Saturday, October 15, 2022

Biden Administration's Dithering Inviting Worldwide Aggression: Russia, China, Iran - Guy Millière

 

by Guy Millière

The weakness of the Biden administration has created aggression everywhere -- Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, North Korea; assaults on the dollar as the World's reserve currency -- even domestically.

  • The West is not threatening Russia. Putin is threatening the West.

  • Putin might desperately try to reverse the situation, whatever the cost... Ukraine and its heroism have shocked the world. Ukraine's army can win, but it will require the unwavering support of the West.

  • The men Putin recently began sending to the front may be reservists, but most have not held a weapon for a very long time and have no will to fight. Some who managed to send messages on Telegram channels say they know they are destined to be cannon fodder.

  • Putin has almost no allies and could lose what limited support he has. Chinese President Xi Jinping has in common with Putin a clear hostility to the West, but has reportedly not supplied Russia with weapons.

  • During a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in Samarkand, Uzbekistan last month, Xi reportedly told Putin that it was necessary to "instill stability and positive energy into a world in turmoil". Whatever that meant, it was not a message of support for the war.

  • Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on September 20 that "Russia should return the occupied lands to Ukraine" -- not exactly the direction in which Putin would like to be going.

  • The Chinese Communist Party, which openly says it wants to dominate the world, apparently does not want a larger war just now. On September 24, Wang Yi, China's foreign minister, was even more explicit...

  • The United States has, once again, like it or not, emerged as the only power capable of defeating an aggressive enemy of democracy; when it does, the status of the US and NATO are strengthened. It is, however, impossible to forget that America's debacle in Afghanistan, the Biden administration's frenzy to sign a lethal nuclear deal with Iran under almost any conditions, and the extreme weakness of Biden's White House before Putin invaded Ukraine. These failures no doubt played into Putin's decision to invade.

  • The Biden administration's failure to arm Ukraine before the invasion and his comments that a "minor incursion" might be acceptable were catastrophic. The same failure to provide sufficient deterrence to Taiwan is unquestionably inviting Communist Chinese aggression.

  • The weakness of the Biden administration has created aggression everywhere -- Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, North Korea; assaults on the dollar as the World's reserve currency -- even domestically.

  • Will the Biden administration ever learn from its mistakes? Or is its ultimate, unspoken goal actually to hand over the United States quietly to Russia, China and Iran?

The Ukrainian government has been defending its country against Russian aggression; the West has been helping Ukraine to defend itself. Putin is now in a dire situation. He is in danger of losing the war that he chose to start seven months ago. He might desperately try to reverse the situation, whatever the cost. Ukraine and its heroism have shocked the world. Ukraine's army can win, but it will require the unwavering support of the West. Pictured: Ukrainian soldiers carry the body of a civilian from a house that was destroyed by shelling in Yakovlivka, in the Donetsk region of Ukraine, on October 13, 2022. (Photo by Anatolii Stepanov/AFP via Getty Images)

September 21. Russian President Vladimir Putin, in a pre-recorded speech on Russian television, announces that Russia is being attacked by the Ukrainian government and the West. He defines Ukrainian territories occupied by the Russian army as "liberated zones". He speaks of the referendums he staged in the regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporizhzhya and Kherson to try illegally to attach them to Russia. He says that he has decided on a "partial mobilization" to defend the Russian fatherland; adds that the West threatens Russia, and that any aggression against Russian territory will lead to a response by "all weapon systems available to us".

Putin, in short, described a parallel position that that bears little relation to his real position. It is clear that Russia was the aggressor and that Ukraine was the country attacked. The Ukrainian government has been defending its country against Russian aggression; the West has been helping Ukraine to defend itself. The Ukrainian territories occupied by the Russian army are still, according to international law, Ukrainian territories occupied by the Russian military, not "liberated zones". The referendums are a sham, intended to cover up an illegal annexation. No one will even recognize the annexation, except perhaps a few failed states. The mobilization is not intended to defend Russia, but to try to avoid the complete debacle of the Russian army in Ukraine. The West is not threatening Russia. Putin is threatening the West.

For weeks, even Putin's most fanatical supporters have been sending alarmist messages that Russia was on the verge of defeat. His supporters appeared partially satisfied with Putin's decisions, but apparently wanted more. Those who spoke on official Russian television delivered extremely violent speeches, such as Ukraine "cannot continue to exist", or threatening a "nuclear annihilation" of Britain.

Moderate Russians, on the other hand, are seeing that Putin now wants to send tens of thousands more Russians to wage a war that they reject. Demonstrations have been taking place in Moscow and St. Petersburg, even though the protesters know they are risking long prison terms.

A large part of the Russian population have not protested loudly, but, it seems, refuse to die for nothing. Those who could afford to leave the country have already left, or are trying to. Flights to countries where Russians can enter visa-free sold out fast. Roads leading to the borders of Georgia and Finland were immediately clogged – and still are.

Leaders of the Western world were not intimidated by Putin's speech; they learned nothing that they did not know already: Putin is in a dire situation. He is in danger of losing the war that he chose to start seven months ago.

Earlier remarks by Putin on Russian television, on February 24, clearly show he thought he was launching a brief military operation intended to overthrow the regime in power in Kyiv and replace it with a man on his own payroll. The operation failed completely. Russian intelligence seems to have told Putin that the Ukrainian people would warmly welcome Russian soldiers, especially in Russian-speaking areas, and that the Ukrainian military would put up little resistance.

The Ukrainian population, however, saw Russian soldiers as invaders, even in the newly illegally-annexed Russian-speaking areas. The Ukrainian military proved remarkably capable of resisting Russia's crushing assaults. Putin also apparently thought Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky would be eliminated or would agree to leave the country. Zelensky stayed, behaved with breathtaking courage and determination, and succeeded in mobilizing Western opinion in favor of Ukraine. Putin thought he had an effective military. He discovered that the Russian army was not only flawed, but also inefficient, and riddled with corruption.

When the Russian army withdrew from the outskirts of Kyiv, it had already suffered heavy losses in both men and materiel. A war that was supposed to be one of conquest saw few territories conquered, and the cost was exorbitant. At the end of June, British and American intelligence services estimated that Russia had lost 80,000 men as well as most of the modern military equipment at its disposal. As early as April, Russian soldiers were using obsolete equipment dating from the Soviet era.

In July, Russia's general staff announced that it was implementing an "operational pause". The Russian army was out of breath.

The Ukrainian counter-offensive started from that moment, and led to the present stalemate. The Ukrainians had received American HIMARS artillery rockets that allow precise strikes from a distance of 50 miles, and began systematically destroying Russia's ammunition stocks, logistical forces and command bases.

The blitzkrieg action the Ukrainian army launched from the Kharkiv region on September 7 led to yet another humiliating defeat for the Russian army. Russian soldiers did not even try to fight. They ran. They left behind many of tanks and military vehicles, as well as confidential documents. Many soldiers reached the Russian border, others surrendered. The Ukrainians recaptured almost 3,000 square miles in less than a week, including Izium, a way-station that Russia had been using to resupply its troops in the Donbass. On October 1, the Ukrainian army recaptured Lyman, in the Donetsk region.

"This week alone, since the Russian pseudo-referendum, dozens of population centres have been liberated. These are in Kherson, Kharkiv, Luhansk and Donetsk regions all together," Zelensky said earlier this month.

Russia's army is in tatters. It still has old howitzers that fire inaccurately but can nevertheless cause destruction. It is trying to defend the positions it holds, but seems to be slowly retreating on all fronts. On September 26, the Institute for the Study of War published a tweet saying "Putin is likely coming up against the hard limits of Russia's ability to fight a large-scale war."

In all the Ukrainian towns and villages liberated by the Ukrainian army, war crimes committed by the Russian army are being uncovered: executions of tortured civilians, mass graves, torture rooms. The horrors discovered in Bucha were just the first in a long, sickening list.

Putin doubtless knows the state of his army and the horrific atrocities committed by his soldiers. He has ordered other horrific atrocities, not only in Chechnya and Syria, but also in Ukraine. Two million Ukrainians from the "occupied areas" reportedly have been deported to remote regions of Russia -- some are children taken from their families and offered up for adoption in Russia. These are serious violations of the 1949 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

Putin is trying not totally to lose the war. He sees that he has no easy way out, that Western leaders want to try him for war crimes, and that dictators who lose wars they start often end up quite badly.

Putin has to continue to lie. Were he to say anything other than what he has been saying from the beginning -- that he had to conduct "a special military operation", not a war, to "protect" the people of Donbass against a "Nazi" Ukrainian government -- would be to reveal that he was lying all along. He is not going in the direction desired by the most fanatical Russians: the total destruction of Ukraine, but no one knows what he will decide in the weeks to come. The "partial mobilization" has already sparked discontent in the Russian population. A total mobilization would no doubt arouse even more, but does Putin even care about the discontent he arouses?

Putin might desperately try to reverse the situation, whatever the cost. The Ukrainian government might never forgive the crimes committed and is unlikely to make any concessions. Ukraine and its heroism have shocked the world. Ukraine's army can win, but it will require the unwavering support of the West. Zelensky said he would only accept a full recognition of Russian defeat, the full withdrawal of the Russia's army from all Ukrainian territory, and Russia's punishment.

To many, Putin's future looks grim.

The men he recently began sending to the front may be reservists, but most have not held a weapon for a very long time and have no will to fight. Some who managed to send messages on Telegram channels say they know they are destined to be cannon fodder. It would take months to make these reservists effective combat soldiers. Even with the required training, their lack of will to fight would render them ineffective. They have to rub shoulders with criminals recruited from prisons and people released from mental institutions who have been given a uniform and an old gun. Cases of mutiny reportedly have multiplied over the months. Deserters who managed to reach European countries are providing testimonies. One man who found asylum in France described the army as if from a third world country.

Russia's army, which now lacks modern weapons, seems unable to acquire them. Due to Western sanctions, also applied by some Asian allies of the West, Russian arms factories have difficulty obtaining the electronic components needed to manufacture advanced weapons that would enable them successfully to confront those supplied to Ukraine. Only two regimes are openly ready to supply weapons to Russia -- the North Korea and Iran -- and these regimes cannot supply modern weaponry; they do not have it.

Ukraine's soldiers, however, are well trained, they now have some of the best weapons, and they have the will to fight.

Putin has almost no allies and could lose what limited support he has. Chinese President Xi Jinping has in common with Putin a clear hostility to the West, but has reportedly not supplied Russia with weapons.

During a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in Samarkand, Uzbekistan last month, Xi reportedly told Putin that it was necessary to "instill stability and positive energy into a world in turmoil". Whatever that meant, it was not a message of support for the war.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on September 20 that "Russia should return the occupied lands to Ukraine" -- not exactly the direction in which Putin would like to be going.

When Putin referred to "all weapon systems available to us", many analysts assumed he was referring to nuclear weapons. Some commentators think Putin might use them if he thinks he is losing everything. All analysts agree that if Putin uses a nuclear weapon (even a small one), he will trigger a strong response.

Biden and Europe are weak; Putin can see it. The Chinese Communist Party, which openly says it wants to dominate the world, apparently does not want a larger war just now. On September 24, Wang Yi, China's foreign minister, was even more explicit than Xi in Samarkand:

"China supports all efforts conducive to the peaceful resolution of the Ukraine crisis. The pressing priority is to facilitate talks for peace. The fundamental solution is to address the legitimate security concerns for all parties. President Xi called on the international community to pursue common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries."

Putin might not want to want to lose China's slim support, almost the only support he has. This view may have led some analysts to believe, perhaps as wishful thinking, that the likelihood of Putin resorting to nuclear weapons is small.

Putin seems to be counting on the fear of nuclear weapons to intimidate the West -- a tactic that has been working -- and on Russia's annexation of Ukrainian territories to claim that he is acting to liberate Russian territories and that any counter-offensive could mean the Ukrainians are attacking Russia. Putin also seems to be counting on energy shortages in the West during the coming winter to force Europeans to lift the sanctions they imposed on Russia. Discontent and angry outbursts among the Europeans are expected: Europeans are not interested in being cold. European leaders have sworn, inexpensively, that they will not give in.

Because Putin has no way out and no way back, he will persist. The sham referenda gave results resembling those of "elections" in the Soviet Union. 99.2 % of "voters" in the Donetsk region chose annexation, 98.4% in Luhansk, 93.1% in Zaporizhzhia, 87% in Kherson. Meanwhile, the Russian army has kept on retreating; Putin nevertheless officially declared the annexation of the regions to Russia. He said that their populations are now Russian "forever", railed against "satanic" West, and proposed a ceasefire that Ukraine did not accept.

It is not certain that that Putin will be able to remain in power. On September 11, Dr Mike Martin, a War Studies Visiting Fellow at King's College London wrote bluntly : "Putin is finished". If, in spite of everything, Putin does manage to stay in power, he will be a diminished dictator, his reputation as a strongman and wise strategist dramatically reduced; he will probably be coasting on borrowed time.

The Russian army has been humiliated. Dozens of generals and senior officers reportedly have been killed. Others have been fired. The Russian economy is slowly falling apart; the possibility for Russian entrepreneurs to do business in the West has weakened and could weaken even more in the months to come. Will the Russian oligarchs indefinitely accept that condition? Some of them in recent months have supposedly "committed suicide". Will these "suicides" continue without Russia's oligarchs asking Putin pointed questions and conspiring with the military to try to redress the situation by removing Putin?

European leaders have, for now, adopted an attitude of verbal firmness. When the war ends, will they learn from their mistakes and finally get rid of their fairy-tale illusions?

In 2019, then US President Donald J. Trump warned then Germany Chancellor Angela Merkel that making her country dependent on gas imports from a regime hostile to the West could expose her country to blackmail and supply disruptions. Merkel was not interested in hearing it. Other European leaders were not interested in hearing it, either, and are now facing the consequences of their own daydreams.

Trump also cautioned the countries of Western Europe to abandon the fantasy that perpetual peace would reign on earth and to respect their commitments as members of NATO, including more funding for their own defense. He added that enemies of the West could strike, and that the US should not be alone in bearing the burden for Europe's defense.

No one listened. French President Macron called NATO "brain dead". Other European leaders have promised to spend more on their defense. Will they do it? For how long? The European countries that were courageous and determined from the start of the war were the United Kingdom and Poland, full stop. France, Germany and Italy took weeks to show some grit.

The United States has, once again, like it or not, emerged as the only power capable of defeating an aggressive enemy of democracy; when it does, the status of the US and NATO are strengthened. It is, however, impossible to forget that America's debacle in Afghanistan, the Biden administration's frenzy to sign a lethal nuclear deal with Iran under almost any conditions, and the extreme weakness of Biden's White House before Putin invaded Ukraine. These failures no doubt played into Putin's decision to invade.

The Biden administration's failure to arm Ukraine before the invasion and his comments that a "minor incursion" might be acceptable were catastrophic. The same failure to provide sufficient deterrence to Taiwan is unquestionably inviting Communist Chinese aggression.

Ruthless dictators dream of conquest; they do not even try to hide it. Enemies of the United States and democracy are ever on the watch for opportunities to strike. In the world as it really is, only the fear of a credible American response can deter enemies and preserve peace.

The way to maintain peace is, as President Ronald Reagan used to say, by "Peace through strength." It was a formula successfully followed by President Trump. The weakness of the Biden administration has created aggression everywhere -- Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, North Korea; assaults on the dollar as the World's reserve currency -- even domestically.

Will the Biden administration ever learn from its mistakes? Or is its ultimate, unspoken goal actually to hand over the United States quietly to Russia, China and Iran?


Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18964/aggression-russia-ukraine

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

A Dangerous New Generation of Militants Is Rising in the West Bank - Jonathan Spyer

 

by Jonathan Spyer

This rising generation did not witness the bitter insurgency of the Second Intifada in the 2000-2004 period, or the Israeli military and intelligence campaign that crushed it.


Israeli soldiers must be on the lookout for loose gatherings of young men in Jenin and Nablus who are ready for violent action against Israelis—soldiers and civilians alike.

Something new is brewing in the northern West Bank. In recent months, in the cities of Jenin and Nablus, the Israeli authorities have observed the emergence of novel and unfamiliar forms of armed Palestinian political organization. These new structures are only loosely associated with existing Palestinian political movements. They represent the coming of age of another generation.

Committed to a broadly Islamist political outlook, with no interest or reference to diplomatic processes, and supporting a strategy of armed insurgency, this inchoate gathering represents a fresh challenge both to Israel and to the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority.

Alongside this emergence and related to it, there has been an uptick in recent months of activity by individuals professing loyalty to the Islamic State organization, in both the West Bank and Israel. The last significant wave of terror attacks, in the April-May 2022 period, featured both incidents emerging from the Jenin-Nablus areas, and acts committed by individuals linked or loyal to Islamic State.

These linked phenomena may well show in outline the next phase of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

So, what exactly is going on?

The current ferment in Jenin and Nablus derives from a combination of factors: The pandemic and its associated closures exacerbated impoverishment. The Palestinian Authority has reduced its activities in the area, and its credibility is nonexistent among the younger generation. This rising generation in turn did not witness the bitter insurgency of the Second Intifada in the 2000-2004 period, or the Israeli military and intelligence campaign that crushed it. Weaponry proliferates and is readily available—often in the hands of clans or organized criminal groups.

All these factors have combined to produce a loose gathering of probably no more than several hundred young men in each of these cities, who are ready for violent action against Israelis—soldiers and civilians alike.

The well-known Palestinian organizations are seeking to organize in this space. Hamas is traditionally relatively weak in the northern West Bank. Islamic Jihad, and Fatah are the strongly rooted movements there.

The Iran-supported Islamic Jihad is particularly prominent in Jenin. In late 2021, it founded the "Jenin Battalion," with the intention of organizing the armed young men of the city and refugee camp under its banner. The 'battalion' appears to have no real hierarchy, and it brings together operatives from a variety of organizations and of none.

Islamic Jihad's contribution, presumably, is financial. But it is seeking to ride a wave, not generating it.

Similarly, in Nablus, "Lion's Den" is the name given to the umbrella grouping bringing together the young militants. Again, money may be coming from the more traditional structures—Hamas or Islamic Jihad in Nablus. But the impetus is local and comes from below.

The result is a rising arc of violence. It began during Ramadan, this year (April-May). On March 29, April 7, April 29, and May 5, deadly terror attacks which together took the lives of 12 Israelis, were launched by individuals hailing from the Nablus and Jenin areas. These attacks placed the areas in question on the radar of the Israeli security forces.

Near nightly raids into these cities have followed. More than 100 Palestinians have been killed, and around 1,500 arrested in the resultant clashes. The attacks continue to trend upward. Figures released by the Shin Bet, Israel's internal security agency, in late September show a total of 212 attacks—such as throwing Molotov cocktails, pipe bombs, and stabbings—that month, compared to 172 in August, and 113 in July. There were 34 shooting attacks in September, compared to 23 in August, and 15 in July. Two Israelis, a soldier and a civilian, were killed in September.

Alongside and parallel to the growth of the attacks emerging from the Jenin and Nablus areas, there are indications of the emergence of active Islamic State activity in Israel and the West Bank. The first three acts of the wave of terror that took place during Ramadan didn't come from the northern West Bank. Rather, all three—in Jerusalem, Beersheba and Hadera, all within Green Line Israel—were committed by individuals professing loyalty to IS. Seven Israelis were killed in these incidents. The Israeli authorities just last week took down an IS cell in Nazareth planning a series of attacks.

So, what does all this mean, and what might it portend? Deterioration to a new, 2000-2004 style insurgency shouldn't be ruled out. But sporadic, largely un-directed ongoing violence is equally likely. Palestinian politics is split and stalemated. Neither diplomacy nor insurgency have broken the enemy or made real gain. The current inchoate military organizing is a knee-jerk, despairing response to this, lacking any political horizon, but fueled by considerable fury, and by an unchanged politics that rejects all compromise.


Jonathan Spyer is a Ginsburg/Milstein Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum and director of the Middle East Center for Reporting and Analysis.

Source: https://www.meforum.org/63697/a-dangerous-new-generation-of-militants-is-rising

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Thursday, October 13, 2022

Calls grow to kick Iran out of UN body dedicated to equality and empowerment of women - Benjamin Weinthal

 

by Benjamin Weinthal

'Why would they vote for this regime, which is anti-woman?'

 

Women and girls of Iran are leading the most significant challenge to the existence of the Islamic Republic of Iran in this century, according to veteran experts of Iran. 

Their opposition to the theocratic state and its radical Islamic law requiring head coverings for women has drawn sharp criticism with respect to Tehran’s role on the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women.

The Geneva-based watchdog organization, UN Watch, said Iran’s clerical regime began in March its "four-year term on the U.N.’s top women’s rights body, having been elected last year with the votes of at least four Western states."

The U.N.’s Commission on the Status of Women is, according to its mission statement, the "principal global intergovernmental body exclusively dedicated to the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women."

IRANIAN ENFORCES OPEN FIRE ON 'SCHOOLGIRLS' AS REGIME PREPARES FOR CRACKDOWN ON KURDISH PROTESTERS: REPORT

Hundreds of women protest at the funeral of Kurdish-Iranian woman Mahsa Amini, who died while in custody of Iran's morality police after they arrested her for violations of hijab laws.

Hundreds of women protest at the funeral of Kurdish-Iranian woman Mahsa Amini, who died while in custody of Iran's morality police after they arrested her for violations of hijab laws.  (Courtesy The Foreign Desk)

It remains unclear if the U.S. will energetically lead a campaign to oust Iran from the U.N. Commission. After Russia invaded Ukraine in early 2022, the U.S. organized a vote to evict Russia from the U.N. Human Rights Council due to its "gross and systematic violations and abuses of human rights" in Ukraine. 

"When democracies turn a blind eye to how the U.N. mechanisms like the Commission on the Status of Women have been usurped by a regime [in Iran] that prides itself on humiliating girls and women on a daily basis, that kills girls and women for showing some strands of hair, that legalizes inequality and propagates the idea of women’s subordination through its totalitarian regulation of social life, its schools system and media, those democracies denigrate themselves," Mariam Memarsadeghi, an Iran expert and fellow for the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, told Fox News Digital

FEMALE STUDENTS SHOUT AT IRANIAN PRESIDENT TO 'GET LOST' AS HE CONDEMNS PROTESTS

Iran’s notorious morality police allegedly killed the 22-year-old Iranian-Kurdish woman Masha Amini last month because she failed to properly cover her hair with a hijab. Amini’s death in police custody has sparked four weeks of ongoing protests. 

Amini’s death has struck a nerve among Iran’s young population. The deputy commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, a U.S.-designated terrorist organization, said the average age of protesters arrested by the regime is fifteen. 

"At the very least, move to oust the regime from the Women's Commission," Memarsadeghi said of the Biden administration. "The U.S. should lead the world's democracies to impose a diplomatic boycott on the gender apartheid regime. This is what Iranian political prisoners are bravely calling for and what the people of Iran deserve as they fight for a future of freedom and dignity, not only for themselves but for all the world". 

Mahsa Amini, the 22-year-old Iranian woman who was allegedly murdered by Iran's morality police.

Mahsa Amini, the 22-year-old Iranian woman who was allegedly murdered by Iran's morality police. (Obtained by Fox News)

When asked about the Iranian regime’s role on the Women’s Commission, a State Department spokesman referred Fox News Digital to the department’s principal deputy spokesperson Vedant Patel, who last week said he did not have any "actions to preview." 

He noted that "Iran’s membership on the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women is, frankly, laughable. We have been always clear that it is outrageous that some of the worst human rights abusers, like Iran, sit on certain U.N. commissions. And this is a perfect example.

"And we’ve been clear in joining the global condemnation of Iran’s violent oppression of women and the violent suppression of protests. As you saw, we were one of the 54 countries that issued a joint statement at the Human Rights Council calling for Iran to stop this violent crackdown."

Stéphane Dujarric, spokesperson for Secretary-General of the U.N. António Guterres, told Fox News Digital "the secretary-general has no role whatsoever in these elections." He noted however that "every member state has a duty to live up to the ideals they have signed onto in the Charter of the United Nations as well as Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Those who sit on these bodies have an added responsibility."

International flags outside the United Nations headquarters in New York Sept. 20, 2021.

International flags outside the United Nations headquarters in New York Sept. 20, 2021.  (Jeenah Moon/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

"U.N. Women does not comment on decisions by member states related to their representation at the commission," a U.N. Women spokesperson told Fox News Digital when confronted about Tehran’s role on the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women and the Islamic Republic’s violent crackdown on women.

"U.N. Women works with all U.N. member states to advance gender equality and the empowerment of women. The Commission on the Status of Women is the global community’s premier intergovernmental body on women’s rights, and any country holding one of the 45 seats at the commission is an indication that the country is willing to actively work within the mandate of this important body and its agenda.

HALEY SAYS IRANIAN REGIME JOINING UN'S COMMISSION ON WOMEN'S RIGHTS IS A 'COMPLETE JOKE'

"The Commission on the Status of Women is a body made up of member states. The commission has 45 members which are elected for a four-year term. As in all U.N. bodies that have fewer members than the 193 U.N. member states, membership is allocated equitably among geographical regions, and member states determine this allocation of seats. All member states of the United Nations can participate in the annual session of the commission, including in the negotiations of the agreed conclusions." 

Manda Zand Ervin, whom President Bush appointed as the U.S. Delegate to the U.N. Commission on the Status of Woman in 2008, told Fox News Digital the commission’s statement is "verbiage." 

"The duty [of the commission] is to protect human rights and not dictators," Zand Ervin said. "This commission was particularly established to protect human rights of women. But everything has become political."

She said Iran’s regime has used its "money and power" to buy the votes of Third World countries to secure a seat on the commission.

Zand Ervin also took the European democracies to task for voting for Iran’s regime to be on the commission. 

"They (the West) should not have voted for Iran," Zand Irvin said. "Why are they covering up the names? Why would they vote for this regime, which is anti-woman, to represent Iranian women? This is shameful for Europe."

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, center, reviews an honor guard during his official departure ceremony as he leaves Tehran's Mehrabad Airport to New York to attend annual U.N. General Assembly meeting.

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, center, reviews an honor guard during his official departure ceremony as he leaves Tehran's Mehrabad Airport to New York to attend annual U.N. General Assembly meeting. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)

UN Watch reported that "four of the 15 EU and Western Group democracies on ECOSOC, which include Australia, Austria, Finland, France, Latvia, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States, voted for Iran. UN Watch called on lawmakers to demand that their governments reveal how they voted."

Zand Ervin did not mince words. 

"The U.N. is a corrupt organization," she said. "The regime is keeping them [European countries] happy by buying their products from western Europeans, especially Germany." She stressed that it is important to classify the Islamic Republic of Iran as a "gender apartheid regime" for its laws relegating women to an inferior status. 

IRAN CUTS OFF SOCIAL MEDIA, INTERNET SERVICES AS PRESIDENT RAISI ADDRESSES UN AMID WIDESPREAD PROTESTS

Zand Ervin has spent the last 30 years working to advance the rights of Iranian women and is the author of the groundbreaking book, "The Ladies’ Secret Society: History of Courageous Women of Iran."

"For us, it is not surprising that the women are fighting because everyone is expecting that this revolution will be by the women. That is why the regime is demonizing women. They are afraid of the power of Iranian women," said Zand Ervin.

The U.N.’s failure to hold autocratic member states like the Islamic Republic of Iran accountable for its alleged violent misogyny has long been a focal point of criticism from Iran experts.

"The truth is that the U.N. has become a tool in the hands of the world’s most brutal regimes," Memarsadeghi said. "It has been become the very opposite of what Eleanor Roosevelt intended — an institution to safeguard human dignity and security.

"Electing the Islamic Republic of Iran to protect women’s rights is like making an arsonist into the town fire chief," Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, said at the time Iran won its seat on the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women.

People light a fire during a protest over the death of Mahsa Amini, a woman who died after being arrested by the Islamic republic's morality police, in Tehran, Iran September 21, 2022.

People light a fire during a protest over the death of Mahsa Amini, a woman who died after being arrested by the Islamic republic's morality police, in Tehran, Iran September 21, 2022.  (West Asia News Agency via REUTERS)

"We call on the U.S., EU states and all other democracies to end their silence — regardless of any nuclear deal with Tehran — and state for the record this is absurd, morally reprehensible and an insult to the oppressed women of Iran. This is a dark day for women’s rights and for all human rights," added Neuer.

Fox News' queries sent to the Islamic Republic of Iran's foreign ministry and its U.N. mission were not answered.


Benjamin Weinthal reports on Middle East affairs. You can follow Benjamin Weinthal on Twitter @BenWeinthal.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/world/calls-grow-kick-iran-un-body-dedicated-equality-and-empowerment-women

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Rep. James Comer: 'We're investigating Hunter Biden because he's a national security threat' - Charlotte Hazard

 

by Charlotte Hazard

Rep. Comer said that the media is protecting the Biden family by not asking the tough questions.

 

Kentucky GOP Rep. James Comer says that if Hunter Biden gets indicted, it should be on major charges, and not "small potatoes."

"What we're hearing out of the Washington Post and rumors that we're hearing, what Hunter Biden is going to be indicted on, this is small potatoes," Rep. Comer said on the Wednesday edition of the "Just the News, No Noise" TV show.

"Lying on the gun application, tax evasion, these are things that we've known about for a long time. I don't really care about those things. We're investigating Hunter Biden not to get Hunter Biden. We're investigating Hunter Biden because he's a national security threat."

Rep. Comer said that the media is protecting the Biden family by not asking the tough questions.

"When CNN interviews the president of the United States last night to talk about Hunter Biden, they talk about his gun violation, and they don't mention the millions of dollars that he received from a Chinese energy company, which is now the American version of Enron," he continued.

According to Comer, the Biden family has been using the Biden name to get rich through overseas deals.

"It looks like to me that Hunter Biden and Hunter Biden's Uncle Jim have been profiting off the Biden name," Comer continued. "They've been serving as a lobbyist for foreign countries and for companies that normal Americans wouldn't be allowed to do business with to try to help them navigate the government bureaucracy."

Comer says that if Republicans take the House back, investigating Hunter Biden and his business deals will be one of the main priorities.

"Joe Biden has an America-last energy policy," Comer stated. "That's China first and America last. Why is he doing that? Maybe it's because he's compromised because of his son's shady business dealings. So these are the things that we're going to look into in a Republican majority."


Charlotte Hazard

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/james-comer-says-hunter-biden-national-security-threat-and-needs-be-indicted

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Saudis say Biden admin requested oil production cut to come after midterms - Anders Hagstrom

 

by Anders Hagstrom

The Biden administration has threatened Saudi Arabia with 'consequences' for moving forward with the cut

 

President Biden's administration urged Saudi Arabia to delay cutting oil production by one month, putting it behind the midterm elections, the country said Thursday.

The Saudi government, which leads the OPEC oil conglomerate, rejected appeals from the U.S. last week and moved forward with cutting oil production, potentially causing gas prices to spike in the U.S. before Election Day. 

"The government of the kingdom clarified through its continuous consultation with the US administration that all economic analysis indicates that postponing the Opec+ decision by a month, according to what has been suggested, would have had negative economic consequences," read a Thursday statement from the Saudis, according to the Guardian.

The Biden administration responded to the decision with outrage, declaring Wednesday that the U.S. would "reassess" its relationship with the Saudis.

SEN. BOB MENENDEZ CALLS FOR END TO ALL COOPERATION WITH SAUDI ARABIA OVER OPEC+ OIL CUT

President Biden speaks during a rally hosted by the Democratic National Committee at Richard Montgomery High School in Rockville, Maryland, on Aug. 25, 2022.

President Biden speaks during a rally hosted by the Democratic National Committee at Richard Montgomery High School in Rockville, Maryland, on Aug. 25, 2022. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

President Biden and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman arrive for a photo during the Jeddah Security and Development Summit (GCC+3) at a hotel in Saudi Arabia's Red Sea coastal city of Jeddah on July 16, 2022.

President Biden and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman arrive for a photo during the Jeddah Security and Development Summit (GCC+3) at a hotel in Saudi Arabia's Red Sea coastal city of Jeddah on July 16, 2022. (MANDEL NGAN/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre went so far as to accuse the Saudis of siding with Russia on Tuesday. She announced Biden's plans to take a step back from the long U.S. alliance with the Saudi government, though both the president and the administration have refused to offer details on potential actions.

AFTER OPEC OIL CUT, WASHINGTON POST CLAIMS BIDEN'S FOREIGN POLICY WITH SAUDI ARABIA HAS ‘FAILED’ ‘BADLY’

In addition to potential electoral fallout in the U.S., many European countries are facing strained energy supplies this year as Russia has limited exports in retaliation to Western economic sanctions over President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine.

"We believe by the decision that OPEC+ made last week, [Saudi Arabia is] certainly aligning themselves with Russia," Jean-Pierre said during a Tuesday briefing at the White House. "And right now, this is not the time to be aligning with Russia, especially with this brutal, unprecedented war that they started in Ukraine."

Biden's allies in Congress are also pushing for him to make a move against the Saudis. Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., called on the White House to "immediately freeze all aspects of our cooperation with Saudi Arabia" on Monday. He added that the U.S. should consider cutting off arms sales to the country.

A flame burns off waste gas at Saudi Aramco's Ras Tanura oil refinery and terminal in Ras Tanura, Saudi Arabia.

A flame burns off waste gas at Saudi Aramco's Ras Tanura oil refinery and terminal in Ras Tanura, Saudi Arabia. (Simon Dawson/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

"There simply is no room to play both sides of this conflict — either you support the rest of the free world in trying to stop a war criminal from violently wiping off an entire country off of the map, or you support him," Menendez wrote. "The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia chose the latter in a terrible decision driven by economic self-interest."

Biden himself confirmed that he is exploring "consequences" for Saudi Arabia in a recent interview.

"There’s going to be some consequences for what they’ve done with Russia," Biden told CNN’s Jake Tapper in an interview released Tuesday. "I’m not going to get into what I’d consider and what I have in mind. But there will be consequences."


Anders Hagstrom Send tips to Anders.Hagstrom@Fox.com, or on Twitter: @Hagstrom_Anders

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/saudis-say-biden-admin-requested-oil-production-cut-come-midterms

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Biden’s lies, outright fabrications repeatedly dismissed, downplayed and softened by media - Brian Flood, Nikolas Lanum

 

by Brian Flood, Nikolas Lanum

Reporters look the other way when Biden ‘constantly lies with impunity,’ Joe Concha said

 

The media has long downplayed and softened President Biden’s decades-long history of falsehoods, as most recently evidenced by a euphemism-filled New York Times report that referred to outright fabrications and lies as "folklore" stories with "factual edges shaved off."

The Times finally discovered Biden’s trouble with the truth on Tuesday but was widely mocked for using mealy-mouthed language in the report.

The Times noted Biden has lied about being "raised in the Puerto Rican community at home," his academic record, his life story, being arrested when protesting civil rights, being arrested in South Africa, pinning a Silver Star on a Navy captain and even the timeline when he rode on Amtrak to visit his sick mother, among other things. He’s told other unbelievable stories that the Times failed to mention, such as the claim he confronted a gang leader named "Corn Pop" in the 1960s. 

But instead of flatly calling Biden a liar, the Times said he "embellished narratives, sometimes only loosely based on the facts, to weave together his political identity." 

The New York Times was mocked Tuesday for euphemism-stuffed report on President Biden’s falsehoods.

The New York Times was mocked Tuesday for euphemism-stuffed report on President Biden’s falsehoods. (REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton/File Photo  |  Getty Images)

WHITE HOUSE FEELING 'TREPIDATION' OVER BIDEN'S 80TH BIRTHDAY, WILL ‘DOWNPLAY’ CELEBRATION: POLITICO REPORT

"Mr. Biden’s folksiness can veer into folklore, with dates that don’t quite add up and details that are exaggerated or wrong, the factual edges shaved off to make them more powerful for audiences," the Times reported.

The Times also claimed former President Trump "lied constantly" and "Biden’s fictions are nowhere near that scale" and took the Republicans-pounce approach by declaring, "Biden’s critics have seized on his falsehoods to depict him as either a purposeful liar or a forgetful old man."

Some of Biden’s dishonest statements are political, such as the time he claimed the economy had "zero percent inflation" during July when it was actually 8.5%. Other times, they’re wildly exaggerated tidbits about his personal life. He often botches key details, misremembers dates and sometimes seems to just make up or embellish tales about his past. 

He has falsely claimed he was "appointed" to the Naval Academy, dishonestly said he was arrested in South Africa, misleadingly bragged he was arrested during the civil rights movement in the United Stated, inaccurately claimed he was once a professional truck driver and oddly claimed he was "sort of raised in the Puerto Rican community at home." 

Biden’s lies are sometimes repeated multiple times, often growing bigger with each exaggerated version of the actual event. He declared this week that "everything was ruined" from the basement to the attic and "we almost lost a couple firefighters" when lightning struck his home 15 years ago. 

NEW YORK TIMES MOCKED FOR EUPHEMISM-STUFFED REPORT ON BIDEN FALSEHOODS: 'FOLKLORE,' 'FACTUAL EDGES SHAVED OFF'

President Biden once inaccurately claimed he was arrested in South Africa trying to see Nelson Mandela.

President Biden once inaccurately claimed he was arrested in South Africa trying to see Nelson Mandela. (Photo by Erin Scott-Pool/Getty Images)

However, the Associated Press at the time reported that "no one was injured" in the "small fire that was contained to the kitchen" and under control within 20 minutes. 

Greg Price, a senior digital strategist for X Strategies, put a spotlight on Biden’s fire falsehood by sharing footage of the apparent exaggeration. He believes "Biden has spent his entire career lying" but regularly gets a pass from the mainstream media.  

"The reason he gets away with it is because, contrary to what Chris Cilizza once said, reporters do in fact root for a side," Price told Fox News Digital, referring to the CNN’s reliably liberal Cillizza famously claiming that "reporters don’t root for a side. Period." 

Despite Cilizza’s often-lampooned 2016 claim, many seem to think the media favors Democrats. Alyssa Farah Griffin, who plays the role of token conservative on ABC News’ "The View," recently claimed Biden’s constant gaffes are "endearing" because "people do make mistakes."  

BILL MAHER DEFENDS BIDEN FROM COMPLAINTS OF HIS AGE FOLLOWING 'WHERE'S JACKIE?' GAFFE

Fox News contributor and "Come On, Man" author Joe Concha believes coverage would be "whatever exceeds 24/7 pious outrage" if a Republican said something so demonstrably false as Biden’s claim that "everything was ruined" when his kitchen caught fire. 

"Instead, it’s silence of the lambs," Concha told Fox News Digital.

"He constantly lies with impunity and for no apparent reason. He said he finished at the top of his law school class. He finished near the bottom. He had to drop out of the 1988 presidential race due to plagiarism. He keeps saying he was arrested during civil rights protests. He said he was arrested trying to see Nelson Mandela. He insists inflation is at or near zero percent. He says we’re not in a recession. And he says the border is closed," Concha continued. "Yet, fact-checkers either ignore the lies or try to defend them."

BIDEN, IN RESURFACED 2017 CLIP, RECOUNTS BIZARRE RAZOR-AND-CHAIN SHOWDOWN WITH 'BAD DUDE' GANG LEADER CORN POP

Media Research Center founder Brent Bozell was among the critics of the New York Times piece, blasting Biden as a "pathological liar" that can’t be saved by the left-wing newspaper. 

Fox News contributor Ari Fleischer agreed, saying the Times piece was "the most cleaned up, soft landing a journalist can spin" on behalf of any politician.

"In the real world, the headline would be ‘Biden Frequently Caught Lying,’" Fleischer wrote. 

The Times is hardly the only journalism institution willing to overlook, downplay or soften Biden’s history of telling tall tales. 

WHITE HOUSE FEELING 'TREPIDATION' OVER BIDEN'S 80TH BIRTHDAY, WILL ‘DOWNPLAY’ CELEBRATION: POLITICO REPORT

The Washington Post recently declared, "After four years of a presidency that swamped Americans with a gusher of false and misleading claims, the Joe Biden era has offered a return to a more typical pattern when it comes to a commander in chief and his relationship with the facts — one that features frequent spin and obfuscation or exaggeration, with the occasional canard."

The mainstream media’s fact-checker industry has regularly turned a blind eye. 

Politifact, a product of The Poynter Institute, appears more concerned with making sure critics of Biden are held accountable than the White House itself. 

Politifact is more concerned with making sure critics of President Biden are held accountable than the White House itself, according to a recent study.

Politifact is more concerned with making sure critics of President Biden are held accountable than the White House itself, according to a recent study.  (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

During Biden’s first 20 months in office, there were 58 pieces published by Politifact to fact-check the president compared to a staggering 338 pieces designed to fact-check Biden critics, according to the Media Research Center's NewsBusters

CNN's fact-checker Daniel Dale, who has gone weeks and months at a time without publishing articles on Biden claims, wrote earlier this year that, in 2021, "Unlike his uniquely dishonest predecessor, Biden did not bury fact-checkers in a daily avalanche of serial falseness. Biden never came close to making a dozen false claims in a single speech, let alone five dozen false claims in one address, as Trump once did."

3 WAYS JOE BIDEN LOST CREDIBILITY WITH VOTERS AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR THE MIDTERMS

New York Times fact-checker Linda Qiu was one of the authors of the piece informing readers that Biden has "embellished narratives" throughout the course of his career. NewsBusters executive editor Tim Graham noticed that despite Qiu clearly being aware of Biden’s fabrications, she hasn’t exactly covered them. 

"Qiu is the paper’s designated ‘fact checker.’ So if Biden is habitually spinning yarns that unravel, she must be busy with Biden checks, right? No. She hasn’t ‘fact checked’ Biden since August 20, 2021 on the Afghanistan withdrawal fiasco under an extremely mild headline: ‘Clarifying Biden’s Take of Evacuation," Graham wrote. 

"A peek at her archive of articles since then includes at least 14 fact checks of Republicans and/or conservatives. This 14-to-1 imbalance in target selection would remind you of PolitiFact – which makes sense, because that's where Qiu worked before joining the Times," Graham continued. "This dramatically imbalanced pattern of targeting explains why conservatives are hostile to ‘fact checkers,’ not to facts."

Fox News contributor Deroy Murdoch has seen enough. 

"Joe Biden frequently recounts stories about phantom Amtrak conductors, imaginary residential infernos, and baseball glory that he never achieved," Murdoch told Fox News Digital. 

"Biden could invent these non-events to make himself look good. In that case, he is a pathological liar. But, even worse, maybe he really believes that these non-events actually took place," he continued. "If so, then he is living a life of total fantasy. Liar or fabulist? The American people need neither in the White House. Joe Biden cannot be replaced as Commander-in-Chief soon enough."  

Fox News’ David Rutz contributed to this report.


Brian Flood, Nikolas Lanum is a media reporter for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to brian.flood@fox.com and on Twitter: @briansflood.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/media/bidens-issues-truth-constantly-dismissed-downplayed-softened-media

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Turkey's Antagonism of Greece Is Putting NATO to the Test - Clifford Smith

 

by Clifford Smith

Last month, Turkey violated Greek airspace 110 times in a single day, an issue that has become a "daily source of tension" according to Greek news outlets.


Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Bob Menendez (D-NJ) has introduced an Amendment that would condition Turkey's ability to buy advanced American F-16 fighter jets, above.

The troubling events in Ukraine are a direct threat to the interests of the US and its allies, but also an indirect threat by giving leverage to a wayward Turkey to strong-arm the US and its allies into ignoring its non-stop abuses simply to get Turkey to help Ukraine against Russia. Turkish acquisition of advanced weaponry, most recently its attempts to purchase advanced F-16 fighter jets, is the issue where this dynamic has played out most clearly.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Bob Menendez (D-NJ) just put this issue front and center by introducing an Amendment that would condition Turkey's ability to buy advanced F-16s.

Scholars have long pointed to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's "Pan-Islamist, Neo-Ottoman," ideology as a threat to regional stability. As such, Turkey was already on a downward slope in its relationship with the US. After Turkey's purchase of the S-400 missile from Russia, it became a downward spiral. Turkey was the subject of the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) due to its deal with Russia and was removed from the F-35 program. Rather than reversing course, Ankara simply changed its request to purchase advanced F-16s to modernize its air force.

Ankara's assumption seemed to be that the US was forced to kick them out of the F-35 program, but that once that was done, things would go back to normal. They were in for a rude awakening. Congressional pushback was immediate, with a pair of bipartisan letters, representing a bipartisan coalition of nearly 60 House members, opposing any sale of advanced F-16s to Turkey. Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, also opposed the sale, and Ranking Member Senator Jim Risch (R-ID) was also hesitant, saying "Until the issues surrounding [the S-400 missile] purchase are resolved I cannot and will not support weapon sales to Turkey."

Just as bad for Ankara: the Biden Administration was lukewarm and made no firm commitments. Current-US Ambassador to Turkey, Jeff Flake, pledged further CAATSA sanctions should Turkey buy more Russian weapons.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine gave Erdogan a new lease on life. Now portraying Turkey, untruthfully, as a steadfast ally of NATO's position on Ukraine, or alternatively as a useful arbiter between Ukraine and Russia, Erdogan had newfound leverage.

Sen. Risch softened his stance, saying "The Turks have made a credible argument for why they should get the F-16s. I'm positively disposed in that direction, but I'm not completely there yet." Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), usually a critic of Turkey, said "I support the sale. While we have differences with the Turkish government, Turkey is a NATO ally, and we need to strengthen that alliance."

This dynamic accelerated after Sweden and Finland petitioned to join NATO. Turkey's Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu immediately said that "Countries supporting terrorism should not be allies in NATO," referring to Sweden and Finland's support for Turkey's oppressed Kurdish minority. Quickly, NATO countries worked to ensure Turkey wouldn't halt NATO enlargement.

Biden announced his support of the sale of F-16's. However, Biden personally stressed that "I need congressional approval to be able to do that."

During the recent House side passage of the NDAA, Reps. Chris Pappas (D-NH) and Frank Pallone (D-NJ) offered an amendment that would bar the sale unless the administration certifies that it is necessary for U.S. national security and concrete steps have been taken to ensure they are not used for repeated unauthorized overflights of Greece.

One would not naturally think that one NATO ally would be flying aggressive missions over another's airspace. But just last month, Turkey violated Greek airspace 110 times in a single day, an issue that has become a "daily source of tension" according to Greek news outlets. The diplomatic strain between the two is severe. This is partly about the decades-old fight over the island of Cyprus, but also other items such as an oil pipeline between Israel and Greece, among others. Leaked documents suggest Turkey even has ready-made plans to invade Greece. These are not trivialities.

So when the amendment passed with a comfortable bipartisan majority of 244 to 179, Turkey was put in a difficult spot. Çavuşoğlu called any such restrictions "unacceptable," a sentiment echoed by Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar, who nonetheless insisted that the House Amendment could be overcome because of "work to be done in both the White House and the Senate." Erdoğan threatened to purchase jets from Russia, the United Kingdom, or France instead.

However, Senator Menendez is now offering a similar amendment in the Senate, something that is expected to be voted on in the coming weeks. A coalition of various ethnic groups and thinkers have signaled their support. This amendment will put the issue in focus. Will Turkey follow through and refuse to buy F-16s if they cannot use them against Greece?

The Biden Administration's position is nuanced. Given Biden's insistence on Congressional approval, when he has the power to waive it in emergency situations, it's fair to ask if his statement is a face-saving way to deny Turkey the jets, while still gaining Turkey's cooperation on Ukraine.

The logic of the situation is clear: the US is willing to appease Turkey if it means NATO unity in opposition to Russia's reckless and criminal attack on Ukraine. But Turkey cannot credibly claim that the sale will provide that sort of unity if they are openly signaling they intend on using American jets to antagonize Greece.

Turkey is hoping that the Senate will overlook this contradiction. It should not. Erdoğan privately disdains NATO, and simply uses it as a tool to gain leverage. Erdoğan is all too ready to move closer to Russia, to Iran, and to coddle the most radical Islamist movements. Turkey needs to change its behavior, not its ask.

Until that time comes, the US should reject Turkish demands that it be allowed to use US technology to antagonize a fellow NATO member.


Clifford Smith@CliffSmithZBRDZ) is director of the Middle East Forum's Washington Project.

Source: https://www.meforum.org/63686/turkey-antagonism-of-greece-is-putting-nato-to

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter