One dead, four injured in terrorist attack in Jerusalem's Old City - Anna Ahronheim, Eliav Breuer

​ by Anna Ahronheim, Eliav Breuer

One person was killed and four were injured in a terrorist attack in Jerusalem's Old City at the foot of the Arab market descending to the Western Wall.

 

Israeli security personnel carry a dead body down the steps leading to the Western Wall following a shooting incident in Jerusalem's Old City.

(photo credit: REUTERS/AMMAR AWAD)

One man was killed and four others were injured in a shooting attack carried out by a Hamas member in Jerusalem’s Old City on Sunday morning.

 

Magen David Adom rescue services said that two of the injured were civilians and two were border police officers. One man was taken in critical condition to Hadassah-University Medical Center at Jerusalem's Mount Scopus with head wounds and was later pronounced dead.

 

A second civilian sustained moderate-to-severe wounds and the border police officers had light injuries.

 

Two female police officers rushed to the scene near one of the entrances to the Temple Mount and opened fire towards the attacker. Two male border police officers later ran to provide assistance.

 

The man killed in the attack was later identified as 26-year-old Eliyahu David Kay from Kibbutz Beer Yitzhak. Kay, an immigrant from South Africa was employed as a guide for the Western Wall Heritage Foundation.

Public Security Minister Omer Bar Lev at the scene of a terrorist attack that left one dead and three injured, November 21, 2021. (credit: Courtesy)

A friend of the family described Kay, one of four children, as “gentle and kind.” He had served in the Paratrooper’s Unit as a lone soldier after moving to Israel several years ago. His parents moved to Israel less than a year ago.

 

“There are no words, his father is in a daze,” he told The Jerusalem Post. “He was such a nice boy, it’s so hard to believe. It was a big dream for the family to move here. They are the most wonderful people, it’s such a shock.”

 

The two other injured civilians were identified as 46-year-old Rabbi Zeev Katzenelnbogen, a father of eight, and yeshiva student Aaron Yehuda Imergreen, who is hospitalized in serious condition at Shaare Zedek Medical Center.

 

The attack, that took place at the Chain Gate in the Old City, was the second in less than a week.  On Wednesday, two Border Policemen were lightly wounded in a stabbing attack on Hagay street in the Muslim Quarter, near the Ateret Kohanim yeshiva.

 

"This morning there was a severe shooting attack in the Old City of Jerusalem. We currently have one killed and three wounded,” said Prime Minister Naftali Bennett at the opening of the weekly cabinet meeting.Bennett, who sent his condolences to the family of the man who passed away and asked to pray for those who were wounded in the attack said that he had received an update from the Public Security Minister Omer Bar-Lev and Police Commissioner Kobi Shabtai and that security forces have to increase their alertness in order to thwart further attacks.

 

“There was a very swift action of our forces, the two policemen who were at the scene and who very quickly neutralized the terrorist. However, this is the second recent terrorist attack in Jerusalem. I have directed the security forces to prepare accordingly and to be alert over concern for copycat attacks. We need to be on heightened alert and prevent further attacks,” he said.

 

Bar-Lev said that the attacker “moved through the alleys and fired quite a bit. Luckily, the alley was mostly empty because otherwise — heaven forbid — there would have been more casualties. The entire incident lasted 32 or 36 seconds. The actions of the female officers was operationally at the highest possible level.”

 

Defense Minister Benny Gantz said that he wanted to commend the forces “who acted quickly and resolutely and thwarted a much more severe attack.”

 

Sending his condolences to the family of the man who was killed and his best wishes to the wounded, he said that Israel “will continue to fight terrorism everywhere it raises its head.”

On Sunday night, Religious Zionist MKs Orit Struk and Simcha Rotman joined with hundreds of youth from a number of right-wing movements in a march and protest from the Jaffa Gate through the market where the terror attack took place to the Western Wall. The protest took place with the approval and escort of the security services.

 

Police officers at the scene opened fire at the shooter, an East Jerusalem Palestinian, and killed him, according to police. He was later identified as Fadi Abu Shkhaydam, a 42-year-old resident of Shuafat camp in east Jerusalem and a known Hamas member. His wife and son are said to have left the country several days before the attack.

 

A man in his 30s has succumbed to his wounds from the shooting attack outside the Kotel in Jerusalem’s Old City

— Anna Ahronheim (@AAhronheim) November 21, 2021

صورة تظهر الشهيد فادي أبو شخيدم لحظة تنفيذ عملية إطلاق النار في القدس وقتله جندي إسرائيلي وإصابة 3 آخرين pic.twitter.com/1soUr4ZUd6

— وكالة شهاب للأنباء (@ShehabAgency) November 21, 2021

Bar-Lev who arrived at the scene of the attack said that Abu Shkhaydam came to pray at the al-Aqsa mosque on a daily basis and that on Sunday he arrived with a Beretta M12 and started shooting.

 

"There was a difficult incident this morning that was dealt with quickly and professionally by the men and women of the Israel Police," Bar Lev said. The terrorist is affiliated with Hamas' political wing who regularly prayed in the Old City, and whose wife escaped abroad three days ago. He used a standardized weapon that is uncommon in Israel," he said.

A Carlo submachine gun used in a shooting attack in the Old City of Jerusalem on November 21, 2021. (credit: POLICE SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT) The site of a shooting attack in the Old City of Jerusalem on November 21, 2021. (credit: POLICE SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT)

 

In video from the scene shared on social media, a voice can be heard repeatedly yelling “help” in Hebrew, followed by several bursts of gunfire.

 

Prior to carrying out the attack, Abu Shehadam, wrote in a Facebook post that "God determines our destiny, but most people do not know. The question of our destiny is a question that God determines, God in His wisdom and greatness, He chooses whoever He wants and presents them to their destiny."

 

Hamas quickly took responsibility for the attack, calling it a "heroic operation” and warning “the criminal enemy and its government to stop the attacks on our land and our holy sites. [Israel] will pay a price for the iniquities it commits against Al-Aqsa Mosque, Silwan, Sheikh Jarrah and elsewhere.”

 

Israeli security forces later raided Shkhaydam’s home and the Rashidiya school where he taught religious studies in east Jerusalem. His relatives including his daughter, brother and nephew were also reportedly arrested by security forces.

 

Later on Sunday afternoon, an 18-year-old Palestinian stabbed a 67-year-old man in the coastal city of Jaffa, moderately wounding him. The attacker also attempted to stab the man’s wife before fleeing the scene.

 

The Palestinian, from the West Bank city of Jenin, was arrested an hour after the attack.

While the defense establishment does not think that the attack in Jaffa is connected to the earlier attack in Israel’s capital, security forces have been placed on high alert in order to thwart any copycat attacks.

 

Anna Ahronheim, Eliav Breuer

Source:https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/terrorist-attack-reported-at-jerusalems-old-city-685571

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran is a nuclear threshold state, and Israel is on its own - Oded Granot

 

​ by Oded Granot

Israeli officials are disturbed not only by Washington's willingness to rejoin the nuclear deal without any information about Iran's true intentions, as well as without a contingency plan should the talks fail.

A week before the Iran nuclear talks resume in Vienna, IAEA director Rafael Grossi, a very worried man, is slated to arrive in Tehran. The words "very worried" are repeated in two IAEA reports.

The worrying conclusion from the documents is that Iran had been adept at exploiting the time that has passed since former US President Trump withdrew from the nuclear deal in 2018 to shorten the time it will take it to develop a nuclear bomb, while violating all its commitments. Iran has enriched uranium to levels higher than what it is allowed to; manufactured and installed high-speed centrifuges; and more. If the 2015 nuclear deal was planned to keep Iran at least one year away from amassing enough enriched uranium to build a single bomb, that distance has been shortened and now stands at only three weeks. Experts think it will take Iran one and a half to two years to build a bomb with a nuclear warhead.

Iran still hasn't hit breakthrough on a bomb, and maybe hasn't decided whether or not to do so, but it has already become a nuclear threshold state. Along with the enriched uranium it has stockpiled and its high-speed centrifuges, it has also acquired both technology and experience over the years – and these will be difficult if not impossible to destroy.

There is a direct link between the IAEA chief's visit to Tehran and the nuclear talks that are supposed to begin again next week in Vienna. The issue of oversight at Iran's nuclear facilities is  a major obstacle in the discussion about reviving the deal.

In private conversations, American functionaries admit that the Iranians are continuing to hide not only what is happening at its nuclear facilities, but also their intentions for the Vienna talks. Do they really want to reach a deal, or merely play for time? Will they insist on going back to the original agreement, which has been emptied of meaning, or will they agree to a stronger, long-term agreement (unlikely)? And of course, will they insist on sanctions being lifted first, with a promise they will not be reinstated (which would prevent any deal), or will they agree to compromise?

The personality of the head of the Iranian delegation to the talks also lowers expectations. Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri Kani is the opposite of Mohammed Zarif: he is conservative, radical, and close to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who opposes the nuclear deal. He does not speak fluent English, and is not trying to prevent a smiling countenance.

In these circumstances, Israeli officials are disturbed by Washington's desire to return to the Vienna talks not only without actual information about the Iranians' true intentions, but also without any contingency plan should the talks fail. The Biden administration's declarations that "all options are on the table" are weak language, and require Israel to continue to prepare for the eventually that it will have to operate alone.

 

Oded Granot

Source: https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/iran-is-a-nuclear-threshold-state-and-israel-is-on-its-own/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Why the Palestinian Authority won't fight terrorists - Stephen M. Flatow

 

​ by Stephen M. Flatow

As far as they're concerned, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine are their brothers. And the Israelis are their enemies, peace agreement or no peace agreement.

The IDF last week carried out an anti-terrorism training exercise. It wasn't exactly headline news; the army does that sort of thing all the time. It's part and parcel of being surrounded by enemies who want to kill you.

What caught my eye about this particular exercise, however, was that it consisted of a simulated kidnapping of Israelis by Palestinian Arab terrorists in Judea and Samaria.

The two-day drill practiced "scenarios of complicated kidnappings where troops have to enter Palestinian villages in order to find the civilian hostages," reported The Jerusalem Post. "During the searches, troops encountered scenarios of violent rioting, something the military knows soldiers face in real events."

Recalling the kidnap-murders of three Israeli teens in the summer of 2014, Lt. Yossi Eliaz, commander of the Rotem Battalion in the Givati Brigade, said the exercise was necessary because "it's a scenario that could happen again."

Let's think about that for a moment.

The Israeli military authorities think that a terrorist kidnapping of Jews is so likely that they felt they had to take hundreds of soldiers away from their regular duties and devote two entire days, in addition to many other resources, to rehearsing for such an incident.

But how can that be? The entire premise of the Oslo accords, which Israel and the Palestinian Arabs signed in 1993 and are still binding, was that the Palestinian Authority would stamp out the terrorists.

New York Times columnists, Jewish State Department officials and the Peace Now-J Street crowd told us for years that if Israel allowed Palestinian self-rule and the creation of a large, powerful Palestinian police force, then they would fight terrorism.

"They know the terrain," the Jewish left assured us. "They know where the weapons depots and safe houses and training sites are. They will take on Hamas and Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine."

Israel's leaders knew it was risky. They knew that once they withdrew their troops from the major Palestinian Arab cities that they would lose access to the military intelligence assets that made it possible to combat the terrorists. And they knew that Israeli troops would only be able to re-enter those areas for a few hours at a time in hot pursuit of specific, individual terrorists.

But Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin decided to take that chance. He withdrew from the 40% of Judea and Samaria where 98% of the Palestinian Arabs reside. He allowed the Palestinian Authority to develop huge police and security forces that quickly became a de facto army. Israel even gave them 30,000 rifles.

The Palestinian Authority today has the largest per-capita police force in the world. Yet terrorists are so plentiful, and so well-armed, in PA territory that the Israeli army has to practice for the likely possibility that those terrorists will soon be kidnapping Israelis.

Not only that, the Israeli exercises were based on the assumption that the hostages will be held "in Palestinian villages" and that the Israeli commandos searching for them will encounter "violent rioting."

How is that possible? Jewish State Department officials keep telling us that most Palestinian Arabs are moderate and peaceful. The masses supposedly are against terrorism. Yet the Israeli authorities expect that these "moderate" Arabs will serve as hosts for hostage-takers and will carry out murderous mob violence against any Israelis who try to intervene.

I wonder if that might have anything to do with the PA using its media and schools to raise an entire generation of young Arabs to hate Jews and glorify anti-Jewish violence.

According to the Oslo agreement, the PA security forces are required to disband terrorist groups, seize their weapons, arrest the terrorists and extradite them to Israel for prosecution. They haven't done any of that.

Yes, the PA security forces know the terrain. And yes, they know where the weapons depots and safe houses and training sites are located. They could smash the terrorist groups if they wanted to. They just don't want to.

As far as the PA is concerned, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the rest are their brothers. Occasionally quarrelsome, occasionally rivalrous. But brothers nonetheless. And the Israelis are their enemies, peace agreement or no peace agreement.

The implication dares not be ignored. Today, Israel is carrying out its anti-kidnapping drills in Judea and Samaria. If the Israelis had listened to the advice of the US State Department and J Street – and had withdrawn to the narrow pre-1967 armistice lines then those kidnapping drills would be taking place in downtown Tel Aviv. And so would the kidnappings.

Reprinted from JNS.org.

 

Stephen M. Flatow

Source: https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/why-the-palestinian-authority-wont-fight-terrorists/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Afghanistan fiasco shows US military encourages lapdog generals, retired colonel says: The Last 96 - Ethan Barton

 

​ by Ethan Barton

Austin, Milley, McKenzie could have offered resignation to send powerful message to Biden, retired Col. Andrew Milburn says

 

SNAFU – The Last 96, Part 4

 

This is the fourth part of a Fox News Digital Originals series about the fall of Kabul and the hectic and heroic 96-hour effort to evacuate Afghans fearing retribution from the Taliban. Part 1 Part 2 Part 3

President Biden’s top military advisers should have predicted Afghanistan’s imminent collapse – and then offered their resignations if the commander in chief refused to modify his withdrawal plans, a former deputy commander told Fox News.

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley and Central Command head Gen. Kenneth McKenzie had a responsibility to stand firm if they believed the fast-paced troop withdrawal would end in catastrophe, retired Marine Col. Andrew Milburn told Fox News.

"Can you imagine if those three or even two out of three had offered their resignation?" Milburn, a former Special Operations Central deputy commander, said. "You don't think that might have caused the president to think twice?"

He argued that all three are products of a culture the military has fostered that favors leaders who are obedient, rather than principled freethinkers.

AFGHANISTAN WITHDRAWAL: RECORDS REVEAL IG OPPOSITION TO BIDEN ADMIN ORDER TO SCRUB HUNDREDS OF ONLINE REPORTS

"I think they’re products of a culture that has arisen within the U.S. military that simply does not encourage innovative thinking or creative thinking," Milburn, who spent 31 years in the military, told Fox News. "That rewards perhaps obedience above all else."

"I think within our organizations, the Joint Force, we sadly have a culture that does not always see the most strong-willed creative thinkers rise to the top," he continued. "It's a culture that I think is amiss."

WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 28: U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin (C) Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley (L) and Commander of U.S. Central Command Gen. Kenneth McKenzie (R) testify during a hearing before Senate Armed Services Committee at Dirksen Senate Office Building September 28, 2021 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The committee held the hearing "to receive testimony on the conclusion of military operations in Afghanistan and plans for future counterterrorism operations." (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images) (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

‘The ultimate sanction’

To date, no one has been held accountable for failing to predict the Taliban’s swift seizure of Kabul while U.S. citizens still inhabited the city. Milburn said the Afghan government’s collapse should have been obvious.

"How are these three holding themselves responsible? I've seen all three of them during the 90-day period use that term," Milburn said of Austin, Milley and McKenzie.

"It's very difficult to explain exactly what that means if you continue in office," he added. "Holding yourself responsible often is a prelude to resignation. Not always, but … that's really the ultimate sanction. So, it is hard to take them seriously."

Milburn said the trio has "rendered their own words hollow."

He pointed to a Sept. 28 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing where Milley testified that he wouldn’t resign because the service members in Kabul couldn’t refuse their orders. The general said it would be unfair to abandon his duties while enlisted men couldn’t.

Milburn told Fox News that Milley’s testimony "showed that he didn’t have a good understanding of his professional ethics" and called his reasoning "illogical."

While explaining why he didn’t resign, Milley also testified that the nation "does not want generals figuring out what orders we are going to accept." He emphasized the importance of civilian control of the military.

WATCH "SNAFU – The Last 96, Part 4":

Video

But Milburn said the American public’s wishes aren’t "really the only arbiter of making that moral decision because … his oath was to the Constitution."

"It's not necessarily, what the American public would like," Milburn continued. "It is what does he feel his duty to the Constitution is. Not to any particular person."

Milley also testified that he only serves as an adviser to the president and that the commander in chief can choose to ignore his counsel.

While Milburn agreed, he also said that if Austin and McKenzie gave the same advice, that a particular order could cause a catastrophe as bad as the Afghanistan withdrawal, "wouldn't you make a firmer stand?"

"That is the time to stand your ground and simply say, 'no boss. I'll give you my resignation,'" Milburn told Fox News. "That should be our collective expectation of these people."

WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 29: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark A. Milley testifies during a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Ending the U.S. Military Mission in Afghanistan in the Rayburn House Office Building at the U.S. Capitol on September 29, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Rod Lamkey-Pool/Getty Images) (Photo by Rod Lamkey-Pool/Getty Images)

Such a move wouldn’t be unprecedented. James Mattis, former President Trump’s first defense secretary, vacated his post after repeated disagreements with the commander in chief.

"You have a right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours," he wrote in his resignation letter.

Milburn also argued that Biden’s military leaders should have planned for the Taliban’s immediate takeover, even if it was considered unlikely.

"No one really without any sense of foresight could say [Biden] will yank [the troops] out and the Afghan government will not collapse," he told Fox News.

"Certainly as military planners, you always have some contingency plan, no matter how unlikely you think an event is to occur," Milburn added. "If the events are going to be catastrophic, you plan for that."

"Ignoring the ramifications of any decision that you make or order that you pass, I suppose would come within that category of SNAFU," he said.

TALIBAN HOLDS MILITARY PARADE SHOWING OFF ARSENAL OF MILITARY GEAR ABANDONED BY US

Ultimately, uniformed leaders need to know when to stand against superiors to best serve the nation, Milburn argued.

"As a military professional, our duty isn't simply to follow orders," he told Fox News. "There is a point where if we see something that is happening catastrophic to the institution, then doesn't our oath to the Constitution obligate us to take action?

Yet McKenzie didn't act on a top Taliban leader's suggestion the U.S. take responsibility for security over all of Kabul during the evacuation, the four-star general testified during a Sept. 29 House Armed Services Committee hearing. He said he was unsure if that offer was presented to Biden.

"That was not why I was there, that was not my instruction," McKenzie told the panel. "I did not consider that to be a formal offer and it was not the reason why I was there, so I did not pursue it," McKenzie told the panel.

The Taliban ultimately took point on securing the Kabul airport. An ISIS-K suicide bomber bypassed the Taliban's checkpoints and killed at least 170 Afghans and 13 U.S. service members.

Austin’s ‘chronic decision-phobia’

Milburn said poor leadership is standard and that bad decisions from the top – even minor ones – amplify down the ladder.

He repeated a joke Marines often told: "What is the difference between the Marine Corps and the Boy Scouts of America? The Boy Scouts have adult leadership."

It was the kind of joke used "to mitigate your sense of powerlessness" from "the bottom of the pyramid," Milburn told Fox News. In the military, "the results of ineffective leadership or inefficiency or just minor mistakes are felt greatly at kind of the tail end of the whip."

Austin, for his part, built a reputation for "chronic decision-phobia" – fearing decision-making – when he headed Central Command, Milburn wrote in a Task and Purpose op-ed where he called on the secretary to resign.

FILE - In this June 17, 2021 file photo, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, left, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley talk before a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington. (Evelyn Hockstein/Pool via AP) (Evelyn Hockstein/Pool via AP)

Failure to make decisions "causes a great deal of frustration beneath you," Milburn told Fox News. "A lot of us would rather have a tyrannical commander than one who simply avoided decisions because at the tail end of the whip, that causes all kinds of confusion."

In the military, "the most important thing you have is your reputation," the retired colonel told Fox News. "It's not even rank, it's not necessarily authority at any given time. It's the ability for you to inspire people, especially those beneath you."

Milburn flagged a program that failed horribly under Austin when he served as the top commander in the Middle East.

The Defense Department launched a $500 million program in December 2014 to train 5,400 Syrian fighters a year to help the U.S. combat ISIS. The following September, Austin told the Senate Armed Services Committee that only "four or five" trainees were fighting In Syria.

The program was shuttered weeks later.

"It just seemed incomprehensible to me that there were no ramifications for him aside from, I assume, just being embarrassed," he told Fox News. "Can you imagine anyone not getting fired for that kind of mismanagement? But somehow he survived."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Milburn said it probably caused "irreparable damage" to Central Command and to the military.

"What we saw during the closing days of the fall of Kabul, who can deny that those images were disastrous to just our credibility as a nation?" Milburn added.

The Pentagon declined to comment.

Matt Leach contributed to this report.

 

Ethan Barton is a producer/reporter for Digital Originals. You can reach him at ethan.barton@fox.com and follow him on Twitter at @ethanrbarton.

Source:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/afghanistan-fiasco-shows-us-military-encourages-lapdog-generals-retired-colonel-says-last-96

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Heroes and Zeros: The Kyle Rittenhouse Verdict - Clarice Feldman

 

​ by Clarice Feldman

The Left may choose to live in a postlegal, postrational world where ill-educated, propagandized mobs rule, but the rest of us do not.

For 85 minutes on Friday, we held our breath as America’s-not-Sweetheart Kamala Harris was acting president while Joe Biden was anesthetized for a colonoscopy. Near in time, a 12-member panel of jurors in Kenosha, Wisconsin ignored threats shouted on the courtroom steps to find Kyle Rittenhouse not guilty of all the charges against him.

The judge and defense counsel bravely labored on, ignoring the many death threats against them. Kyle was brave to defend himself during the riot and at the trial where the prosecution engaged in numerous unethical acts, not the least of which was charging him with crimes for which they lacked any reasonable scintilla of evidence. Videos, most taken by amateurs at the scene of the rioting, revealed that he had defended himself against three thugs with long criminal records who had physically threatened him, like hyenas charging the smallest gazelle in the herd. The conclusion was solidly based on the facts and law in a distressing world where mobs think they, not reason, fact, or law, should rule the day. They have been given leeway by Democratic leaders to think that way.

In the strikingly pusillanimous ranks were the governor of Wisconsin and the usual Democratic pols, including the president and vice-president.

Here’s the mealy mouthed response to the verdict from Wisconsin governor Tony Evers, who had refused then-president Trump’s offer to send in the National Guard to keep rioters from burning down Kenosha, the scene of the attacks on Kyle and his defensive shootings. This was a protest against the justifiable police shooting of an armed man who had an outstanding warrant for sexual abuse, had stolen the keys to his former girlfriend’s car, and was attempting to ride off with it with her child still inside it. Evers was as responsible as the rioters for the violence that destroyed so much of that city and the homes and small businesses which were uninsured or underinsured:

“No verdict will be able to bring back the lives of Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum, or heal Gaige Grosskreutz’s injuries, just as no verdict can heal the wounds or trauma experienced by Jacob Blake and his family. No ruling today changes our reality in Wisconsin that we have work to do toward equity, accountability, and justice that communities across our state are demanding and deserve.

“Kenoshans are strong, resilient, and have spent the last year working every day together toward healing. This case and the resulting national spotlight on the Kenosha community and our state have undoubtedly reopened wounds that have not yet fully healed. I echo the calls of local Kenosha community leaders and join them in asking everyone who might choose to assemble and exercise their First Amendment rights in any community to please only do so safely and peacefully. We must have peace in Kenosha and our communities, and any efforts or actions aimed at sowing division are unwelcome in our state as they will only hinder that healing.

“I’ve seen the pain and the frustration of so many, and we must remain steadfast in our commitment to ending violence in our communities, supporting victims and survivors as they heal from trauma, and rooting out the disparities that are so often inextricably linked to that violence and trauma. We must be unwavering in our promise to build a state where every kid, person, and family can live their life free of violence and have every chance to be successful.

“We must move forward, together, more united and more motivated to build the sort of future we want for our state -- one that is just, one that is equitable, and one where every person has the resources and opportunity to thrive -- and I will not stop working to achieve that vision.” 

If you want to end violence, act to prevent it instead of doing what you did do -- encourage it by applauding it, contributing to organizations that foment it, and removing law enforcement -- as you and the mayor of Kenosha did -- when riots take place. And stop treating thugs like Blake and Rosenbaum, Huber and Grosskreutz, as victims. If they are victims at all they are victims of your indulgence of their transgressive, illegal behavior. Indeed, the best thing the citizens of Kenosha can do to stop violence is to elect a better mayor, and the best thing the citizens of Wisconsin can do to that same end is vote Evers out of office. Those two may choose to live in a postlegal, postrational world where ill-educated, propagandized mobs rule, but the rest of us do not.

For a brief moment, it even seemed like President Biden got the message. In an impromptu remark on the White House lawn, he praised the jury, stating he stood by their decision and that the system worked. 

Vice President Kamala Harris commented on the verdict in Kyle Rittenhouse's homicide trial, suggesting it showed the criminal justice system is not equitable, apparently contradicting President Joe Biden's remarks. 

In a tweet Friday evening, the vice president and former prosecutor said: "Today's verdict speaks for itself. I've spent a majority of my career working to make our criminal justice system more equitable. It's clear, there's still a lot more work to do."

While Harris' comments seemed to condemn the outcome of the trial, Biden had stood by the jury's decision earlier Friday.

Back inside the White House, however, Biden’s handlers prevailed upon him to erase within the hour the first rational remark he made in as long as I can recall. 

This is a man who, before there was even a trial or he was president, claimed on no evidence whatsoever that Kyle was a “white supremacist,” fanning the flames of rioters and defaming an innocent kid who was in Kenosha not to riot but instead erase graffiti, offer emergency aid, put out fires, and defend his friends and neighbors against vicious thugs.

In the zeros category, a special place belongs to the prosecution for bringing this evidence-free case and for engaging in substantial unethical behavior throughout the trial. Victoria Taft writes:

Americans, already disgusted by the FBI, manufactured Trump Russia scandals, and counterintelligence investigations into concerned parents like they’re members of Al Qaeda, closely watched this case and were repulsed by the chicanery used to prosecute Rittenhouse.

They’re supposed to be the justice guys, right?

It’s a wonder that Rittenhouse was found not guilty on all counts.

You can blame Leftist propagandists or your laziness if you believed that Rittenhouse’s assailants were black, or that his gun was illegal, or that he brought it “across state lines,” or that he was a “chaos tourist” and a “vigilante.”

But there’s a special Mike Nifong-sized ring of hell for prosecutors who introduce these slanders into a courtroom, knowing that their subterfuge might put a kid away for the rest of his life.

Thomas Binger and Jim Kraus did this in many ways, by invoking lies -- that they knew were lies -- into pre-trial bail hearings, motions, and then ultimately into the courtroom itself in the trial. All of these lies were dutifully transcribed by friendly journalists. Indeed, as I reported at PJ Media, prosecutors never went back to revise or revisit the plethora of charges brought against Rittenhouse to test against the truth. If the mob believed ’em, they stayed in the charging documents. 

Another zero goes to those who refuse to accept the justifiable verdict as Tucker Carlson reports. 

Andrew Branca , a criminal defense lawyer who did such a wonderful job blogging the trial on Legal Insurrection, proposes Kyle’s Law, explaining that in cases like this one and the Trayvon Martin case, prosecutors for personal gain have brought criminal charges which are not evidenced nor winnable and should suffer the consequences for the prosecution’s inability to disprove self-defense by a majority of the evidence. 

The penalty for such a jury finding he proposes is this:

 If the jury agrees the prosecution failed to meet even this very low threshold, the defendant is immediately entitled to compensation for any losses resulting from this unfounded prosecution. 

And that compensation shall be made both by the state generally and by the prosecutor personally. 

First, the state generally:  A self-defense defendant who qualifies under Kyle's Law would be entitled to monetary compensation from the state for legal expenses, lost wages, and all other economic costs associated with the unjust prosecution. (Washington state already has a statute that does precisely this, §9A.16.110, but it is the only state that does. This needs to expand to every state.) 

Second, the prosecutor personally: A self-defense defendant who qualifies under Kyle's Law would be entitled to monetary compensation from the prosecutor personally for mental distress, emotional pain & suffering, lost economic/ business/educational opportunities, reputational damage, and so forth, plus any legal costs incurred to secure this compensation -- and that means the suffering of both the defendant himself AND his immediate family. (No state currently has such a provision of law.) 

Further, if the State seeks to reimburse the prosecutor for this damage award, that reimbursement also becomes the property of the self-defense defendant. 

Only by holding the state generally and the prosecutor personally both responsible for such cases of unjust persecution of self-defense cases can we keep these victims of violent attack from also becoming victims of an assaultive justice system.

Once again, while pretending to seek unity, the Left would divide us by race (even where race is not involved whatsoever, as it was not here), and it’s becoming so patent and ridiculous and so pervasive that Babylon Bee, the satire site, is on the mark when it laughingly announces the Muppets will now wear labels on their foreheads identifying their race.

We’re not buying what they’re selling.

Image: Michael Ramirez

 

Clarice Feldman

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/11/heroes_and_zeros_the_kyle_rittenhouse_verdict.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Nadler, Dems Blast Rittenhouse Verdict, Demand Federal Charges - Daniel Greenfield

 

​ by Daniel Greenfield

[K]eeping the tensions going is a political strategy.

 

If at first you don't succeed, try, try and try again.

Some verdicts are a surprise, but the Rittenhouse verdict was all but inevitable largely because of the grotesque misconduct of the prosecution which couldn't have performed any better if it had been actively trying to sabotage its own prosecution. After a few years where some conservative lawyers crashed and burned, Rittenhouse's team succeeded by staying focused and focusing on the facts and the law.

Meanwhile, the prosecutors that the lynch mob had been counting on were the ones acting like a clown show.

Is it over? Good question.

Virtually every Dem and lefty group, from Biden on down, has put out statements critical of the verdict that range from the restrained...

"While the verdict in Kenosha will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included, we must acknowledge that the jury has spoken," Biden

to the violently histrionic from Bill de Blasio...

"Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum are victims. They should be alive today. The only reason they’re not is because a violent, dangerous man chose to take a gun across state lines and start shooting people. To call this a miscarriage of justice is an understatement."

Former civil rights group, the ACLU, chose to issue a statement blasting the surfeit of due process while blaming everything on "white supremacy".

And, more seriously, Rep. Nadler demanded a federal review.

"This heartbreaking verdict is a miscarriage of justice and sets a dangerous precedent which justifies federal review by DOJ. Justice cannot tolerate armed persons crossing state lines looking for trouble while people engage in First Amendment-protected protest," Nadler wrote in a tweet posted Friday afternoon. 

The DOJ coming in here would be legally challenging, but not as impossible as some people believe. Many of the arguments and narratives you've been hearing on social media and in the media, useless in the existing case, were prepping the ground for a federal case.

A federal case, most likely on civil rights charges, would be challenging, but it's important to remember what the overall agenda would be.

As I wrote in the conclusion to my review of David Horowitz's new book, "I Can't Breathe", keeping the tensions going is a political strategy.

That is why I Can't Breathe: How a Racial Hoax is Killing America has arrived now, not right after the riots, but at its most timely point as an administration stacked with racist radicals turns the BLM hoax into policy and whose response to any election, whether it’s the gubernatorial election in Virginia, or any future elections to come, is their familiar brand of racist poison.

Americans were relieved to see the end of the violent year of BLM riots that devastated entire communities, but as the Democrats prepare for difficult elections in 2022 and 2024, there is every reason to believe that a desperate party facing defeat will turn to race riots once again.

The Rittenhouse verdict serves the Dems and the wokes quite well in this regard because they have an instrument for creating tension and the entire process of demanding federal intervention and any possible federal case would keep the whole thing alive and politically useful.

 

Daniel Greenfield

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2021/11/nadler-dems-blast-rittenhouse-verdict-demand-daniel-greenfield/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Hunter Biden's firm helped Chinese company purchase rich cobalt mine in $3.8 billion deal: report - Peter Aitken

 

​ by Peter Aitken

Biden's business ties may have continued into the early days of his father's presidency

Miranda Devine turned away from entering Hunter Biden's NYC art show

NY Post columnist tells Tucker that a Picasso painting is cheaper than one of Hunter Biden's

An investment firm that counts Hunter Biden among its founders helped a Chinese company purchase one of the world’s most lucrative cobalt mines from an American company, according to a report by The New York Times. 

Biden established the firm Bohai Harvest RST (BHR) Equity Investment Fund Management Company with two other Americans and some Chinese partners in 2013. The American members controlled 30 percent of the Shanghai-based operation and served on the board. 

The company notably completed a deal in 2016 that saw a Congo cobalt and copper mine transfer from American company Freeport-McMoRan to Chinese outfit China Molybdenum for the sum of $2.65 billion. 

CNN anchor John King said on Wednesday that Hunter Biden is a "swamp creature" who used his powerful father to make money. (Photo by Teresa Kroeger/Getty Images) (Photo by Teresa Kroeger/Getty Images)

BHR served as a minority stakeholder to buy out around $1.14 billion of shares from Lundin Mining of Canada, who owned a portion of the Congo mine. 

China Molybdenum then bought BHR’s shares of the mine two years later, according to Hong Kong filings. The deal resulted in China Molybdenum owning 80% of the mine, with the remaining portion owned by Congo’s state mining enterprise. 

HUNTER BIDEN APPEARS AT NYC ART GALLERY DISPLAYING HIS PAINTINGS WITH WIFE MELISSA

The Times reported that Biden controlled 10 percent of BHR through Skaneateles LLC, a company based in Washington. 

Chris Clark, a lawyer for Biden, said he "no longer holds any interest, directly or indirectly, in either BHR or Skaneateles," and Chinese records indicated Biden was not a member on the board as of April 2020. 

Hunter Biden, the son of new US President Joe Biden, attends his father's inauguration as 46th US President  on January 20, 2021, at the US Capitol in Washington, DC. (Photo by JONATHAN ERNST / POOL / AFP) (Photo by JONATHAN ERNST/POOL/AFP via Getty Images) (Getty Images)

UN, WHITE HOUSE DEMAND PROOF OF PENG SHUAI'S SAFETY, CHINA SAYS IT'S ‘NOT AWARE’ OF ISSUE

But Chinese business records reviewed by Fox News in April 2021 showed that Hunter Biden continued to hold a 10% stake in Chinese private equity firm Bohai Harvest RST Equity Investment Fund Management Co. through Hunter's company, Skaneateles LLC.

"He has been working to unwind his investment, but I would certainly point you — he’s a private citizen," Psaki said at that time. "I would point you to him or his lawyers on the outside on any update."

GINA CARANO JOINS CAST OF HUNTER BIDEN BIOPIC ‘MY SON HUNTER’

A former board member also claimed that money from the deal – which the owners were not involved in – went to the operating funds and did not distribute among the owners. 

"We don’t know Hunter Biden, nor are we aware of his involvement in BHR," Vincent Zhou, a spokesman for China Molybdenum, said in an email.

Hunter Biden’s business ties remain an item of intense scrutiny for the media, particularly his activity in China. President Biden particularly warned about China’s growing dominance of cobalt as a stumbling block to America’s attempts at shifting from petrol gas to electric cars, as cobalt is a key ingredient in electric car batteries. 

Tesla last year pursued a deal to acquire Glencore, a Canadian mining company, in an effort to increase its acquisition of cobalt for its electric car batteries. 

Vehicles are seen parked at the Tesla car plant Monday, May 11, 2020, in Fremont, Calif. The parking lot was nearly full at Tesla's California electric car factory Monday, an indication that the company could be resuming production in defiance of an order from county health authorities. (AP Photo/Ben Margot)

 

Peter Aitken is a New York born-and-raised reporter with a focus on national and global news.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-firm-chinese-purchase-cobalt-mine

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

China's 'Morally Bankrupt' Olympics - Gordon G. Chang

 

​ by Gordon G. Chang

It is now time for the world to face the reality of the Communist Party of China and the horrific system it has constructed. There is only one correct choice: Move the Games.

• The disappearance of tennis star Peng Shuai this month has led many around the world to question the holding of the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing. The Games are scheduled to begin February 4.

• It is now time for the world to face the reality of the Communist Party of China and the horrific system it has constructed. There is only one correct choice: Move the Games.

• [T]he regime will make Peng publicly retract accusations or destroy her. The individual means nothing in China's current system. Too many times state television has aired ghastly confessions of obviously worn-down individuals.

• There are many reasons to boycott or move the Olympics from Beijing.... Of course, no ruling group that organizes rape, slavery, mass detention, torture, killings, and organ harvesting should be permitted, among other things, to host international sporting events.

• The International Olympic Committee maintains these atrocities are none of its business. Yet the protection of athletes is. Peng's detention tells us athletes will not be safe in China. The Games, after all, are first and foremost about the competitors, and their personal safety must be the primary concern.

• Even at this late date, it is time to boycott or move the Games from China.

The disappearance this month of tennis star Peng Shuai (pictured) has led many around the world to question the holding of the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing. Now, only the morally bankrupt could think it is a good idea to allow the hostage-taking, rapist-protecting, genocide-committing Chinese regime to host this competition. (Photo by Wang He/Getty Images)

The disappearance of tennis star Peng Shuai this month has led many around the world to question the holding of the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing. The Games are scheduled to begin February 4.

Now, only the morally bankrupt could think it is a good idea to allow the hostage-taking, rapist-protecting, genocide-committing Chinese regime to host this competition.

It is now time for the world to face the reality of the Communist Party of China and the horrific system it has constructed. There is only one correct choice: Move the Games.

For decades, people overlooked the great crimes of Chinese communism because they had hope that it would, over time, evolve and become benign. When "reformer" Deng Xiaoping shoved aside Hua Guofeng, Mao Zedong's chosen successor, and engineered at the end of 1978 the historic Third Plenum, outsiders thought they were seeing a new—and far superior—"New China."

In fact, as the Communist Party embarked on gaige kaifang—the policy of "reform and opening up"—the regime both moderated its foreign policy and relaxed or eliminated totalitarian social controls. Then, optimism ruled.

But not now. The current ruler has reversed trends that many outsiders—as well as the Chinese people themselves—welcomed. The ruling group, never benevolent, has become even more monstrous under Xi Jinping.

Enter Ms. Peng, sporting hero and darling of the Chinese public. On November 2, she posted on Weibo, often called China's Twitter, an accusation that Zhang Gaoli, aided by his wife, pressured her into providing sex.

The charge was unprecedented in the history of the People's Republic of China. Zhang was once a senior leader, a vice premier who also served from 2012 to 2017 on the Communist Party's Politburo Standing Committee, the highest ruling body in the country.

Peng's posting was removed within a half hour, and the two-time Grand Slam doubles champion—Wimbledon in 2013 and the French Open in 2014—herself disappeared.

On November 17, China Global Television Network (CGTN), the international arm of the Chinese state broadcaster China Central Television, released the text of an e-mail, in English, purportedly written by Peng. In that message—correctly described by many as "creepy"—she said she was "fine." Peng also said the "news" released by the Women's Tennis Association "including the allegation of sexual assault, is not true." Almost nobody believes that the message is both authentic and not the result of coercion.

Next, on November 19 a CGTN commentator posted on Twitter three photos of Peng, purportedly first released by the tennis star's friend on the popular Chinese app WeChat. Peng in the pictures looks happy playing with a cat and stuffed animals, including a panda.

Then Hu Xijin, editor-in-chief of the Communist Party's Global Times tabloid, on November 19 said on Twitter that Peng "will show up in public and participate in some activities soon."

Hu was prescient. On the following day, he posted two videos purporting to show Peng in a restaurant this month. The conversation at the table indicates that the videos were shot on November 20. The conversation, however, is stilted, obviously scripted to highlight the date it supposedly took place.

Finally, Hu posted a video of a smiling Peng at a tennis event in Beijing, supposedly taken on the morning of November 21.

Peng is not the only high-profile figure detained in recent months. Businessman Jack Ma, citizen journalists Zhang Zhan and Chen Qiushi, and celebrity Zhao Wei were all disappeared. Consider it a pattern.

Xi Jinping's China is far more coercive and secretive than the China of the preceding three decades, suggesting the regime is returning to its old ways. Mao and Mao-admirer Xi reflect the true nature of Chinese communism.

That regime, now dominated by Xi Jinping, is a threat to athletes coming to China to compete, as the Peng incident demonstrates. "Athletes are useful to the Communist Party as long as they are tools of the state," Cleo Paskal of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies told Gatestone. "If they try to be individuals, they become a liability. The state will destroy the individual if that person is any risk to the Party." As Paskal, also associated with Chatham House, notes, Peng now poses a risk to the regime.

That is why the regime will make Peng publicly retract the accusations or destroy her. The individual means nothing in China's current system. Too many times, state television has aired ghastly confessions of obviously worn-down individuals.

President Joe Biden on November 18, in response to a reporter's question in the Oval Office, said he is considering a diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Games. Senator Tom Cotton, the Arkansas Republican, has just called for "a complete and total boycott."

There are many reasons to boycott or move the Olympics from Beijing. So far advocates of such actions have focused on the Communist Party's genocidal policies against Uyghurs and other Turkic minorities and its other crimes against humanity. Of course, no ruling group that organizes rape, slavery, mass detention, torture, killings, and organ harvesting should be permitted, among other things, to host international sporting events.

The International Olympic Committee maintains that these atrocities are none of its business. Yet the protection of athletes is. Peng's detention tells us athletes will not be safe in China. The Games, after all, are first and foremost about the competitors, and their personal safety must be the primary concern.

Paskal points out that holding the Games in China goes against the whole concept of Olympic competition. "The Olympics are about individuals striving to be their best," she says. "That is antithetical to the Communist Party, which is about subservience of the individual to the goals of the state."

Even at this late date, it is time to boycott or move the Games from China.

• Follow Gordon G. Chang on Twitter

 

Gordon G. Chang is the author of The Coming Collapse of China, a Gatestone Institute distinguished senior fellow, and a member of its Advisory Board.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17954/china-olympics

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Teachers' union in Canada introduces 'weighted voting' for minority members - Monica Showalter

 

​ by Monica Showalter

So much for 'one person, one vote' democratic norms. This is rigging from racial grievance mongers and they better not bring it here. Oh, Canada...

In the name of promoting racial equity in that hotbed of racism known as Canada, a labor union representing 60,000 teachers and other educational employees there has restructured its voting system to weight the votes of minority members at the expense of others, in order to ensure an particular outcome in voting on the claim of racial equity.

Here's what National Post columnist Jonathan Kay found:

On Monday, @OSSTFD20TEACHER (Ont Sec School Teachers' Fed, District 20) announced that their rules would be changed so that each non-white union member would have his/her vote weighted more than white members. Here are the slides they used to justify the decision to rank & file pic.twitter.com/hwBNi0yVOR

— Jonathan Kay (@jonkay) November 20, 2021

What with racial blending these days, it will be interesting to see how they plan to sort their members out. Will a member with three white and one black grandparent get a quarter vote? Or will everyone go the Elizabeth Warren route and note that 1/1,024 percent of Native American ancestry? Frankly, it's none of anyone's business what someone's color is, and many people don't actually know their entire racial story. 

But here we are, with the fanatics in charge, demanding a right to place people in racial boxes same way the plantation owners did in the old days, on the disgusting presumption that they are all cogs in a machine who only vote their own racial interests. These de facto racists pulling this have every intention of rigging the votes to grandly claim that they have eliminated racism. What they will do is institutionalize racism, intensify racial grievances, and turn whites into a racial tribe same as the others.

Here's how they say it will work:

pic.twitter.com/I9Lx2cGPJ6

— Jonathan Kay (@jonkay) November 20, 2021

So much for the old-time view, recognized in every Western democracy, of 'one man, one vote.' The twitter thread notes that the union members weren't too happy about this decision and then a round of snitchings began. Such nice people.

Who are these loonies? They're part of the big secondary school teachers union in Canada with about 60,000 members; their own union local membership numbers about 1,400 teachers. Their broader union website says:

The Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation (OSSTF/FEESO) is a trade union representing almost 60,000 members in 140 bargaining units across the province.
Founded in 1919, OSSTF/FEESO represents public high school teachers, occasional teachers, educational assistants, continuing education teachers and instructors, psychologists, secretaries, speech-language pathologists, social workers, plant support personnel, attendance counsellors and many other educational workers.
OSSTF/FEESO bargaining units represent both English and French members in elementary and secondary school workplaces, private schools, consortia offering support services to school boards and universities.

They seem to be a pretty nasty bunch, too - look at their bylaws and impressive punishments for dissenters on offer. Complain about a lazy teacher who's drunk on the job and lose three weeks of pay, get held up like Hester Prynne to a public scorning, and lose one's right to participate in union meetings. That's some union:

DUTIES OF MEMBERS TO OTHER MEMBERS

A member shall:

1. avoid interfering in an unwarranted manner between other members and pupils;
2. on making an adverse report on another member, furnish that member with a written statement of the report at the earliest possible time and not later than three days after making the report;
3. prior to registering a complaint of harassment or bullying against another member, inform the member, either personally or through a representative, that the actions are unwelcome and must cease;
4. Any member making an adverse report on another member shall include in the written statement the relevant date, details and alleged incidents that were related in the adverse report to the member and address and deliver the written statement to the member. (A.96)

Those OSSTF members found in violation of OSSTF by-laws may have their names forwarded to the OSSTF Provincial Judicial Council. Sanctions included in the by-laws include being banned from OSSTF meetings, a fine not to exceed the gross salary for 21 working days, and/or publication of the name, charges, and penalties of the member found in violation.

Now they're going for race-norming in election counts, which amounts not only to rigging a vote, but full-blown racism.  

 

We all know that Canada is a nation with a lot of blue-state-type voters -- they elected Justin Trudeau, after all. This is the country raised and educated Kamala Harris. Canada's that place that did that disgusting attack on free speech with their legal assault on Mark Steyn a few years back. We know there are wokester-cubed things that go on in Canada. It's not all Canadians, of course, but it's a lot of them, basically the urban majority which calls the shots. Nearly third of that country is unionized, compared to 10.8% here, with some urban areas such as in Quebec having nearly 40%. With this kind of race-rigging going on, it's pretty obvious that many Canadians will be inducted into this kind of thinking.  

 

That said, we should be concerned with that kind of crap coming here. Canadian far-left ideas spill over easily into the U.S. Leaders of U.S. and Canadian teachers' unions are close. There have been radical union leaders in the U.S. who actually are Canadian, such as Leo Gerard at the United Steelworkers. They start this kind of vote-rigging with unions in Canada, import it to the U.S. and soon enough, move it to regular U.S. elections, particularly since Big Labor controls the Democrat party.

 

It's the end of democracy as normal people know it and the pigeon-holing of minorities into single-issue grievance groups, which in the end, silences everyone.

 

One can only hope that Canada's teachers who don't like this eventually gain the upper hand and toss this fundamentally anti-democratic idea out for good. If it gets bad enough, and they do it in time, maybe they can.

Hat tip: Lauri Regan

Image: Twitter screen shot

 

Monica Showalter

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/11/labor_union_in_canada_introduces_weighted_voting_for_minority_members.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Wounds With a Russian Knife in Them - Amir Taheri

 

​ by Amir Taheri

Is the "situation" as developed in Transcaucasia a model of Russian behavior in the international arena?

• The "interim solution" imposed by Russia denies Azerbaijan control of the enclave while preventing its ethnic Armenian population to develop working state structures. In other words, the wound remains open with a Russian knife in it that could be turned anytime Moscow wished.

• Is the "situation" as developed in Transcaucasia a model of Russian behavior in the international arena?

• Several examples could be cited in support of a "yes" answer.

• By keeping all those nations in a state of crisis with their neighbors, Putin achieves one of his two geostrategic goals: preventing NATO expansion to Eastern Europe, Transcaucasia and Central Asia. Because no country in conflict with its neighbors would be allowed to join the US-led coalition, it is important for Russia to keep all those wounds open with its knife in them.

• With the US behaving strangely for the past five years or so and the EU crippled by Brexit, the Western democracies have not been able to develop a coherent analysis of the Russian challenge let alone shape a policy to deal with it. Sending a small number of American or British troops to the Baltic republics and Poland may provide some beguiling TV news footage while huffing and puffing about sanctions could be seen as a sign of confusion rather than a strategy to stand against a de-stabilizing power.

• One school of thoughts in Western policy-making circles is to let Putin choke on the morsels such as Syria, Libya, Iran, Donetsk, Transcaucasia and Belarus that he has bitten but cannot chew let alone digest. That may sound clever in pseudo-Machiavellian terms but could be disastrous in terms of big power politics.

By keeping nations in a state of crisis with their neighbors, Russian President Vladimir Putin achieves one of his two geostrategic goals: preventing NATO expansion to Eastern Europe, Transcaucasia and Central Asia. Because no country in conflict with its neighbors would be allowed to join the US-led coalition, it is important for Russia to keep all those wounds open with its knife in them. Pictured: Putin at the Russian Civil War memorial on Unity Day, in Sevastopol, Crimea, on November 4, 2021. (Photo by Mikhail Metzel/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images)

It was supposed to be a five-year "breathing space" in which two belligerent neighbors would resolve their disputes and shape a durable peace with help from their big altruistic neighbor.

And yet, just months after the "good news" was spread by all concerned, Armenia and Azerbaijan have reignited their border war in Transcaucasia with Russian troops keeping a low profile.

Vladimir Putin had hailed the ceasefire that his emissaries had negotiated as "a great achievement" and a sign that Russia, if given a chance, would act as peacemaker and not the troublemaker that the European Union claims.

The duel in Transcaucasia may appear too insignificant and too remote to merit special attention by the broader outside world. The dispute over the tiny enclave of High Qarabagh would look too exotic to merit special attention.

The "interim solution" imposed by Russia denies Azerbaijan control of the enclave while preventing its ethnic Armenian population to develop working state structures. In other words, the wound remains open with a Russian knife in it that could be turned anytime Moscow wished.

At the same time, the "interim solution" makes both regimes in Baku and Yerevan dependent on Russian power for at least the next five years. It also keeps Turkey out, thus depriving Azerbaijan of a powerful regional ally. On the opposite side, Armenia is deprived of an opportunity to seek meaningful support from potentially sympathetic powers in Europe and North America. Moscow also benefits from its new military presence in the region by gaining control of borders with the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Is the "situation" as developed in Transcaucasia a model of Russian behavior in the international arena?

Several examples could be cited in support of a "yes" answer.

In Ukraine, having annexed Crimea, Putin is careful about the dosage of his support for secessionists in Donetsk. He wants them strong enough to keep Ukraine in a state of tension but not too strong to create a full-fledged breakaway state.

Putin is playing a similar game in Moldova by supporting ethnic Russian secessionists up to a point but not to the extent that could enable them declare full independence.

Russia's relation with Georgia is also shaped by a variation on the same theme. Having formally annexed South Ossetia, Moscow still maintains a military presence in Abkhazia, another chunk of Georgian territory seized in 2008 while casting itself as an honest broker in a quest for "a permanent solution".

Moscow has seized the opportunity by the US withdrawal from Afghanistan to beef up its own military presence in neighboring Tajikistan, ostensibly to cope with a potential threat from the Taliban across the border.

This is meant to keep the Taliban on their best behavior for fear of facing Russia as an active adversary. At the same time, it casts President Imam Ali Rahman's regime in Dushanbe a Russian protégé. In the past few weeks, Moscow has used the Taliban bogeyman to strengthen military "cooperation" with Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan as well.

By keeping all those nations in a state of crisis with their neighbors, Putin achieves one of his two geostrategic goals: preventing NATO expansion to Eastern Europe, Transcaucasia and Central Asia. Because no country in conflict with its neighbors would be allowed to join the US-led coalition, it is important for Russia to keep all those wounds open with its knife in them.

Putin's second geostrategic goal is to throw a lasso around the European Union and, wherever possible, encourage defection by some of its members.

The proximity pressure exercised against the Baltic republics is part of that strategy which is also being tested by using Belarus as a surrogate to knock holes in the EU's outer borders with hordes of immigrants recruited in the Middle East.

Russian activism in Syria and Libya, and its strange alliance with Egypt in the Libyan theater, are also calculated to exert pressure on the EU which, Putin believes, is in a weak position caused by Brexit and the five-years of uncertainty that the United States has experienced under Presidents Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

At another level, the openly pro-Russian path taken by the Khomeinist leadership in Tehran gives Putin another card to play with minimum, not to say zero, actual political and/or economic investment by Russia.

The message is that without acknowledging Russian leadership stature there could be no peace and stability in the Mediterranean, central and eastern Europe, the Middle East and Central Asia.

With the US behaving strangely for the past five years or so and the EU crippled by Brexit, the Western democracies have not been able to develop a coherent analysis of the Russian challenge let alone shape a policy to deal with it. Sending a small number of American or British troops to the Baltic republics and Poland may provide some beguiling TV news footage while huffing and puffing about sanctions could be seen as a sign of confusion rather than a strategy to stand against a de-stabilizing power.

One problem is that many Western analysts pretend that in dealing with the Russian challenge the choice is limited to the full-scale cold war that could morph into military confrontation or appeasement of the kind that Angela Merkel preached right to the end of her term as Germany's chancellor.

Rethinking strategy for dealing with Russia needs to consider a number of issues including internal developments that, while tactically beneficial to Putin and Putinism may be detrimental to it. Today, Putin does not face a credible internal opposition because no one has succeeded in developing a credible alternative to his narrative. By putting too many chips on Alexei Navalny, Western powers have indicated support for another version of Russian nationalism of which Putin claims to be the original version.

One school of thoughts in Western policy-making circles is to let Putin choke on the morsels such as Syria, Libya, Iran, Donetsk, Transcaucasia and Belarus that he has bitten but cannot chew let alone digest. That may sound clever in pseudo-Machiavellian terms but could be disastrous in terms of big power politics.

Despite several signals by Russia indicating its fear of a rising and aggressive China, the issue has received little attention from the US and EU. Bringing Russia in from cold and preparing for a smooth end to decades of Putinism remains one of the biggest challenges that Western democracies face today.

Amir Taheri was the executive editor-in-chief of the daily Kayhan in Iran from 1972 to 1979. He has worked at or written for innumerable publications, published eleven books, and has been a columnist for Asharq Al-Awsat since 1987.

This article was originally published by Asharq al-Awsat and is reprinted by kind permission of the author.

 

Amir Taheri

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17955/wounds-russia-knife

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter