Ukraine Mobilization: New “Recruits”, Forced and “Dragged Off The Streets to Fight”: Former Ukrainian PM
By Ahmed Adel
Global Research,

Mobilisation reserves in Ukraine have been emptied while the military calls for troop rotation at the front, which cannot be done, former Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov said on his Telegram channel on October 23. This is unsurprising as Ukraine has been illegally mobilising men since at least January, demonstrating the alarming lack of manpower the country has, an issue even well before the failed so-called “Spring Offensive,” which actually began in early June.
“The mobilisation in Ukraine has turned into a real nightmare for the Ukrainians […] Ukraine’s reserves have been emptied, while at the front, the military is asking for a rotation [of troops], which cannot be done due to lack of personnel in the Ukrainian Armed Forces,” said the former Ukrainian Prime Minister.
According to Azarov’s publication, recruitment centres began attracting former prisoners to “capture” as much of the population as possible because the mobilisation resource was exhausted, and many people fled the country in any way possible.
“Thus, as long as the Ukrainian authorities use force against their own people, there will be fewer and fewer supporters in the country, and fewer volunteers will appear in the ranks of the Ukrainian forces,” the former Ukrainian prime minister added.
Ukraine’s Intelligence Chief admits there are no More Troops without “Forced Mobilisation”
“This means that with such sentiments in society, Ukraine has a catastrophically low chance of holding its own,” Azarov concluded.
Earlier, a spokesperson of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine said that the mobilisation potential of Ukraine still allows additional recruitment of men of military age without changing the legislation. Ukraine has been under martial law since February 24, 2022, and the next day, Volodymyr Zelensky signed a decree on general mobilisation, and thus, male citizens aged 18 to 60 are prohibited from leaving Ukraine’s borders. In fact, the legislation is so draconian that Ukrainian men face prison sentences of up to five years for evading military service during mobilisation.
However, even the few provisions within the draconian legislation are being violated, such as the procedure for delivering summonses – a written document issued in the name of a specific person – for conscription. The summons must be prepared in advance, and if issued correctly, the conscript must appear before the relevant state body responsible for mobilisation. According to the law, summonses cannot be delivered by messenger, text, phone, or e-mail, and they cannot be filled out in front of the person to whom it is handed. If the summons is issued incorrectly, the conscript does not have to appear for mobilisation.
Yet, in Ukraine, these few provisions in the legislation are being violated on a mass scale.
One such case occurred in January 2023 in Odessa, when military recruiters hid inside an ambulance, and when they saw men of military age, they jumped out onto the street, handed out summons and forcibly dragged those who resisted into the ambulance. A month later, in Ternopil, military recruiters grabbed men at a bus station and forced them into the bus. Then, on March 20, a video appeared in which a taxi driver in Odessa expressed “insufficiently patriotic thoughts”, but two days later, he was reportedly “found and drafted into the army.”
These are just three examples of countless Ukrainians being literally dragged off the streets to fight in a war they have no interest in being involved in. This is also a major contributing reason to the utter failure of the so-called “spring offensive.” These forcibly conscripted men became the “cannon fodder” we heard about over the summer because they naturally had low morale and lacked military training.
In addition, many men are motivated to join the Ukrainian military just because it is one of the few secure sources of income, no matter how meagre it is, due to the destroyed economy. However, many of these men end up dead, become incapacitated due to injury, or do their best to avoid conflict to preserve their lives.
It is recalled that Ukrainian investigators detained Yevhen Borisov on charges of illegal enrichment, dereliction of duty, and evading military service in July. Borisov was fired as the military commissioner of the Odessa region in June after investigative reports found he and family members had bought property in Spain along with luxury automobiles worth $4 million, money he attained from taking bribes for exemptions, among other reasons.
In this way, Ukraine does not only have the problem of empty reserves, as highlighted by Azarov, but deep corruption that means many military-age men can avoid conscription, so long as they can pay the bribe, whilst poor Ukrainian men, which today forms most of the male population, are literally dragged off the streets to participate in a futile war against Russia, which they know they cannot win.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Kyiv Antagonizing Catholic Church After Pope’s Calls for Peace Negotiations
Foreign Mercenaries Fighting for Kiev Regime Forces Should Leave Immediately
France Escalates Tensions in Europe
The EU’s Approach Towards Ukrainian and Russian Agricultural Imports Harms Polish Farmers
Kiev Regime Promotes Terror in Belgorod – Field Report
Mar 19, 2024
Related Articles from our Archives
Report: US Intelligence Believes Ukraine Was Behind Killing of Darya Dugina7 October 2022
Germany, Spain to Train Ukraine Troops Under EU Program16 November 2022
Ukraine Forces Shell Ukrainian Village with Cluster Bombs26 April 2022
Genocide Unfolding in Palestine
By Craig Murray
Global Research,

Tonight has been the most violent bombardment of Gaza so far, notably concentrated on precisely the areas into which Israel ordered the population to evacuate. I find it almost impossible to believe that this genocide is under way with the active support of almost all western governments.
I want to look at two questions – what will happen internationally, and what is happening in western societies.
Israel plainly is on the course of further escalation and intends to kill many thousands more Palestinians. More than 2,000 Palestinian children alone have now been killed by Israeli aerial attack in the last fortnight.
Gaza has no defence from bombs and missiles, and there is no military reason why Israel cannot keep this up for months and simply rely upon aerial massacre. We are perhaps within a week of thirst, starvation and disease killing even more people per day than bombardment.
The population of Gaza are simply defenceless. Only international intervention can stop Israel from doing whatever it wishes, and those countries which have influence with Israel are actively abetting and encouraging the genocide.
The question is, what is Israel’s aim? Do they intend to reduce the Gaza Strip still further, annexing half or more of it? Will starvation and horror enable the international community to force Egypt to accept the expulsion of the population of Gaza into the Sinai Desert as a “humanitarian” move?
That appears to be the end game: expulsion of population and territorial expansion into Gaza. That would require a ground invasion, but probably not until after even more intense aerial bombardment to eliminate all resistance. This territorial ambition of course accords with the violent expansion of illegal settlement in the West Bank which is currently under way, with the world paying almost no attention. It is very hard indeed to comprehend the passivity of Fatah and Mahmoud Abbas at the moment.
Netanyahu’s political stock within Israel is so low, that the only way he can recover is by making a major step towards the complete genocide of the Palestinian people and the achievement of Greater Israel. Netanyahu now knows that there is no violence against Palestinians so extreme that the western political elite will not support it under the mantra of “Israel’s right to self-defence”.
I do not see any salvation for Gaza coming from Hezbollah. If Hezbollah were to employ their vaunted missile strike capabilities, the moment to do it would be now when the Israeli armour is drawn up in massive parks outside Gaza, a perfect target even for longer range missiles of limited accuracy. Once dispersed into Gaza the armour would be far harder for Hezbollah to hit at range.
Hezbollah is even better equipped now to fight a defensive war in Lebanon than it was when it defeated the Israeli advance in 2006. But it is not configured or equipped to fight an aggressive ground war into Israel, which would be a disaster. It also has to worry about hostile militias in its rear. If Hezbollah can provoke an Israeli incursion into Southern Lebanon, that would enable it to inflict substantial casualties, but Israel is not going to do that in a way that detracts from its capabilities in Gaza.
Iran has greatly improved its diplomatic position in the last year. The Chinese-brokered lessening of hostility with Saudi Arabia has potential to revolutionise Middle Eastern politics, and the benefits of this will not lightly be laid aside by Tehran. Iran had also made real progress with the Biden administration in overcoming the blind hostility of the Trump years.
Iran has no desire to throw away these gains. That is why it seems to me extremely improbable that Iran had endorsed the 7 October attacks by Hamas. Iran is now restraining Hezbollah. But there are limits to the patience of Iran. The extraordinary truth is that Iran is probably the only state under discussion here with a genuine humanitarian concern for the lives of Palestinians. If the genocide unfolds as horribly as I anticipate, Iran can be pushed too far.
Israel-Palestine War: Western Powers Giving ‘Warrant for Genocide’, Says Prominent Israeli Historian
That said, I offer just a cautionary footnote that Saudi Arabia is not, under MBS, quite the reliable US/Israeli puppet it has historically been. I do not have much time for MBS, as you know, but his high opinion of the importance of the Al Saud and their leadership role among Arabs, makes him a different proposition to his predecessor.
Saudi Arabia has leverage. The Biden administration has gone all in on regional domination, sending two aircraft carrier groups into a situation which should it escalate, could send oil prices to highest-ever levels, with Russia blocked from the market. Biden is risking a huge gas price hike in an election year.
Biden’s calculation, or that of his security services, is that nobody can or will intervene to save the Palestinians. They judge the genocide as containable. That is an extraordinary gamble.
There has been an extraordinary amount of vitriol aimed at Qatar by pro-Israel commentators, for hosting the Hamas office and leadership. This is extraordinarily ignorant.
Qatar hosts Hamas, just as Qatar hosted the Taliban Information Office, at the direct request of the United States. It provides a means of dialogue between the United States and Hamas (exactly as it did with the Taliban) both at deniable level, and through third parties, including of course the government of Qatar. Thus when Blinken arrived in Qatar one day and the Iranian foreign minister the next, these were in fact “proximity talks” involving Hamas.
How do I know? Well, at Julian’s request, I visited Qatar about five years ago to discuss whether Julian, and Wikileaks, might potentially relocate to Qatar, which Julian had described as “the new Switzerland” in terms of being a neutral diplomatic venue.
It was explained to me by the Qataris, at a very senior level, that Qatar hosted the Taliban Information Office and Hamas because the United States government had asked them to do so. Qatar hosted a major US military base and depended on US support against a Saudi takeover. If I could generate a request from then President Trump for Qatar to host Wikileaks, then they would do so. Otherwise, no.
So I know what I am talking about.
One tiny but good result of this brokering in Qatar was the release of two American national hostages. British diplomats have told me that discussions in Qatar have so far held back the Israeli ground offensive, but I am not convinced that Israel really wished to do this yet. They are having sadistic fun shooting children in a barrel.
Qatar has also been the origin of deals allowing in a tiny amount of aid to Gaza, but this is so small as to be almost irrelevant. It is performative humanitarianism by the West.
I have frequently praised China for the fact that their economic dominance has been unaccompanied by any aggressive desire for world hegemony, but this also has its downside. China sees no benefit in assisting the Palestinians in practice. Hopeful reports of China sending warships refer simply to pre-planned exercises, largely in the Gulf. That China is carrying out such joint exercises with Gulf states is indeed part of a long term increasing of influence, but is not relevant to the immediate reality.
Russia of course has its hands full in Ukraine. It is allowing its Syrian bases to be used as a conduit following increased Israeli bombing of Syrian airports, but there is not a great deal more that it can do. Erdoğan is genuinely furious at what is happening in Gaza, but Turkey is struggling to find any way to apply pressure, barring linkage to Ukraine shipping issues (which Erdoğan is considering).
That is a very rough and ready tour d’horizon, but the net effect is that I see no current hope for averting the atrocity which is unfolding before our horrified eyes.
Most of our eyes are indeed horrified. The gap between the western political and media elites and their people on this issue is simply enormous. Western leaders have not only failed to restrain Israel, they have almost unanimously egged Netanyahu on, with the continued repetition of the phrase “Israel’s right to self-defence” as justification for the mass bombing, removal and starvation of an entire civilian population.

The western leadership glee in vetoing every attempt at a ceasefire resolution at the UN is astonishing.
Massive demonstrations have been taking place across Europe against this unspeakable massacre, and the knee-jerk reaction of politicians at their isolation from public opinion has been to try to make such shows of dissent illegal. In the UK people have been arrested for displaying Palestinian flags. In Germany pro-Palestinian demonstrations have been entirely banned. Something similar has been attempted in France, with predictable failure.

I have myself attended pro-Palestinian demonstrations in three different countries, and the most striking thing on each occasion was the strong support of passers-by, and the number of people spontaneously coming out to join the demo as it passed.
A wave of racism has been unleashed in the UK and elsewhere. I am astonished by the Islamophobia and racial hatred released online, with no apparent comeback. UK Ministers claim to be alarmed at the “terrorist sympathies” of pro-Palestinian demonstrators, yet it is perfectly legal to call for Palestinians to be exterminated, to compare them to different types of animal and vermin, and suggest they should be driven into the sea. That does not horrify ministers at all.
I am personally now subject to a police investigation for “terrorism” merely for suggesting that the Palestinians too have a right to self-defence and may offer armed resistance to genocide – a right they enjoy beyond doubt in international law. Remember, Israel has formally declared war. Is it the position in British law that the only belief it is legal to hold and express, is that in this war the Palestinians must simply line up quietly to be killed?
The step change in western authoritarianism is likely to be met by blowback.
After 20 years, we had finally come through the vicious cycle of the “War on Terror”, where terrorism, repression and institutionalised Islamophobia all boosted each other across the western world. Outrage at the appalling genocide in Gaza is very likely to result in isolated incidences of, also appalling, Islamist-inspired violence in Western countries, including the UK, particularly because of the UK’s military support of Israel.
That consequential terrorism in itself will be cited by the political elite as justifying their stance. And so the vicious cycle will restart. This will of course be welcome to the agents of the security state, whose power, budgets and prestige will be boosted. Once again we have to be on the lookout for radicalisation and real terrorism, but also for agent-provocateur-led terrorism and for false flag terrorism.
If we descend back into that nightmare again, the direct cause will be elite support for the genocide of the Palestinian people and the Islamophobic narrative. The major cause of terrorism here is Israel, the terrorist apartheid state.
More Deaths in Gaza: Lies and Deception by Joe Biden to Cover-up Israel’s War Crimes Must End
Netanyahu Is Determined to Drag the US Into War with Iran
CJPME Condemns Israel’s Targeted Killing of Canadian Aid Worker
Apr 3, 2024
Video: How Fruitless Is Collective Punishment? “Does the US support the Unbridled Invasion of Gaza by the Nazi Military?”
Judge Andrew Napolitano with Philip Giraldi
By Philip Giraldi and Judge Andrew P. Napolitano
Global Research,

Judge Andrew Napolitano: What damage is Israel doing not just to Gaza, not just to itself, but to the world by its invasion of the Gaza Strip?
Video: “This is much worse than you can imagine.” FBI Had Agents Everywhere on January 6th
Does the US support the unbridled invasion of Gaza by the Israeli military? And if so, does it appreciate the consequences of such support?
Philip Giraldi: The fundamental question that we’re confronting here is the extent to which the US is capable of supporting its own national interest which includes not getting involved in places like Ukraine and Israel-Gaza unless there is a compelling national interest that drives the process.
In this case the US was not threatened by either the Russians or the Gazans yet it’s fully engaged in the process of supporting countries that are basically not doing any good for us.
Watch the video below for the full interview of Philip Giraldi.
Featured image is a screenshot from the video
Become a Member of Global Research
International Civilian Aid Flotilla to Break the Siege of Gaza
Video: Canadians Plunged Into Poverty. Can’t Afford to Eat! Sign of Major Economic Collapse
On NATO’s 75th Anniversary, Ten Reasons for Questioning Its Continuation
Video: Flashback: The Bankster Bailouts (2009). James Corbett and Michel Chossudovsky
Video: ‘Macron, Go Fight Alone for Ukraine’: Big Protest in Paris; NATO, EU Flag Ripped
Apr 3, 2024
Related Articles from our Archives
The Names and Faces of the 16 Children Killed in Gaza10 August 2022
“Light in Gaza – Writings Born of Fire”15 April 2022
Over 250 Artists, Writers Urge Israel to Stop Siege of Gaza18 May 2020
History: Nazi’s Move to Destroy the Palestinian Authority Is a Calculated Plan, Long in the Making. Prof Tanya Reinhart
In mainstream political discourse, Israel’s recent atrocities are described as ‘retaliatory acts’ – answering the last wave of terror attacks on Israeli civilians. But in fact, this ‘retaliation’ had been carefully prepared long before.
Global Research,

This incisive article by the late Professor Tanya Reinhart was first published on Global Research 22 years ago in December 2001.
Tanya Reinhart was a professor of linguistics at Tel Aviv University. She was a staunch critic of the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands by Israel. Her legacy will live.
Emphasis Added
Already in October 2000, at the outset of the Palestinian uprising, military circles were ready with detailed operative plans to topple Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. This was before the Palestinian terror attacks started. (The first attack on Israeli civilians was on November 3, 2000, in a market in Jerusalem).
A document prepared by the security services, at the request of then PM Barak, stated on October 15, 2000 that
“Arafat, the person, is a severe threat to the security of the state [of Israel] and the damage which will result from his disappearance is less than the damage caused by his existence”. (Details of the document were published in Ma’ariv, July 6, 2001.)
The operative plan, known as ‘Fields of Thorns’ had been prepared back in 1996, and was then updated during the Intifada. (Amir Oren, Ha’aretz, Nov. 23, 2001). The plan includes everything that Israel has been executing lately, and more.(1)
The political echelon for its part (Barak’s circles), worked on preparing public opinion to the toppling of Arafat. On November 20, 2000, Nahman Shai, then public-affairs coordinator of the Barak Government, released in a meeting with the press, a 60 page document titled “Palestinian Authority non-compliance… A record of bad faith and misconduct”,
The document, informally referred to as the “White Book”, was prepared by Barak’s aid, Danny Yatom.(2) According to the “White Book”, Arafat’s present crime – “orchestrating the Intifada”, is just the last in a long chain of proofs that he has never deserted the “option of violence and ‘struggle’”.
“As early as Arafat’s own speech on the White House lawn, on September 13, 1993, there were indications that for him, the D.O.P. [declaration of principles] did not necessarily signify an end to the conflict. He did not, at any point, relinquish his uniform, symbolic of his status as a revolutionary commander” (Section 2). This uniform, incidentally, is the only ‘indication’ that the report cites, of Arafat’s hidden intentions, on that occasion.
A large section of the document is devoted to establishing Arafat’s “ambivalence and compliance” regarding terror.
“In March 1997 there was once again more than a hint of a ‘Green Light’ from Arafat to the Hamas, prior to the bombing in Tel Aviv… This is implicit in the statement made by a Hamas-affiliated member of Arafat’s Cabinet, Imad Faluji, to an American paper (Miami Herald, April 5, 1997).”
No further hints are provided regarding how this links Arafat to that bombing, but this is the “green light to terror” theme which the Military Intelligence (Ama”n) has been promoting since 1997, when its anti-Oslo line was consolidated. This theme was since repeated again and again by military circles, and eventually became the mantra of Israeli propaganda – Arafat is still a terrorist and is personally responsible for the acts of all groups, from Hamas and the Islamic Jihad to Hizbollah.
The ‘Foreign Report’ (Jane’s information) of July 12, 2001 disclosed that the Israeli army (under Sharon’s government) has updated its plans for an “all-out assault to smash the Palestinian authority, force out leader Yasser Arafat and kill or detain its army”.
The blueprint, titled “The Destruction of the Palestinian Authority and Disarmament of All Armed Forces”, was presented to the Israeli government by chief of staff Shaul Mofaz, on July 8. The assault would be launched, at the government’s discretion, after a big suicide bomb attack in Israel, causing widespread deaths and injuries, citing the bloodshed as justification.
Many in Israel suspect that the assassination of the Hamas terrorist Mahmoud Abu Hanoud, just when the Hamas was respecting for two months its agreement with Arafat not to attack inside Israel, was designed to create the appropriate ‘bloodshed justification’, at the eve of Sharon’s visit to the US. (Alex Fishman – senior security correspondent of ‘Yediot’ – noted that “whoever decided upon the liquidation of Abu Hanoud knew in advance that would be the price.
The subject was extensively discussed both by Israel’s military echelon and its political one, before it was decided to carry out the liquidation” (Yediot Aharonot, Nov. 25, 2001)).
Israel’s moves to destroy the PA, thus, cannot be viewed as a spontaneous ‘act of retaliation’. It is a calculated plan, long in the making. The execution requires, first, weakening the resistance of the Palestinians, which Israel has been doing systematically since October 2000, through killing, bombarding of infrastructure, imprisoning people in their hometowns, and bringing them close to starvation. All this, while waiting for the international conditions to ‘ripen’ for the more ‘advanced’ steps of the plan.
Now the conditions seem to have ‘ripened’. In the power-drunk political atmosphere in the US, anything goes.
If at first it seemed that the US will try to keep the Arab world on its side by some tokens of persuasion, as it did during the Gulf war, it is now clear that they couldn’t care less. US policy is no longer based on building coalitions or investing in persuasion, but on sheer force.
The smashing ‘victory’ in Afghanistan has sent a clear message to the Third-World that nothing can stop the US from targeting any nation for annihilation.
They seem to believe that the most sophisticated weapons of the twenty-first century, combined with total absence of any considerations of moral principles, international law, or public opinion, can sustain them as the sole rulers of the world forever. From now on, fear should be the sufficient condition for obedience.
The US hawks, who push to expand the war to Iraq and further, view Israel as an asset – There are few regimes in the world like Israel, so eager to risk the life of their citizens for some new regional war.
As Prof. Alain Joxe, head of the French CIRPES (peace and strategic studies) has put it in Le Monde,
“the American leadership is presently shaped by dangerous right wing Southern extremists, who seek to use Israel as an offensive tool to destabilize the whole Middle East area” (December 17, 2001).
The same hawks are also talking about expanding the future war zone to targets on Israel’s agenda, like Hizbollah and Syria.
Under these circumstances, Sharon got his green light in Washington. As the Israeli media keeps raving, “Bush is fed up with this character [Arafat]”,
“Powell said that Arafat must stop with his lies” (Barnea and Schiffer, ‘Yediot’, December 7, 2001).
As Arafat hides in his Bunker, Israeli F-16 bombers plough the sky, and Israel’s brutality is generating, every day, new desperate human bombs, the US, accompanied for a while by the European union, keep urging Arafat to “act”.
Undo the Oslo Arrangements
But what is the rationale behind Israel’s systematic drive to eliminate the Palestinian Authority and undo the Oslo arrangements? It certainly cannot be based on ‘disappointment’ with Arafat’s performance, as is commonly claimed. The fact of the matter is that from the perspective of Israel’s interests in maintaining the occupation, Arafat did fulfill Israel’s expectations all these last years.
As far as Israeli security goes, there is nothing further from the truth then the fake accusations in the “White Book”, or subsequent Israeli propaganda. To take just one example, in 1997 – the year mentioned in the “White Book” as an instance of Arafat’s “green light to terror” – a ‘security agreement’ was signed between Israel and the Palestinian authority, under the auspices of the head of the Tel Aviv station of the CIA, Stan Muskovitz.
The agreement commits the PA to take active care of the security of Israel – to fight:
“the terrorists, the terrorist base, and the environmental conditions leading to support of terror” in cooperation with Israel, including “mutual exchange of information, ideas, and military cooperation” (clause 1). [Translated from the Hebrew text, Ha’aretz December 12, 1997].
Arafat’s security services carried out this job faithfully, with assassinations of Hamas terrorists (disguised as ‘accidents’), and arrests of Hamas political leaders.(3)
Ample information was published in the Israeli media regarding these activities, and ‘security sources’ were full of praises for Arafat’s achievements. E.g. Ami Ayalon, then head of the Israeli secret service (Shab”ak), announced, in the government meeting on April 5, 1998 that “Arafat is doing his job – he is fighting terror and puts all his weight against the Hamas” (Ha’aretz, April 6, 1998). The rate of success of the Israeli security services in containing terror was never higher than that of Arafat; in fact, much lower.
In left and critical circles, one can hardly find compassion for Arafat’s personal fate (as opposed to the tragedy of the Palestinian people). As David Hirst writes in The Guardian, when Arafat returned to the occupied territories, in 1994,
“he came as collaborator as much as liberator. For the Israelis, security – theirs, not the Palestinians’ – was the be-all and end-all of Oslo. His job was to supply it on their behalf. But he could only sustain the collaborator’s role if he won the political quid pro quo which, through a series of ‘interim agreements’ leading to ‘final status’, was supposedly to come his way. He never could. . . [Along the road], he acquiesced in accumulating concessions that only widened the gulf between what he was actually achieving and what he assured his people he would achieve, by this method, in the end. He was Mr. Palestine still, with a charisma and historical legitimacy all his own. But he was proving to be grievously wanting in that other great and complementary task, building his state-in-the-making. Economic misery, corruption, abuse of human rights, the creation of a vast apparatus of repression – all these flowed, wholly or in part, from the Authority over which he presided.” (Hirst, “Arafat’s last stand?” The Guardian, December 14, 2001).
But from the perspective of the Israeli occupation, all this means that the Oslo plan was, essentially, successful. Arafat did manage, through harsh means of oppression, to contain the frustration of his people, and guarantee the safety of the settlers, as Israel continued undisturbed to build new settlements and appropriate more Palestinian land.
The oppressive machinery, the various security forces of Arafat, were formed and trained in collaboration with Israel. Much energy and resources were put into building this complex Oslo apparatus. It is often admitted that the Israeli security forces cannot manage to prevent terror any better than Arafat can. Why, then, was the military and political echelon so determined to destroy all this already in October 2000, even before the terror waves started? Answering this requires some look at the history.
The Israeli Political and Military History
Right from the start of the ‘Oslo process’, in September 1993, two conceptions were competing in the Israeli political and military system. The one, led by Yosi Beilin, was striving to implement some version of the Alon plan, which the Labor party has been advocating for years. The original plan consisted of annexation of about 35% of the territories to Israel, and either Jordanian-rule, or some form of self-rule for the rest – the land on which the Palestinians actually live. In the eyes of its proponents, this plan represented a necessary compromise, compared to the alternatives of either giving up the territories altogether, or eternal blood-shed (as we witness today). It appeared that Rabin was willing to follow this line, at least at the start, and that in return for Arafat’s commitment to control the frustration of his people and guarantee the security of Israel, he would allow the PA to run the enclaves in which the Palestinians still reside, in some form of self-rule, which may even be called a Palestinian ‘state’.
But the other pole objected even to that much. This was mostly visible in military circles, whose most vocal spokesman in the early years of Oslo was then Chief of Staff, Ehud Barak. Another center of opposition was, of course, Sharon and the extreme right-wing, who were against the Oslo process from the start. This affinity between the military circles and Sharon is hardly surprising. Sharon – the last of the leaders of the ‘1948 generation’, was a legendary figure in the army, and many of the generals were his disciples, like Barak. As Amir Oren wrote,
“Barak’s deep and abiding admiration for Ariel Sharon’s military insights is another indication of his views; Barak and Sharon both belong to a line of political generals that started with Moshe Dayan” (Ha’aretz, January 8, 1999).
This breed of generals was raised on the myth of redemption of the land. A glimpse into this worldview is offered in Sharon’s interview with Ari Shavit (Ha’aretz, weekend supplement, April 13, 2001). Everything is entangled into one romantic framework: the fields, the blossom of the orchards, the plough and the wars.
The heart of this ideology is the sanctity of the land. In a 1976 interview, Moshe Dayan, who was the defense minister in 1967, explained what led, then, to the decision to attack Syria. In the collective Israeli consciousness of the period, Syria was conceived as a serious threat to the security of Israel, and a constant initiator of aggression towards the residents of northern Israel. But according to Dayan, this is “bull-shit” – Syria was not a threat to Israel before 67:
“Just drop it. . .I know how at least 80% of all the incidents with Syria started. We were sending a tractor to the demilitarized zone and we knew that the Syrians would shoot.” According to Dayan (who at a time of the interview confessed some regrets), what led Israel to provoke Syria this way was the greediness for the land – the idea that it is possible “to grab a piece of land and keep it, until the enemy will get tired and give it to us” (Yediot Aharonot, April 27 1997)
At the eve of Oslo, the majority of the Israeli society was tired of wars.
In their eyes, the fights over land and resources were over. Most Israelis believe that the 1948 Independence War, with its horrible consequences for the Palestinians, was necessary to establish a state for the Jews, haunted by the memory of the Holocaust.
But now that they have a state, they long to just live normally with whatever they have. However, the ideology of the redemption of land has never died out in the army, or in the circles of the ‘political generals’, who switched from the army to the government.
In their eyes, Sharon’s alternative of fighting the Palestinians to the bitter end and imposing new regional orders – as he tried in Lebanon in 1982 – may have failed because of the weakness of the spoiled Israeli society. But given the new war-philosophy established in Iraq, Kosovo and Afghanistan, they believe that with the massive superiority of the Israeli air force, it may still be possible to win this battle in the future.
While Sharon’s party was in the opposition at the time of Oslo, Barak, as Chief of Staff, participated in the negotiations and played a crucial role in shaping the agreements, and Israel’s attitude to the Palestinian Authority.
I quote from an article I wrote in February 1994, because it reflects what anybody who read carefully the Israeli media could see at the time:
“From the start, it has been possible to identify two conceptions that underlie the Oslo process. One is that this will enable to reduce the cost of the occupation, using a Palestinian patronage regime, with Arafat as the senior cop responsible for the security of Israel. The other is that the process should lead to the collapse of Arafat and the PLO. The humiliation of Arafat, and the amplification of his surrender, will gradually lead to loss of popular support. Consequently, the PLO will collapse, or enter power conflicts. Thus, the Palestinian society will lose its secular leadership and institutions. In the power driven mind of those eager to maintain the Israeli occupation, the collapse of the secular leadership is interpreted as an achievement, because it would take a long while for the Palestinian people to get organized again, and, in any case, it is easier to justify even the worst acts of oppression, when the enemy is a fanatic Muslim organization. Most likely, the conflict between the two competing conceptions is not settled yet, but at the moment, the second seems more dominant: In order to carry out the first, Arafat’s status should have been strengthened, with at least some achievements that could generate support of the Palestinians, rather then Israel’s policy of constant humiliation and breach of promises.”(4)
Nevertheless, the scenario of the collapse of the PA did not materialize.
The Palestinian society resorted once more to their marvelous strategy of ‘zumud’ – sticking to the land and sustaining the pressure. Right from the start, the Hamas political leadership, and others, were warning that Israel is trying to push the Palestinians into a civil war, in which the nation slaughters itself. All fragments of the society cooperated to prevent this danger, and calm conflicts as soon as they were deteriorating to arms. They also managed, despite the tyranny of Arafat’s rule, to build an impressive amount of institutions and infrastructure. The PA does not consist only of the corrupt rulers and the various security forces. The elected Palestinian council, which operates under endless restrictions, is still a representative political framework, some basis for democratic institutions in the future. For those whose goal is the destruction of the Palestinian identity and the eventual redemption of their land, Oslo was a failure.
In 1999, the army got back to power, through the ‘political generals’ – first Barak, and then Sharon. (They collaborated in the last elections to guarantee that no other, civil, candidate will be allowed to run.)
The road opened to correct what they view as the grave mistake of Oslo. In order to get there, it was first necessary to convince the spoiled Israeli society that the Palestinians are not willing to live in peace and are threatening our mere existence. Sharon alone could not have possibly achieved that, but Barak did succeed, with his ‘generous offer’ fraud. After a year of horrible terror attacks, combined with massive propaganda and lies, Sharon and the army feel that nothing can stop them from turning to full execution.
Why is it so urgent for them to topple Arafat?
Shabtai Shavit, former head of the Security Service (‘Mossad’), who is not bound by restraints posed on official sources, explains this openly:
“In the thirty something years that he [Arafat] leads, he managed to reach real achievements in the political and international sphere… He got the Nobel peace prize, and in a single phone call, he can obtain a meeting with every leader in the world. There is nobody in the Palestinian gallery that can enter his shoes in this context of international status. If they [the Palestinians] will lose this gain, for us, this is a huge achievement. The Palestinian issue will get off the international agenda.” (interview in Yediot’s Weekend Supplement, December 7, 2001).
Their immediate goal is to get the Palestinians off the international agenda, so slaughter, starvation, forced evacuation and ‘migration’ can continue undisturbed, leading, possibly, to the final realization of Sharon’s long standing vision, embodied in the military plans. The immediate goal of anybody concerned with the future of the world, ahould be to halt this process of evil unleashed. As Alain Joxe concluded his article in Le Monde:
“It is time for the Western public opinion to take over and to compel the governments to take a moral and political stand facing the foreseen disaster, namely a situation of permanent war against the Arab and Muslim people and states – the realization of the double phantasy of Bin Laden and Sharon.” (December 17, 2001).
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Notes
(1) For the details of this operative plan, see Anthony Cordesman, “Peace and War: Israel versus the Palestinians A second Intifada?” Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) December 2000, and it summary in Shraga Eilam, “Peace With Violence or Transfer”, ‘Between The Lines’, December 2000.
(2) The document can be found in:
(3) For a survey on some of the PA’s assassinations of Hamas terrorists, see my article “The A-Sherif affair”, ‘Yediot Aharonot’, April 14, 1998.
Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page
Become a Member of Global Research
War on Gaza: Torture, Executions, Babies Left to Die, Sexual Abuse… These Are Israel’s Crimes
Operation Al-Aqsa Flood: The Defeat of the Vanquisher: Colonel Jacques Baud
Shielding US Public from Israeli Reports of “Friendly Fire” on October 7
The Bloodshed in Gaza Excludes Israel from the Civilised World
The World Must Force Peace on Israel
Feb 19, 2024
Related Articles from our Archives
Obituary: Peace activist Tanya Reinhart dies at age 6318 March 2007
The Hamas government should be recognized1 June 2006
Leak shows ex-Trump ambassador to the Nazi entity threatening NYU over Palestine protests

Ambassador David Friedman, October 2017
The Grayzone has obtained a letter signed by former President Trump’s fanatically pro-settler ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, and sent to New York University leadership demanding the school crack down on free speech to satisfy Israeli interests.
A letter sent to NYU leadership claims the school is “no longer a safe space for Jewish students” while demanding policies that would shatter free speech on campus. The letter was signed by David Friedman, Trump’s rabidly pro-settlement ambassador to Israel, as well as dozens of Jewish American alumni apparently afflicted with a particularly severe version of main character syndrome.
The letter demands that NYU ramp up security for Jewish students and add mandatory coursework on the issue of “in line with universal values, fact-based critical thinking, and civil discourse.”
Read the leaked letter, “A Message from the NYU Jewish community,” here.
Additionally, the letter demands that NYU create a position “dedicated to combating anti-Semitism.” The school already maintains no fewer than 15 positions dedicated to promoting “Global Inclusion, Diversity, and Strategic Innovation.”
The letter goes on to demand that NYU disband clubs that “utilize hate speech to promote violence and endorse terrorism” and pursue the criminal prosecution of students who “deface property and/or use hate speech in the name of terrorism.” It offers no definition of hate speech, however. The assumption seems to be that strong language denouncing Israel’s violent assault on Gaza, or supporting the Palestinian armed struggle, should be treated as equivalent to verbal threats, and even physical violence, against Jews.
While providing no evidence or documentation of open support for terrorism amongst the student body, the letter alludes to Student Bar Association president Ryna Workman, who authored an op-ed in the body’s weekly newsletter blaming the Israeli state policy of apartheid for inspiring the events of October 7. Workman was promptly canceled for her speech, losing not only her position as president of the Student Bar Association, but a job offer that had previously been extended to her.
Other students were filmed tearing down posters of Israeli hostages taken by Hamas. While none of these acts endorsed terrorism, authors of the NYU letter call for the students to face criminal punishment.
The Grayzone reached out to each of the letter’s recipients for comment but has not received a response. A request for an interview with David Friedman has also gone unreturned.
US-Israeli reciprocal ambassador David Friedman after being briefed on the siege of Gaza: “I don’t understand. The people in Gaza – they’re basically Egyptians. Why doesn’t Egypt take them back?”

Friedman, a former bankruptcy lawyer who served as Trump’s ambassador to Israel, helped oversee the relocation of the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and admonished the United Nations for denying Israel’s “biblical” connection to the city.
Friedman has made no effort to masque his religious zealotry throughout his political career. In an interview with the late televangelist Pat Robertson’s CBN network, Friedman marketed the annexation of the West Bank as a chance to bring the bible “back to life.”
While Friedman has denounced Grayzone editor Max Blumenthal as “one of the most vile anti-Israel haters on the face of the earth,” he apparently sees no issue with Pat Robertson, who once claimed that Jews are too busy “polishing diamonds” to fix their own cars.
In the illegal settlement of Beit El, Friedman is considered a hometown hero. He served as the head of the American Friends of Beit El Institutions and has “raised millions of dollars” for Beit El development projects according to the New York Times. The family name “Friedman” is plastered over schools, playgrounds, plazas and more in the settlement.
Beit El is a “critical component in our collective battle for the safety, security, and unity of the State of Israel,” Friedman once proclaimed. Unsurprisingly, this critical component of the state of Israel was comprised — to the tune of 96.85 percent — of illegally seized, private Palestinian property, according to a 2006 analysis by the Americans for Peace Now NGO.
Apparently not content with aiding and abetting flagrant violations of international law, Friedman is now demanding his former law school enact policies intended to violate the first amendment of the American constitution.
Biden admin justifies Nazi’s assault on Gaza hospitals with recycled Nazi ‘intelligence’

Israeli forces assault areas around Gaza City’s Shifa Hospital, November 14, 2023
As Israel assaults Gaza’s Shifa Hospital, the Biden administration claims that “Hamas does use hospitals” as military bases. Once again, Washington appears to be relying on dubious Israeli propaganda rather than independent analysis.
With Israeli troops storming Gaza’s Al-Shifa and Al-Rantisi hospitals, the United States and Israel are doubling down on discredited claims that Hamas has been maintaining “command centers” out of the basements of hospitals in Gaza, even after so-called evidence produced by Tel Aviv was thoroughly debunked.
“I can confirm for you that we have information that Hamas, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, used some hospitals in the Gaza Strip, including Al-Shifa, and tunnels underneath them, to conceal and to support their military operations and to hold hostages,” National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters Tuesday.
Kirby’s claim echoed the assertion by National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, who maintained that “open-source reporting” shows “Hamas does use hospitals, along with a lot of other civilian facilities, for command-and-control, for storing weapons, for housing its fighters.”
On November 14, Pentagon spokeswoman Sabrina Singh told reporters that US intelligence had no “boots on the ground,” nor any intelligence assets capable of independently gathering intelligence from or about Shifa. When asked if the declassified intel briefing spun out by Kirby and Sullivan arrived through Washington’s “Israeli counterparts,” she refused to answer. But she strongly suggested the intelligence dump was politically motivated.
“This is newly-downgraded information that we felt was important to get out today, because there have been a lot of questions about the hospital and how Hamas operates, and so it was important to get out there,” Singh insisted.
Hamas denies using hospitals for military purposes, and both local healthcare workers and international humanitarian organizations back that up. “I’m sick and tired of these [Israeli] claims that there are Hamas command centers [in hospitals],” Norwegian physician Dr. Mads Gilbert told Al-Jazeera on November 12. Having performed life-saving procedures for several weeks inside Shifa during Israel’s 2014 assault on Gaza, Gilbert noted, “As I’ve said 100 times… we’ve never seen high-ranking Hamas people in Al-Shifa,” adding “we’ve been able to roam freely.”
But that did little to prevent Israeli troops from waging an all-out assault on the facilities. As Israeli forces surrounded Shifa hospital on Tuesday with the full-throated support of the Biden administration, arresting journalists outside the facility and violently clearing displaced people from its grounds, doctors inside were forced to move babies in intensive care from one wing of the hospital to another to save their lives. A lack of fuel had already forced many of those infants off vital oxygen supply units.
Meanwhile, Israeli forces have been unable to find any presence of hostages inside or around the hospital. As Israeli Army Radio reported on November 15, “There is no indication of the presence of abductees inside the hospital.”
Systematic Israeli misinformation campaign dismissed by US as “fog of war”
Israeli and American officials have yet to produced any proof that Hamas operates a “command center” under Al-Shifa. Video published by the Israeli military purporting to prove Hamas kept hostages in the basement of Al-Rantisi Children’s Hospital, Gaza’s last remaining medical center with a pediatric cancer ward, was less than convincing.
In that video performance, top Israeli army spokesman Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari claims that what appears to be a bomb shelter for young children is actually a Hamas torture chamber, citing objects as unlikely as a baby bottle and a woman’s clothes. In one particularly memorable and widely panned moment, Hagari insisted the days of the week written in Arabic on a calendar were actually the names of the “terrorists” meant to guard captive Israelis ostensibly being held there.
The Israeli military has since attempted to downplay the deception as a “mistake in translation.”
It was hardly the first round in Tel Aviv’s fake news campaign. In the weeks since Palestinian resistance groups launched their shock assault on October 7, native Arabic speakers have taken to social media to mock the audio recordings Israel regularly publishes which purport to show Hamas members gleefully discussing carrying out war crimes.
In November alone, official Israeli social media accounts have been forced to walk about at least a half-dozen false assertions. A video showing a crying woman describing how she retrieved her son’s decomposing body from the streets of Gaza was transformed by Israel’s embassy to the US, which used fake captions to falsely claim she was blaming Hamas for the siege. When questioned, the embassy subsequently deleted the post.
The same week, Israel’s main government account on Twitter had to delete its false claim that “AP, CNN, NY Times, and Reuters had journalists embedded with Hamas terrorists on October 7th massacre” – a lie which the New York Times condemned as “reckless” and said put its journalists on the ground in Israel and Gaza “at risk.”
Days later, Israel’s official Arabic-language Twitter account deleted footage of a woman dressed in nursing scrubs who claimed to work as a nurse in Gaza’s Al-Shifa hospital denounced Hamas for supposedly stealing fuel and medicine. Other doctors and nurses at the medical center reportedly told journalist Younis Tirawi: “We don’t know this woman; she has never worked here before & we’ve never seen her at the hospital.”
Social media users claimed the woman was Israeli actress Hannah Abutbul, who moonlights as a social media manager of an Israeli company named Aish International that works alongside the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Abutbul denies appearing in the video.
On November 10, Israel’s Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) claimed Hamas was “INSIDE the Indonesian hospital last night,” citing a video which appeared to show a firearm being displayed. An observer who pointed out that the object was actually a billy club had their reply ‘hidden’ by the official Israeli account.
Throughout the blood-spattered onslaught on the Gaza Strip, US officials have consistently taken Israeli claims at face value, even parroting Tel Aviv’s excuses when prompted. Following Biden’s now-retracted claim to have seen “confirmed pictures of terrorists beheading children,” US officials continue to exhibit a remarkable willingness to side with the Israeli government and echo its talking points.
During a November 14 press briefing, a reporter asked State Department spokesman Matthew Miller about the Israeli government’s habitual spreading of “misinformation.” Miller responded by brushing off Israel’s parade of fabrications as an inevitable feature of the “fog of war.”
“In the fog of war, from thousands of miles away at the podium,” the spokesman insisted, “I have no way to independently adjudicate the various claims that are being made.”
VIDEO: What really happened on October 7?

The Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal joins Chris Hedges to discuss his investigation into Israel’s indiscriminate use of heavy weapons against Israeli citizens on October 7, and the shock-and-awe campaign of misinformation it subsequently employed to create political space for its brutal assault on Gaza.
This was originally published by The Real News Network.
Editor’s note: Since the publication of this interview, an Israeli police investigation has confirmed that Israeli Apache helicopters killed numerous Israeli citizens at and around the Nova electronic music festival, and that Hamas did not know in advance about the festival. The Israeli government has also acknowledged that 200 of those it counted as Israeli casualties were, in fact, Hamas militants killed by its forces on October 7, and that it may have marketed images of their charred bodies to the public as proof of Hamas’ brutality.
For all the sensationalism surrounding the events of Oct. 7, when Hamas broke through the Gaza fence and seized territory in the Gaza Envelope as part of Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, there is still much that we do not know. The official Israeli death toll from the attack is estimated at 1,200 civilians, revised from an initial estimate of 1,400. Among this figure are several hundred civilians, which Israel says were killed by Hamas militants. Other testimony from survivors of Oct. 7 suggests an alternative explanation—that in its fervor to defeat Hamas, Israeli commanders may have willingly targeted and sacrificed Israeli soldiers and civilians in the crossfire. Max Blumenthal of The Grayzone joins The Chris Hedges Report for an in-depth look.
Chris Hedges: There’s growing evidence that in the chaotic fighting that took place once Hamas militants entered Israel on October 7, the Israeli military decided to target not only Hamas fighters but the Israeli captives with them. Tuval Escapa, a member of the security team for Kibbutz Be’eri, told the Israeli press, that he set up a hotline to coordinate between kibbutz residents and the Israeli army. Escapa told the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, that his desperation began to set in. “The commanders in the field made difficult decisions, including shelling houses on their occupants in order to eliminate the terrorists along with the hostages.” The newspaper reported that Israeli commanders were, “Compelled to request an aerial strike against its own facility inside the Erez Crossing to Gaza in order to repulse the terrorists who had seized control.”
That base housed Israeli Civil Administration officers and soldiers. Israel, in 1986, instituted a military policy called the Hannibal Directive, apparently named for the Carthaginian general who poisoned himself rather than be captured by the Romans following the capture of two Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah. The directive is designed to prevent Israeli troops from falling into enemy hands through the maximum use of force, even at the cost of killing the captured soldiers and civilians. The directive was executed during the 2014 Israeli assault on Gaza, known as Operation Protective Edge. Hamas fighters on August 1, 2014, captured an Israeli soldier, Lieutenant Hadar Golden. In response, Israel dropped more than 2,000 bombs, missiles, and shells on the area where he was being held. Golden was killed along with over 100 Palestinian civilians. The directive was supposedly rescinded in 2016.
Joining me to discuss the reports of Israel shelling its own citizens with tanks and missiles is Max Blumenthal, who investigated this for The Grayzone. So you did a wonderful job piecing together these reports that are coming out of Israel. Why don’t you lay out what Israeli commanders faced after roughly 10 hours, several hours after this incursion, and then perhaps give me some details about what you found out?
Max Blumenthal: Well, thanks, Chris. I’m still trying to piece together what happened on October 7. One reason that I’m left investigating even after this report that I thought was comprehensive was that in the face of so much death and destruction caused by Israel’s military in Gaza – Which is basically tantamount to genocide. You have systematic killing in Gaza – Everyone I know there has … Luckily I don’t know anyone who’s been killed, but everyone I know there has lost neighbors or relatives. They’ve all lost their homes. So the Israeli military and the Prime Minister’s office, Netanyahu’s office, are recycling October 7 atrocities and they’re also introducing new deceptions in order to try to keep the media’s lens focused on October 7 now that it is starting to hone in on the horror of Gaza. We have all these new stories about babies baked in ovens, we’ve heard stories about babies cut out of mothers’ wombs by so-called Hamas terrorists, rape, gang rape, women after being taken, gang raped in the streets in Gaza City.
All of these lies were spun out. The 40 beheaded babies was repeated by Biden, who claimed he’d seen photographs. All of these lies were repeated and put forward in order to give Israel the latitude to carry out this genocidal assault that we’re now witnessing. And we can see Biden was so stunned by the propaganda that was being pushed on him by Netanyahu’s office and the pro-Israel media that he immediately caved. Tony Blinken in his recent Senate testimony also repeated some of these lies. So I’m still trying to unpack it because it’s these lies that went beyond the actual killings and atrocities that were committed by gunmen from the Gaza Strip on October 7 that have made it possible for Israel to target and exterminate hundreds of entire families in the Gaza Strip as well as hospitals and medical centers. So I started my investigation when testimony started to filter out in Israeli media which contravened the official story of October 7.
The official story, which has been told to Americans and Israelis, is that Hamas “terrorists” stormed into Southern Israel and began shooting and killing people at random. Then burned them alive, tied up entire families in their homes, and then burned them all, somehow, melted cars and burned people in their cars as they were trying to flee, and carried out this gigantic mass shooting. It does appear clear that many Israeli non-combatants were shot by Hamas gunmen but that’s where the official story stops. What I was able to determine from these testimonies, as well as basic and visual analysis of the photos that the Israeli Foreign Minister and Foreign Ministry and Prime Minister’s office were putting forward, was that Israel used disproportionate force on its own citizens in order to dislodge a politically driven military offensive by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which was aimed at extracting political concessions from the state of Israel, which had been besieging the Gaza Strip for 15 years. So you read one of those testimonies, and I guess we can go into some detail about them and how I came to my conclusions.
Chris Hedges: Yeah, let’s go in because, in your article, which people can read on The Grayzone, you print pictures. I’ll let you go from there. The photographic evidence seems to contradict the statements that have come out of Jerusalem.
Max Blumenthal: It’s important to understand that the main goal in this Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad military offensive was to gather as many captives as possible, particularly Israeli soldiers, in order to trigger the prisoner exchange that was witnessed when Gilad Shalit in 2011 was released; The Israeli soldier who was taken in 2006, who was operating a tank outside Gaza, was taken in exchange for 1,027 Palestinian prisoners, including the current prime minister of Gaza, Yahya Sinwar. So this entire Al Aqsa Flood operation is understood against the backdrop of the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange. So gunmen were sent with detailed maps to population centers and to military bases. In the military bases, they were obviously given instructions to attack and kill Israeli soldiers who were maintaining the siege of Gaza. Much of the Gaza division, which has also been responsible for so many massacres inside Gaza over the years, was wiped out. The Erez Crossing… I don’t know if you’ve been through there, Chris.
Chris Hedges: Yeah, many times. Many times, yes.
Max Blumenthal: Okay. Yeah, because you’ve been to Gaza, I’ve been through there three times. It is the nexus, the nerve center of the siege of Gaza. It’s not only where you cross through if you want to enter Gaza and return to, or if you’re a resident of Gaza you’ll have to pass through there to get medical treatment outside. It’s the home of the civil administration, the bureaucracy of the panopticon-style occupation of Gaza. So that was immediately overrun by gunmen as a military target, and with all these soldiers inside, the head of the Gaza division actually went into an underground bunker. He recounted this story to Haaretz and made the tough decision to bomb Erez Crossing and they sent Hellfire missiles onto the Erez Crossing from Apache helicopters. And this was basically the beginning of the Iron Swords Operation that Netanyahu declared several days later, which is essentially the carpet bombing of Gaza.
But Apache helicopters were scrambled in the morning. The assault began around 6:00AM at daybreak, and by 10:30AM, according to Israeli media accounts, all of the special force’s commando teams, and the well-trained Hamas teams had already left. By that point, there were two squadrons of Apache helicopters that had been scrambled, and they were not even at full strength until 12:00PM. So you have action at Erez Crossing, and then you have Kibbutz Be’eri, which is the site that registered the most casualties of non-combatants. I counted something like 150 among the confirmed death toll printed at Haaretz and most of them, they were not soldiers. These were people who were caught in the crossfire, Hamas gunmen had tried to take them captive, and there were standoffs in their homes. And by the time Israeli special forces arrived, many of those standoffs had either ended or they ended them simply by shelling people’s homes with tanks.
According to Yasmin Porat, who had fled the electronic music festival – Which had come under attack, which was held right between Kibbutz Be’eri and Kibbutz Rahim, which also have military bases essentially embedded within them – It was held on the road between these two kibbutzim and came under attack. Many captives were taken. This woman, Yasmin Porat, fled to Kibbutz Be’eri, went into a home with her partner, and then they were taken captive momentarily by gunmen. She recounted to Israeli National Radio that when the Israeli special forces arrived, they started shooting everyone and that most of the captives, along with the Hamas gunmen, were caught in the crossfire, and that everyone was killed except for her and her captor, who used her as a human shield in order to guarantee his own safety when he surrendered.
She saw her own partner, whose hands had been bound by her captors, get shot by Israeli special forces, and then they lobbed two tank shells into the home that she had been in. So if you look at the pictures of Kibbutz Be’eri, they look like the homes in Gaza that I’ve seen, or you may have seen that came under shelling from Israeli tanks and Israeli artillery. There’s no way that Hamas gunmen could have done that much structural damage to this entire kibbutz with the small arms that they were equipped with; Kalashnikovs and some RPGs.
I24, an Israeli Foreign Ministry-sponsored propaganda network, actually went to this kibbutz on a guided tour and said they saw tank tracks everywhere. It’s obvious what happened there and it was stated clearly by the security coordinator of Kibbutz Be’eri, who you quoted at the top of this interview. He was on a hotline with the Israeli Military Command and they decided to shell houses on top of their occupants, including Israeli civilians. Now, why were they doing this? As you mentioned, there’s the Hannibal Directive, this once-secret directive that was introduced after Israel entered into a major prisoner swap with I believe the PFLPGC, which operates out of Syria in exchange for Ahmed Jabril and hundreds of other prisoners in order to get back some Israeli soldiers who had been taken in the Lebanese Civil War.
Chris Hedges: It was only three. I don’t think it was a very –
Max Blumenthal: Yeah, it was three.
Chris Hedges: – Yeah.
Max Blumenthal: So this is a politically painful prisoner swap, and the Israeli public was furious, and the right-wing politicians were furious. So they introduced this directive named after the Carthaginian general Hannibal – Who took his own life, he took poison rather than being taken captive by the enemy – And it authorizes Israeli commanders to kill their own soldiers if they’re taken captive by the enemy in order to prevent such a prisoner swap from taking place. And it was used again, this is when it got exposed in 2014 – August 1, 2014, what’s known as Black Friday in Southern Gaza – And I was actually there in the aftermath of this massacre. A lieutenant named Hadar Golden was taken by Hamas fighters. He was in the field when Israel broke a ceasefire and started attacking around the southern city of Rafa. The Israeli Military Command authorized airstrikes, artillery strikes, and tank fire to bring the full wrath of the Israeli military onto this area in order to make sure that this soldier did not get taken alive.
Over 100 people in Rafa were killed in this massacre. The morgues were filling up. It was hideous. I actually visited a hospital called Kuwaiti Hospital, which is now under attack again, and because the mortuaries were so full of bodies on this day, they actually had to bring in ice cream coolers to store the bodies of babies. The doctor who interviewed me, who I interviewed about that, his entire family was killed about a week and a half ago, after he refused Israeli orders to evacuate Kuwaiti Hospital. But back to the Hannibal directive. We have to question whether it was put into play on October 7. Because we not only have the Erez Crossing where many soldiers were killed – And if you look at the aftermath, the roof was clearly brought down. There’s serious structural damage to the roof of Erez Crossing – You have Kibbutz Be’eri where there was tank shelling, and then you have these Apache helicopter pilots in the air who were stating in their testimonies in Hebrew to Israeli media that they had no intelligence, no way of distinguishing civilian from combatant on the ground.
And yet they were told to empty their tanks, completely unload their ammo, then head back to the base, get filled up again, reload, and then go shoot as many cars and people as they could on the ground. Pure chaos. These testimonies have been totally ignored, by the way, by Western media. Were they encouraged to kill captives or shoot cars that they thought contained captives? We don’t know. What we do know is there were orders from the top to kill Israeli civilians if Hamas gunmen were around them in order to get the gunmen. And it’s like the same military doctrine that’s being employed in Gaza: Any civilian is a target if they are the “terrorist’s next-door neighbor.” Israel actually calls it the Neighbor Policy. They don’t know any other doctrine. They don’t have any other means of targeting and they weren’t prepared, obviously, for this military onslaught. So they went to their core doctrine of bombing everything in sight.
That brings us to the third scenario. We talked about Erez Crossing and Kibbutz Be’eri, then you have the chaos of the Nova Electronic Music Festival. And it’s there that it appears clear that after a lot of these Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad commando teams had left – This is an element that’s left out in a lot of Western media – Many people from Gaza started streaming in, including lower level characters from the armed factions who may have had weapons but weren’t part of the operation or weren’t trained, onlookers, people who wanted to see what Israel looked like, to see the land that their families had been kicked off. There were some heinous killings, and you could see actual captives being taken by guys on motorcycles who didn’t even have weapons. They were grabbing people.
A lot of this happened around the Nova Music Festival. There was a lot of shooting between festival security guards and various gunmen, and a lot of people were killed, but many people were fleeing the festival by car. There is a video of some Hamas gunmen stopping cars and shooting people. But then you have all of these images that the Israeli Foreign Ministry put out of cars that are completely melted, and their corpses inside are charred. And those to me are telltale signs of Hellfire missile strikes from Apache helicopters, and the Apache crews, the squadrons. They put out a video afterward of themselves shooting cars, hitting cars with Hellfire missiles, and shooting people who were pedestrians walking on the ground with cannon fire.
We don’t know who those people were, but if you look, a lot of the cars were heading back to Gaza. So they were very likely cars of people from Gaza who may have been taking captives and so many captives or would-be captives were killed. Was one of them Shawnee Luke? This woman whom the Israeli Foreign Ministry has been making such a big deal of who was a festival partygoer, who was attractive, and was a German citizen. There’s some video of her being taken. They say they found a skull fragment from her.
Was she in a car that was hit by a Hellfire missile? Unclear. But it’s very clear that many of these cars were hit by Apache helicopters and the helicopter pilots said they had no idea who was in them. They were shooting people on the other side of Gaza after they entered, by the afternoon of October 7. It’s very clear to me that many people were killed. Many Israelis were killed by Israeli forces, along with many active duty, uniformed Israeli soldiers who were actively engaged in the siege of Gaza were combatants.
Chris Hedges: I want to buttress that I went into Kuwait after the first Gulf War and drove up the Highway of Death, which was miles and miles of Iraqi military vehicles, all of which had been hit by Apache helicopters. And when I saw one of the pictures, one of the images of a car with two completely blackened corpses, that is what I saw in vehicle after vehicle after vehicle going into Kuwait. Some of these images which were disseminated by the IDF have been removed. And maybe you can explain why you think they were no longer made available to the public.
Max Blumenthal: Well, when I first went to Gaza in 2014, in the midst of Israel’s 51-day-long assault on Gaza, I came across a car that was on the roadside that had been roasted by a Hellfire missile along with its driver. The driver’s body had been removed but it was undoubtedly charred and you could actually see his sandal melted into the gas pedal. He had been hit by a Hellfire missile. I embedded the picture in my article to compare it to the vehicles that the Israeli Foreign Ministry was pointing to as evidence of Hamas savagery, and it’s identical. By the way, he was a taxi driver, a poor young guy named Fadi Alowa, who had taken a wounded Hamas fighter to the hospital without even knowing that he had been a fighter. And so they killed him.
The Israeli Foreign Ministry has a website called hamas-massacre.com. And the UN Ambassador – This unhinged character named Gilad Iradan, who used to be in charge of Israel’s meddling operations to attack college students who were organizing to boycott, divest, and sanction Israel, or forming Palestine solidarity student groups – Gilad Iradan whipped out this QR code at his UN address, about two weeks ago, and the QR code was supposed to lead to a Google Drive folder that contained all these images of charred cars, melted bodies, and all sorts of other atrocities that Hamas had committed. But all the pictures eventually disappeared. My initial read was that they concluded that a lot of these pictures were either fake, or they could have even depicted Hamas fighters who had come in and been hit by Hellfire missiles. But then Gilad Iradan in embarrassment later said that there was a technical error, and he tried to repost the images.
And that makes sense because they have no shame. They lie relentlessly, shamelessly and so it didn’t seem like they actually deleted them out of shame. They deleted them because of a major technical error, which is also ironic because Israel’s supposed to be the technically savvy startup nation that’s teaching the world through innovation and creativity how we can enter the AI future, but they can’t even maintain a simple Google Drive.
And that shows the boneheadedness of this entire operation. But it’s worked. It’s been very successful in convincing Brussels and Washington that Hamas was ISIS. That is Israel’s message: Hamas is ISIS, they’re irrational, they aim to simply kill Jews, they don’t have any political demands, and the only response to them is the response that the US waged on ISIS – After supporting ISIS, by the way, in Syria – Which was to destroy much of Raha, ISIS’s base of operation, as well as Mosul in Iraq. The man who actually oversaw those operations, James Glynn, the marine officer, was sent to Israel to consult the Israeli military in the immediate aftermath of October 7 on how they should respond. Now, the Pentagon’s pulling back and saying, whoa, this is a little bit crazy for us even. We don’t even know what you’re targeting, or where your targeting is coming from. But they gave him the green light because they fell for the propaganda shock and awe campaign of these photos.
And recently actually at a fundraiser for the Republican Jewish Coalition – Which is funded substantially by the Adelson family of the late laconic oligarch, Sheldon Adelson, but also many other wealthy Republican, pro-Israel Jews in Las Vegas at Adelson’s Hotel – A character named Ellie Beir appears on stage, who is a volunteer rescuer and a religious nationalist orthodox Jew from New York, who is living in Israel and had arrived as a first responder in October 7 through a group called United Hatzalah. And this is obviously like a fundraising speech. And he declares that a baby had been burned in an oven, had been baked in an oven by Hamas “terrorists.”
I’m looking at his comments right now. I have them in front of me. He actually had not seen any baby in an oven. It was someone named Ellie Moskowitz, who is from his first responder United Hatzalah team. And Ellie Moskowitz had not seen any baby baked in an oven. He said that he found a small bag with contents of body parts that had been apparently pressed against a heating element. These body parts were displayed by Netanyahu filtered out on Twitter and sent to influencers by the Israeli Foreign Ministry in the PM’s office after Netanyahu was embarrassed by the retraction of the story about 40 beheaded babies. So if we go back to October 8, CNN and Biden begin telling this phony story about 40 beheaded babies, they are both forced to retract, Netanyahu puts out an image of some burned body parts, says it’s a baby, and then flash forward to this fundraiser in Las Vegas where these first responders are saying that there was a baby baked in an oven based on body parts they had in a bag which were pressed against a heating element.
Now, put two and two together. What heating element could have created that much heat to char a body part, which didn’t even belong to a baby, but was put forward by Netanyahu to save face? It was likely a Hellfire missile and body parts that had been blown to bits by a Hellfire missile, which were likely an Israeli citizen but could have been someone from Gaza, are being put forward as an Israeli baby. But if you look at the confirmed death count, only one Israeli baby was killed. It’s horrible and tragic. It was a 10-month-old baby named Millie Cohen, who was accidentally shot by Hamas gunmen in an exchange of fire.
And more reporting will come out about this, but you can look at the confirmed death toll at Haaretz. There’s no other baby. There’s no baby burned in an oven, no one’s even saying that. So what we’re looking at is the most horrific, lurid propaganda, which is bogus, all derive from apparent friendly fire and is being spun in order to justify the actual beheading of babies with missiles in the Gaza Strip and the systematic extermination of an entire society. A senior Israeli security source told Yedioth Ahronoth, the top Israeli tabloid, that 20,000 people had been killed in Gaza. I personally think that could be an overcount, and they’re trying to boast to the Israeli public about how many people they’ve killed to satisfy the bloodlust of the public after October 7.
But if that’s true, that’s like 1% of the entire population, which definitely qualifies as genocide. So this propaganda has been used to justify the realization of the lie. Many Israelis who are involved in this military operation or who are seen torturing people in the West Bank, workers in the West Bank on camera, are reenacting the lurid propaganda that they believe to be true about October 7, and it could lead to a regional war. Because the genocidal fury has overwhelmed Israeli society, the propaganda, the shock and awe campaign, has prevented Brussels and Washington from being able to put any check on it.
Chris Hedges: What do you think this means for the hostages that are in Gaza?
Max Blumenthal: That’s a great question, and one of the hostages answered it. I don’t know her name. She appears to be from one of the kibbutzim that had the most captives taken, it’s called near Nir Oz, and that’s where two of the elderly captives were released came from. It’s a kibbutz that has many people, more from the left of the Israeli political spectrum, who would be critics of Netanyahu, come from. So he may not be – Netanyahu, his government, and the Israeli population – Very favorably disposed to them. But one of these hostages, an older woman, appeared on camera from wherever she was being held inside Gaza and excoriated Netanyahu, and said, you have no desire to get us. What are you doing? Have a ceasefire, negotiate for our release, and get us out of here. You’ve already killed 50 of us. And that is correct. At least 50 captives have already been killed in these blitzkrieg-like Israeli bombings where they’re using 2,000-pound bombs and Mark 82 bunker-buster bombs.
So I don’t think they’ll make it out alive. It would be a miracle if they made it out alive. Everyone wants them to make it out alive, whether they’re on the anti-Zionist side, or … Well, I shouldn’t say everyone wants to make it out alive. It appears that those who want them to make it out are those who are protesting Netanyahu outside his office and outside the military headquarters who tend to be leftists or anti-Zionists in Israel. And those who could care less about them getting out are Netanyahu’s supporters the military supporters and the military commanders themselves. Because what about this operation suggests that they’re actually trying to rescue hostages? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. And the political dynamics that have been put in play by assaulting everyone in the Gaza Strip, are sending the message that no negotiations are possible whatsoever.
Netanyahu could fall at any day as this operation goes on if certain things take place. For example, if the soldiers that the Israeli military has sent into the few unpopulated areas in Northern Gaza where they’ve set up these defacto bases of Merkava tanks, if they actually get out of their tanks and wade into the rubble or try to actually take out tunnels themselves, they’re going to lose many, many lives, and Netanyahu will likely fall, but he would also fall if he negotiated for the release of these captives. Why? Because of the propaganda that he put into play, the propaganda was so extreme and so lurid, and they went so far beyond an already horrific reality on October 7 that the Israeli public was whipped into such a fervor that they would not stand for any negotiation with Hamas. So the only objective that can be put forward, which has been reinforced by Tony Blinken, is regime change in Gaza. And regime change in Gaza means months and months of grinding, genocidal war in which no captive could possibly survive.
Chris Hedges: Isn’t it straightforward? They took the captives because they wanted a prisoner exchange. Netanyahu could empty the Israeli prisons of four or five, six, I don’t know, 10,000 Palestinian prisoners, and they would get there. The hostages would go home, wouldn’t they?
Max Blumenthal: Yeah. This isn’t about Hamas per se. Hamas does have the political mandate to carry out an armed struggle. That’s why it was elected in 2006, including by people who are not necessarily Islamists outside of its base. They actually won cities across the West Bank. It wasn’t that they won Gaza, they won all of Palestine that was able to vote. So their mandate is to do armed struggle to resist where the Bata and the Palestinian authority basically gave up, and they’re going to continue doing that. But Palestinian armed struggle has always been driven by political demands that were essentially rational and were related to ending ethnic cleansing and ending the military occupation of Palestinians. The leadership of Hamas put forward clear political demands at the beginning of the Al Aqsa Flood as they did in 2014 during Operation Cast Lead. They relate to preventing the incursions of fanatical religious nationalists to the Al Aqsa Compound, the third holiest site in Islam, they relate to ending the siege of Gaza so that they can actually determine they can enjoy some sovereignty. They can actually fish in their own seas. They can have an economy, they can visit Jerusalem.
Emptying the Israeli prisons, where something like 1,500 Palestinians are now held without charges, 700 Palestinian children pass in and out of these prisons every year. There are currently at least 150, now there are probably 200 Palestinian children being held in these jails. They’re hostages. They’ve been kidnapped. I’ve gone to their trials in the Israeli children’s courts and they were kidnapped in their own beds. Ahad Tamimi was kidnapped. I’ve known her since she was a child and her village, Nabi Salih has been waging this unarmed struggle against the Israeli occupation in the West Bank. Her dad was kidnapped, Basam, who’s really the leader of that struggle and is an international hero.
And so it relates to the whole occupation. And the only way that they could trigger some negotiation, they believe, was by taking captives, because all diplomatic channels had been cut off. The entire West had declared Hamas a terrorist organization that could not be negotiated with. So the only way to spur negotiations is through violence. And that’s what they did. And what they’ve done is forced the essential dynamics of Zionism into an accelerated mode. Because Zionism, as a settler colonial movement based on an anachronistic ideology, Heron Volk ideology from the turn of the century Europe, has demonstrated its unwillingness to accommodate the native population as it seeks to consolidate its settler-colonial presence. And so it must move towards genocide as all other settler-colonial movements have done. And so that’s where we’re at right now, is the phase of whether Israel will be able to finish the job that it began in 1948 or not.
And any negotiations that could have taken place with a rational authority are off limits. This is also an obvious failure of American and Western leadership to recognize not only what they’re dealing with in the Gaza Strip, which is yet another Palestinian faction that is using violence to spur political momentum because all diplomatic means had been cut off for them, but also what they’re dealing with in Israel. Where they’re dealing with a fundamentally genocidal political movement and a genocidal society. This Israeli society is primed for genocide. You can look at the viral videos. The videos that are going viral in Israeli social media are parents actually enlisting their own children as props to mock Palestinian children who are dying, dressing them up in hijab to mock Palestinian girls who are dying, who are being starved, who are thirsty because the water has been cut off.
There’s a new trend started by an Israeli journalist from Channel 13 in Israel of mocking Palestinian prisoners in the West Bank who are detained for eight hours and forced to listen to a children’s song endlessly to torment them, and they dance around mocking the video of the prisoners. The singer of that children’s song was brought to perform in an Israeli military base. You can look at the footage of all the pop singers appearing at military bases or in the so-called Gaza Envelope, where reservists are preparing to go into Gaza, and it’s straightforward genocidal anthems about re-conquering Gaza, driving out its inhabitants, and reestablishing Israeli settlements that are even bigger than the former settlement of Gush Katif. The Israeli Ministry of Intelligence has even introduced a think tank’s paper, which calls for the full ethnic cleansing of Gaza and the forced transfer of its residents to Egypt. They put it forward as an official blueprint for the aftermath of this operation that they call Iron Swords.
So that’s what the US has green-lit here. And by trying to spur some basic political momentum and relaxation of the siege – Hamas might’ve just agreed to a relaxation of the siege to be able to deliver something for their constituents – By trying to do that with violence when all diplomatic channels have been cut off, what they’ve done is forced this conflict into its final phase. I don’t think Israel will stop before it believes that it has finished the job that it began in 1948.
Chris Hedges: Great. That was Max Blumenthal from The Grayzone. You can read his article, “October 7 Testimonies Reveal Israel’s Military Shelling Israeli Citizens With Tanks and Missiles” at The Grayzone. I want to thank The Real News Network and its production team: Cameron Granadino, Adam Coley, David Hebden, and Kayla Rivara. You can find me at chrisedges.substack.com.
Israel’s war on hospitals
By Max Blumenthal, Mohamed El-Saife and Anya Parampil
With exclusive footage from inside the largest hospital in the Gaza Strip, Al-Shifa, The Grayzone examines the Israeli military’s policy of attacking and eliminating medicare care centers across the northern part of the besieged Palestinian territory as it seeks to expel its residents.
BOOK REVIEW: Thoughts on Stalin – the history and critique of a black legend by Domenico Losurdo – Part 2

The Gulag
Propaganda in the imperialist organs of mass communication portrays the Soviet Union as a gigantic prison camp – the gulag – where the inmates are tortured, subjected to humiliating and dehumanising treatment. Losurdo demolishes these lying assertions, first, by reference to the treatment of prisoners in Soviet prisons; second, by referencing the complete omission by imperialism and its ideologues, of the vast network of gulags abd concentration camps in the imperialist world and the mass extermination of millions of people by imperialist and colonialist countries over the past several centuries as well as recently.
Australia, he writes, was Britain’s Siberia, to which Irish dissidents as well as people who had committed minor crimes such as theft of a shilling or a handkerchief were sent, not to speak of the millions of Australian aborigines who were exterminated.
Under British rule in the mid-19th century, millions of Irish people were condemned to death through famine and a very large number were forced to emigrate to America to avoid death by starvation.
In India tens of millions of people died through man-made famines under Britain’s watch, including 3 million Bengalis during the Second World War.
Then there are the Canadian holocaust and those in the United States. Slavery and lynching of blacks in the US until quite recently were regarded as public spectacles and well-advertised as something to be viewed as entertainment.
The practices of the Third Reich, says Losurdo, cannot be separated from the history of relations instituted by the Western powers towards colonial people and peoples of colonial origin.
Racial extermination, stressed Benjamin Disraeli, is the expression of an “irresistible natural law”.
Gandhi, quite correctly, equated British imperialism and Nazi imperialism in his denunciation of colonial Britain and Nazi Germany: “In India we have Hitlerian rule, however disguised it may be in softer terms”; and “Hitler is Great Britain’s sin. He is only the response to British imperialism.”
Even today, captured Taliban members are incarcerated in a place resembling the Nazi concentration camp of Auschwitz.
Annihilation by air of entire cities – Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki – on the one hand and of the Jews by the Nazis on the other hand are comparable in their cruelty, cynicism and scale of death and destruction. In other words, there is a long history which connects Western imperialist countries to racial hierarchical theories and extermination of the so-called ‘inferior races’. Hitler’s Germany was a continuation of the same genocidal tradition which condemned the ‘inferior races’ to slavery and physical destruction. It is by no means an invention of the 20th century, nor can it, in the interests of objectivity and truth, be confined to the vile Nazi regime. Hitler was not a lone mad German: he was a representative of German imperialism engaged in a deadly struggle for world domination against its rival imperialist powers.
Devoid of all context, ‘history’ books written by the paid flunkeys of imperialism, and, therefore, best falsified in the interests of the bourgeoisie, are characterised by the absence of history. “Colonialism, imperialism, world wars, national liberation struggles, different and opposing political projects, they all disappear. Nor do they even ask about the relations of the liberal West with fascism and Nazism” (pp.205-206).
All that is left is the centrality of the personalities of Hitler and Stalin, who, in a grotesque display of absurdity, are put on the same pedestal and equated with each other. Such books are an insult to the intelligence of the thinking reader.
That Andrew Jackson, US president in the mid-19th century, ordered the deportation of Cherokee Indians; that Theodore Roosevelt thought that the “inferior races” should be met with extermination in case of their rebellion; that large numbers of US citizens of Japanese descent were put behind bars by the administration of US President Franklin Delaney Roosevelt during the Second World War; and that he also seriously considered castrating all German males following Germany’s defeat in the war – all this is omitted by bourgeois historians. It was the onset of the Cold War against the Soviet Union that saved defeated Germany and Japan from the fate otherwise reserved for them by the US.
A simple comparison between the attitude of the West, on the one hand, and that of the Soviet Union, in particular of Stalin, to the national awakening in Eastern Europe and the colonies, reveals clearly the racism of the former and the liberating character of the latter. Stalin was very impressed by the awakening of the marginalised nationalities within the Hapsburg Empire and greeted this development with joy.
The Bolshevik government in Russia was the first government systematically to promote the national aspirations of the minority nationalities; it created a dozen republics, promoted to leadership positions people from national minorities; where necessary it created written languages where none had before existed; the Soviet state financed the mass production of books in non-Russian languages, newspapers, magazines, movies, operas, museums, orchestras and other cultural products. Nothing comparable had ever before been attempted (see Terry Martin, The affirmative action empire: nations and nationalism in the Soviet Union, 1929-39, Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London).
The Republics were endowed with a national flag, an anthem, a language, a national academy, and in some cases a Commissar for Foreign Affairs, and they had the right to secede from the federation.
The nationalities policy of the Soviet Republic constitutes a glaring contrast with that of the colonialist and imperialist states, with their obsessive pursuit of uniformity. In the US and Canada, for instance, people belonging to the national minorities (those lucky enough to have survived the genocides) were compelled to “break ties with their birth community and with their own family, native children must also renounce their dances and their ‘strange’ clothing, forced to have short hair and, above all, avoid the use of their tribal language as if it were the plague; breaking the rule that demands exclusive use of the English carries severe punishment, and in Canada they are subjected to electric shock” (p.188).
Losurdo writes that “we are forced to think of Nazism when we read of the forms in which” Canada perpetrated its Holocaust – or the ‘final solution’ to the indigenous question. The Commission for the Truth about the Canadian Genocide speaks of “death camps”, of “men, women and children” who are “deliberately exterminated”; of “a system whose objective is to destroy the greatest part possible of native people through sickness deportation, and murder.” In the pursuit of this objective, the champions of white supremacy don’t even spare innocent children, who die “from beatings and torture, or after having been deliberately exposed to tuberculosis and other illnesses”; others go on to be subjected to forced sterilisation. It is evident that we are face to face with “practices identical or similar to those in force in the Third Reich, and their application arises out of similar ideology, and that’s again similar to that which presides over the construction of Hitler’s racial state” (ibid. p.193).
Turning to the southern states of the US, we find that, in the decades following the Civil War, black prisoners, who constituted the overwhelming majority of the prison population, were frequently rented out to private companies, crowded into “large wheeled cages that followed the encampments of construction and railroad tycoons, where they were cruelly punished, poorly clothed and fed. On falling sick these prisoners received no medical treatment, a great many of them have broken shoulders, with sores, scars and blisters, some with their skin cruelly ravaged from lashings … they lie there dying … with living parasites crawling across their faces …” and much more (ibid. pp.183-184).\
The bourgeoisie of these states, which presided over these horrific practices, has the audacity to point an accusing finger at the great and glorious Soviet Union’s alleged maltreatment of its prison population, which was positively humane and cultured, as is testified to by even the fiercely anti-communist, anti-Soviet and anti-Stalin writers such as Anne Applebaum. The picture drawn by Applebaum of the conditions prevailing in Soviet prisons is such that it could be confused “with a product of Soviet propaganda, if it had not come from a fiercely anti-communist author” (p.165).
Here is a depiction of the conditions in Butryka prison, Moscow, in 1921 at a time when the civil war was raging:
“The prisoners were allowed free run of the prison. They organised morning gymnastic sessions, founded an orchestra and a chorus, created a ‘club’ supplied with foreign journals and a good library … A prisoners’ council assigned everyone cells, some of which were supplied with carpets on the floors and walls. Another prisoner remembered that ‘we strolled along the corridors as if they were boulevards.’ To Bobima, prion life seemed unreal: ‘Can’t they even lock us up seriously’?” (Applebaum, cited in Losurdo p.165).
There were frequent protests. The reader may be interested to read the demands, partially accepted, made during a hunger strike by political prisoners (a goodly part of them Trotskyites): expansion of the prison library to include newspapers published in the USSR; complete update of the economics, politics and literature sections; subscription to at least one foreign newspaper; enrolment in correspondence courses; acquire paper in quantities no less than ten notebooks per person each month. So observes Applebaum of the conditions in June 1931 – the height of the campaign for the “liquidation of the kulaks as a class”. That, however, does not appear to have dramatically altered the existing situation in the prisons. Here is an excerpt on the penal colonies in the far north at the start of the 1930s:
“Needing hospitals, camp administrators built them, and introduced systems for training pharmacists and prisoner nurses. Needing food, they constructed their own collective farms … Needing electricity, they built power plants. Needing building materials, they built brick factories.
“Needing educated workers, they trained the ones they had. Much of ex-kulak workforce turned out to be illiterate or semi-illiterate … The camp’s administration therefore set up technical training schools, which required, in turn, more new buildings and new cadres: math and physics teachers, as well as ‘political instructors’ to oversee their work. By 1940, Vorkuta, a city built in permafrost, had acquired a geological institute and a university, theatres, puppet theatres, swimming pools, and nurseries” (Applebaum, cited in Losurdo at p.167).
As strange as it may be, “the Gulag little by little brought ‘civilisation’ … to remote uninhabited areas”, concedes Applebaum.
As in society at large, the prison administration encouraged “’socialist emulation’ among the prisoners. Those who stand out enjoy additional food and other privileges.
“Eventually, top performers were also released early. When the [White Sea] Canal was finally completed, on time, in 1933, 12,484 prisoners were freed. Numerous others received medals and awards. One prisoner celebrated his early release at a ceremony … as onlookers shouted ‘Hooray for the builders of the Canal’” (p.169).
“The camps were permeated with a production obsession and a thirst for knowledge, as is revealed by the presence of an ‘Educational-cultural department’ (KVC) in the prisons. Precisely for that reason, wall newspapers were taken seriously. If we read them, we find that the biographies of the rehabilitated prisoners are written in a language extraordinarily similar to those of good workers outside the colony. They worked, studied, made sacrifices and tried to improve. The aim was to re-educate them into ‘Stakhanovites’, among the first in line to participate with patriotic enthusiasm in the development of the country… In the camps, as in the world outside, ‘socialist competitions continued to take place’ … the guard addressed the prisoner as ‘comrade’ … many prisoners ended up working as guards or camp administrators” (ibid. p.120).
No small number of them learned a profession to exercise following the moment of their release.
“Even during Nazi Germany’s war of annihilation against the USSR, time and money were generously invested to strengthen and improve the political education meetings for the prisoners: In the first quarter of 1943 … at the height of the war, frank telegrams were sent back and forth from the camps to Moscow, as camp commanders desperately tried to procure musical instruments for their prisoners. Meanwhile the camps held a contest on the theme ‘The Great Motherland war of the Soviet People against German Fascist occupiers’;; fifty camp prisoners and eight sculptors participated” (Applebaum cited in Losurdo pp.170-171).
The atmosphere of national unity brought out by the Great Patriotic War was felt within the Gulag. Consequent upon several amnesties, the Gulag experiences a massive reduction in population; ex-prisoners heroically took part in combat, expressing their satisfaction and pride in the fact that they had access to technologically advanced weapons “thanks to the industrialisation of the country”; they found careers in the Red Army, were accepted into the Communist Party, and won honours and medals for their military courage (see Applebaum in Losurdo p.172).
Just one more example: On Solovetsky Islands, prisoners, many of them having been scientists in St Petersburg, not only had access to a theatre and a library with 30,000 volumes, but also had a botanical garden, including “a museum of flora, fauna, and of local art history” (Applebaum, in Losurdo p.166).
Losurdo rightly points out that the “prison system reproduces the relations of society in which it is expressed”. Inside and outside of the Gulag, one sees in action a state focused on development seeking to mobilise and ‘re-educate- all forces to overcome the country’s backwardness, becoming more urgent in view of the then approaching war that was, by Hitler’s explicit declaration in his Mein Kampf, to be one of enslavement and annihilation.
In these conditions, harsh treatment of the opponents of Soviet power is combined with the “emancipation of oppressed nationalities, as well as a strong upward social mobility with access to education, culture, and … leadership positions by part of the social strata that until that time had been totally marginalised. The pedagogical concerns with production and the social mobility related to it is fact … even inside the Gulag”. By contrast, the world of Nazi concentration camps reflects “… a racial hierarchy that characterises the racial State, by that time established, and the racial empire to be built” (Losurdo p.182).
“To conclude”, says Losurdo, “the prisoner in the Gulag is a potential ‘comrade’ obligated to participate in particularly hard conditions in the strengthening of production, [whereas] the prisoner in the Nazi Lager is firstly an Untermensch, forever marked by their nationality or racial degeneration” (ibid.).
Further, “the Nazi concentrationary universe is set up to devour millions upon millions of slaves … and that project would have devoured an infinite number of more victims, had it not been destroyed by an opposing project, based on the recognition not only of existential rights, but also the cultural and national rights of the natives” (ibid. p.191).
Anti-semitism
It is an essential part of the imperialist narrative that the Soviet Union, in particular Stalin, practised anti-semitism. Through endless repetition by the bourgeois media, this outrageous lie has acquired the force of a public prejudice. It is not just the ordinary bourgeois ideologues who push this lie, but also the Trotskyites.
The accusation of anti-semitism was for the first time raised by Trotsky in 1937 – the year in which, alongside the Betrayal of Revolution, he denounced the re-emergence of the barbarism of anti-semitism in the USSR. Trotsky gives no proof for his baseless slandering accusation, which is built around a syllogism: “The October Revolution put an end to the outcast status of Jews. But that doesn’t in any way mean that it has forever wiped out antisemitism … Legislation alone doesn’t change men … Their thoughts … depend on tradition … The Soviet regime isn’t yet twenty years old… despite exemplary legislation, it’s impossible that national chauvinistic prejudices, especially antisemitism, have not stubbornly survived among the most backward segments of the population” (Thermidor and anti-semitism).
Losurdo correctly replies to this slander thus: “By definition, the weight of a secular tradition couldn’t miraculously disappear in the segments of the population that had not yet adopted modern and revolutionary culture. But what sense was there, then, in accusing a regime or leadership group, who had in no way altered the ‘exemplary legislation’ approved by the Bolsheviks, and who, in committing to a colossal process of industrialisation, expanding literacy and access to culture, had continuously restricted the social and geographical areas in which ‘national and chauvinistic prejudices, particularly anti-semitism’ were deeply rooted? Was it not Trotsky himself who spoke of the unprecedented speed with which the USSR developed the economy, industry, urbanisation and culture, and verified the rise of a ‘new Soviet patriotism’, a sentiment ‘certainly deep, sincere and dynamic’, shared by the various nationalities previously oppressed or incited against one another?” (p.241).
At the same time that Trotsky poured down his vile slander, a. Jewish German writer, Lion Feuchtwanger, fleeing the Third Reich, spoke in his travel report effusively of the resolution of “the old and apparently unsolvable Jewish Question” in the USSR. He wrote of the “… consensus in support for the new [Soviet] State among the Jews I have met”; and further, “like all national languages, Yiddish is lovingly cared for in the [Soviet] Union. There’s schools and newspapers in that language, and congresses are held for the supervision of Yiddish and the performances in that language enjoy the highest consideration”.
Even more devastating was the reaction of the American Jewish community to Trotsky’s accusation, one of whose authoritative representatives responded thus:
“If his other accusations are as baseless as his complaint against antisemitism, then he has absolutely nothing to say” (cited in Losurdo p.242).
Another leader stated: “In relation to antisemitism, we are used to seeing in the Soviet Union the only glimmer of light. Therefore it is unforgivable that Trotsky launches such baseless accusations against Stalin” (ibid.).
“While in Germany”, writes Losurdo, “the denunciation of ‘Judeo-Bolshevism’… became more frantic than ever, and the process that would lead to the ‘final solution’ was quickly advancing, a strange campaign of insinuations was launched against the country that … more courageously than any other, classified Hitler’s antisemitism as ‘cannibalistic’, against the country that very often inspired those who in German territory resisted the wave of hatred against the Jews” (ibid.).
Those who defied the Nazi regime were members of the Communist Party of Germany. They were members or sympathisers of a party that, “…at the international level, had Stalin as their essential point of reference” (ibid., p.243).
The accusation of antisemitism hurled at Stalin is all the more grotesque in view of the fact that he fought against, and denounced, antisemitism intrepidly during his entire political life. Beginning with 1901, as a 20-year old youth in Georgia, in one of his first written works, he lists the struggle against oppression of nationalities and religious confessions as being one of the most important tasks of the ‘social democratic party‘. Particularly targeted being “the Jews, continually persecuted and insulted, deprived of those miserable rights that other Russian subjects enjoyed – the right to move freely, the right to attend school, the right to occupy public jobs, etc.” (Stalin, Works, Vol 1 p.19).
A few years following the outbreak of the 1905 revolution he wrote that the Tsarist regime reacts by encouraging or unleashing pogroms. The only way, he said, to eradicate pogroms is through “the destruction of the Tsarist autocracy’ (ibid., p.71).
He developed the same theme following the overthrow of Tsarism between February and October 1917. Beaten in Russia, antisemitism became an evermore menacing threat in Germany. Stalin did not wait for the rise to power of the Hitlerites before denouncing antisemitism in the most uncompromising terms. On 12 January 1931, in a declaration to the American Jewish Telegraph Agency, he classified “racial chauvinism” and antisemitism as a kind of “cannibalism” and the return to “the jungle”. And this stance of his was reproduced in the Soviet Union, in Pravda on 30 November 1936 by way of warning governments and public opinion the world over against the terrible threat looming over Europe and the wider world.
In a speech of 6 November 1941, on the anniversary of the October Revolution, Stalin went on to characterise Hitler’s Germany in the following scathing terms:
“In its essence, Hitler’s regime is a copy of that reactionary regime that existed under Tsarism. It’s well known that the Nazis trampled on the rights of workers, the rights of intellectuals, and the rights of peoples, just as the Tsarist regime trampled over them, and that it unleashed medieval pogroms against the Jews, just as the Tsarist regime unleased them.
“The Nazi party is a party of the enemies of democratic freedoms, a party of medieval reaction and the most sinister pogroms” (Selected Works Vol 14, p.253).
Contrast this with the attitude of Churchill, who in 1937 stressed the ‘nefarious’ role of Judaism in the Bolshevik agitation. In the same year, he wrote an article, that remained unpublished, in which he expressed the thought that the Jews were at least partly responsible for the hostility directed at them (see Howard Zinn, A people’s history of the United States). Stalin’s position is diametrically the opposite; he continued to characterise the Nazis as cannibalistic “champions of pogroms”, from whose barbarity the Soviet people had the honour and credit of saving “European civilisation”.
Hitler for his part, literally two days later (i.e., after Stalin’s 6 November 1941 speech), at a Munich rally to mark his coup attempt in 1923, condemned Stalin as “the man that has, for the time being, become the head of that state [the USSR] which is nothing more than an instrument in the hands of the all-powerful Jews. While Stalin stands on stage before the curtain, behind him are Kaganovich and that expansive network of Jews who control that enormous empire” (see Losardo p.248).
On this premise, the war for the enslavement of the Soviet Union is, at the same time, the war for the annihilation of the Jews.
In view of this it is perfectly understandable, then, that the ethnic group which became the particular target of the Third Reich’s genocidal fury, distinguished itself in the fight against its barbaric Nazi tormentors. “During the war, in relation to its population, Jews earned more medals than any other Soviet nationality” (Michael Ignatieff, ‘In the centre of the earthquake’, New York Review of Books, 12 June 1997, quoted in Losurdo p.249).
This is hardly compatible with the slanderous theory of Stalin or the USSR’s alleged antisemitism. Throughout the existence of the Soviet Union, Jews continued to be disproportionately represented in the country’s universities and scientific establishments and institutions. According even to Montefiore, anti-Stalin to his fingertips, determined to label Stalin as antisemitic, in 1937 “Jews formed a majority in the government”. These facts can hardly be cited in support of the theory of Stalin’s or the Soviet Union’s alleged antisemitism.
After the formation of the Eastern socialist bloc in the aftermath of the Second World War, the new regimes offered to the Jews political positions that they had never before occupied. They could become judges, officials and enter the government. Far from being discriminated against, the Jews enjoyed preferential treatment.
When at the end of the 1940s the Zionist movement was outlawed, the overwhelming majority of the Jews rejected the idea that the Jewish community should mark itself out as a national minority.
When, during a conversation with the famous Soviet writer Ilya Ehrenburg in Moscow in 1948, Golda Meir expressed her displeasure over assimilated Jews (“it disgusts me to see Jews who don’t speak Hebrew or at least Yiddish”), Ehrenburg responded angrily: “You are a servant of the United States”. Speaking to another interlocutor, Ehrenburg stated:
“The state of Israel must understand that in this country the Jewish Question no longer exists, that the Jews of the USSR must be left in peace and that all attempts to induce them to Zionism and to repatriation must stop. It will be met with resistance not only by the [Soviet] authorities but by Jews themselves” (p.261).
The Zionists, by attempting to seduce Soviet and Eastern European Jews were engaged in an attempt to cause a colossal brain drain of the sort of people needed for reconstruction after the devastating war. The overwhelming majority of the Jews themselves opposed such Zionist activity. Israeli diplomats in Moscow, behind the backs of Soviet authorities, established direct contacts with the Soviet Jewish community. By now, Israel aligned itself closely with the West; many important scientists of Jewish origin were sought to be lured by Zionist propaganda to emigrate and join a bloc determined on crushing the very country that had been responsible for their emancipation and social promotion. In view of their anti-communist activity in the socialist camp, active Zionist circles were ruthlessly repressed. In Czechoslovakia, for instance, Slansky was imprisoned and sentenced to death because, according to his daughter’s testimony, he had favoured emigration to Israel. None of this can, however, be attributed to “Stalin’s war against the Jews”, as is absurdly claimed by those determined to demonise Stalin and the Soviet Union that he led for three decades.
Why the venom against Stalin?
If Stalin was such a monster as he is made out to be, how come that for three decades communists, as well as famous philosophers and statesmen, paid tribute to him with approval, respect, and even admiration? How come that Deutscher paid tribute to the statesman, Stalin, who had made a decisive contribution to the defeat of the Third Reich and built socialism in the USSR? How come that, led by a generalissimo and such a ridiculous figure as Khrushchevites and ordinary bourgeois historians would have us believe Stalin was, the Soviet Union was able to defeat the monstrous Nazi war machine that had in succession subjugated the rest of continental Europe? And how was the USSR, starting from a position of extreme weakness, able to transform itself into an industrial and military superpower?
How did such the absurdly grotesque Stalin as portrayed by Khrushchev and bourgeois scholars achieve the status of historiographical and political dogma?
Losurdo answers thus: “The key to explaining that unique phenomenon can be found in the history of political mythologies. After Thermidor, the Jacobins are put to the guillotine at the moral level. They become ‘those sultans’, ‘those satyrs’, who had nearly everywhere created ‘palaces of pleasure’ and ‘palaces of orgies’, in which ‘they gave in to all excesses’”. In addition Robespierre was accused of being possessed of libido dominandi – the desire to dominate – preparing to get married to Capet’s daughter in order to be able to ascend the French throne!
The Jacobins were accused of hating culture; of planning to ban libraries; of being enemies of humanity, intent on spreading darkness and ignorance; of having set the human spirit back by many centuries.
Forgotten was the fact that the Jacobins had mandated compulsory schooling, which earlier the Thermidorians had denounced as the hubris of reason, and celebrated the beneficial advantage of prejudice.
With regard to the number of the Terror’s victims, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, even millions, are flaunted without any recourse to evidence; “In many, it’s a matter of genocide, as denounced by the Jeunesse Dorée in their anti-Marseillaise anthem against ‘the drinkers of blood of humanity’, ‘that anthropophagic horde’, ‘those terrible cannibals’. It is an accusation taken up and radicalised by the left. Soon after Thermidor, Babeuf speaks of a ‘process of depopulation’ carried out in Vendée by Robespierre who goes as far as to pursue the infamous, unprecedented political objective of ‘wiping out the human race’ … we witness a convergence between the extreme right and extreme left … both agreeing to depict Robespierre as a genocidal monster” (pp.331-332).
But it didn’t take long for Babeuf to grasp the real meaning of Thermidor; before the judges who were prepared to send him to the guillotine, he expressed his disdain for the “system of hunger” brought in by the new Thermidor rulers.
Similar venom to that unleashed by the Thermidor on Robespierre and his revolutionaries was unleashed by imperialism on the Bolsheviks in the aftermath of the October Revolution of 1917. The Bolsheviks are considered synonymous with debauchery and depravity; of having nationalised women and forcing every girl over the age of 16 to be turned over to an arbitrarily chosen man, forced to suffer on her body and soul the government’s impositions. These lurid slanders were published with the authorisation of President Wilson in such an authoritative organ as the New York Times.
The Bolsheviks are depicted, just as the Jacobins were, as being ‘barbarians’, as agents of Jewish internationalism, even more alien to civilisation both for their geographic origin, as well as the support provided by them to colonial revolts and to the people of colour, just as Nazi propaganda insisted on repeating. Finally, while Robespierre was accused for some time by Babeuf of having wanted completely to ‘wipe out the human race’, Robert Conquest satisfies himself in blaming Stalin for organising the starvation of the Ukrainian people – the same Stalin who had done so much for Ukraine in the field of culture and industrial development (see p.333).
Belakun, the Hungarian communist and leader of the short-lived Hungarian revolution was accused of having “established a harem with a lavish assortment of women, where the perfidious and insatiable Jew could ‘rape and dishonour dozens of virgins of the Christian caste’. Repeating this slander is a newspaper that will later become the official organ of the Nazi party, … But at that time shares an outlook that’s widespread in Western public opinion and on both sides of the Atlantic” (ibid., p.332).
All this reminds us of Marx’s penetrating observation that the “English Established Church would more readily pardon an attack on 38 of its 39 articles than on 1/39 of its income”.
TO BE CONTINUED
Water Transport Workers Federation of India takes stand against Nazi genocide

tor_1957@yahoo.co.in
Chennai
14.02.2024
TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN
The Water Transport Workers Federation of India representing more than 3500 workers at the 11 Major Ports in the Country has decided to refuse to load or unload weaponized cargoes from Israel or any other country which could handle military equipments and its allied cargo for war in Palestine.
We the Port workers, part of labour unions would always stand against the war and killing innocent people like women and children. The recent attack of Israel on Gaza plunging thousands of Palestinians into immense suffering and loss. Women and children have been blown to pieces in the war. Parents were unable to recognise their children killed in bombings which were exploding everywhere.
At this juncture our Union members have collectively decided to refuse handling all types of weaponised cargoes. Loading and unloading these weapons helps provide organizations with the ability to kill innocent people.
Therefore, We, the Indian Port & Dock Workers from various Major Ports active in the ground of Cargo handling sector, call on our members to no longer handle any ships which carry military material to Palestine/Israel.
We therefore also call for an immediate ceasefire. As the responsible trade unions, we declare our solidarity with those who campaign for peace. We call upon the workers of the world and peace-loving people to stand with the demand of free Palestine.
Tran
T. NARENDRA RAO
General Secretary
Nicaragua, climate crisis and capitalism

In a recent webinar addressed by Ambassador Valdrack Jaentschke, who led the Nicaragua government delegation to the 2023 United Nations climate change conference in Dubai, more commonly known as Cop28, the ambassador explained how Nicaragua is combating climate change, both at home through its renewable energy and other programmes, and in the international arena through cooperation and by the power of its example in implementing policies that demonstrate a real concern for the earth (in contrast to imperialist greenwashing).
He began by recalling the Paris climate conference of 2015. While Nicaragua upheld the position that the capitalist economic system is at the root of our environmental problems at that meeting, the majority of participants and all the meeting’s outcomes simply reinforced the status quo. The recent Cop28 conference, he said, was simply a continuation of that same old line. Whilst accepting the continued pollution problems created by the imperialist economic model, the Western nations had the audacity to blame developing countries for the problems created by their own economic system! The Conference agreed targets aimed at setting a limit on the absolute rise in global temperatures. But these technical conversations about points of degrees are moot for those who are suffering the real consequences today. The most important question in Nicaragua’s view is: who is principally being affected by temperature increases? Today, these include the populations of small island development countries (SIDS), and islands in the Pacific and the Caribbean. A mere 1.5C increase in temperature in the lowlands of central America would result in these islands’ complete disappearance.. Western audiences may be reassured by empty promises, but the reality is that, as temperatures rise, life is literally disappearing from under the feet of many people across Asia, Africa, the Pacific and the Caribbean.
Affected nations, already facing huge obstacles to their development as a result of imperialist looting and domination – including economic sanctions, debt, war, corruption and poverty – are now also having to contend with the recurring devastation caused by climate change. Nicaragua did not and does not cause climate change, said the ambassador. Data show that a few rich countries with the highest carbon emissions in the world are responsible for more than 83% of global emissions, while Nicaragua emits less than 0.05%. Yet Nicaragua’s economy suffers a yearly impact from climate change equivalent to 8% of its GDP. This adversely affects not only its infrastructure but also production, the environment, health, education and energy. Floods and changing patterns of rainfall and temperature are depleting crop production and yields.
Having to replenish the regular devastation of public goods is a huge burden on a poor country. For a developing society trying desperately to lift its people out of poverty, the endless struggle to create vital infrastructure like roads, buildings, houses, schools and health centres, only to have them decimated by floods and hurricanes, is dispiriting.
Imperialists breaking their promises, refusing to pay what they owe
Climate reparations are a core demand of the Nicaraguan government. Ambassador Jaentschke explained that the capitalist rulers of the world always ensure reparations for damage to their own interests, one of the most notorious examples being the two centuries’ worth of payments made to former slaveowners for the ‘losses’ they suffered when slavery was officially abolished in Britain! This system of compensation only ever works one way, however, from the poor to the rich.
Since it was the Western capitalist-imperialist system of production that caused the climate problems besetting so many developing countries today, the beneficiaries of that system ought to pay the bill humanity now faces.
The Paris agreement and subsequent Cop conferences agreed that the Western imperialist countries would fund a mechanism to compensate poor countries, pledging to provide a replenishment fund of at least $100bn annually to help towards replacing what is being lost every year. In reality, however, under 10% of the promised funds have been received while Western nations are circumventing their responsibilities, both in terms of paying the promised reparations and in terms of addressing the ongoing impact of their activities on the global climate.
As one of the countries most seriously affected, Nicaragua is at the forefront of the campaign to have this global injustice recognised and addressed. The imperialist nations are not emitting any less than they were when they made their commitments in 2015; and are emitting four times the target that was then agreed upon. Meanwhile, the Western concept of ‘carbon neutrality’ is a cynical bit of greenwashing that manipulates public understanding, creates business opportunities and achieves nothing.
Greenwashing v real green measures
Cop28 ended with an agreement that “signalled the beginning of the end” of the fossil fuels era but which was itself unequal, said Ambassador Jaentschke. The Western nations have reached a stage of technological advancement that the developing nations have not; using climate excuses to forbid the development of other countries is entirely unacceptable.
Nicaragua itself is proactively seeking alternative sources of energy. On 27 November 2023, Latino Metrics highlighted the huge progress the country has made in the field of renewable energy – not that we would know if from reading the Western environmental columnists, but Nicaragua has surpassed Norway and Sweden to become a world leader in the production of clean energy, raising its production rate from 21% to 70% of energy consumed in the last two decades. As a small, developing but revolutionary country, Nicaragua approaches the issue of climate from a perspective of social responsibility and with a real care for its people and their environment. The Sandinista government’s decisions and actions, whether in the field of health, education, development or climate change, are underpinned by the socialist principles of their revolution.
The capitalist system of production is at the core of the climate crisis. The pursuit of maximum profit is the reason humanity faces these problems – and the reason it is unable to address them in any meaningful way. Capitalist-imperialism is the motivator for wars, genocide, poverty, injustice, inequality, as well as for social and environmental degradation.
In the final analysis, there aren’t hundreds of problems in the world – there is just one. The perceptible and accelerating deterioration in the quality of our lives and of our environment is directly attributable to the outdated, parasitic, moribund system of capitalist production for profit, and will only be solved when that barrier to human progress has been removed.
How unjust and cruel US sanctions impact on Cuba’s health provision

By Aymee Díaz Negrín – Presentation to the annual Latin American Conference held in London on 27 January 2024
I think when we talk about the US blockade against Cuba, many times we think only about the illegal and unilateral sanctions against a country or a government with a political system completely different from the US, but the blockade is not only against the Cuban government. It has a devastating impact on the Cuban population, especially in the education and health sectors, despite the Cuban government’s huge efforts to provide high quality medical services.
Just to give you an idea about the impact of the US policy: between March 2022 and February 2023 the blockade cost the Cuban health sector almost 240 million dollars.
I am going to mention some examples to better understand what this means:
• During the period March 2022 and February 2023, MediCuba, the Cuban medical products importer, made 69 requests to US companies for access to resources and supplies needed by the national health system. Three replied in the negative and 64 did not reply.
• There are currently 20,000 Cuban families waiting for diagnoses of genetic diseases to whom it has not been possible to provide adequate care because the necessary technology uses over 10% US components and is inaccessible.
• JASCO, a Japanese company that manufactures spare parts for laboratory equipment has refused to sell to Cuba, because of her inclusion in the US list of State Sponsors of Terrorism.
• Three Swiss banks refused to transfer donations to Cuba from the solidarity organisation MediCuba-Switzerland, intended for the purchase of surgical instrumentation for the burns and reconstructive surgery unit at Havana’s Hermanos Ameijeiras hospital.
• In the most difficult moments of the Covid-19 pandemic, when the number of cases had peaked and our intensive care wards were overstretched, Cuba was prevented from importing pulmonary ventilators, under the pretext that the European suppliers were subsidiaries of US companies, which is undoubtedly a cruel and inhumane act and also a gross violation of trade rules and international law. Cuba had to develop its national production of pulmonary ventilators with its own prototypes.
• When our main medical oxygen production plant broke down at the peak of Covid-19 cases in our country and two US companies tried to supply Cuba with medical oxygen, it was demonstrated that a specific licence was required from the US government, even in times of pandemic despite the UN’s call to waive sanctions during that period.
• Cuba also has evidence of actions taken by US government agencies to prevent the sale of medical oxygen to our country by foreign companies from two Latin American countries.
• According to the UN, Cuba was the only country to which AliExpress could not make and distribute donations to face Covid, owing to the effect of the US unilateral sanctions.
• In Cuba, about 450 new cases of cancer are diagnosed in children each year. Many of them lack the drug of choice because of the impossibility of acquiring it.
All these examples are inhumane and affect the right to life and well-being of the Cuban people, the majority of whom, more than 80%, have never experienced life without the blockade.
The harm is very real, to be honest, and undermines the quality of public services, causing delays, waiting lists for specialist consultations, and shortages of medicine and medical supplies.
All the examples I cited above are caused by three fundamental measures implemented by the United States:
1. the inclusion of Cuba on the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism.
2. the impossibility of acquiring medicines and medical technology of US origin or with more than 10% of US components.
3. the ruthless persecution of Cuba’s financial transactions
All these measures can be removed by the president of the United States if there were political will and a genuine desire to help the Cuban people.
Until that day arrives – we don’t know when – Cuba will continue to make enormous efforts to maintain the free health services for all that is one of the main achievements of the revolution. Just to give an example, in 2022, despite the country’s difficult economic situation, 73% of Cuba’s national budget was allocated to the sectors of greatest implications for the population, including public health, education and social security.
In addition to Cuba’s efforts, we have received solidarity support from organisations and thousands of people like you around the world. I want to take this opportunity to thank all of you, individuals CSC members and trade unionists who supported the Covid Medical Appeal which raised thousands of pounds to send syringes, cryotubes and butterfly needles to Cuba for use in vaccinating the Cuban population.
We highly value the launch of a CSC new appeal “Cuba Vive” jointly with NW, Northern Ireland and Scotland regions of UNISON to fundraise to buy medicines, surgical supplies and medical equipment.
It is true that a country cannot sustain itself through donations, but you can be sure that every medicine, every supply, every medical equipment will be helping to save a life.
I am going to close with a sentence from the general secretary of the Cuban health workers’ union that you can find in CubaSi and I quote: “The Cuban people are very grateful for every action of support. You show that the unjust and illegal policies of the US government cannot and will not be able to block solidarity”.
Thank you
International law or rules-based order?

Two days after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in favour of South Africa’s prima facia case of genocide against Israel, Israel, and its primary sponsor the United States, along with the usual cohort of vassal states including Britain, all withdrew funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which provides food and aid to Gaza. The very same people deprived of food, water, medical supplies and all other life supporting mechanisms whilst being bombed into oblivion by Israel using US and British weapons, have had what meagre support they had withdrawn.
Whilst the withdrawal of UNWRA funding could be considered a war crime in itself, the action is in flagrant defiance of the ICJ’s ruling that found the charges of genocide brought by South Africa, plausible.
The ICJ ordered Israel to abide by six provisional measures to prevent genocide and alleviate the humanitarian catastrophe, one of which was for Israel to secure immediate and effective steps to provide humanitarian assistance and essential services in Gaza. This defunding is a retaliatory message to the ICJ that, by deciding that Israel was non-compliant with the present orders thus warranting further orders, Israel will not recognise the ICJ’s authority.
What does this say about the authority and influence of the highest international court in our world? What does it say about Israel’s acknowledgement of the court’s legitimacy when following its ruling, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responds with, “Israel’s commitment to international law is unwavering. Equally unwavering is our sacred commitment to defend our country.”
He said South Africa’s allegation that Israel was committing genocide was “not only false, it’s outrageous, and decent people everywhere should reject it“.
Well decent people the world over have made it clear what they think, and they reject Israel and Western support of its ongoing genocidal campaign. Whilst many may have no historical knowledge of the region and no understanding of the geo-political implications or US imperialist ambitions, they do know the difference between right and wrong. They know genocide when they see it on their social media feeds despite Western media’s intense campaign of propaganda and protestations to the contrary.
What we are witnessing is the rampant unravelling of two carefully constructed narratives that have run in parallel since 1945. One is the right of Israel to exist on any basis and the other is the pretence that we are all governed according to some democratic principles enshrined in international law.
Since 1945, international law has been centred on the United Nations and its Charter. 193 countries have acceded to the UN Charter as member states, declaring their wish to be part of the community of nations. As part of the deal, they are obliged to follow the fundamental principles and provisions that extend from that Charter, including its highest court, the ICJ.
Swedish diplomat Dag Hammarskjöld once stated, the goal of the UN was not to “take mankind to heaven, but to save humanity from hell.” Well its courts and plethora of resolutions haven’t done much for humanity in Palestine!
Israel and its sponsors, the US and Britain, flagrantly disregard international law and the demands of millions of pro-Palestinian demonstrators worldwide, and they must be brought to account. It is time to delineate the words and actions of our leaders and to make them accountable for what they do.
Words matter. Words are how we communicate, interpret and understand one another and our world. They are also how we are manipulated into accepting wars and injustices that if clearly articulated, we would fervently fight. Remember “weapons of mass destruction”? Our leaders and mass media constantly play with words to mould our thinking. Have you noticed how Israelis are ‘killed’ but Palestinians ‘die’?
A change in phraseology coming out of the US in recent years interchanged international law with rules-based order. Over time the rules-based order became the dominant phraseology despite it not having the same meaning.
The rules-based order flouted by American and British politicians is less about international law and more about international law as interpreted by the United States. It allows the US to flout the rules that govern other nations and in particular, to use it in support of its exceptionalist approach to Israel. This was clearly articulated in the joint declaration made during President Biden’s visit to Israel in July 2022.
The statement reaffirmed ‘the unbreakable bonds between our two countries and the enduring commitment of the United States to Israel’s security’ and the determination of the two states ‘to combat all efforts to boycott or de-legitimize Israel, to deny its right to self-defence, or to single it out in any forum, including at the United Nations or the International Criminal Court’.
This commitment clarifies the consistent refusal of the United States to hold Israel to account for its repeated violations of humanitarian law and condemn its policy of apartheid in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
The US and its allies have always been partial in their application of the moral imperative, particularly when applied to international law. Israel remains the most immune and regardless of sin, its brutal ethnic cleansing continues with the financial and military support of the US and Britain. Israel is America’s military base in the Middle East. It has ensured US domination of the region and its oil since WW2 and that is why Israel is supported regardless of its actions or world opinion.
Whilst from the perspective of the West, such actions are seen as consistent with their ‘rules-based order’ for the rest of the world, they violate the most basic rules of international law and of humanity itself.
The ICJ ruling in support of South Africa’s submission that Israel is committing a genocide against the Palestinian people is a positive step, but if the court has no teeth, and if the genocide continues, what is the point of the court? Of the United Nations itself? And if there is no legal imperative for stopping what we all see and know is a genocide, and our own governments are complicit, who is going to exert justice?
Israel and the UN system are both in the dock. If nothing is done to hold Israel accountable it will be because the US has a veto over the only body with any executive power – the UN Security Council. The US has used that position to protect Israel and green light its genocidal and apartheid activities with impunity for 75 years despite international outrage. The question is, how much longer will the world’s people allow that situation to continue?














