Can You See Peace in Ukraine?

KYIV, UKRAINE – Feb. 25, 2022: War of Russia against Ukraine. A residential building damaged by an enemy aircraft in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv © Drop of Light / shutterstock.com

Unwelcome intervention by the US and NATO in the Russo-Ukrainian War has angered Putin and delayed the end of the conflict. As the war approaches its third year, it is time for the US to initiate negotiations to achieve peace. NATO must also dissolve or reorient itself to prevent further violence.

On February 24, 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine as concerns about Ukraine joining NATO grew. Over two years later, the war rages on and global powers continue to ignore pleas for negotiation even as the death toll mounts. With Russia now threatening the international community, the United States has a responsibility to engage in negotiations.

Ukraine, NATO and the Soviet Union

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is not simply a territorial land grab. There is a long and complex history between the two countries that exist in the context of a tense global political climate. 

After Russia, Ukraine is the largest country in Europe. The two nations share deep cultural, economic, familial and political ties. But compared to Russia, Ukraine is a fledgling nation. Ukraine officially gained independence from the USSR in 1991, but has since had a difficult time escaping Russian influence and finding stability.

After WWII, the rivalrous Cold War began between the US and the Soviet Union, which at the time included Ukraine. Two years later, the US led the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to resist Soviet expansion. To balance the scale, the Soviet Union created the Warsaw Treaty Organization (WTO), also known as the Warsaw Pact, in 1955.

In 1991, the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact fell. There was no longer a need for NATO. However, NATO did not dissolve. Despite assurances from the US and NATO’s Secretary to limit expansion, NATO engaged in membership talks with numerous post-Soviet republics and satellite states, such as Ukraine. 

The US affirmed its support for Ukraine joining NATO with NATO’s 2009 Declaration to Complement the Charter. In the following years, the US channeled both political and financial support to Ukraine and began aiding the country with military supplies, becoming Ukraine's biggest defense partner. 

America’s place in the war

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has been catastrophic, costing billions of dollars and resulting in nearly one million casualties. While US President Joe Biden has made it a point to show his support for Ukraine, some argue that international involvement in the war has been uncalled for and driven by political interests. 

While serving as vice president, Biden supported the termination of a top prosecutor in Ukraine. The prosecutor was investigating Burisma, a private energy company where Biden’s son Hunter served as a board member. During his time at the company, Hunter made one million dollars per year. Political opponents accused Biden of abusing his power as vice president to benefit his family’s personal financial benefit. 

On September 24 at the United Nations, Biden spoke proudly of American democracy. He dared to say “I’ve made the preservation of democracy the central cause of my presidency.” Yet his role in the Russia–Ukraine War says otherwise. While at least 70% of Americans want negotiations to end the war in Ukraine, Biden ignores the will of the people and brutally continues escalating the war by providing weapons and $175 billion in aid to Ukraine. 

However, the role of the US is not simply that of an individual actor. The US also leverages its immense power within NATO to influence the war strategically. 

NATO’s mistakes

In reality, NATO has been a disaster for the world. The organization and its allies have stockpiled biological, radiological, chemical and nuclear weaponry. Led by the US, NATO member states have aided and armed belligerent nations, such as Israel against the Palestinians, Lebanese and Syrians. They armed and provided intelligence to Saudi Arabia against Yemenis. They instigated civil wars in Libya and Syria. The US alone has a military presence in many nations and participates in military alliances, often in support of NATO members. A recent example is the US involvement in Niger in support of France, but now, both countries are arguing on how to deal with the junta that overthrew the president. 

The Russia–Ukraine war and the bloodbath caused by Israel in Palestine are testimonies to NATO members’ destructive behaviors, which violate the organization’s commitment to the UN to support global peace and security.

As for the situation in Ukraine, NATO continued expanding east despite Russia’s persistent objections. In December 2021, Russia gave its last official warning to NATO to cease this expansion. Russia demanded, among other things, that NATO bar any military activity in Ukraine. Putin also referenced alleged genocide being carried out in eastern regions of the country and the need to denazify a fascist, Western-leaning Ukraine to further justify the invasion. 

If Ukraine had joined NATO, Russia could have had US offensive nuclear missiles right at its borders. By permitting Ukraine to stay neutral, NATO could have prevented the catastrophic war. But, as usual, the US-led NATO ignored the warnings. 

Unable to resolve the concerns through negotiation, Russia deemed itself forced to invade Ukraine. For Americans to understand Russian concerns about Ukraine joining NATO, they might see a parallel with the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, when the Soviets installed some of their offensive nuclear missiles in Cuba. If the Soviets had not withdrawn those missiles, it could have resulted in another world war. Regrettably, Biden has not demonstrated the same circumspection that Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev did when he decided not to provoke his adversary further.

As a result, the Russia–Ukraine war has gone on and has been one of the deadliest European wars in history. As of September, Russia incurred over 610,000 casualties and Ukraine around 480,000. All that could have been prevented if the US-led NATO opted for negotiation. 

The world is wising up. Many nations do not support US-led NATO action against Russia and reject efforts to isolate Russia, instead favoring peace. 

Negotiating peace is the right thing to do

As in the Cuban Missile Crisis, negotiation has been the only way to resolve these issues effectively. Escalation may ultimately lead to nuclear war, threatening the existence not only of the US and Russia but the entire world. Many nations would like to see a ceasefire and meaningful negotiations, especially regional powers that are sympathetic to Russia such as China, India and Iran.

To stop further destruction, NATO must allow Ukraine to remain a neutral country outside of the organization. But suppose that does not mitigate the Russian security concerns. In that case, NATO may have to withdraw the membership of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to support further neutrality. Before his death, political scientist Henry A. Kissinger even suggested that NATO allies push Ukraine to give up territory to stop the war. 

Yet, a far better solution for global peace would be the dissolution of NATO itself. A US-led NATO interfering in the affairs of other countries has caused much pain and suffering across the globe. It is time for the organization to be tethered or dissolved for good.

Achieving peace requires that all parties come to the table and negotiate, give up something they want and atone for past wrongs. As hundreds continue to die each day, it is high time for the US to recognize these truths and take steps toward achieving peace. 

By MEHDI ALAVI

Fair Observer originally published the article on October 6, 2024.

Read More

French Genocide in Algeria: Time for Introspection

 

During the colonial era, France routinely committed ethnic cleansing and genocide in Algeria. However, France has yet to offer an apology or reparations. In a time when it has empowered genocide in Palestine, France could gain some respect by apologizing to the people of Algeria, paying reparations to the millions who suffered and bringing officials to justice.

In 2017, Emmanuel Macron admitted that French colonization was a “crime against humanity” while campaigning for the French presidency. However, Algeria expected France to officially apologize for these crimes. France has yet to do so. In fact, President Macron dared to question if Algeria would have existed if it had not been for the “French colonizers.”

In the Algerian War of Independence from 1954 to 1962, France committed unimaginable atrocities against Algerians in both Algeria and France. Algerians who cooperated with French forces were often captured and killed by their countrymen fighting for independence. Many escaped and sought asylum in France, where they were then put in camps and denied basic human rights and access to education. Those in Algeria fighting against the French were subject to horrific crimes such as systematic torture, which often resulted in deaths that were labeled as suicides.

In 1961, a year before Algeria gained independence, thousands of Algerians peacefully protested in Paris. In this event that became known as the Paris Massacre, French police killed over 100 of the demonstrators, shooting some and throwing others into the river. The French government covered up such atrocities by censoring the media and destroying archival evidence.

On September 20, 2021, President Macron condemned the “massacre of Algerians in Paris.” He issued an apology to the Algerians who fought alongside the French forces and to the families of those whom the Algerians captured as traitors and killed during the fight for independence. 

Over the course of the conflict, the French colonization of Algeria is estimated to have cost up to 1.5 million Algerian lives. In 1962, an agreement was finally reached calling for a cease-fire, and Algeria gained independence after 132 years of French rule.

The shaping of Algeria

For the last five hundred years, Algeria has had a turbulent past. Around the turn of the seventh century, Arabs first conquered the region today known as Algeria. At the time, it was home to an indigenous group called the Berbers, known for their bravery and independence. However, that conquest was short-lived, and upon a second attempt, the Arabs were defeated by a Berber warrior queen named Kahinah.

In 705, the conquest finally succeeded. Arabs settled in the region and Berbers gradually became Muslims, adopting Arabic as their language. In 711, Berbers joined the Arabs in the conquest of Al-Andalus, present-day Spain and Portugal.

In 742, the Muslim Berbers rebelled against Arab rule and succeeded. By 907, much of North Africa came under the control of the Fatimids, a Shia sect. Over time, local rulers began to follow Sunni Islam and from that event to the 15th century, the area lived in turmoil.

Then, the Europeans arrived. In 1471, the colonization of Africa began with the Portuguese taking some of the Moroccan coastlines. In the early 16th century, Algeria came under the Ottoman Empire.

Although Algeria was under the Ottomans, that did not stop colonists from attacking it. The French invaded Algeria in 1682, the Dutch in 1715, the Spanish in 1775 and the US in 1815, to name a few. In 1830, the French conquered Algeria and it eventually became a French colony.

The colonization of Algeria

When the French invaded again in 1830, it took them nearly 20 years to conquer Algeria. The occupation was bloody and brutal, resulting in a substantial reduction in the local population. Some even consider the conquest genocide.

As the French struggled to gain control, they deliberately killed, raped, tortured, and buried unarmed civilians alive. Out of a population of three million, French forces caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Algerians, some occurring as the result of disease and famine. Around two million civilians were kept in prison camps. French officer Lucien de Montagnac, who was sent to assist in the colonization effort, wrote that the French must “annihilate all that will not crawl beneath our feet like dogs.”

The legacy of colonization in Algeria goes far beyond mass killings. The French stole religious endowments, restricted movement and confiscated fertile lands which they then gave to settlers. The French also plundered gold, iron, coal and other minerals, some of which are still in France.

Over the next century, France struggled to maintain control of Algeria. In 1911, a group of upper-class Muslims labeled themselves “Young Algerians” and demanded representation in the French National Assembly, which was duly declined. Not long after, when France began drafting Muslims to fight the Germans in WWI, many Algerian Muslims took up arms and resisted the law. In the following decades, tensions continued to boil over between Algerians and the French.

The Algerian War

By 1945, encouraged by the 1941 Atlantic Charter, Algerians demanded full independence. When Nazi Germany accepted defeat, Algerians gathered in large numbers to not only celebrate the fall of the Nazi regime but also to garner attention during the United Nations Conference in San Francisco. They wanted the delegates to know that Algeria existed and was ready to be an independent nation. In May, after the conference commenced, mass protests broke out in cities across Algeria.

Like all other mass protests, some violence occurred. The French reacted with aggression, and by the end of June had massacred several thousand Algerians. Many of those Algerians had fought side-by-side with France against Germany.

From their experience in 1945, Algerian patriots realized the only way to gain their freedom was through armed struggle. In 1954, unable to make progress, young Algerian patriots formed the Revolutionary Committee of Unity and Action (CRUA). They tried to unite the Algerians to fight the French and liberate their country. The CRUA created the National Liberation Front (FLN) to direct the Algerian War of Independence, which in turn created the National Liberation Army (ALN). So began the Algerian War.

Protests continued throughout the country, and as France suppressed uprisings, violence broke out. French brutality angered more peaceful civilians to join the revolutionaries, and the movement grew.

In 1958, France offered Algerian Muslims an opportunity to become equal with the French settlers. After so much bloodshed, it was too late, and revolutionaries rejected the offer and asked for independence. By March 1962, the French agreed to grant independence after the 132-year struggle.

Make wrongs right

Despite admitting their atrocities, the French maintain that they will not offer any “repentance or apologies.” To regain some respect, France could acknowledge, apologize and make reparations for the crimes against humanity they committed during colonial times. Importantly, reparation payments should go directly to victims and their descendants, not to the coffers of the Algerian government. To compensate for the ravages of colonization, the French could additionally allocate a sum for education and infrastructure.

Support should also be offered by organizations like the UN. Despite its mission to support peace and security, the UN has consistently failed to stop genocide, prevent ethnic cleansing or sufficiently support victims such as those in Algeria. Consider the ongoing example of the innocent Palestinian men, women and children being butchered daily by US-backed Israel. From Cambodia to Sudan, the UN has let down countries and communities across the world.

In the case of Algeria, the UN heard the cries but failed to provide justice. Even with denials and cover-ups, evidence of the French atrocities were overwhelming. To right these wrongs, a UN-organized International Tribunal for Algeria (ITA) would be a good first start. Just as victims of the Holocaust have been compensated, Algerians must also receive compensation.

While no sum of money can ever erase the suffering of Algerians, reparations are an important step. First, victims get justice. Second, poor countries and victims get valuable financial support. Third, they set an important precedent for holding colonizers accountable. France must take responsibility and action to rectify the country’s dark history in Algeria.

By MEHDI ALAVI

Fair Observer originally published this article on September 20, 2024.

Read More

The Wondrous Life and Strong Policies of President Ebrahim Raisi

 

Tehran, Iran – May 22, 2024: Ebrahim Raisi, president of Iran, Amir Abdollahian, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran, and two others on a billboard after their death in a helicopter crash near Tabriz.

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi was recently killed in a helicopter disaster. He was the people’s president, constantly working for his citizens’ best interests. Raisi has been mourned by many world leaders and over a million Iranians.

he Bell 212 helicopter tragedy on May 19, 2024, killed several important political figures: Iranian President Sayyid Ehrahin Raisi-Sadati, aka Ebrahim Raisi; foreign minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian; Governor of East Azerbaijan Malek Rahmati; and Supreme Leader Representative Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashim. The head of the president’s security team, two pilots and a flight crew also perished. The preliminary investigation showed “no evidence of foul play or attack.” Poor weather caused the accident, as fog impaired the pilot’s visibility.

The day after the crash, on May 20, Raisi was pronounced dead. I wish to honor the president’s passing by presenting his most valuable contributions to Iranian society. Such a hard-working, influential man deserves nothing less.

Raisi’s life and achievements

Ebrahim Raisi was born in Mashhad, Iran in 1960. He lost his father at age 5, causing his family to struggle financially. At age 15, he joined the seminary in the city of Qum. At age 20, he joined Iran’s new judiciary following the conclusion of Iran’s 1979 Revolution. In 1983, he married Jamileh Alamalhoda, daughter of Mashad’s Friday prayer Imam Ahmad Alamolhoda. They had two daughters together.

From here, he was appointed to several important positions. In 1988, he stood as a member of a judicial committee overseeing political prisoners, including the members of the Mujahideen-e Khalq terror organization. A year later, he became the prosecutor of Iran’s capital city of Tehran. In 2004, he was appointed as first deputy chief justice. In 2006, he was elected to the Assembly of Experts, a clerical body appointing the Supreme Leader. In 2012, Raisi earned his PhD in law from Shahid Motahari University. He was appointed Prosecutor General of Iran in 2014 and chair of the Astan Quds Razavi, one of Iran’s biggest religious endowments, in 2016.

His political career did not stop there. Raisi ran in the 2017 presidential election as a critic of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The incumbent president Hassan Rouhani, who invested much of his reelection campaign in the JCPOA, ultimately won. In 2019, Raisi was appointed as Iran’s chief justice. He ran again in the 2020 presidential election and won in 2021. He earned 62% of the popular vote, though the turnout was around 49%. This was over three years after US President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA.

Finally, on May 19, 2024, Raisi died in the aforementioned helicopter crash in the mountainous region of Azerbaijan. His funeral processes were held in Tabriz, Tehran, Ray, Qum and Mashhad, with over a million attendees.

Raisi was the people’s president. He worked seven days a week, traveling across the country, visiting every province and talking to people from all walks of life. He sat with villagers as if he were one of them, listening and trying to address their issues. In government, he developed positive relations with Iran’s judicial and legislative branches. He enjoyed good relations with the military and religious authorities.

Raisi took the focus away from Iran’s unsuccessful approach with the West, instead turning attention to neighboring countries and the East. He improved relations with Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Egypt, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Uzbekistan. In particular, he solidified Iran’s friendship with Russia and China. A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman speaking on behalf of Chinese President Xi Jinping said Raisi made “positive efforts to consolidate and expand the comprehensive strategic partnership between China and Iran.”

In February 2023, Raisi finalized the 25-year “strategic cooperation pact,” with China. The two countries signed numerous other bilateral cooperation documents. In April 2023, Raisi led Iran to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a Eurasian political, economic and security organization. He led Iran to sign an agreement with Iraq to construct a railway from the Iranian city of Shalamcheh to the Iraqi city of Basra.

In May 2023, Raisi signed an agreement with Russia to build a 170-kilometer railway connecting the Iranian city of Rasht to the Azerbaijani city of Astara. In November 2023, a month after the October 7 Hamas terror attack on Gaza and Israel’s barbaric response to it, Raisi participated in a Saudi summit. This meeting condemned Israel’s war crimes against Palestinians in Gaza.

In January 2024, Raisi led Iran to join Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS), an intergovernmental organization promoting non-interference, equality and collaboration. In May 2024, he signed several agreements with Pakistan to strengthen “bilateral relations across political, economic, trade, and cultural domains.” That included increasing the bilateral trade to $10 billion.

During Raisi’s tenure, Iran increased its crude oil exports from 0.6 million barrels per day in June 2021 to over 1.6 million in April 2024. The country achieved this over 200% increase despite the draconian sanctions the US implemented in 2018.

Official condolences from world leaders

Iran was showered with condolences from countries worldwide honoring Raisi and the other officials. “I send condolences upon the deaths of President Ebrahim Raisi, Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian and all who perished in yesterday’s helicopter crash,” Pope Francis wrote to Iran’s Supreme Leader.

Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim was “deeply saddened” by Raisi’s passing. “His dedication to justice, peace, and the upliftment of the ummah [the Islamic community] was truly inspiring. We committed ourselves to bolstering Malaysia-Iran relations, working together for the betterment of our peoples and the Muslim world. Our pledge will be fulfilled,” Ibrahim said.

Even the US, Iran’s worst adversary, sent Iran a message regarding his death: “As Iran selects a new president, we reaffirm our support for the Iranian people and their struggle for human rights and fundamental freedoms,” Department of State spokesman Matthew Miller said.

Iran declared five days of mourning for Raisi and the other officials’ deaths. Lebanon and Syria followed with three days while India and Iraq took one. On May 21, the UN lowered its flag to half-mast in honor of the late president. The UN Security Council atomic watchdog observed a minute of silence to honor him.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres and members of the Security Council extended “sincere condolences to the families of the deceased and to the Government and people of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

Iran’s policy will not change

Iran’s democracy must continue without Raisi. According to Article 131 of the Iranian Constitution, “The Council…is obliged to arrange for a new President to be elected within a maximum period of fifty days.” Iran has already scheduled the popular presidential election for June 28.

The deaths of Raisi and others will not alter Iran’s foreign policy. After such large public attendance at his funerals in five different cities, any loyal follower is obliged to enforce his policies: to strengthen relations with neighboring countries, collaborate further with China and Russia and support oppressed people worldwide. Specifically, Iran would continue supporting the oppressed Palestinians until they can restore Palestine.

Raisi was a great man. We must never forget nor devalue his policies that brought our world one step closer to peace.

BY  MEHDI ALAVI

The article was originally published by Fair Observer on June 12, 2024.

Read More

How Do You See Iran’s Attacks on Israel?

  

 

Fired missiles fly to the target. Missiles at the sky at sunset with Iran flag. Missile defense, a system of salvo fire. © Hamara / shutterstock.com

Despite deep animosity over Israel’s decades-long mistreatment of Palestinians, Iran has shown considerable restraint. Nevertheless, Israel lashed out, killing three senior Iranian officers and six other Iranians in an illegal air strike in Damascus. Iran’s reply was a responsible and moderated strike on Israel that killed no one. Yet it cost Israel and its allies billions and gained Iran a valuable advantage.

Article 154 of its constitution requires Iran to support oppressed peoples. Palestinians continue to endure significant oppression. Thus, Iran stands with the Palestinian people and works to promote their liberation. (Encouragingly, an increasing number of Americans are also aligning themselves with the plight of the oppressed Palestinians.) Iran has thus supported Hamas, earning the ire of this Palestinian group’s arch-foe, the US-backed Israel.

Iran’s leadership demonstrates sagacity rather than acting capriciously. It has no desire to provoke an unnecessary war with Israel. However, when Israel assassinated senior Iranian officials in Damascus via an airstrike on April 1, 2024, Iran needed to respond. On April 14, Iran responded with a drone and rocket attack that targeted Israeli territory but caused no deaths.

In the aftermath of Iran’s attack, the US has made efforts to rein in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and prevent escalation. However, this endeavor has proven to be challenging. Netanyahu believes that the US Congress would compel the US to support Israel in a potential conflict with Iran. Presently, he finds himself surrounded by fellow hardline extremists who, like him, fail to recognize the shifting attitudes of the American populace towards Israel. Notably, among the younger generation of Americans, only 14% express sympathy towards Israel, a stark decline from 64% in 2023. These Americans are unwilling to commit to armed conflict or sacrifice their lives for Israel.

Once again, the US intervened to support Netanyahu, entreating Iran to permit a symbolic Israeli strike. Iran, of course, refused, but on April 19, Israel carried out an air strike in Iran’s Esfahan province. There were no casualties. For the moment, this seems to be the end of the exchange.

Netanyahu is cognizant that his political career is effectively over after the Israel–Hamas war, and thus his mandate as well, ends. He faces prosecution for personal corruption and mismanagement, particularly concerning dealings with Hamas. He thus has a personal incentive to prolong the war, perhaps banking on US intervention to safeguard Israel.

Should Israel or the US mount another offensive resulting in casualties or significant damage, hell would break loose in the Middle East. Such a war could destroy US influence in the region and even imperil the very existence of Israel.

A century of struggle and suffering in Palestine

Let’s back up a bit and consider why Gaza is such a sensitive topic for Iran.

In the early 20th century, Jews fled persecution in Christendom and migrated to Palestine. Palestinians initially welcomed them, providing sanctuary. Palestinian hospitality encouraged Zionist-minded Jews to settle in Palestine. By 1930, tensions escalated as the newcomers perpetrated violence against Palestinians. This violence peaked between 1947 and 1948, resulting in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians known as the Nakba.

Since then, Israel, with the support of the US-led West, has continued to marginalize Palestinians and push them into smaller and smaller plots of land. Israel split Palestine into two territories: the larger West Bank in the east, and the tiny Gaza Strip, only 365 square kilometers, to the south. After Palestinians voted for Hamas in 2006, the militant group assumed control of the Gaza Strip. Israel (and Egypt) responded by blockading the territory, creating what is frequently called an open-air prison, with two million people crammed into an area the size of the US Virgin Islands (home to 87,000 people).

Since the outbreak of the present Israel–Hamas war in October 2023, Israel has not only killed over 34,000 people in its land and air assault on the Gaza Strip but intensified its blockade, at times even restricting the inflow of drinking water, and put the territory’s population on the brink of starvation.

Founded in a revolution against an oppressive secular government backed by Western powers, the Islamic Republic of Iran sees itself as the protector of the Islamic world against oppression and imperialism. For Iranians, Palestine is the prime case of a suffering Muslim people. So, naturally, whatever happens in Gaza reverberates in Iran.

Iran’s commitment to standing with the oppressed finds its origins in the nation’s majority Shia Islamic faith. Wherever Shia Muslims reside, they draw inspiration from Imam Hussein, a grandson of the Prophet of Islam, who sacrificed his life and those of his loved ones in defense of justice. “In the face of oppression,” Imam Hussein declared, “I choose to stand with courage and uphold the banner of justice.” Shias align themselves with the oppressed and advocate for justice. They do not discriminate based on race, religion, ethnicity, or any other criteria. Presently, Shias in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and various other nations unite in solidarity with Palestinians, even though most Palestinians are Sunni Muslims rather than Shia. What matters most for Iranians is solidarity with the Muslim community and with oppressed peoples across the globe.

Israel’s actions have provoked anger worldwide, even in the West. What is true in the rest of the world is true in Iran tenfold. Iranians are deeply angry. Yet it is a testament to the restraint and prudence of Iran’s leadership that it has so far not let this righteous outrage tempt it into a war.

Iran’s strategic calculations in the face of Israeli provocations

Although Iran rejects aggression, Israel nearly drew it into war anyway by striking its officers. On April 1, 2024, Israel breached Syrian and Iranian sovereignties by bombing the Iranian consulate compound in Damascus, Syria, resulting in the death of 16 individuals. Among the casualties were three senior commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force — Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, General Hossein Aminollahi and General Mohammad Hadi Haj Rahimi — and six other Revolutionary Guard members.

The US promptly announced that it had nothing to do with Israel’s bombing of Iran’s consulate in Syria. However, the US administration refrained from condemning it. As usual, its media empire repeated the US assertions by downplaying the Israeli assault on the consulate. Incapable of independent thought, the US and its media still keep persistently echoing Israel’s lies, propaganda and unverified rumors.

