A ‘Sunni Crescent’ Composed of Syria and Turkey Threatens Israel

A ‘Sunni Crescent’ Composed of Syria and Turkey Threatens Israel

 HUGH FITZGERALD

The Syrian jihadist government has been consolidating its power by systematically attacking the minorities — Alawites, Druze, and the Kurds — in the country. It has just taken over the Kurdish-majority city of Qashmili, and has forced the dismantlement of the Kurdish autonomous region in northeast Syria, with the Kurdish militia of the Syrian Democratic Forces now being integrated into the Syrian National Army. 

And Turkey is delighted that the Syrian Kurds will no longer be a threat to Turkish interests. More on the Damascus-Ankara “Sunni Axis” can be found here: “Why the fall of Kurdish autonomy is Israel’s strategic nightmare – opinion,” by Amine Ayoub, Jerusalem Post, February 10, 2026:

The headlines from Syria this week are being celebrated as a triumph of “territorial unification.” The new Syrian Sunni Islamist regime, led by President Ahmed al-Sharaa, has successfully consolidated power in the strategic city of Qamishli.

Under the guise of a “phased integration” deal, the Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria has effectively been dismantled.

The post-Assad honeymoon – a period of hope that a new Damascus would usher in a pluralistic, decentralized democracy – is officially over.

There is no pluralism in al-Sharaa’s Syria. The minorities — non-Arab Kurds, Shia Arabs, and non-Muslim Druze — have had to submit to a Sunni Arab regime. Power is now centralized in Damascus, where Sunni Arabs are the undisputed rulers.

For Israel, the reality is even more sobering. The demise of the Kurdish buffer in the northeast does not signal a new era of stability; it heralds the birth of a militarized, Islamist “Sunni Crescent” that targets Israeli security with a fervor that the “predictable” Bashar al-Assad never possessed.

For nearly a decade, the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) served as a vital, if unofficial, partner in the regional fight against radicalism. Its de facto autonomy provided a geographic and ideological break between the Mediterranean and the Iranian border and, more importantly, a bulwark against Turkish expansionism….

The Kurdish-led SDF had been the Americans’ most effective ally in the war against ISIS. The Kurdish autonomous region has also been a buffer, standing in the way of Turkish expansionism; Erdogan regards the Syrian Kurds as dangerous, because he sees them as potentially linking up with Kurdish separatists in Turkey, and has wanted to crush them.

 Now he need no longer do so; the Syrian government has pressured the SDF so relentlessly that the Kurds have agreed for their SDF units to be dismantled and integrated into the Syrian National Army. Yet the Syrian state is not neutral; it is run by Sunni Arabs who are jihadists. The minorities are now merely tolerated; the ruling Sunnis do not treat them as equals.

Turkey has long sought to crush the Kurdish autonomous region in northeast Syria. And now, instead of having to fight the Kurds inside Syria, Ankara has watched as the Syrian army has forced the Kurds to dismantle their SDF forces and to give up their autonomy. Damascus has not objected to the military outposts that Turkey has set up just inside Syria. It sees Ankara as its ally against Kurdish separatists.

Al-Sharaa is not prepared for peace with Israel, despite his claim that he is prepared to make peace “with all of Syria’s neighbors.” He wants back all of the land the IDF seized just north of the Golan Heights, including Mount Hermon. His close ally, Erdogan, more than a year ago called for all the Muslim states to contribute to a pan-Islamic army capable fo defeating Israel, and he left no doubt as to whom he thought was most fitting to lead such an army — himself.

The honeymoon is over, and the era of the “Sunni Crescent” has begun.

Orban: Europe Decided to Go to War With Russia by 2030, Already Preparing

Europe Decided to Go to War With Russia by 2030, Already Preparing - Orban

Sputnik

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said on Saturday that Europe has decided to go to war with Russia by 2030 and that preparations are already underway in certain European countries. 

"Europe has decided that it will go to war [with Russia] by 2030. Not that it wants to, might, or plans to - it has decided. It has made the decision," Orban said. 

Preparations for war are being carried out across Europe, except in Hungary and Slovakia, he added.

"Nine [European] countries already have compulsory military service. In some places, it also applies to women. The population is being sent instructions on what to do in the event of war. Military spending has risen sharply. Agreements have been signed to send troops to Ukraine," he said. 

In recent years, Russia has noted unprecedented NATO activity near its western borders. The alliance has expanded its initiatives, describing them as measures to deter alleged Russian aggression. Russian authorities have repeatedly expressed concern over the buildup of NATO forces in Europe. The Russian Foreign Ministry has said that Russia remains open to dialogue with NATO on an equal footing, provided that the West abandons its course toward militarizing the continent.

Nukes by the numbers: A problem we can’t wish away

Nukes by the numbers: A problem we can’t wish away

Peter R. Huessy

Last year, the Defense Intelligence Agency concluded that Russia and China increasingly lean on nuclear weapons to pursue their national interests. Together, they could surpass the U.S. strategic nuclear force in numbers, creating a multiple-challenger problem and raising the risk of coordination between adversaries.

Put plainly: The nuclear balance is moving against the United States.

Start with Russia. The DIA projects a force of 400 land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles. Fifty would be Sarmats, each reportedly capable of carrying up to 20 high-yield warheads — about 1,000 warheads. The remaining 350 would be Yars missiles, with roughly four medium-yield warheads each — about 1,400 more. That puts Russia at roughly 2,400 warheads on land-based ICBMs alone.

Russia’s sea-based force adds more. The Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missile reportedly carries six warheads. Under the DIA’s forecast, that comes to about 1,152 additional warheads, pushing the combined ICBM/SLBM total to roughly 3,552. Russian strategic bombers can carry still more — around 1,000 warheads on air-launched systems.

That implies a Russian long-range strategic force as high as 4,552 warheads — far above the 2010 New START ceiling.

China’s trajectory looks even more unsettling. The DIA now projects 700 Chinese ICBMs by 2035, a striking revision given the agency’s history of underestimating Beijing’s growth. China reportedly produces 50 to 75 ICBMs per year. With roughly 400 already fielded, an additional 300 by 2035 are well within reach even at a slower production rate.

Warhead potential varies by missile type. The DF-31A can carry three re-entry vehicles. The DF-41 can reportedly carry up to 10 warheads. Depending on the mix, China could field anywhere from roughly 2,100 to 7,000 ICBM warheads.

The DIA also forecasts 132 Chinese SLBMs by 2035: 72 JL-3 missiles and 60 additional missiles for three new Type 096 ballistic-missile submarines. If the JL-3 carries three warheads, that yields 216 SLBM warheads. If the new SLBM carries at least six, that adds 360 more. In that scenario, China fields about 576 SLBM warheads — bringing the total for Chinese ICBMs and SLBMs to roughly 2,616 to 7,616 warheads.

More

The decades-long “climate change” plan

The decades-long “climate change” plan to strip away personal freedom, wealth and property

Rhoda Wilson

The Rockefeller family and the Trilateral Commission have been orchestrating a sinister plan under the guise of “climate change.” This scheme raises serious threats to individual freedom, personal wealth and property rights. What’s really at stake in this agenda and how might it impact our way of life? Jesse Smith dives into the implications and uncovers the truth behind the headlines.

In Part 3, Smith describes how the Rockefeller family and the Trilateral Commission have been instrumental in advancing a new international economic order and global governance, aiming to establish a technocratic dictatorship.

They co-opted the environmental movement, using fear and misinformation to shift the blame for ecological damage from corporations to individuals, and promoting the concept of Sustainable Development as a means to control resources and populations.

The Rockefeller family has created and funded various organisations, including The World Bank, the United Nations and the Club of Rome, to promote the theory of anthropogenic global warming and push for a sustainable future.

The United Nations’ Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 are key plans to implement a technocratic system, to inventory and control all aspects of human life and nature, ultimately leading to the annihilation of individual rights and national sovereignty.

The ultimate goal of the “green economy” is not environmental protection, but a wealth redistribution scheme that benefits multinational corporations and private banks, while stripping away individual freedom, wealth and property.

As detailed in Part 2 of “Technocracy Ascending,” David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and the Trilateral Commission achieved a great deal in moving the world toward a new international economic order and global governance (i.e., a new world order). Brzezinski understood the decline of nation states was a necessity for advancing a global order where the private banking cabal and transnational corporations assumed political dominance. In his book ‘Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era’, Brzezinski stated that:

Technocracy Inc. was one of the early movements campaigning for centralised control at the expense of democracy. Though their initial aim was to transform the North American continent into a scientific dictatorship, the Rockefeller clan pushed these ideas globally. Working through their vast, interwoven network of corporate, academic, political and philanthropic institutions, they advanced the globalist mindset with the United Nations (“UN”), often energising the ideas and formulating the strategies. More on the UN’s role will be discussed later.

More..

Russia Warns NATO Military Preparations in Scandinavia Threaten National Security

Russia Warns NATO Military Preparations in Scandinavia Threaten National Security

Sputnik

Military preparations by Norway, Sweden and other NATO countries pose a direct threat to Russia's national security and compel Moscow to take military and technical measures in response, Russian Ambassador to Oslo Nikolai Korchunov said in an interview with Sputnik. 

"Oslo, Stockholm, and Helsinki are working together to increase military mobility through the development of west-to-east transport and logistics corridors, as well as the cross-border use of bases and other military infrastructure," Korchunov said. 

He said these and other military preparations by NATO countries on the northern flank, openly aimed against Russia, increase tensions and pose a direct threat to Russia's national security, compelling Moscow to adopt military and technical countermeasures. 

In recent years, Russia has been flagging up NATO's unprecedented activity and buildup of troops near its western borders. The Kremlin has stated that Russia does not threaten anyone, but would not ignore actions that are potentially dangerous to its interests.

NATO countries are making plans for a partial or complete naval blockade of Russia, Russian Ambassador to Norway Nikolai Korchunov said.

Korchunov said NATO members, including Norway, by operations Baltic Sentry, Eastern Sentry and Arctic Sentry actually transfer the Baltic and Arctic region to "barracks routine," and restrict freedom of navigation in violation of international law.

In recent years, Russia has been flagging up NATO's unprecedented activity and buildup of troops near its western borders. The Kremlin has stated that Russia does not threaten anyone, but would not ignore actions that are potentially dangerous to its interests.

‘They will fire every missile’: Israel braces for worst-case Iran scenario

‘They will fire every missile’: Israel braces for worst-case Iran scenario

Ron Crissy

With Arrow and David’s Sling batteries, a large air and naval deployment and US interceptor systems, Israel is preparing to defend its home front if Iran talks collapse — including a scenario in which Tehran launches a massive missile barrage as a last resort, with possible international backing

As the diplomatic channel between the United States and Iran continues, Israel is preparing for war. Jerusalem’s red lines are nowhere near Tehran’s, which refuses even to consider limits on its missile program — the same missiles that caused destruction in Israel during the 12-day war.

For Iran, its ballistic missile program is not merely a weapons system but a supreme strategic asset, possibly even more important than its nuclear project, given its proven ability to paralyze Israel’s home front and inflict significant damage despite advanced defense systems. Lessons from the war — in which Israel was forced to manage a “munitions economy” in the face of hundreds of launches, intercepting most of them yet still sustaining heavy damage — reinforced in Tehran the view that Israel is vulnerable to attrition attacks that could deplete its interceptor stockpiles.

Because Iran views its missile array as a primary tool of deterrence and decisive force, intelligence assessments conclude it will not relinquish it even under U.S. pressure in negotiations. That hard line places the region on what officials describe as a collision course — either signing an agreement that leaves Israel exposed to a significant threat, or sliding toward all-out war. In response, Israel’s air defense system — composed of seven battalions deployed nationwide and built around five layers — is preparing alongside the U.S. military, and possibly an international coalition.

Tal Inbar, a senior research fellow at the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, told ynet that Iran’s launch capabilities have not changed significantly from previous attacks, though the regime still possesses dozens of heavier missiles that have not yet been used.

“We have not seen the capability for extremely massive fire — not many hundreds or thousands simultaneously,” Inbar said. “But in a war in which the Iranian regime feels these are its final hours, it will fire everything it has. In such a case, one could imagine strikes even on symbolic targets that are not military.”

He stressed that these are extreme scenarios. “One can assume that if the United States initiates the attack, there would be an operation designed to prevent as much as possible the use of these tools. The U.S. can do things Israel cannot, for example a barrage of hundreds of cruise missiles on various launch sites in Iran. These are things we have not seen before.”

During the most recent confrontation with Iran, the Israel Defense Forces made extensive use of its defense systems. Reports last month claimed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asked President Donald Trump to delay a strike on Iran partly due to interceptor shortages. Since then, large American forces have arrived in the region, also to assist with interceptions — despite significant interceptor use in defending Israel in June last year and challenges in replenishing stockpiles.

Israel’s air defense systems are undergoing tests, adjustments and upgrades to address evolving threats. Still, U.S. assistance — providing a broader response to Iranian threats even far from Israeli territory — remains a critical component of the defense array.

As part of coordination between Israel and the United States, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir made a secret visit to Washington about two weeks ago, following visits by Military Intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Shlomi Binder and Mossad chief David Barnea. Zamir met with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine for high-level strategic coordination. Senior American officials have also visited Israel, including U.S. Central Command chief Adm. Brad Cooper. The guided-missile destroyer USS Delbert D. Black docked in Eilat and will continue operating in the Red Sea as part of what Trump described as a “large armada” sent to the region. The deployment includes the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, the USS Gerald R. Ford en route to the Middle East and eight additional destroyers.

More

Trump sends world's largest aircraft carrier to Middle East after Netanyahu warned: 'Iran plays games'

Trump sends world's largest aircraft carrier to Middle East after Netanyahu warned: 'Iran plays games'

ELINA SHIRAZI

The United States is sending the world's largest aircraft carrier to the Middle East in a massive show of strength, sources confirmed on Friday. 

The nuclear–powered behemoth will bolster American forces already stationed in the region as Washington ramps up its military presence to a formidable new level.

The deployment of the USS Gerald R. Ford, a $13 billion floating fortress, is a clear signal of intent, effectively doubling the US Navy's carrier strike power in the area.

The move adds significant military weight to President Donald Trump's efforts to pressure Iran into a new deal regarding its nuclear program.

Instead, a top Iranian security official visited Oman and Qatar this week to exchange messages with US intermediaries rather than engaging in direct dialogue. 

The deployment of the USS Gerald R. Ford will station two American aircraft carriers and their accompanying warships in the region simultaneously. 

The massive vessel and its strike group are set to join the USS Abraham Lincoln and its fleet of guided–missile destroyers, which are already patrolling the Arabian Sea.

Currently positioned in the Caribbean, the USS Gerald R. Ford is expected to take up to four weeks to steam into the region. 

The arrival window aligns perfectly with the high–stakes ultimatum issued by President Trump on Thursday. Trump set a blistering deadline to finalize a deal by next month, warning he is prepared to 'change course' should negotiations fail to materialize.

A Senior Administration official tells the Daily Mail that prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu's meeting influenced Trump to take a stronger position towards Iran.

'Netanyahu basically said, Iran plays games. You don't want to get played. Trump listened.' 

The last time the US had two naval carriers in the region was during most of the war between Hamas and Israel over Gaza. 

More

Russia’s Next-Door ‘EU Neighbors’ Secretly Plotting to Obtain Nukes - Reports

Russia’s Next-Door ‘EU Neighbors’ Secretly Plotting to Obtain Nukes - Reports

Sputnik

European countries bordering Russia have secretly begun discussing the possibility of developing their own "nuclear deterrent" capabilities for the first time since the Cold War, Bloomberg reported Friday, citing sources familiar with the talks between certain governments and militaries.

The discussions are taking place bilaterally and trilaterally among closely aligned nations—many of which host US military bases. According to sources, the countries involved are proceeding with caution, carefully calibrating how their actions might be perceived by Russia. The talks are so closely held, Bloomberg reports, that they occur at a military level so high even some ministers may not know of their existence.

The participating countries recognize that the development of a nuclear arsenal would require high costs and potential violations of international agreements, as well as accepting the possibility of being attacked in return for agreeing to defend an ally.

Experts interviewed by Bloomberg believe that the majority of European countries would not be able to afford replacing US nuclear assets with their own. For instance, the United Kingdom and France spend nearly $12 billion per year together to maintain their arsenals, that's more than half of Sweden's annual defense budget.

In March 2025, French President Emmanuel Macron claimed that Russia had become a threat to France and Europe. Citing Washington's shift in its stance on Ukraine and its role within NATO, he called for a European debate on extending France's nuclear umbrella to cover the entire EU. The sentiment was quickly echoed by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who urged Europe to enter an arms race with Moscow. 

The Kremlin pushed back sharply. Spokesman Dmitry Peskov dismissed Macron's remarks as "extremely confrontational" and riddled with inaccuracies—pointing out, in particular, their failure to acknowledge NATO's military infrastructure steadily advancing toward Russia's western borders.

US-Controlled ATACMS Missiles Deployed In South China Sea, 10km Off China's Mainland

US-Controlled ATACMS Missiles Deployed In South China Sea, 10km Off China's Mainland

Drago Bosni

Mere days after the US-backed government in Taipei launched the so-called Joint Firepower Coordination Center (JFCC), defined as “an enhanced firepower coordination effort in close cooperation with the United States”, multirole sources have confirmed that the Chinese breakaway island province of Taiwan is deploying the overhyped and exorbitantly overpriced M142 HIMARS MLRS (multiple launch rocket system) to the islands of Penghu and Dongyin.

The US-made system is also equipped with ATACMS missiles, extending its reach to 300 km. Taipei insists that this will “strengthen the effectiveness of the kill chain”, while its Ministry of Defense (MoD) stressed that the increase in HIMARS orders to 111 units was undertaken specifically to forward-deploy them to the islands closest to China’s mainland.

Dongyin, the northernmost island of the Matsu archipelago in the East China Sea, (see Map) is located around 10 km from mainland China. Deploying missiles such as the ATACMS there puts virtually the entire Fujian province within range, including key cities like Fuzhou, Ningde and Quanzhou.

However, the situation is even worse, given that the US controls those missiles through the JFCC. Its establishment and the permanent deployment of American personnel at command and control facilities in Taipei to oversee planning and potential use of ATACMS missiles in case of yet another US/NATO-orchestrated escalation are deeply troubling and concerning for Beijing.

However, Taipei is still trying to present it as “harmless assistance in coordination and supervision”. They’re just not saying for what.

Obviously, China is not buying it and for good reason. Namely, the JFCC allows Washington DC to select targets and finalize attack plans. Formally, this is done jointly with local forces, but we all know how the Pentagon uses vassals and satellite states, especially when it comes to striking strategic assets such as critical industrial and scientific infrastructure, both of which are found in abundance across mainland China.

Taiwanese Defense Minister Koo Li-hsiung says these concerns are “incorrect and misleading”, insisting that US troops on the island are “not acting as supervisors or monitors”. Koo claims that “the presence of US staff reflects longstanding, institutionalized cooperation mechanisms focused on strengthening Taiwan’s defensive and combat capabilities rather than any form of foreign oversight”.

More...

Matryoshka Satellites, Robotic Arms: Former US Space Force Commander Warns Of Russian, Chinese Threats

Matryoshka Satellites, Robotic Arms: Former US Space Force Commander Warns Of Russian, Chinese Threats

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

When a Russian “nesting-doll” satellite maneuvered into close proximity to a US satellite last June, it was the latest move in a dangerous game of cat-and-mouse in space.

Cosmos 2558 had been observed shadowing USA 326 ever since being launched in 2022. But now it had hatched a surprise by releasing a smaller module that started moving even closer to the US satellite.

“This is the second one we’ve seen do this from the Russian side,” said DeAnna Burt, who was chief operations officer at the US Space Force at the time of the incident.

“You have a satellite that then has another satellite within it that then, we believe, is a KK or Kinetic Kill vehicle that would go out and rendezvous with another satellite and potentially harm it or image it or do different things,” she added.

Burt retired in October 2025 and spoke to RFE/RL during a visit to Prague organized by the Aspen Institute. In a wide-ranging interview on January 30, she discussed threats to satellites from Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, as well as a shadowy conflict already ongoing since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

“We have seen what we would call rendezvous proximity operations, which means…flying around and surveying the other satellite,” Burt said, when asked about the incident last June.

The concern, she added, was “would they release a kill vehicle” or was it “purely surveillance and reconnaissance?” It turned out it was the latter. But it was still alarming, not only due to the risk of collision.

“What you’re seeing in the development here, all of these are tests building up to capability…hypothetically, if I were going to launch a counter space capability, first I’d want to make sure I can acquire targets before I could then strike targets.”

Burt is not the first to warn of such Russian threats.

The previous incident was briefly discussed by the then chief of space operations of the US Space Force, General John Raymond, in comments to Time Magazine in 2020. “The way I picture it, in my mind, is like Russian nesting dolls,” he said. “The second satellite came out of the first satellite.”

In 2024, Raymond’s successor General Chance Saltzman warned of a “Day Zero” if Russia deployed a nuclear weapon in space to destroy satellite capabilities. That year, a claim by the Pentagon that Russia had “likely” deployed an anti-satellite weapon in space was denied by the Kremlin.

More recently, on January 21, an Atlantic Council report said the United States was “unacceptably vulnerable” to such threats and urged a shift to “resilient satellite architectures.”

Burt said this was something that was already a major US priority: “Having the ability to take a hit and to be able to recover…with satellites that are on the shelf ready to launch.”

More

Amazon's Ring And Google's Nest Unwittingly Reveal The Severity Of The U.S. Surveillance State

Amazon's Ring And Google's Nest Unwittingly Reveal The Severity Of The U.S. Surveillance State

Glenn Greenwald 

That the U.S. Surveillance State is rapidly growing to the point of ubiquity has been demonstrated over the past week by seemingly benign events. While the picture that emerges is grim, to put it mildly, at least Americans are again confronted with crystal clarity over how severe this has become.

The latest round of valid panic over privacy began during the Super Bowl held on Sunday. During the game, Amazon ran a commercial for its Ring camera security system. The ad manipulatively exploited people’s love of dogs to induce them to ignore the consequences of what Amazon was touting. It seems that trick did not work.

The ad highlighted what the company calls its “Search Party” feature, whereby one can upload a picture, for example, of a lost dog. Doing so will activate multiple other Amazon Ring cameras in the neighborhood, which will, in turn, use AI programs to scan all dogs, it seems, and identify the one that is lost. The 30-second commercial was full of heart-tugging scenes of young children and elderly people being reunited with their lost dogs

But the graphic Amazon used seems to have unwittingly depicted how invasive this technology can be. That this capability now exists in a product that has long been pitched as nothing more than a simple tool for homeowners to monitor their own homes created, it seems, an unavoidable contract between public understanding of Ring and what Amazon was now boasting it could do.

Many people were not just surprised but quite shocked and alarmed to learn that what they thought was merely their own personal security system now has the ability to link with countless other Ring cameras to form a neighborhood-wide (or city-wide, or state-wide) surveillance dragnet. That Amazon emphasized that this feature is available (for now) only to those who “opt-in” did not assuage concerns.

Numerous media outlets sounded the alarm. The online privacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) condemned Ring’s program as previewing “a world where biometric identification could be unleashed from consumer devices to identify, track, and locate anything — human, pet, and otherwise.”

Many private citizens who previously used Ring also reacted negatively. “Viral videos online show people removing or destroying their cameras over privacy concerns,” reported USA Today. The backlash became so severe that, just days later, Amazon — seeking to assuage public anger — announced the termination of a partnership between Ring and Flock Safety, a police surveillance tech company (while Flock is unrelated to Search Party, public backlash made it impossible, at least for now, for Amazon to send Ring’s user data to a police surveillance firm).

The Amazon ad seems to have triggered a long-overdue spotlight on how the combination of ubiquitous cameras, AI, and rapidly advancing facial recognition software will render the term “privacy” little more than a quaint concept from the past. As EFF put it, Ring’s program “could already run afoul of biometric privacy laws in some states, which require explicit, informed consent from individuals before a company can just run face recognition on someone.”

Those concerns escalated just a few days later in the context of the Tucson disappearance of Nancy Guthrie, mother of long-time TODAY Show host Savannah Guthrie. At the home where she lives, Nancy Guthrie used Google’s Nest camera for security, a product similar to Amazon’s Ring.

More...

Are the Ukrainian peace talks a hoax?

Are the Ukrainian peace talks a hoax?

Paul Craig Roberts

The so-called Ukrainian peace talks have puzzled me for sometime. For the conflict to be resolved requires Trump and Putin to work out an agreement between themselves, but this necessary meeting has not occurred.

Trump has said repeatedly that he wants the issue resolved, but his terms have never been clear other than demanding a cease fire before the terms of the agreement are known. It is not clear that Trump has taken trouble to understand what Putin means by the root cause of the problem or that the real problem is the absence of a mutual security agreement between Russia and the West.

Perplexingly, the “peace process” has been characterized by Trump blaming Putin for not accepting a cease-fire in place of a negotiated agreement and adding more Russian sanctions as a punishment. This has never struck me as indicating any seriousness on Trump’s part toward finding a solution, and it has puzzled me that Putin continues to see hope in such an unpromising process.

Russian foreign minister Lavrov has come around to my point of view. He says the negotiations continue in words, but not in deeds, which is a polite way of saying that the negotiations have lost their purpose.

Lavrov has noticed what I have been pointing out for sometime, and that is that there is dialogue on paper but pressure in practice. I called attention to the fact that it is inconsistent for Washington to allegedly pursue peace in Ukraine while it foments regime change in former provinces of the Soviet Union that border the Russian Federation. Washington seeks to win the allegiance of these provinces away from Russia as is currently underway in Armenia. 

These efforts follow Washington’s recent attempt at color revolution in former Soviet Georgia. To allegedly negotiate peace in Ukraine, while stirring up trouble elsewhere on Russia’s border gives the lie to the Ukrainian “peace process.” Just last Monday American vice president Vance was in Armenia on a high profile visit chipping away with American offers Armenia’s economic engagement with Russia.

Another peculiar aspect of this so-called “peace negotiations” is the two people who are conducting them. One, representing Trump, is Witkoff an American real estate developer. The other, representing Putin, is the American– Russian Kirill Dmitriev, an Atlanticist Integrationist in charge of the small $10 billion Russian sovereign investment fund. Both are trying to negotiate money deals, not the elimination of armed conflict.

The Kremlin’s line is that it is a double-track policy to see if economic deals can be made, regardless of whether the Ukrainian situation can be resolved.

This strikes me as utter nonsense, and it seems to strike Lavrov the same way. Lavrov notes that Washington is interfering with Russian oil exports by illegally seizing Russian-flagged tankers at sea in international waters, and by applying sanctions to India for its oil and weapons deals with Russia. Clearly, Washington is increasing pressures on Russia. What basis does Putin have for continuing to pretend and to deceive the Russian people that Ukrainian peace negotiations are almost concluded? Why is a popular leader destroying his own credibility, or allowing Dmitriev and Witcoff to destroy his credibility?

Putin made an extraordinary strategic error when he refused early in the game to put down a strong Russian foot. It remains to be seen what consequences the world will pay for this extraordinary strategic blunder by the president of Russia

Jews pray on Jerusalem's Temple Mount as decades-old status quo begins to shift

Jews pray on Jerusalem's Temple Mount as decades-old status quo begins to shift

LINDA GRADSTEIN

Escorted by police, a group of about 25 people walked across the Temple Mount esplanade to the steps leading up to the Dome of the Rock, the site where the First and Second Temples once stood.

They climbed a few steps toward the mosque, singing “Yedid Nefesh” (“soulmate”), usually sung on Friday nights.

“Are you with us?” a policeman asked this reporter.

When I said no, he told me to stop filming as participants in the group continued to video themselves walking on the large courtyard of the mount.

The men did not want to be interviewed, but Ilana, one of the few women in the group – who asked that only her first name be used – agreed to speak.

Wearing a white kerchief covering her hair, Ilana said she had immigrated to Israel from the Ukraine.

“I used to go to pray at the Kotel,” she said, referring to the Western Wall, just below the Temple Mount. “But then I started coming here whenever I had the opportunity. It feels very special to pray here.”

A few Muslims sitting on a nearby stone wall watched the group silently.

Ali, who said he goes to pray every day at Al-Aqsa (so called because it was “the farthest” mosque from Mecca when the Quran was revealed), said Jewish groups visiting and even praying there doesn’t bother him.

“It does disturb some people, but it doesn’t bother me,” he said. “If they do it quietly, it’s okay. People should worship God in the way they want to.”

But other Palestinians disagreed. A group of three women from the Galilee, who said they come about once a week to pray at the mosque for their families and for those who were killed in Gaza, frowned as they watched the Jewish group.

“This place is for Islam, and Jews are supposed to pray at the Wall,” Samira said.

Indeed, that has been the case since 1967 when Israel took over Jerusalem’s Old City from Jordan during the Six Day War. For many Israelis, it was the fulfillment of a dream, with the chance to pray at the Kotel  – the Western Wall. The iconic photo of three paratroopers standing at the Wall is inscribed into every Israeli’s DNA.

The Temple Mount, which Muslims call the Haram al-Sharif, is holy to both Jews and Muslims.

For Jews, it is the site of both the First and Second Temples (destroyed in 586 BCE and 70 CE, respectively), and the holiest site in Judaism. For Muslims, it is the site where Mohammed ascended to heaven on a miraculous trip called Isra’ and Mi’raj (“the night journey and ascension”) and is the third-holiest site after Mecca and Medina.

When Israel conquered east Jerusalem in 1967 and later annexed it, then-defense minister Moshe Dayan made a controversial decision to allow the Waqf (Islamic religious trust) to continue administering the site, while Israel would be responsible for its security.

In an effort to ease potential tensions in 1967, the government made a decision that while Jews could visit the site, they could not pray, dance, or engage in any other religious activity.

As part of the deal, while Muslim prayer is permitted in the area, and hundreds of thousands go there to pray during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan (see box), Jewish prayer was not permitted.

The area has long been a flashpoint for Israeli-Palestinian tensions, and riots have repeatedly broken out after Muslim worshipers threw rocks at Jews praying at the Western Wall below and police stormed the area.