Dual Fascisms

Who Won?

There is a lot of controversy over whether Iran or Israel “won” last weekend. Of course, this is a skirmish very unlikely to be over. It does provide a distraction from Israeli failure to achieve anything but Zionist fantasies of expelling or massacring Palestinians, which has of course undermined its credibility and image around the world. The expectations of a triumphant Israel were extremely high, given western political and media complicity with the Israeli lobbies and pro-Israeli mythologizing.

So it is easier for Israel to disappoint. But there is substance here. Iran has behaved with patience, proportionality and restraint. It attacked only military targets; it did not use its best weapons (it has many tends of thousands, and large numbers of sophisticated ballistic missiles that have the capability of carrying nuclear warheads; it says that it did use seven hypersonic missiles with glide vehicle warheads, and that all seven got through); it provided extensive warning and obtained Washington consent. It has revealed a capability hitherto untested. Iran in other words behaved in the most human and humane manner possible, unlike Israel’s murderous attacks on Iranian commanders and Iranian property in Syria and Iran which the collective West never condemns. Instead, the US and the UK had to help Israel with the interception of missiles for which Iran had kindly given advance warning as to when they would arrive and, so far as I know, where.

Perhaps Israel really did shoot down most of its drones but that was the intent: overwhelm the Iron Dome (a juiced up network of Patriot systems) so as to get some cruise and ballistic missiles through which hit two Israeli air fields in the Negev and a number of air defenses. This sends the message to Israel that it can respond directly on Israeli targets; that the Iron Dome is not invincible; that Iran’s non nuclear capability can be more effective - and more usable - than Israeli nuclear capability; that Iran can force Israel to reveal its positions (not to mention that Iran has nuclear-capable missiles that could be configured to attach nuclear warheads fairly quickly, although a still current fatwa prohibits this; Iran also has submarines that could be configured for nuclear warfare); that Iran’s regional and great power allies are as terrifying as anything the collective West can put up; that rogue and vicious Israel can at last be held to account. And that US bases in the Middle East are increasingly vulnerable to missile attacks from Iran, Iraqi militia, Hezbollah and Houthi.

Israel Fail

Furthermore, Israel’s major objective, which was very likely to draw the USA into a wider regional war that would work to the advantage of Zionist aspirations to a Greater Israel, has not been successful - if anything, the USA has collaborated with Iran in helping to ensure a calibrated, de-escalatory response, and it is not straight forward that the USA will support a further Israeli attack on Iran. In other words, the Israeli attack may have achieved a wider split between the USA and Israel. Israel cannot win any wider war without the USA.

Yet, Netanyau, Israel’s back against the wall, is under considerable public pressure and pressure from his cabinet of fanatics and will nonetheless be forced to respond to the Iranian attack. Iran’s interests are best served if Israel does not respond or responds only moderately. Iran’s economy is booming, with a growth rate of 7% following from its membership of the Shanghai Organization and the BRICS, the repair of its relationship with Saudi Arabia, its security agreement with Russia and the supply of Russian weaponry to Iran, all of which has reduced the pressure on Iran of decades’ worth of Western sanctions. It is also benefitting from rising oil prices, in the context of the plunging economy of its regional competitor, Israel.

Iran will not want a wider war, but it is by no means clear that it will lose a wider war; there is a very good chance that a wider war, especially if and when Russia and China become involved in the defense of Iran, will see the end of Israel and the resurgence of a new Arab-dominated Middle East free of US and Israel meddling. All this would very likely secure Turkey as a solid ally of the Global South and not of Washington, and finally begin to shift the Washington orientation of Egypt and Jordan, and strengthen voices of resistance to Washington across North Africa.

Russian involvement will bring to bear missiles, nuclear and other, hypersonic and other, deliverable from land, sea and sky, that are more advanced than those of either the USA or Israel; Chinese participation brings to bear the advantages of by far the world’s greatest manufacturing capability. Russian cooperation with North Korea and China in the manufacturing and launch of satellites would also have a role. Alexander Mercouris in his daily broadast speculates whether Iran has received help from Russia and/or North Korea in the development of liquid propelled, high acceleration rockets with glide bomb warhead attachments.

The situation in the Middle East continues to be highly dangerous. That it is not currently in explosive mode owes a great deal, whether one likes him or not (I like him no more than I like Biden), to Trump waiting in the wings for November. We should beware the temptation to a depressed Israel to go down fighting with use of nuclear weapons. There are currently, as we approach midday of April 16 on the West coast of the USA, mixed signals from the G7 and from the Israeli Cabinet, on the question of an Israeli strike on Iran. A report in yesterday’s Jerusalem Post (once owned by Conrad Black) says that Israel has settled on a hard response to Iran; US counsels restraint.

Ukraine, NATO Fail

In Ukraine a new Russian army unit has been deployed near Belgorod, presumably with a view to strengthening the border against future Ukrainian attacks, implementing the execution of a buffer zone and readying for an advance in the Sumy and Kharkiv directions. Oddly, Ukrainian forces near Kupyansk have been deployed down to Chasiv Yar.

The Right Sektor 67th brigade has refused deployment to Chasiv Yar; it has enjoyed greater freedom or discretion, often in favor of private interests - somewehat comparable to Russia’s Wagner group under Prigozhin. Resentment against Azov entitlement is encouraging Ukrainian surrenders and desertions more generally. Dima reports that both the 67th and the 28th brigades are being disbanded in retaliation for their alleged disobedience or unwiullingness to fight. Russian field propaganda is seeming to have an impact on Ukrainian soldiers in persuading them to give up rather than die. Their treatment of soldiers surrendering is pretty good in terms of food and medical attention. Their treatment at home at the hands of the secret police would be far worse. As Tucker Carlson has observed, this conflict is more like a civil war.

But Zelenskiy is still hoping that Mike Johnson will pull through - and perhaps he might, even offering a proposal that could “legitimize” seizure of Russian assets for the war effort to support Ukraine in effect directing not $61 billion to Ukraine (or, rather, to the US military industrial complex) but the interest on $300 billion or even the capital. The $61 billion itself will make no difference on the battlefield, as now acknowledged by Ohio senator J. D. Vance. Chief US military representative in charge of US involvement in Ukraine, General Cavolli, has noted that the Russian army is now larger than ever, and that it will remain a more lethal force regardless of the outcome of the conflict in Ukraine. NATO’s attempt to use of Ukraine to weaken Russia is a catastropic failure, while NATO and Europe are weaker.

Mercouris today cites the Economist, an article in whose most recent issue compares the likely failure in Ukraine with the Suez catastrophe in 1956. A secret attempt by Britain, France and Israel to seize control over the Canal provoked a punishing and humiliating reaction from Eisenhower that hammered the final nail into the British Empire (except, of course, it didn’t, since empires seem hard to kill).

The question of Russian assets is even more controversial and legally dubious, and most of these assets are in Europe, not the USA. Johnson’s proposal will involve different aid packages for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. There is apparently nothing yet to do with the southern border.

The Battlefields

Regular Russian missile strikes on Ukraine continue. Russian troops have encircled Ukrainian troops in the so-called Kanal micro district of the eastern part of Chasiv Yar. Ukrainian troops are being redeployed from Kupyansk to Chasiv Yar, which may incite Russian forces to bring forward an invasion of Kupyansk, or even, to bring forward their offensive of the entire northeast around Kharkiv, where Ukrainian forces will no long have as much back-up from their positions in Kupyansk. Russian intelligence chief, Budanov, has warned that without more support from the West a Russian invasion on Chasiv Yar will be catastrophic. Redeployment of troops from Kupyansk may may little difference; Ukraine’s Third Assault Brigade “Azov” brigade has refused to be redeployed to Chasiv Yar and will be disbanded, and the 25th Airborne paratroop brigade will also be disbanded in the light of its disobedience in Avdiivka some weeks ago. In the Avdiivka area, and perhaps benefitting from the hardening of the ground, Russian forces have begun to penetrate Umanske and Naitailove to the west of Avdiivka, and to have captured Pervomaiske to the south, while Ukrainian positions in Krasnohorivka are becoming untenable. Russian forces have advanced north of Avdiivka from Stepove along the railway and may have now reached Ocheretyne and are putting pressure on - and cutting road supply routes to - Ukrainian positions in the Keramik and Novobakhmutivka areas. Russian forces now control most of Berdychi and have taken the village of Semenivka to its south, between Orlivka and Berdychi. The 47th Mechanized Brigade, trained by the West to spearhead the 2023 counteroffensive, is close to being encircled, if it has not already been encircled.

Peace Negotiations

There is increasing chatter on both sides about peace negotiation. Negotiations cannot realistically go back to Istanbul 2022 but must take a starting point that reflects where the war currently is. Where the war currently is, territorially, and where it will have to be from a security point of view, is that East of the Dnieper is Russian, including at least parts of Kiev and Odessa. People may argue about the trade importance of the Dnieper, and it makes sense that there should be recognition of mutual trading interests and how to facilitate them, but the Dnieper is obviously an important and natural physical boundary.

The current Kiev regime with its Banderite roots and foundation in a US-instigated coup in 2014, is totally unacceptable. A new Ukraine must start with a new, democratically elected government. It must be neutral with respect to NATO and NATO countries, and the size and shape of its army must be limited. I see that Beebe and Lieven are today arguing for reciprocal arrangements, but their standpoint is incorrectly founded on the convenient assumption - for the collective West - that this is a conflict between Russia and Ukraine when obviously it is a conflict between Russia and NATO.

What needs to be up for discussion as a prelude to - not as a coda to - an agreement on Ukraine is a new global security architecture that entails amongst other things a reassessment of the US Empire of Meddling and Europe’s Holier Than Thou imperial posturing, involving among many other things the dismantling of NATO and restructuring of the UN/UNSC.