Connect with us

OPINION

Why the Western far-rights supports Russia in the Ukrainian crisis?

Published

on

For almost a year, the largest country in the world has been expelled from the world’s notable part. After the Russian actions over Ukraine, the US, the UK, and the EU have imposed an unprecedented amount of restrictions against this Bear Awoken; perhaps now even Iran faces less external obstacles in economy or diplomacy than Russia.

The Atlantists’ ultimate goal is clear: to isolate the Kremlin — or at least to make such an impression. And really, all parts of the Western societies, more or less, perform various hostility against Moscow, up to absurd cancelling of the human heritage such as Dostoevsky’s novels or Tchaikovsky’s music.

All parts of the West except one. The persons who are as banned as Russia, the persons who are as shamed as Russia, the persons who neither can use Western financial platforms to gain money for their civic projects as if they were Russian militants.

I mean the very special social group whom Mainstream Media call ‘far-right radicals’, ‘nationalists’, ‘fascists’, and so on — not to mention that in the West-backed Ukraine, the real neo-Nazi under swastikas are marching across the streets every year, which nobody cares.

If you look at a stereotypical Western far-right activist 2-3 decades ago, you would recall somebody similar to a member of the current Ukrainian nationalistic Azov battalion: a Nazi-tattooed mobster with Mein Kampf under his pillow at night, struggling for ‘white race purity’ at day, and investigating a hoax ‘Jewish conspiracy’ at class time.

But the modern Western far-rights — or, precisely, the people who are called ‘far-rights’ by the media — are something quite another. They have Africans and Asians among their teams, they support Israel against its Muslim neighbours; and at the same time some of them favor Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan as the latter proclaims himself ‘the Protector of Muslims’: a public figure whom the Christians, according to their opinion, are desperately lacking. Because yes, the New Rights consider themselves as protectors of Christianity — on the contrary to suspicious experiments of Third Reich’s or Ukrainian nazists with paganism and other occult esoterics.

And, for the most interesting, this New Western Rights support Russia. If you listen to their public statements, you would hear — oh, wait, it would be hardly to hear anything. One of their leaders, a British independent journalist Tommy Robinson — who used to sit in the same prison with Julian Assange for the political activism — is banned on most media platforms except Telegram, a crypto-messenger with the Russian roots. Perhaps these New Rights’ Telegram channels — tiny in comparison to mainstream media — are the modern analogue of Iskra (Rus. Sparkle), a marginal newspaper founded in 1900 by the future Russian revolutionary and the future Ataturk’s ally Vladimir Lenin in a desperate attempt to overthrow the old order by the 3,000 poorly-printed copies of his outlet.

But just listen to this. At his recent Telegram livestream on January 6, 2023 — dedicated to the second anniversary of the US Capitol Storming — Tommy Robinson, together with other alternative journalists from both sides of the Atlantic, hardly criticised the West for its double standards over the Ukrainian Crisis and the Capitol Storming.

‘9 years ago, in 2014, armed street activists overthrew democracy in Ukraine, occupied its official buildings’, Tommy Robinson said. ‘The same people, who are now intending to imprison the January 6 protesters, celebrated that Ukrainian events and called it democracy when the Ukrainian radical groups overthrew the elected government’.

 Another participant of Tommy Robinson’s livestream, an American alternative journalist Tayler Hansen, called the actual US domestic politics ‘a totalitarian nightmare’ and ‘a dream for totalitarian state’ — meaning inadequate charges against over 800 persons who mostly peacefully protested in and outside the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. Same way, Hansen labeled the Ukrainian crisis as a ‘money laundering project’ for the White House which provides Kiev multibillion aid from American taxes.

Similar views has another British New Right, the leader of the Britain First movement Paul Golding. So far he is less than marginal, his Telegram channel counts 19,000 subscribers, but previously, before total ban, his Facebook page used to have hundreds of thousands of fans, according to his own claims.

In his Telegram — literally the last bastion of alternative (neither good, nor bad, but alternative) opinion in the UK — Golding satirizes the mainstream anti-Russian narrative: ‘So Ukraine fired a missile at Poland, killing several Poles, but its Putins fault, he wrote on November 16, 2022, when the Ukrainian rocket attacked its Western neighbor — an assault Russia initially was blamed for.

I can go on, but the situation is obvious: the Western New Rights support Russia or at least maintain neutrality in the Moscow’s fight with the West. While, ironically, their love is mostly one-sided: Vkontakte, the Russian analogue of Facebook, has banned both Tommy Robinson and Paul Golding for an unknown reason.

And if you want a philosophical explanation, remember my comparison between Tommy Robinson and Vladimir Lenin. In the last 100 years, the world has turned upside down: the political lefts have turned into the political rights, and vice versa.

Don’t you see a similarity between the previous far-right and the current far-left? The old-school German Nazi divided people into privileged and unprivileged groups, such as the white race and all others — while the modern American Democrats divide people into privileged and unprivileged groups, such as transgenders and all others.

So, love them or hate them, Tommy Robinson and all his banned legion are the modern analogues of Lenin and Ataturk, struggling against censorship and inequality. The far-rights standing for racial brotherhood against the Western democratic bombardments of Serbia, Libya, and Iraq: doesn’t it sound absurd? No more absurd than the Iranian Shahed 136 kamikaze drones conducting strikes at the Ukrainian military objects now.

The author is an Adjunct Professor at the Higher School of Economics (St. Petersburg, Russia)

OPINION

Iranian retaliation: Moving through conspiracy theories

Published

on

Iran’s retaliation against Israel has once again revealed the wonderful products of our conspiracy theory industry. I have no doubt that we will be in the top three in the world without having played a game, and if we are on form we will be playing either a Middle Eastern or Balkan country in the final. If conspiracy theories were an exportable product, we would certainly be in the top five in the world in terms of per capita income.

In fact, the tensions between Iran and Israel are literally a game of chicken. In reality, the Iranian regime is just one of Israel’s puppets. The government in Tehran pretends to be against Israel, but behind the scenes it is working with it. If it can mobilise hundreds of drones, why doesn’t it hit important Israeli targets? Or why has no one been killed in Israel?

Of course, I know that there is no point in trying to refute them; but it is impossible not to regret that these conspiracy theories can be voiced uncontrollably in a significant part of the media, as an indicator of the intellectual level of our country. Listening to them, I feel like saying: ‘Hitler was also a Soviet agent. Stalin recruited him early on. The Second World War was already a central piece. Hitler’s aim was to ensure Germany’s defeat and to take control of the Soviet Union’s vast Eastern European territories’. Incidentally, the fact that the Soviet Union alone suffered 27 million deaths (one and a half times the population of Turkey, which was eighteen million in 1945) is a minor detail. It is not likely to disprove my conspiracy theory. Besides, there is no one around to ask these questions.

Codes of Iranian retaliation

In essence, Iran responded to the Israeli attack on its embassy in Damascus with more than adequate retaliation. More than adequate because Iran could have hit some Israeli targets outside Israeli territory. In fact, in recent months it had hit some sites in northern Iraq allegedly used by Israeli intelligence. But this time it targeted Israeli territory directly. And it should be underlined immediately that this is the most comprehensive attack on the entire territory of Israel since its establishment, taking its place in military-political history.

As for the claim that Iran did not or could not use weapons that could have inflicted greater damage on Israel, the answer to the first question is directly related to Tehran’s aversion to a regional war. From the Iranian point of view, the clock is ticking in its favour because Iran’s influence has grown enormously in Iraq and Syria – supposed democracies that Washington, with not very clever calculations, destroyed simply because they were anti-Israeli. In these two countries, groups known to be pro-Iranian and calling themselves the Axis of Resistance have gained power, while the Hezbollah movement, which was born in Lebanon as a result of Israel’s policy of nothing but violence, has established full contact with Iran through Syria. Add to this the strengthening of the Ansarullah movement in Yemen and the gradual Hezbollahisation of Hamas, i.e. its transformation into an effective resistance organisation, and Iran seems to have placed Israel under a serious siege in the region.

As multipolarity irreversibly restructures the world balance, Israel’s main supporters, the US and Europe, calculate that they will suffer a serious loss of power and sphere of influence, and they are not wrong in their calculations. There is no doubt that the decline in the power of the US and the collective West will reduce Israel’s room for manoeuvre in the Middle East. Moreover, Iran, which is said to have reached the final stage in its efforts to build nuclear weapons, has no reason to want a regional war. On the contrary, it is Netanyahu and Israel that want a regional war and are trying to drag America into it, because the Tel Aviv government, having achieved nothing that could be considered a success (the rescue of hostages, the capture/killing of prominent Hamas leaders, etc.) in its genocidal ethnic cleansing operation in Gaza, which for the first time has been strongly criticised even by Western public opinion, sees its salvation in dragging Iran into the war. This is why he is carrying out his provocations against both Hezbollah and Iran.

Netanyahu is also using provocations against Iran in order to draw the American administration, which does not want a war with Iran, into the conflict. The recent bombing of the consulate in Damascus was designed to do just that. Iran has therefore had to build up its strike capability on nuances (an area in which conspiracy theorists are very poor). In other words, it had to respond, but it had to do so in coordination with the United States in a way that would not lead to a major war. That is exactly what Iran did over the weekend. Hundreds of drones and Hezbollah’s rapid fire, which began as they approached Israeli airspace, must have been designed to keep Israel’s so-called Iron Dome air defence system busy with more targets than it could handle. Taking advantage of the vacuum created by this saturation, ballistic missiles apparently caused serious damage to critical Israeli airfields (Nevatim and Ramon).

Moreover, it appears that Iran did not hit these airfields with hypersonic missiles, because if it had, the details of an important weapon in Tehran’s inventory would have been revealed and Israel, on the one hand, and the United States, the United Kingdom and their allies, on the other, would have begun a feverish study of what could be done against this weapon. In other words, Iran seems to have applied the most important rule of strategy and retaliated without showing all its cards. It has shown Tel Aviv that it can strike anywhere in Israel without using hypersonic missiles.

CNN ezzle

It is also clear that there is nothing serious in Iran’s claims that the attention of anti-Israel or Israel-critical public opinion or Western states, which was focused on Gaza, has suddenly turned to the Iran-Israel conflict and that Gaza has been forgotten. Such rhetoric is based on the assumption that Israel has stopped or will stop its operations in Gaza. But after this retaliation, in which Iran has shown Israel what it can do, eyes will turn back to Gaza. On the one hand, if the Israeli offensive in Gaza is suspended or stopped, this would be a serious point in Iran’s favour because it would put it in the position of being the country that protects/rescues the people of Gaza from Netanyahu’s genocide. On the other hand, if the Israeli offensive continues, all eyes will turn there again.

There is also a contradictory situation in Western countries between public opinion, which is increasingly critical of Israel, and the governments that support Israel, and this situation is likely to continue. In other words, we are talking about a Western world that will not/cannot stop supporting Israel, whether Iran retaliates or not. From this point of view, we can conclude that Iran has given a nuanced response when balancing this issue with the demands of its own public opinion for retaliation. The retaliation was both sufficient and did not lead to a regional war. So Netanyahu did not win.

The repercussions of Iran’s retaliation in regional politics showed once again that it has not received, and is unlikely to receive, political support from the Arab countries. While Jordan actively defended its airspace against Iran directly with Israel and the United States, the rest of the Arab countries, with the exception of Syria, did not allow the passage of Iranian drones and missiles. This shows that the Arab countries are in favour of treating the Palestinian issue as their own family problem. These Arab countries, which are negotiating and struggling with Israel and America on the Palestinian issue, consider the attempts of non-Arab Muslim states to take a central role in the Palestinian issue with political Islamist slogans and religious justifications such as Islamic brotherhood as an intrusion of others into their legitimate sphere, and there is no doubt that there are lessons to be learned from the Turkish government, which has shown its willingness to be active on this issue on every occasion.

For the time being, the possibility of a regional war seems to have been averted, but it is almost impossible to predict what provocations Netanyahu or any other Israeli government might resort to if it wants to launch an all-out war against Iran, dragging America into it. There is no Israeli political formation/government on the horizon that would internalise a two-state solution by taking serious steps backwards in Palestine, taking into account the possibility of diminishing American aid in a multipolar world. On the other hand, while those in Gaza are being subjected to genocidal ethnic cleansing, the Palestinians in the West Bank, whose homes and lands are being confiscated, who are constantly oppressed and persecuted, have no choice but to resist. The region is likely to remain a hot zone of conflict in a multipolar world until the US presidential election. If Trump is elected and translates his ideas into foreign policy, the regional equation could change significantly.

Continue Reading

OPINION

Presidential elections in Venezuela

Published

on

In what is already one of the most anticipated elections in the Latin American and Caribbean region, this March 25 the deadline established by the National Electoral Council (CNE) expired for political parties to officially nominate their candidates for President of the Bolivarian Republic in the electoral elections to be held on July 28. In total, thirteen (13) candidates has been registered, among them, as expected, is not María Corina Machado, who is disqualified by the Venezuelan Electoral Justice, but who in any case campaigned throughout the Caribbean country generating direct confrontation with the highest Venezuelan electoral authority and with the government of Nicolás Maduro.

The entire Venezuelan electoral process has been surrounded by criticism, speculation and conflicts within and between political parties, in addition to pressure and interference from the United States and part of the European Community to intervene in the election of candidates (such as María Corina Machado (who They are disqualified by the Venezuelan Electoral Power, for various irregularities, among which conspiracy and betrayal of the country stand out, to try to overthrow Nicolás Maduro. Although the economic and social situation has had a slight improvement in the last year, Venezuela is still going through an important socio economic crisis, which is why the result of the next presidential elections is uncertain.

Electoral schedule

On March 5, the Board of Directors of the Venezuelan National Electoral Council (CNE) unanimously established the date of the schedule that will be carried out in the coming weeks and months, establishing July 28, 2024 as the day for hold the presidential election, as announced by the president of the highest electoral authority, Dr. Elvis Amoroso, in the company of vice president Carlos Quintero and the rectors Rosalba Gil, Aimé Nogal and the rector Juan Carlos Delpino.

In accordance with the CNE decision, the special Electoral Registration day will take place from March 18 to April 16; The members of the subordinate electoral bodies will be selected on March 20; The presentation of candidate applications was scheduled from March 21 to 25; and the electoral campaign will begin on the 4th and will end on July 25.

Choosing the date was not an easy task nor was it born of free will, but rather it was a process of debate and democratic consultation that included the participation of political forces of various ideological orientations. The debate took place in the Venezuelan streets and in the respective grassroots organizations, as well as within the traditional political parties, and the proposals for tentative dates were presented

and defended in the Venezuelan National Assembly itself, within the framework of a National Agreement. on General Principles, Calendars and Electoral Guarantees. This Agreement was signed by the National Assembly with the different political sectors of the Caribbean country, and was subsequently presented for consideration by the CNE, on March 1st. Finally, the recommendations of the dates transmitted from the Legislative Branch to the Venezuelan Electoral Branch led to the decision to hold the next elections on July 28, the day that coincides with the birth of President Hugo Chávez (1954).

Confirmed candidates

The candidates who have run before the CNE for the 2024 Presidential Election are the following:

  • For Chavismo: Nicolás Maduro (Gran Polo Patriótico)

For the opposition:

  • Antonio Ecarri (Pencil Alliance)
  • José Brito (First Venezuela)
  • Juan Carlos Alvarado (Copei)
  • Luis Eduardo Martínez (Democratic Action – AD)
  • Luis Ratti (Popular Democratic Right)
  • Benjamín Rausseo (National Democratic Confederation – Conde)
  • Daniel Ceballos (Arepa Digital)
  • Javier Bertucci (The Change)
  • Leocenis García (Prociudadanos)
  • Claudio Fermín (Solutions for Venezuela)
  • Luis Enrique Márquez (Centers)
  • Manuel Rosales (Fuerza Vecinal)

In this sense, the Venezuelan political organizations that have expressed their willingness to participate in the presidential elections are: Podemos; Communist Party of Venezuela (PCV); Love for Venezuela; Homeland For All (PPT), We are Venezuela; Alliance for Change; Green Movement of Venezuela; Future Venezuela; Venezuelan Popular Unity; Authentic Renewal Organization; Unified Trends to Achieve the Organized Revolutionary Action Movement (Tupamaro); People’s Electoral Movement, as well as; Democratic Action (AD); Red Flag (BR); Republican Movement (MR); National Student Union (UNE); Corn cake; Activist Popular Will; Pencil Alliance; Let’s Change Citizen Movement; National Integrity Movement – Unity; Progressive Advance; Independent Electoral Political Organization Committee (Copei); First Venezuela (PV); Venezuela Vision Unit; United Venezuela; Hope for Change; National Democratic Confederation (Conde); and Solutions for Venezuela; Popular Democratic Right.

The Bolivarian fury (La Furia Bolivariana)

Also, this Monday, March 25, the so-called Bolivarian Fury, forces that support and recognize the leadership of Nicolás Maduro, filled the center of the city of Caracas to join the “Great National March” to accompany the registration of his presidential candidacy. Maduro before the president of the CNE, Elvis Amoroso, and the rectors of the body.

In addition, the National Directorate of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), as well as the social movements and political organizations that make up the Great Patriotic Pole (GPP), participated in this activity.

In that sense, the first vice president of the PSUV, Diosdado Cabello, stated that: “today it is the PSUV’s turn to register its candidate, after more than 317 thousand assemblies throughout the country, where in a sovereign, democratic manner, our bases decided that brother Nicolás Maduro be the standard bearer of love for the Homeland.”

María Corina Machado’s substitute

Opposition leader María Corina Machado, disqualified by the CNE, nominated Corina Yoris, a renowned Venezuelan philosopher, 80 years old, who was a member of the commission that organized the October 2023 opposition primary, which chose Machado as a presidential candidate. of the opposition, even without being legally able to participate, participated in primaries controlled and observed only by the opposition.

Yoris, despite being a prominent Venezuelan academic, does not have extensive experience in Venezuelan politics, and is not widely known by the majority of the Venezuelan electoral population. However, the support and indication of María Corina Machado should be enough for Machado’s followers to automatically support her. The political forces that support his candidacy are the Un Nuevo Tiempo party and the Democratic Unity Roundtable.

At the end of this note, 8pm on Monday, March 25, Yoris has not been able to register his candidacy, registrations that are online and not in person, which is why a new wave of criticism has arisen on social networks and in the traditional press media, since it is understood that it is the government of Nicolás Maduro that would be preventing his candidacy. The extension of the deadline for the registration of applications by the CNE would also be evaluated. However, neither of these things has been confirmed at the moment.

Continue Reading

OPINION

Does a Turkish military formula exist between Lebanon and Israel?

Published

on

After the Russian genocide of 1864, the Ottoman Empire settled Circassians in the Golan Heights to create a buffer between the Arab tribes and the Jews, who were then few in number. The name Golan comes from a Circassian commander who was killed in the region.

Today, Circassians still struggle to survive in the areas close to the Syrian-Jordanian-Israeli border. This includes Circassians who are citizens of Israel living just below the Lebanese border.

The struggle in the lands that ancient peoples have sought to conquer throughout history, where peace and stability have been absent, continues unabated today.

After the 7th of October Operation Aqsa Flood, the peoples of the Middle East, caught in the flood of blood, are longing for the days when the conflicts will end and the region will be stabilised.

What happens if the war spills over into Lebanon?

Israel demands that Hezbollah withdraw south of the Litani River, in accordance with UN Resolution 1701, so that its citizens in the north can return. If the problem is not resolved diplomatically, Israel has made it clear that it will take military action.

In a possible war between Hezbollah and Israel, Hezbollah would inflict considerable damage on northern Israel, while Israel would turn Beirut into Gaza. In other words, a different course from the war Israel is currently waging with disproportionate force will await it. But in the end it will be a costly confrontation with no winners for either side.

We seem to be moving towards that confrontation, albeit in slow motion. The escalation of the conflict carries great risks for the region and the world, which is already on edge. Various proposals to reduce tensions are also being discussed.

Turkish troops to reinforce UNIFIL?

One of the proposals in the Middle East is to deploy Turkish troops south of the Litani River to create a buffer between Israel and Hezbollah. At the moment there are Turkish troops in UNIFIL (United Nations peacekeeping force) on the Lebanese-Israeli border. There is talk that Turkey will provide security south of the Litani by sending reinforcements to the Turkish forces in the region. In return, Hezbollah will withdraw from the area and hand it over to the Turkish military. Israel would then reassure its citizens living in the north that they would be safe from Hezbollah attacks and allow them to return to their homes.

The reason for the deployment of the UN peacekeeping force UNIFIL in the so-called Blue Line area is to prevent border conflicts between Israel and Lebanon and to ensure peace in the region.

In Gaza, the West Bank and southern Lebanon, Israel has not hesitated to target UN personnel in defiance of international law. UNIFIL spokesman Andrea Teneti said: “Three UN military observers and an interpreter were injured by an explosion near their location on the Blue Line and were taken to hospital. The safety of UN personnel must be guaranteed.

It is obvious that UNIFIL, which cannot protect itself, cannot fulfil its mission. Therefore, it is said that the presence of Turkish forces in the region can prevent a possible war and ensure peace, security and stability in the region.

Lebanese Christians against Hezbollah?

Lebanon has a lot to lose in a possible war between Hezbollah and Israel. Civil war is always a real possibility in Lebanon, which has long been at an economic, political and social low.

In some Christian villages near the border, Hezbollah members are exposing themselves to Israel and showing their side.

For example, some residents of Rmaish, a Christian village in Lebanon, claimed to have foiled a Hezbollah attack on Israel from the outskirts of the village. The villagers then captured cars allegedly used by Hezbollah and began posting them on social media. Rmaish is in a geographically advantageous position in relation to some Israeli bases and strategic locations. The people of Rmaish say they are not involved in this war and want to avoid Israeli reprisals. Members of Maronite Christian political parties, including Kataeb, the Lebanese Power Party and the Free Patriotic Movement, have been inciting civil war by ringing church bells to mobilise the population against Hezbollah.

Lebanese don’t want war

Lebanon has been headless for a long time. No government has been formed since the parliamentary elections of September 2022. A new president has still not been elected after Michel Aoun, whose term ended in October 2023 and who left the Baabda Palace. In the event of a possible Israeli war, this situation would plunge the Lebanese, already unable to unite, into civil war. While Israel will bomb Beirut, which it has long coveted, from the air, it will also hit Lebanon’s already inadequate infrastructure. After hitting Rafik Hariri International Airport, the country’s only airport, the Lebanese will be trapped like the Palestinians who are helpless at the Rafah border crossing.

To avoid all this, Hezbollah has so far acted cautiously and strategically. But the time for non-retaliation is fast passing. Its response to the assassinations in Beirut, in Dahiyeh, the heart of Hezbollah, and in the Beqaa has generally been limited. But Israel insists that Hezbollah must withdraw south of the Litani River for the peace and security of its citizens in the north.

A possible war would not be limited to Lebanon, but would also involve Syria and even Iran. Benjamin Netanyahu may have been referring to this regional war when he said before the Aqsa flooding operation on 7 October that the borders in the region would change. Netanyahu knows that his government’s time is running out and that Israel is heading for early elections, and he wants to prolong the war to prevent the collapse of his cabinet.

Can Turkey, in accordance with its historical responsibility, prevent this war in the region by its mere presence, without endangering Turkish troops or becoming actively involved in the conflict? Although we generally volunteer for “patrols”, does such an initiative have a chance of success and would the risks outweigh the rewards? Will the Turkish military leave the area they are in?

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey