessible again.

Experts stressed that it is impossible to destroy missile power solely by bombing tunnel entrances, underlining the limitations of such bombardments.

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth claimed in April that they had effectively ended Iran’s missile programme. However, an NBC News report noted that Tehran utilized the ceasefire period to reconstitute its military strength.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Mohammed bin Salman urges Trump to strike Houthis after Mokha falls

Published

on

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has requested that US President Donald Trump launch air strikes against the Houthis in Yemen.

According to two US officials who spoke to Axios, Trump rejected the request, and US officials emphasised that the administration has no plans for direct intervention against the Houthis for now.

Oil prices surged on Thursday after the resistance led by Houthi militias (Ansarallah) seized the strategic coastal city of Mokha in Yemen.

This development brought the Yemeni resistance one step closer to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, which is vital for global trade and Saudi oil exports.

With Iran already disrupting traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, Houthi control over Bab el-Mandeb could provide Tehran with powerful new leverage over the US and its Gulf allies.

On Thursday, as Houthi forces advanced towards the coastal city of Mokha and Saudi-backed Yemeni forces retreated, bin Salman telephoned Trump to brief him on the deteriorating situation.

A few hours later, the prince called again to request that Trump carry out US air strikes against the Houthis.

Trump declined, but a US official stated that the administration would provide Saudi Arabia with intelligence and targeting data on the Houthis.

The official noted that approximately 200 US military personnel are currently stationed in Saudi Arabia, providing non-military support.

A senior Trump administration official indicated that Washington’s priority is keeping the Red Sea open, while leaving the broader fight to regional partners.

“We are in continuous dialogue with Saudi Arabia and the Government of the Republic of Yemen regarding regional stability,” the official said.

The official continued:

“The US remains focused on protecting our core national security interests, such as ensuring freedom of navigation in the Red Sea, while empowering our regional partners to take the lead in managing and resolving regional security challenges.”

The US is concerned by the rapidly escalating conflict in Yemen and is seeking to avoid direct military intervention while increasing its support for Saudi Arabia.

According to two sources familiar with the matter, Admiral Brad Cooper, Commander of US Central Command (CENTCOM), travelled to Saudi Arabia on Thursday for urgent coordination meetings.

The conflict between Saudi Arabia and Yemeni resistance forces reignited in July after Riyadh blocked an Iranian aircraft carrying senior Houthi officials from landing in Sanaa following their return from Ali Khamenei’s funeral.

Bin Salman requested Trump’s political support to strike Sanaa airport, but made clear that Saudi Arabia did not require US military assistance. Trump granted his support.

The Houthis subsequently retaliated by attacking Saudi tankers in the Red Sea. These strikes threatened a route crucial to the kingdom’s oil exports, and the group later expanded its attacks to Saudi energy facilities.

Saudi Arabia and its Yemeni allies responded with air strikes and ground operations against Houthi positions.

Saudi Arabia’s request for direct US military intervention marks a sharp reversal from July, when Riyadh informed Washington that it could manage the Houthis on its own.

As clashes intensified, the Saudis began seeking progressively greater support from the US.

Sources close to the discussions noted that in recent weeks, US military and civilian officials informed their Saudi counterparts that Trump’s directive is to keep American forces focused on Iran and the Strait of Hormuz, and to avoid opening a new front.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu ignored MBZ warning on Hamas 7 October plan, report says

Published

on

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly ignored a direct warning from UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in the run-up to 7 October 2023, according to an investigation by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

The report states that the UAE leader, widely known as MBZ, was convinced in September 2023 that an explosion was imminent in the region, particularly given the escalating tensions in the West Bank.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog, who maintains close ties with bin Zayed, recounted: “In the months leading up to the war, he spoke with me about this issue frequently. He consistently conveyed the message that the situation needed to be de-escalated. He even dispatched a special envoy to Israel who met with the prime minister. The emir appeared to sense that the region was on the verge of erupting.”

MBZ also engaged in direct discussions with Netanyahu. These exchanges followed a standard operational protocol: a representative from the United Arab Emirates embassy would arrive at the prime minister’s office equipped with a specialised, secure telephone device to ensure confidentiality.

However, according to the newspaper, the call initiated by bin Zayed on this occasion was extraordinary in nature.

A week and a half before 7 October 2023, the UAE ruler placed a call to Netanyahu from the Presidential Palace in Abu Dhabi, and the two leaders spoke for 45 minutes.

During this conversation, bin Zayed warned that Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader in Gaza, was planning a major operation against Israel.

Bin Zayed voiced deep concern that such an event would not only lead to significant bloodshed, but would also destabilise the entire region and undermine the Abraham Accords.

Haaretz reported that three senior foreign sources possess direct knowledge of the call’s contents, marking the first public disclosure of the conversation’s existence.

A close Palestinian adviser to bin Zayed, who had emigrated from Gaza to Abu Dhabi years earlier and maintained extensive connections across the Gaza Strip, was also present during the exchange.

According to the adviser, the UAE ruler stressed to Netanyahu that Israel needed to prepare for this specific threat.

The adviser stated:

“The emir explained that, according to his assessment, Sinwar was preparing for a major event. He told Netanyahu that Israel had to be prepared. At the same time, he proposed working towards an economic solution for the Gaza Strip to prevent escalation, alongside calming the situation in the West Bank.”

Bin Zayed urged Netanyahu to take the matter seriously. Yet, to the emir’s surprise, the prime minister reacted with relative calm.

Netanyahu told bin Zayed that, in his own assessment, Hamas was planning to operate in the West Bank area. Reassuring the Emirati leader, Netanyahu insisted that Israel was prepared for any scenario.

The UAE leader later recounted his conversation with Netanyahu and his subsequent warning to CIA Director William J. Burns.

Bin Zayed shared with Burns the intuitive alarm he had sought to convey to Netanyahu—that “something over there is about to blow”—and noted the Israeli prime minister’s conviction that the unstable theatre was in fact the West Bank.

“The emir hoped that, despite Netanyahu’s reserved reaction, he would take the message seriously and take action,” the adviser said.

However, neither anticipated that the prime minister would hear the warning without briefing the heads of his defence and security establishments: neither the director of the Shin Bet, nor the director of the Mossad, nor the chief of staff of the Israel Defence Forces was informed of MBZ’s warning.

Haaretz noted that Gaza-related negotiations between Israel and Hamas had been proceeding smoothly in early 2023, providing the context in which the Emirati ruler’s concerns emerged.

The report received swift corroboration from the Israeli political opposition. Former prime minister and leader of the B’Yachad party, Naftali Bennett, stated that he knew the warning issued by UAE leader Mohamed bin Zayed to Netanyahu concerning Hamas’s plans prior to 7 October was genuine.

Speaking to 103FM, Bennett said: “I am telling you: I know this to be true.”

Bennett continued:

“Mohamed bin Zayed of the UAE warned Netanyahu that Sinwar was planning an operation. The head of the Egyptian General Intelligence Directorate, Abbas Kamel, also notified Netanyahu a few days before the massacre that a major operation was being planned. I do not wish to discuss my sources with anyone. I am telling you: I know this fact to be true.”

Contending that Netanyahu had led Israel “blindly into this horrific disaster,” the opposition figure asserted: “He was so deeply captive to the conception that Hamas was an asset that, despite receiving explicit warnings, he did nothing.”

Bennett maintained that Netanyahu bears direct responsibility for 7 October, not merely by virtue of being prime minister, but because “he spent 15 years strengthening Hamas and doing nothing.”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey