Heading towards global war?

 

   By Reginald Johnson

            (Editors note:  As this article was being published, President Trump announced that the war on Iran would be over "soon." This is a bizarre statement. Just the day before, his war secretary Pete Hegseth said the war was "just beginning." On Saturday, Trump said ground troops could be sent to Iran. The administration doesn't seem to know what it is doing. If the war ends soon, that will be a good thing. But I'm very skeptical this will actually happen, because nothing that Trump says can be trusted. Remember this is the same president who ordered bombing attacks against Iran in the middle of what were supposed to be good faith negotiations with Iran over that country's nuclear development program. He did this twice, last year, and then again this year.) 

        As the Iran War ratchets up in intensity, there is fear the war could spark a global conflict with disastrous consequences.

       In the nine days since the United States and Israel launched their unprovoked attack on Iran, the war has already spilled over into many other countries in the region, with Iran hitting US bases and other targets in Bahrain, Kuwait, Dubai and Qatar. Israel has moved again into Lebanon, attacking the pro-Iranian group, Hezbollah.

   Missile attacks have also taken place against targets in Turkey and Azerbajan, with Israel blaming Iran. But the Iranians have denied responsibility and claim that Israel conducted "false flag" strikes trying to draw Turkey and Azerbajan into the war.

  In still more developments, Russia reportedly is providing Iran with intelligence on US targets in the region and US President Donald Trump is considering giving arms to the Kurds in Turkey, so they can invade Iran. Trump is also said to be weighing sending US ground troops to fight in Iran.

 Finally, as oil prices skyrocket due to shipping lanes being closed through the Strait of Hormuz, there are concerns about how China will respond to the situation. China gets 60 percent of its oil from Iran, and now that supply may be threatened with the strait closed.

    One of those who's deeply disturbed about the trend of events is Columbia Professor Jeffrey Sachs.

 "We are probably in the early days of World War III," said Sachs, a former UN official and a noted foreign policy critic. "The question is, whether it is contained."

   Speaking on a podcast with Prof. Glenn Diesen, Sachs said he's both concerned about the escalating trend of the war and also the irrational behavior of Trump.

  He described Trump as "mentally unhinged" and a "madman" determined to establish American hegemony around the world, despite the risks.

   Sachs said the world has seen madmen before who were bent on conquest, such as Napoleon and Hitler.

  But, Sachs said, "we've never had a circumstance like this in the nuclear age."

  "I would say the world is in a more dangerous situation than ever before. Period," he said. 

  Despite the gravity of the moment and Trump's reckless policy, Sachs said there are few in Washington, DC willing to call out Trump and demand that the war end before it is too late.

  "We're wondering, where, if any, are the grown-ups in the United States in positions of authority who will speak truthfully about this?" he said in another interview with Danny Haiphong.

    "I don't see almost any. There are a few voices in Congress, (Senator) Rand Paul is one of them, Congressman (Thomas) Massie is another...but there are very few others and this is what is alarming," Sachs said.

  Two other military/foreign policy experts, Ret. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson and former CIA analyst Larry Johnson said in interviews recently that due to economic pressures relating to the price of oil, and Israel's losses in the war, the Iran conflict would probably not last long. Both said that contrary to the glowing reports in the US media about US progress in the war, Israel was being hit hard by Iranian missiles and US bases have been badly damaged, too.

 Another concern for Israel is they are running out of interceptors to block incoming missiles.

Speaking on a podcast with Danny Haiphong, Wilkerson said his biggest worry is that Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu might resort to using a nuclear weapon if Israel is losing badly.

  "I have no doubt he'll use one," Wilkerson said. "That's really the problem."

Connecticut residents protest the US war on Iran

By Reginald Johnson

Recent days have seen protests pop up around Connecticut against the illegal attack by the United States and Israel against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

In Norwalk on Saturday, about 20 people attended a vigil against the war and an anti-war banner was hung over the I-95 bridge at Exit 16.

"We tried to stop this war. We we were unsuccessful. So now we're trying to stop this one as soon as we can," said John Miksad, one of the participants, in an interview with News 12.

Benjamin Wesley, who helped organize the vigil, said "Nobody wants this war but we have to be LOUD with our lawmakers and make it clear to them! The lives of our fellow American servicemen and citizens and Iranian servicemen and civilians hang in the balance."

Wesley said a big focus going forward should be on getting Congress to pass war powers resolutions which will require President Trump to obtain Congressional authorization before launching any further attacks on Iran.

Groups participating in the Norwalk protest were Veterans for Peace, Jewish Voice for Peace, World Beyond War. The Peace Pact and Democratic Socialists of Connecticut.

In New Haven, about 60 people rallied against the war on Sunday outside City Hall.

The ANSWER Coalition and the Party for Socialism and Liberation sponsored the demonstration, according to the New Haven Independent.

'This could go nuclear'

 

     By Reginald Johnson

         Although there's still hope for a diplomatic solution to settle the dispute between the United States and Iran, chances remain high that the US and Israel will attack the Middle Eastern country.

    And should war break out with Iran, a global conflict involving the major powers could be triggered, and the possibility that nuclear weapons will be used is not out of the question.

   That's the view of one the most prominent US foreign policy critics, Prof. Jeffrey Sachs.

    Speaking on the Danny Haiphong podcast recently, Sachs said:  "No war is inevitable, but this war is likely. It's championed by Israel, and Israel is running American foreign policy in the Middle East."

   Sachs added that US President Donald Trump is a "puppet" of Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu, who, he said, "has wanted a US attack on Iran for 30 years." 

  The former advisor to the UN Secretary-General and now teacher at Columbia made his remarks as tensions build between Washington and Tehran, with Trump demanding that Iran end its nuclear development program and threatening to use military force against Iran if it refuses to do so. Talks are ongoing between the two nations, but there's skepticism about whether the negotiations are going anywhere.

Sachs said the situation vis a vis Iran is "fraught with danger."

Unlike other countries like Venezuela, Syria or Somalia that US has been able to attack with little or no  pushback, Iran would be a much more formidable opponent. Iran is a much larger country with a strong ballistic missile system; it has a nuclear energy program which could be retooled to build a nuclear bomb, if leaders chose to do that; and it has major powers for allies, in Russia and China, both nuclear-armed.

  "Iran is not isolated in this and their friends are many, and some are nuclear-armed. This is just the kind of thing that can absolutely lead to a disastrous cycle of escalation." Sachs said.

  "This could go nuclear," he said. 

Sachs said it was critical at this point for the leaders of other large countries that have a stake in the Middle East, such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Russia and China, to get involved and "explain to Mr. Trump, 'Don't do this.' "

  " And whether that is enough remains to be seen," he said. 

  

  

Trump: destroying international law

           By Reginald Johnson

    The distinguished economist and foreign policy analyst Prof. Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia says that President Trump is a "thug" who is flaunting both domestic and international law and creating a more dangerous world in the process.

      In an interview with Danny Haiphong following the US attack on Venezuela and abduction of that nation's leader Nicolas Maduro, Sachs said, "We have a thug who is President of the United States. He is threatening the lives of world leaders, kidnapping them, threatening the worst, threatening the president of Colombia, Gustavo Petro. This is thuggery."

Sachs said that  "we have international law to prevent human annihilation, to prevent the tragedy of international anarchy."

  But Trump is ignoring rules outlined in the UN Charter prohibiting threats against other countries, its leaders and attacks against other countries except in cases of self-defense.

 Sachs said the assault on Venezuela was "brazenly illegal" and a "grotesque violation of the UN Charter."

"Trump is ripping up the UN Charter. Obviously, he did not pay one iota of attention to it and in my view this extroardinarily dangerous," he said.

 In other comments on the Venezuela situation to the UN Security Council, Sachs, a former advisor to the Secretary-General, said it was imperative that the world body condemn the US attack on Venezuela, and threats against other countries.

  He urged the council to pass resolutions calling on the United States to "immediately cease and desist from all explicit and implicit threats or use of force against Venezuela," end the naval quarantine and withdraw all forces from in or near Venezuela.

 Sachs closed his remarks to the council with a sobering message: "The survival of humanity depends on whether the United Nations Charter remains a living instrument of international law or is allowed to wither into irrelevance. That is the choice before this council today."

  The Venezuelan representative to the UN, Samuel Moncada, condemned the US attack and also pleaded with the council to do something.

  "If the kidnapping of a Head of State, the bombing of a sovereign country and the open threat of further armed action are tolerated or downplayed, the message sent to the world is a devastating one --- namely, that the law is optional and that force is the true arbiter of international relations," he said.

 US Ambassador to the UN Michael Waltz, meanwhile, justified the US assault by characterizing it as a "law enforcement action" designed to remove a "narco-trafficker" who was involved in illegal activity harmful to the American people. About 100 Venezuelan and Cuban security forces died during the attack.

  "There is no war against Venezuela," he said.

Despite wide criticism by member countries of the US action, the council failed to take up any statement condemning the attack.

  In recent weeks, Trump has continued his pattern of threatening other countries. He's demanded that Denmark give up control of Greenland and turn it over to the US, saying that America needs Greenland for national security. Trump has indicated he would use military force if a "deal" is not reached.

 Most disturbingly, Trump continues to threaten Iran, saying that the government there is crushing a purported "democratic uprising" by the people and the US may have to take punitive military action. The US already bombed Iran last year, with Trump claiming the US needed to destroy that nation's alleged nuclear bombing-making facilities. Iran has denied making any nuclear weapons.

  It should be noted that last year's attack was illegal under the UN Charter, since Iran had not attacked the US and there was no threat of an imminent attack by Iran. Any renewed attack by the US would be similarly illegal.

  Sachs said "there is a high likelihood" of war with Iran in the near future.

 "If it happens," he said, "that would be vastly more dangerous than what's happening in the Americas, because that area is in the most explosive zone in the world and it is an area where the great powers can easily clash and where escalation --- even to nuclear war --- becomes possible."

Trump heats up war with Iran with disturbing posts

By Reginald Johnson

In another unhinged social media post today, President Trump said that "we" know where Ayatollah Khameni, the Supreme Leader of Iran is hiding, and "we could take him out now" but won't "for now." Trump demanded Iran surrender to avoid further death and destruction. Trump sounds like some mob boss plotting the death of his enemies.

 He also said in another post that "we" control the skies over Iran, making it abundantly clear the US is working closely with Israel on the attack against Iran. There's no pretense anymore that the US is not fully involved in the Iran war.

 The American people have to rise up and say NO to this war! This could turn into a catastrophic regional war, or even a world war, where millions would die.

 Though the horse is out of the barn, people should still back Sen. Tim Kaine's Senate resolution to block Trump from attacking Iran without Congressional approval. Call 202-224-3121 and demand your senators support the resolution.

At this stage, people better start demanding impeachment as well. Trump is acting recklessly and in violation of the Constitution in many ways.

 

 

Jill Stein: act now to stop World War III

 

        By Reginald Johnson

     Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein said this week it is critical that the United States act quickly to stop Israel from continuing its genocidal war in Gaza and aggressive military actions against Iran and Lebanon.

   Otherwise, she said, we may be headed towards the unthinkable.

   “It is imperative that the US stand up now before it’s too late, before we’re dragged into it which we should not be. This is an absolutely deadly conflict which has every capacity to spiral into not only a major regional but potentially a World War III type conflict that could readily go nuclear. And with Netanyahu and the fascist government that they have now, it is not hard to envision they’re using a nuclear weapon.”

  Speaking on the Krystal Kyle and Friends show, Stein said President Biden has to call Netanyahu and warn him that Israel has to stop its military campaign otherwise US aid will immediately end all aid and the US will get behind an economic boycott of Israel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bj2PZ-Pd8PA&t=499s

  Israel cannot wage its war without “full-bore” military support from the US, she said.

 Stein said that previous presidents, including Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower, had prevented Israel from pursuing dangerous military actions at different times by threatening to withhold aid.

 So far, President Biden and the presumptive Democratic Party nominee for president, Vice President Kamala Harris have only made mild criticisms of Israel’s campaign in Gaza. They have also said nothing about the recent missile assassination strikes against Hamas and Hezbollah leaders in Beirut and Tehran ---actions which many observers believe could touch off a regional war.

                                              

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Protesting a War with Iran

      By Reginald Johnson 

   NEW HAVEN  ---  Scores of protesters gathered here Sunday to condemn the US airstrike in Iraq which killed a top Iranian military official, an act which they said could touch off a catastrophic Middle East war.

   “Unless the people rise up and stop it, this war will engulf the whole region and quickly turn into a global conflict,” said a speaker from the anti-war group A.N.S.W.E.R, which sponsored the rally.

  “For all who believe in peace and for all those who want to avert another catastrophic war, now is the time to take action,” she said.

   The rally in New Haven was one of more than 70 protests around the country which took place over the weekend, following the assassination airstrike which killed Qaessem Soleimani after he arrived at Baghdad, Iraq airport. Soleimani was the head of Iran’s elite Quds military force and considered the second most powerful person in Iran.

   President Trump said that he ordered the airstrike after receiving intelligence which indicated that Soleimani was planning a number of deadly attacks on American forces in the Middle East. The American administration also blamed Soleimani for orchestrating the killing of hundreds of Americans in the past.

  But speakers at the rally questioned the intelligence and said that Trump and other officials are lying just the way Bush administration officials lied 16 years ago about Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein having weapons of mass destruction (which were never found) to provide a pretext for the invasion of Iraq. That invasion began a long and bloody war which led to the deaths of 5,000 Americans and upwards of 1 million Iraqis.

  “If he (Soleimani) was the kind of person they are claiming, he would’ve been taken out years ago,” said one speaker from A.N.S.W.E.R, which stands for Act Now to Stop War and End Racism.

   That speaker also said that the Iraq War cost hundreds of billions of dollars --- money diverted from funding social services and human needs back home.

   Another speaker who identified himself as an indigenous person, reminded people that the land where they were standing on was once land held by the Quinnipiac Indian tribe.  But the land was later taken away by European colonial governments.

  “Just like the Quinnipiac people, the people of Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan, don’t have a say in how they are treated by this illegal, imperialist and immoral government.  This is what’s been happening for the last 527 years,” he said, referring to the landing of explorer Christopher Columbus in the Caribbean in 1492.  Columbus’s arrival began a wave of European immigration to North and South  America and in the process the systematic decimation of native peoples on the continents.

   The speaker went on, “There has not been a period in the history of this government when it hasn’t been attacking some country around the world. Whether it is in South America, Central America, the Middle East,  Asia, the Philippines,  Puerto Rico, Cuba... this government is criminal and what happened the other day was an act of war and a war crime.”

   He then led the crowd in a chant: “Trump says more war. We say no war!  Trump says more war. We say no war!”     

    

   

  

  

  

Rush to Judgment in Syria

 By Reginald Johnson

  Once again there are claims that the Syrian government launched an attack against its own people, using chemical weapons.

  And once again the United States is threatening to punish Syria, even though there has been no independent verification proving that an attack took place and identifying who was responsible.

  Aid workers and opposition leaders charged on Saturday that Syrian aircraft dropped barrel bombs over the town of Douma, near Damascus, releasing a chemical gas which left people suffocating and eventually dying. Press reports indicated that dozens of people may have died.

  Media outlets such as the New York Times and CNN said there had been no outside confirmation that the attack took place and that the Syrian military was responsible.

  Officials of both the government of Syria and Russia, which is helping Syrian forces in their battle against opposition groups during a seven-year civil war, have denied responsibility for the bombing.

  Despite the lack of firm evidence as to who was culpable, President Donald Trump and members of Congress wasted no time in naming Syria, Russia and Iran as the guilty parties.

 Trump, who only last week said that the United States was interested in withdrawing its forces from Syria, put out a Tweet on Sunday morning, labeling Syrian president Bashar al-Assad as an “animal” and blaming  “Putin’s Russia” and Iran, for supporting him. Trump said that there would be a “big price to pay” because of the incident.

   Trump did not spell out what kind of retaliation the U.S. was thinking about.  But the White House’s Homeland Security advisor Thomas P. Bossert said on ABC’s “This Week” program that a military strike was possible.  “Nothing should be taken off the table,” he said.

  U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC, one of the most hawkish members of Congress, said Trump must act to punish Syria. Graham told the “This Week” show on ABC that this was a “defining moment”  for Trump’s presidency. “Assad is at it again,” he said.

  So-called moderate Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, also chimed in, telling a reporter that some kind of “targeted attack” against Syria was needed right now.

  Just a year ago, Trump ordered the U.S. military to fire 59 Tomahawk missiles at Syrian targets in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack carried out by the government in which 100 people reportedly died. Trump's action at that time won bipartisan praise.

   Just as there was little questioning about the veracity of the reports about the chemical attack one year ago, there’s also little skepticism being voiced now about the validity of the claims by anti-government militants and so-called aid workers about barrel bombs being dropped on the population in Douma.

   It seems odd that the Syrian military would want to carry out a chemical attack at this time. The government has been winning the civil war against various insurgent groups, including some that are affiliated with Al-qaeda. Syrian forces had encircled the city of Douma and it was really just a matter of time before the Syrian army would take control of the city.

  What would be gained by Syria carrying out this terrible attack? The government would be risking world condemnation as well as the possibility that the Trump administration would change its mind and decide not to begin the withdrawal of some 2000 American military personnel.

   The question of cui bono, or who benefits? has to be asked in assessing the claims about a chemical attack. Clearly opposition forces will stand to benefit if this attack is linked to the Syrian government and the Americans decide to not only launch a punishing military strike to hurt Assad, but also to reconsider the idea of leaving Syria.

   The possibility that this attack was staged by opposition groups or by some intelligence forces from different countries who are aiding them, cannot be ruled out.

   The United States, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states have been aiding the forces who are trying to topple the Assad government. The U.S. has had military personnel in Syria for several years now in violation of international law, since America was not attacked by Syria and the U.S. had no UN authorization to introduce forces into that country. The Trump administration has maintained that the primary purpose of American forces in Syria has been to dismantle the ISIS terrorist group. However, it has been clear for years that the U.S. has been aiding opposition forces in order get rid of the pro-Russia and pro-Iranian Assad government.  

    We don’t really know at this time who may have carried out the chemical attack, if indeed there was a bombing. The Russians and the Syrians are actually maintaining that the incident may have been fabricated.

   What is needed here is an international investigation overseen by the United Nations to determine the exact nature of this attack and who in fact carried it out. It is wrong for both the Trump administration, members of Congress, and the press to automatically assume that the Syrian government, the Russians or the Iranians were somehow responsible for this attack, simply based on the claims of very self-interested people in the opposition groups or from the “White Helmet” aid group, whose authenticity has been questioned. At this point we do not have firm evidence to lay the blame on the Syrian government and their allies.

   It would be completely irresponsible for the Trump administration to launch another missile strike against Syria, simply based on the limited information that is now available.

   However, given the power of the pro-war, neocon bloc in Washington, symbolized by people like Sen. Graham, combined with Trump’s shaky political situation due to the Russia-gate investigation, and the fact that Trump won praise from both sides of the aisle after his attack on Syria last year,  it is likely that Trump will decide to launch another military strike against Syria.

   Another factor in the situation is what impact super hawk John Bolton, the extremist former UN ambassador, will have on Trump’s thinking. Bolton was recently appointed as Trump’s national security advisor and his work begins Monday.

 As with the recent claims made by the UK about an alleged poisoning attack by Russia against a former British spy in England, it is critical for the media to challenge government claims. The media cannot just roll over and accept sweeping accusations about the possession of, or use of, chemical weapons by other countries without asking tough questions.  That’s because these claims ---- sometimes erroneous --- are often used as a predicate for military action. Military action means loss of life and sometimes that loss of life can be huge, as we have seen in the Iraq War.

  So the press has a crucial job in challenging government officials. Lives are at stake and ultimately the peace of the world is at stake.