The Iranian Question
Newsweek is saying that Israeli's airstrike on Iran last month reportedly destroyed an Iranian nuclear research facility at Parchin, which lies 19 miles south-east of the country's capital, Tehran, according to “multiple sources within U.S. and Israeli intelligence.”
This site has featured prominently in past, largely fraudulent efforts by Israel and elements of the US foreign policy establishment to generate public concern over Iranian production of nuclear weapons (which has never existed although, as Professor John Mearsheimer told Judge Napolitano yesterday, Iran must almost certainly now feel under great pressure from Israeli threats to develop a nuclear defense as soon as it can).
The question is why would the US intelligence establishment have taken so long to report this, if it is true? Whether it is true or not, why would it want to disseminate this information at this moment? Does Intelligence need to convince the public that Israel has now disabled Iran, that Israel is stronger than many believe? Are they pushing Iran into a retaliation that might then justify an even more aggressive US/Israeli response? Are they simply taking advantage of what might be an Iranian decision not to respond at this time to the Israeli attack in October in order to make it seem that Iranian restraint is a manifestation of weakness, not of moral and strategic strength?
The thought that Iran may have decided on the path of restraint is encouraged by the delay, discussed here yesterday, in the movement to final signature of the security pact between Russia and Iran (suggesting Russian ambivalence in its support for Iran), and the news yesterday that Elon Musk has met very recently with the Iranian ambassador to the UN and other Iranian officials. Iranian statements following this meeting suggest that Iran is open to a reset in Iranian relations with the US. Given that Iranian President Pezeshkian was voted in on a pro-Western “ticket,” one might say, this would not be so extraordinary except for Israel’s escalation of hostility towards Iran and for Israel’s lethal strikes on Iranian allies Hezbollah and Hamas in Lebanon and Gaza, and for Israel’s ruthless genocide of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and its criminal killings by bomb and missile of large numbers of civilians and militia in Lebanon, not to mention Syria and, possibly, Iraq.
But I find it curious that Iran, even if one were to imagine the absence of these intense provocations by Israel to draw the US into a full-scale war against Iran so as to cover up the otherwise pending collapse of Israel, would consider trusting the US for more than two seconds, given the recent Presidential win of Donald Trump, and Trump’s notoriety,first, during his first administration, for destroying the JCPOA agreement foisted on Iran by the West to stop Iran acquiring nuclear weapons which it never wanted to develop anyway and, second, Trump’s order for the murder of Iranian general Soleimani (who was in Damascus on peace mission). Not to mention: the US role in the overthrow of democratically elected Iranian President Mossadegh back in 1953; US pandering support of the succeeding autocratic regime of the Shah of Iran; US deep hostility to the Islamic Revolution of 1979, and US support of what has evolved into an anti-Iranian terrorist group, the MEK. Trump’s recent appointments to the State Department and Department of Defense and others (most or many of these nominations still have to be confirmed by Senate) indicate, with the possible exception of Gabbard as DNI, bellicose anti-Iranian intentions.
Ukraine Battlefields
The most important developments over the past few days I would say are (1) the Russians have launched an offensive from the north into Ukraine’s Chernihiv area, west of Sumy, in a bold strike that may warn Zelenskiy of the proximity of Russian forces to Kiev; (2) Russian forces have entered and have occuped the industrial zone of northern Kupyansk; (3) Russian forces have entered Kurakhove and are taking towns all around the Kurakhove reservoir, adding further pressue on Pokrovsk to the northwest; (4) Russian forces are making fast progress northwards in the Zapporizhzhia and southern Donestsk areas, in and above districts that at earlier points of the war were so bloody, protracted and terrible such as Robotyne, Vremivka and Urozhaine; (5) Russian forces are moving closer and closer to southern Pokrovsk; (6) Russian forces are endangering Velyka Novosilka, north of Urozhaine; (7) Russian Defense Minister Belousev has visited the Russian forces of the Dneiper Group in an indication of further offensives in Zapporizhzhia.
The Russian offensive into Chernihiv has put under Russian control (from west to east) the Ukrainian villages of Kolos, Novoselivka and Muravi.
As reported today by Dima at the Military Summary Channel offensives in Zapporizhzhia bring Russian forces ever closer to significant Ukrainian settlements of Orikhiv, Huliipilske, Huliapole, Vremivka. The Russians are only 2.5 kilometers from Novodanyivka, north of Robotyne. West of Urozhaine, Russians are moving north of Novodarivka and Rinopil. The Ukrainians are offering little resistence. Russians have taken the stronghold of Dorozhnianka on the route to Huliapole, and surrounded Marfopil.
Further east, Russian forces are attacking strongholds around Uspenivka and, to the immediate southeast, Hannivka, catching Ukrainian forces in a cauldron between Dalnie to Maksymivka (all south of Kurakhove). Russians have begun an offensive on Sukhi Yali to the west, with a view to cutting of Ukrainian forces fleeing the cauldron.
Well to the west of Kostiantynivka which, a few weeks ago, was still a major site of struggle for the Russians, the Russians have taken Antonivka and are working to seize a Ukrainian stronghold between Antonivka and Illinka. Russian forces are on the outskirts of Beretsky and Nova Illinka on the northern banks of the reservoir and are storming Stari Terny at the western end. One likely aim is for Russia to establish a line of control between Kurakhove and Dalnie to the north.
West of Selydove, Russian forces have taken control of Yurivka and Novooleksiivka, Petrivka and Hrythorivka, all very close to southern Pokrovsk. Further north, Russian forces control a quarter to a half of the conurbation of Toretsk. In the Siversk direction Russian forces are on the outskirts of Fedorivka, south of Siversk city.
Trumpian Peace
Trump in recent comments at a conference in Mara-a-Lago has promised to work hard to restore peace in Ukraine and in the Middle East. Trump appears to want to see Russia and Ukraine talk to one another, which is a line that pretends that the conflict is merely a local one, not something for which the US, with NATO, are deeply responsible. In as much as that may be Trump’s starting position, then it is poorly conceived for reasons I have rehearsed many times in this space, even if this position of Trujmp’s also betrays a desire by the new Administrstion to pull out of project Ukraine.
Ukraine has long shown itself incapable of respecting Russian interests concerning Ukraine or of respecting the rights of ethnic Russians resident in Ukraine. The US has shown itself incapable of taking these concerns into account or caring about anything, really, other than US hegemony. There is no hope at this time for an effective outcome from the negotiation process, least of all through a process that involves Russia talking only with Ukraine, or involves discussion with Ukraine’s illegitimate leader, Zelenskiy.
The current administration meanwhile is trying to queer Trump’s pitch, one might say, by continuing to funnel funds to Kiev, which will bolster Zelenskiy a while longer, prolong the warm encourage Europe in its obduracy, and undermine the prospects of any kind of negotiation.
Here is the judgment of Andrew Korykbo ( Korybko) upon assessment of what is known so far of Trumpian thinking. Korybko sees some form of involvement of Western troops in Ukraine as peacekeepers as very likely. I myself don’t think this is likely prior to an agreement with Russia; without Russian consent, then these peacekeepers will be killed by Russian fire and the war restarts:
The only way in which Russia can achieve its maximum goals before the entrance of Western/NATO troops into Ukraine as peacekeepers is through military means, which would require another large-scale multi-pronged offensive of the sort that characterized the special operation’s early days. Even then, however, the high risk of once again overextending its military logistics, being ambushed by Stingers/Javelins, and thus risking reputational costs and even on-the-ground losses, will remain.
As such, there are really only three options left for Russia: 1) escalate now before Western/NATO troops enter Ukraine and either coerce Zelensky into agreeing to these demands or capture and hold enough land in order to demilitarize as much of the country as possible; 2) escalate after they enter at the risk of sparking a Cuban-like brinksmanship crisis that could spiral into World War III; or 3) accept the fait accompli of freezing the conflict along the Line of Contact and begin preparing the public accordingly”.
Energy Problems
Talking of Europe, outgoing German chancellor Scholz has today talked by phone with Putin, reportedly floating some kind of frozen conflict (?) solution where Ukraine would remain neutral, even as his finance minister makes life harder for the German economy with talk of prohibitions of imports of Russian oil through German ports and at a time when Europe may face significant energy problems (supply and price problems related to LNG) throughout the coming winter.
Russia may cut back on gas supplies to Austria, still supplied by pipeline, in retaliation for an unfavorable arbitration decision in Stockholm against Gazprom. Gazprom has noted the negative consequences for European heavy industries, in the name of cutting dependence on Russian supplies (and attempting to enforce a transition to renewables?), leading to a reduction in gas consumption in Europe while it increases in high-growth economies such as Russia, China and Central Asia.
Alexander Mercouris today speculates that the consequence could be an increase in energy prices in Europe, and an increase in demand for US LNG that, in turn, might prompt Washington to cap exports of LNG so as to contain inflationary pressures on the domestic US market.
Neither Mercouris, nor Gazprom nor Russia seem overly concerned about the challenges here of global warming, not least because they see that one result of Europe’s turning away from gas is, in practice, heavier reliance on coal, which has an even more toxic climate impact. At Valdai, Putin made precisely this point, that Europe talks of cutting carbon emissions by cutting back on a relatively low climate-impacting fuel (gas) in exchange for heavier reliance on a relatively high climate-impacting fuel (coal). Because Russia is increasingly using gas and nuclear power, its own carbon footpring is steadily falling.
Ukrainian Nuke
A briefing paper from Ukraine cited by the London Times indicates a plan outlined for Zelenskiy to develop a nuclear weapon within a matter of months, although Kiev denies that any such plan has been approved and insists that Ukraine is committed to the terms of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Zelenskiy has previously talked about such a possibility in the event that Ukraine is refused entry into NATO and he broached the topic in a conversation he had with Trump during Zelenskiy’s most recent visit to New York. The Times has interviewed the author of the briefing paper and has confirmed the existence of such a paper. Ukrainian capability of producing a nuclear weapon is perhaps being used by Zelenskiy as a form of threat to the West, although it would likely be a far longer process than the briefing paper implies and, were Ukraine to publicly undertook such a course, the US and the West might be obliged to impose sanctions on Ukraine and Russia might consider it necessary to imposing a crushing response.
Mainstream Media (Non) Coverage of Genocide
See Media Lens