Rumble link here.

As German’s Bundestag MP and prominent politician Sahra Wagenknecht calls for diplomacy instead of US missiles, German establishment is using her rhetoric to allow voters to express their discontent without any threat to power. More popular parties, like AfD, are less fortunate, because they are labeled ‘extremists’ for the very same views. RT’s Rachel Marsden explains.

By MK Bhadrakumar, Indian Punchline, 10/5/24

The US president Joe Biden sprang a surprise during a press gaggle with reporters outside the White House on Thursday (10/3/24) when he essentially didn’t rule out a potential meeting with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin at the upcoming summits of the Group of 20 or the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. Biden sort of signalled, ‘Barkis is willing.’ As he put it, “I doubt that Putin will show up.”

As these White House gaggles generally go, Biden deliberately chose to respond to the TASS correspondent who asked the question, who of course knew that Biden knew that a trip by Putin to the Western Hemisphere to attend the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on November 18-19 is under active consideration in the Kremlin.

Biden and Putin have a lot to talk about but what adds up is that Biden signalled his interest in a conversation just a day after the massive Iranian missile strike against Israel, which came as a bolt from the blue and dramatically upended the legacy of his presidency.

Don’t be surprised if the Middle East crisis dominates a Biden-Putin summit in Rio de Janeiro — that is, if such a meeting takes place. The Ukraine war is coasting inexorably toward a Russian victory. Biden’s interest lies in making sure somehow that Ukraine’s capitulation — and NATO’s humiliation — get carried over to January 20. But Putin must cooperate. This is one thing. 

Meanwhile, what causes sleepless nights for Biden is the situation in the Middle East, which may cascade uncontrollably toward a regional war. Here, Putin is not the problem but can be the solution. This needs some explaining.

To be sure, policy differences have arisen between Biden and Netanyahu which is only to be expected given their sense of priorities respectively as politicians. It may seem the current crisis in the US-Israeli relationship is rather severe but how much of it is for the optics or, how little of it is for real is the moot point. Certainly, even a transition from war to a new diplomatic order is currently not in the cards.

However, the US and Israel are also joined at the hips. There is no question that Biden is allowing seamless assistance to flow to Israel in its war effort and for keeping its economy afloat. And the US is blocking all moves in the UN Security Council calling for a ceasefire, which means that peacemaking efforts cannot even begin.

Iran’s missile attack on Israel, in this context, needs to be put in perspective. Rather than an act of belligerence, it can be seen as a coercive measure to force Israel to abandon its ground operation in Lebanon. President Masoud Pezeshkian has disclosed that Iran exercised utmost restraint so far to stop Israeli atrocities only because of pleas by Western leaders that negotiations leading to a potential ceasefire in Gaza were at a crucial stage. But the West didn’t keep its promise leaving Iran no option but to act.

Passivity or inaction in the face of Israel’s relentless rampage against the Palestinian population aimed at ethnic cleansing created a distressing situation for Iran as the saviour of oppressed Muslims. Besides, Iran’s entire strategy of deterrence came under challenge too.

Biden is today like a cat on a hot tin roof. A Middle Eastern war is the last thing he wants. But he has no control over Netanyahu who is already plotting the next move on the escalation ladder. As for Iran, its sense of exasperation over western perfidy and moral bankruptcy is palpable. The US’ credibility has suffered a severe beating all across the West Asian region.

Enter Putin. On the Middle Eastern chessboard, Russia’s role assumes great importance. Russia-Iran relations touch an unprecedented level today. Russian statements have become highly critical of Israel in recent years. Russia has openly kept contacts with the groups constituting the Axis of Resistance.

Russian diplomacy is moving with a ‘big picture’ in mind to bring the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to the centre stage of international politics. In the past year, security consultations between Moscow and Tehran notably intensified. Some reports have appeared about Russia transferring advanced military equipment to strengthen Iran’s air defence capabilities.

Significantly, Russia was the only country that Iran informed in advance about its missile strike against Israel. According to the well-known US podcast Judge Napolitano: Judging Freedom (below), the Russian naval fleet in the East Mediterranean downed 13 Israeli missiles last week near Lebanon.

Apparently, a frantic Netanyahu has been trying to reach Putin on phone for the past few days but the call is yet to materialise. On the diplomatic track too, Russia has underscored the highest importance it attaches to the relations with Iran.

Clearly, the US senses the imperative to engage with Russia. What may be acceptable can be proportional strikes by the two West Asian protagonists, couched in carefully calibrated media campaigns. For example, targeted attacks on individual military installations, which would save face for Israel and avoid a major war — it’s a preferable scenario for Iran too, because it avoids unnecessary risks and preserves the trump cards for a game that promises to be long drawn out.

In the final analysis, what matters is the US-Israeli intentions. The Financial Times cited Israeli sources to the effect that the game plan is to inflict maximum damage to Iran’s economy so as to trigger the latent ‘protest potential’ of Iranian society. The Israeli hope is apparently that a credible regime change agenda will find resonance in Washington and attract US intervention.

Anyway, Biden’s move to engage with Putin suggests that a US military intervention is to be ruled out. On the other hand, the historic Russian—Iranian security pact, which is expected to be signed during the forthcoming BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, on October 20-22, gives Iran vastly more strategic depth to negotiate with the West.

Russia’s own interest lies in boosting Iran’s defence capability and pressing ahead with broad-based bilateral cooperation anchored on the economic agenda in the conditions under sanctions while on a parallel track advancing Iran’s integration into Moscow’s Greater Eurasia project. In short, Russia is uniquely placed today as a stakeholder in a stable and predictable Iran at peace with itself and the region.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov told reporters in Moscow Thursday, “We are in the closest contact with Iran on the current situation. We share a wonderful experience of cooperation in various fields. I think this is the moment when our relations are particularly important.” By the way, President Pezeshkian received the visiting Prime Minister of Russia Mikhail Mishustin on Monday, September 30 in Tehran just hours ahead of the launch of the Iranian ballistic missiles against Israel.  

At a meeting of the UN Security Council dedicated to West Asian developments, Russia’s Permanent Representative to the UN Vasily Nebenzya stated on Wednesday, “As part of its mandate to maintain international peace and security, the UN Security Council must compel Israel to immediately cease hostilities. You and I also should make every effort to create conditions for a political and diplomatic settlement. In this context, we take note of Tehran’s signal that it is not willing to whip up confrontation any further.”

Interestingly, the Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov lost no time to pick up the threads of Biden’s remark on a meeting with Putin. He said on Friday, “There have been no talks on this issue and as of today, at this moment, there are no prerequisites for it. However, the president has repeatedly stated that he remained open for all contacts.”

YouTube link here.

By Aaron Sobczak, Responsible Statecraft, 10/4/24

Russian President Vladimir Putin wants to increase the size of Russia’s military even while it’s seeing regular successes on the battlefield. These developments are leading some in the Ukrainian military and civilians alike to become more open to the idea of talks aimed at ending the war.

The Kremlin is currently negotiating a new military budget proposal of upwards of $145 billion which would mean that, if signed into law, Russia’s 2025 defense spending would grow to 32.5% of the budget, a 4.2% increase from this year’s spending.

This proposed increase coincides with the Kremlin’s recent announcement that it would revise the country’s nuclear doctrine, saying that Russia could respond to a conventional attack with nuclear weapons and that it would consider any attack that is supported by a nuclear power to be a “joint attack” — a policy presumably meant to deter at any Ukrainian attack inside Russian territory with U.S/Western weapons.

And even as the Russian military is increasingly seeing more successes on the battlefield, it’s about to increase in manpower. To support his previous order to add 180,000 troops to the military, Putin has called up 133,000 Russian men to serve as part of the autumn draft.

Meanwhile, it appears the Ukrainian military and public at large are growing war weary. The Financial Times reported this week that “Ukraine is heading into what may be its darkest moment of the war so far” in the face of increasing battlefield losses, its struggles to replenish military ranks, and the prospects of facing another winter with regular power and heating outages. “Society is exhausted,” said the Ukrainian parliament’s foreign affairs committee chair.

FT points out a poll conducted this summer by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology for the National Democratic Institute which found that 57% of the public supported negotiations with the Kremlin, up from 33% the previous year. Additionally, 55% are opposed to a deal that would include ceding land to Russia, down from 87% last year.

FT also noted that according to KIIS polling, “making any deal acceptable that allows Russia to stay in the parts of Ukraine it has seized since its first invasion in 2014 will hinge on obtaining meaningful Western security guarantees, which for Kyiv means NATO membership.”

Diplomats engaging with Ukraine also report that Zelenskyy and other Ukrainian officials seem more open to peace talks. One diplomat said, “We’re talking more and more openly about how this ends and what Ukraine would have to give up in order to get a permanent peace deal.”

In other Ukraine war news this week:

Reuters reports that China and Brazil, amongst others, compiled a peace plan to present to Ukraine and Russia last Friday. Seventeen countries met in New York during the last United Nations General Assembly meeting to discuss a potential end to the war, with China chairing the talks. Zelenskyy showed no interest in the peace plan, and questioned why they were drawing up alternative plants to his own.

Incoming NATO secretary-general says that the alliance will support Ukraine regardless of who wins in America’s November election. According to The Wall Street Journal, new Secretary-GeneralMark Rutte said, “I am absolutely convinced that on this issue, they both see what is necessary.” He added confidently that “supporting Ukraine is the right thing to do. And it is also an investment in our own security.”

In September 30th’s State Department Briefing;

State Department Spokesman Matthew Miller responded to a question regarding Ukraine’s ability to strike at Russian targets. Miller reiterated that Ukraine does not need permission to strike Russian targets with its own weapons. He also stated that the United States had given Kyiv permission to use some American weapons in a retaliatory fashion against targets in Russia.

He was pressed as to why Ukrainians are limited as to which American weapons they can use to strike targets in Russia. In his response he said, “We look at all of the capabilities and all the tactics and all the support that we provide Ukraine in totality, and look at how – when we approve any new weapon system or any new tactic, we look at how it’s going to affect the entire battlefield and Ukraine’s entire strategy. And that’s what we’ll continue to do.”

In this week’s October 2nd State Department Briefing;

A reporter asked Mr. Miller if Washington was ready to start implementing Ukraine’s proposed victory plan, to which he responded with, “We took that plan, we reviewed it, we saw a number of productive steps in it. We’re going to engage with them about it.”

Finally, Miller interacted with a question which compared US support of Israel during the recent Iranian missile strike to the support which Ukraine has received. He explained that the United States gives Ukraine the support needed to shoot down missiles, saying that “we have made clear that we support Ukraine’s right to defend itself not just in words but in deeds, and we have provided them with the equipment they need to shoot down missiles.”

YouTube link here.