For years, Iran’s Supreme Leader has exercised patience in response to Israel’s provocations, including sabotage of its endeavors in Iran’s nuclear and missile programs as well as targeted killings of Iranian scientists and military personnel. Following Israel’s bombing of Iran’s consulate in Syria on April 1, military action was withheld initially, with Iran appealing to the UN Security Council to denounce the violations.

After the UN failed to condemn Israel, Iran’s Supreme Leader declared Iran’s intention to retaliate against Israel, approximately ten days before the attacks. Demonstrating an exemplary degree of responsibility, Iran issued a warning to Israel, the US, the UK, France, and other supporters, prompting them to prepare for defense. Approximately 72 hours before the attacks, Iran notified both its regional neighbors and Western powers of its imminent intentions. This deliberate choice allowed Israel and its allies time to prepare for defensive measures. Symbolically, Iran sought to showcase its capabilities to its adversaries while assessing their strengths and vulnerabilities.

On April 14, Iran executed its attacks on Israel utilizing outdated, sluggish drones and missiles. The journey spanned three to five hours before reaching their intended targets.

By international law and moral standards, Iran’s response was appropriate. Unlike Israel, which follows the Western model by indiscriminately targeting innocent men, women and children, Iran’s objective from the outset was to minimize casualties. Notably, the attacks resulted in no deaths and only one unintentional injury.

Through the operation, Iran successfully achieved its objectives. The strikes seriously damaged at least two Israeli bases, including the highly sensitive Nevatim Airbase, previously utilized by Israel to target Iran’s consulate. Notably, Israel’s purportedly top-tier defense infrastructure faltered during this operation. While British, French and other Western forces participated, the US conducted the bulk of the interceptions.

To Iranians, the attacks served as significant experimental endeavors. Remarkably, the financial cost to Iran amounted to less than $2 million, whereas its adversaries had to spend $3 billion to counter the attack. Perhaps more importantly, the exercise afforded Iran a deeper understanding of its adversaries’ capabilities.

On April 19, Israel launched rockets toward the nuclear facilities in Natanz, Esfahan province, Iran. Reports indicate that Iran intercepted all incoming projectiles, with some debris landing in Iraq. Iran has not retaliated.

The ever-pro-Israeli US press, led by The New York Times, sought to ignore or downplay Iran’s success and paint the exchange as a mere distraction. Americans should exercise discernment and not take such propaganda at face value. Instead, they should seek out independent sources, such as Fair Observer, for a more realistic perspective.

A call to reform US policy on Israel

It is time for Americans to shake off the passivity they have indulged in for too long. The US, after all, is supposed to be a democracy. Yet a significant majority, exceeding 60% of Americans, disapprove of Israel’s actions in Gaza, while Congress approves $26 billion in more aid for Israel. To reclaim the nation’s integrity, Americans must conscientiously vote out representatives who support such allocations in future elections.

As an American committed to safeguarding the nation’s long-term interests, I advocate for constructive engagement with Palestinians to facilitate the cessation of Israeli colonization and the restoration of the Palestinian state. This endeavor should ensure equal rights for all Palestinian Christians, Jews and Muslims. Additionally, individuals of Jewish descent without historical ties to Palestine should be permitted to repatriate to their ancestral lands or other countries, provided they have not been complicit in crimes against humanity.

True Christians and Jews must actively follow their religious teachings by promoting brotherhood and peace. They must not permit political and religious demagogues to encourage or engage in atrocities such as those in Palestine in their names. Additionally, they should acknowledge that Israel is no friend of the US, but rather an adversary, one which has even fired upon the US Navy with apparent impunity.

Under President Joe Biden — a self-declared Zionist — achieving a peaceful solution in Palestine appears unlikely. Nevertheless, it remains certain that each individual will be held accountable for the suffering they cause, whether directly or indirectly, upon others. Before they are held accountable before God, let us hold them accountable at the ballot box, and perhaps save their souls or, at least, our own.

BY   MEHDI ALAVI

The article was originally published by Fair Observer on May 3, 2024.

Read More

How to Tell Between an Iranian “Proxy” and an Ally

Aitit,southern Lebanon/Lebanon:1/6/2017: flags of Hezbollah with the sun shine reflection During a military salute For the funeral © crop media / shutterstock.com

Western media habitually label Hamas, the Houthis, and Hezbollah as Iran’s proxies. One could just as reasonably consider European countries proxies of the US. Such a blind approach only serves to further erode the media’s credibility. A more accurate description for these groups would be “allies” or “partners” of Iran.

William Randolph Hearst, who built the United States' largest media conglomerate, famously declared, "You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war." Hearst pioneered yellow journalism, a style characterized by its extensive use of bold headlines and exaggerated narratives, often rooted in speculation and dubious information.

Sensationalism plagues the American media. The dramatization of news stories to attract a wider audience and generate revenue is a persistent trend. The media habitually deploy misleading information, propaganda and unverified rumors.

This penchant for sensationalized reporting has become so ingrained that even some formally independent media outlets can be drawn into this vortex. Fair Observer purports to champion balanced and truthful reporting. However, during the recent coverage of escalating tensions between the United States and Iran, this author noted with surprise the editorial oversight that allowed contributors to refer to Iran's allies and partners as proxies.

The terms “proxy,” “ally” and “partner” all describe relationships between actors on the international stage, but they are not synonyms. A proxy is an entity acting on behalf of another, often with a degree of subordination. In legal contexts, a proxy typically grants the designated individual general discretion throughout the matter at hand.

An ally, by contrast, is a party that provides assistance or support in a shared endeavor. Formalized agreements between states for wartime support are what alliances often become in the legal realm. In the context of Iran's Axis of Resistance, this can include non-state actors as well.

Finally, a partner refers to an entity associated with another for the joint execution of an activity that offers mutual benefit. In legal terms, a partnership is an agreement between two or more parties to engage in mutually advantageous projects.

Iran's Axis of Resistance comprises entities such as the Houthis, Hamas and Hezbollah. These groups should not be categorized as Iranian proxies, but rather as allies or partners. (While their alliances with Iran may lack formal agreements, their actions demonstrate a level of cooperation.) Most importantly, each group retains its own decision-making authority. The Houthis pursue independent governance in Yemen. Similarly, Hamas, a Sunni group, has a history of conflict against Iranian-backed forces in Syria to overthrow Syrian President Assad. Hezbollah receives financial and military aid from Iran, yet it maintains its independent decision-making capacity.

Iran firmly bases its policy on ethical grounds when it supports the restoration of Palestinian control over Palestine. Analogous to the shared democratic values purportedly uniting the US and the EU, Iran and its allies share a common goal: the cessation of Palestinian occupation and the facilitation of a coexistence of Palestinian Christians, Jews and Muslims without unequal Jewish power.

The era of colonialism has concluded. Should the Western coalition, led by the US, seek to dismantle Iran’s Axis of Resistance, they must stop colonizing Palestine, thereby letting Palestinians to govern their own territory. Failing this, the resistance will grow stronger and force the West to retreat in disgrace, as seen in Vietnam and Afghanistan.

The proxy narrative is a misconception in Middle Eastern politics

The ongoing conflict between Israel, backed by the US, and the Palestinians in Gaza has garnered global attention since the October 7 attacks by Hamas on Israel. While not directly implicated in the October 7 assault, Iran's allies or partners in Lebanon, Iraq, Palestine, Syria, Yemen and other nations have aligned themselves with Hamas in the aftermath of the incident. The adversarial stance of the United States and its media towards Iran often unjustly characterizes these entities as Iran’s proxies. That is just another lie to instill public anger against Iran. 

In a report spanning 20 pages, Michael Knights of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy asserted that Iran typically refrains from imposing its will on groups such as the Houthis, allowing them autonomy in their decision-making processes. Knights contends that the Houthis are neither direct proxies of Iran nor opportunistic wartime allies. They align with Iran based on shared ideological beliefs rather than coercion. Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, the leader of the Houthi movement, considers himself equal to Iran's supreme leader.

The Council on Foreign Relations’ study too found that mutual consent, not proxy servitude, forms the basis of Iran’s associations, which further debunks the notion of Iran’s dominance over its partners.

The persistence of Palestinian resistance

The Houthis, Zaidi Shia Arabs known for their robust determination and autonomous disposition, remained unsubdued by British dominion over Yemen for 129 years. The are combatants who resist oppression, something evident in their solidarity with the oppressed Palestinians in Gaza. Although, like Iranians, they are Shia Muslims, Iranians are predominantly Twelver Shias. The two sects diverged in the 7th century, and so are separated by more historical distance than Catholics are from Protestants or Orthodox Christians. 

Currently, the Houthis are attracting attention for their strategic blockade of the Bab al-Mandab strait in the Gulf of Aden, aimed at Israel and its allies, including the United States and the United Kingdom. Their actions are underpinned by a principled stance, conditioning the lifting of Israel's internationally condemned blockade of Gaza as a precondition for de-escalation.

Since 2007, Hamas has effectively governed Gaza following the 2006 parliamentary elections, catalyzed by US President George W. Bush's endorsement of Palestinian electoral processes To the US’ surprise, Hamas won the election in Gaza. Instead of endorsing it, the US opted to finance and endorse violence against Hamas, instigating internal conflict among Palestinians. Subsequently, Hamas consolidated control over Gaza in 2007.

Despite Israel's awareness of Hamas as a resistance movement aspiring to reclaim Palestine, it seized upon Hamas' ascension to perpetuate Palestinian disunity and thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state. Under Benjamin Netanyahu's leadership, Israel supported Hamas to prevent the realization of a Palestinian state. In return, Hamas purportedly endorsed a Palestinian state alongside the state of Israel, notwithstanding its status as a resistance entity.

Lacking progress on the two-state paradigm, hostilities naturally escalated between Hamas and Israel. Despite agreeing to a ceasefire and lifting the blockade in 2008, Israel broke the agreement, launching a ground invasion and aerial bombardment of Gaza, subsequently reinstating the blockade. Since then, Israel has invaded and bombed Gaza. The October 7 assaults represented Hamas' desperate bid for liberation from Israeli subjugation. Predictably, Israel's responses have been disproportionately forceful, seeming even genocidal to observers in many corners of the globe. However, US media persists in hiding the truth, perpetuating Israel's customary falsehoods and propaganda.

Iran’s allies share a common objective with Iran: the liberation of Palestine from prolonged oppression under Western colonization. This aggression has perpetuated regional instability, engendering numerous casualties and extensive devastation.

A wake-up call for transparency

Israel has committed atrocities that lay bare a disturbing reality: Media conglomerates are complicit in perpetuating a narrative that shields Israel from accountability, serving as an extension of US policy. Chief among these entities is The New York Times, which actively disseminates falsehoods and propaganda to obfuscate the crimes committed by both the United States and Israel.

We must recognize that the deep state influences the US government and its affiliated media conglomerates, making them untrustworthy as information sources. Therefore, individuals should cross-reference information from these sources with independent media outlets and alternative sources to verify their truthfulness.

Independent media like Fair Observer must vigilantly avoid falling into the deceptive narratives that mainstream conglomerates perpetuate. They must conduct rigorous independent research to maintain the accuracy and integrity of their reporting. Accountability is a moral imperative. And even if we do not hold ourselves accountable in this life, we all will be accountable before God.

BY MEHDI ALAVI

The article was originally published by Fair Observer on April 23, 2024.

 

Read More

How to Know God in Religion

Cosmic Cliffs in the Carina Nebula. James Webb Space Telescope. Glittering Landscape of Star Birth. Elements of this image furnished by NASA. © GizemG / shutterstock.com

The overwhelming majority of the world believes in God. Religion emerged through introspection and observing God’s bountiful creation. Prophets and teachers formed the world’s understanding of God, particularly in the three most popular religions: Christianity, Islam and Hinduism. It is prudent to discuss their commonalities and differences, and how their modern supporters represent their faiths.

Most people in the world adhere to a religion. Followers of the top three religions constitute 72.5% of the world's population. The populace is 31.6% Christian, 25.8% Muslim and 15.1% Hindu. They all have one thing in common: a belief in God.

In history, man has realized that there must be a God that transcended everything, although he cannot perceive this deity with his usual senses. As time passed, the spontaneous realization of God gradually evolved into institutions that we now refer to as religion. People sought religion to address their concerns about natural phenomena and the powers that control them. Therefore, it is not surprising that the essence of all major world religions remains the unity of mankind. It is founded on the belief in the one and only God, which is worshiped through the multitude of idols in Hinduism, the Trinity in Christianity and the oneness in Islam.

When these three major religions are cleared of all man-made innovations, they boil down to many of the same virtues. They promote honesty, trust, compassion, love, peace, cooperation and brotherhood. They prohibit dishonesty, betrayal, theft, rape and murder. They inspire us to help the poor and disadvantaged. The following is a brief discussion of God as he is presented in these religions.

God in Hinduism

Among the world’s major religions, Hinduism is believed to be the oldest, beginning between 2,300 and 1,500 BC. It is rooted in monotheism, the belief in a single omnipotent God. In about 2,000 BC, an early Vedic hymn titled, Origin of All Things, set the foundation for Hinduism by referring to God as the source of life:

There was neither aught nor naught, nor air, nor sky beyond.

What covered all? Where rested all? In watery gulf profound?

Nor death was then, nor deathlessness, nor change of night and day.

The One breathed calmly, self-sustained; nought else beyond it lay.

As time passed, the deity was called the Brahman — “supreme, lord, eternal, unborn, imperishable.” He put in motion “creation, preservation, and destruction.”

Over time, Hindu writers went overboard in creating deities to illustrate the Brahman. He is now represented by over 30 million gods, vying for superiority. This is head-scratching for many. However, the hymn leads wise believers to one conclusion: “God alone knew how the world came into being.”

Hinduism’s core values are based on the purpose of life and ethical virtues. It teaches that given how our universe is created, it is in our best interest to work together for the well-being of mankind and other species. The primary belief of Hinduism is of a universal God. It perceives a pure, wakeful, omnipresent intelligence that created and maintains the universe. It professes the mindset that a clever person should have: He knows that God is beyond the grasp of knowledge, he sees God in every being and he does not get fixated on his choices in achieving eternal life.

Hinduism has influenced and been influenced by other religions. In particular, the faith has influenced Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism and Zoroastrianism. It shares numerous concepts with the Abrahamic religions — Judaism, Christianity and Islam — including the soul (atman) and personal, loving devotion to a deity (bhakti).

The peaceful spirit of Hinduism must not be confused with the bigoted zeal of its followers in attacking minorities in India, especially Christians and Muslims. The country is considered extremely dangerous for women. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi has disgraced the faith by demonizing the minority Muslims and polarizing Hindus against them. In the 2002 Gujarat massacres, Modi allegedly instructed other officials not to intervene as Hindu mobs killed Muslims. As punishment for failing to stop the massacres, the United States banned Modi from entering the country for years.

God in Christianity

Around 2,000 years ago in the early 1st century AD, Jesus Christ was miraculously conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of his virgin mother, Mary. He was one of Abraham’s descendants. He rose among the Israelites and performed countless miracles.

According to biblical scholars, Jesus’s ministry began with his baptism by John the Baptist. He taught that besides worshiping the one God, people should treat others the way they want to be treated. His kind demeanor and peaceful approach provided a positive passivity permeated with intense love and charity toward others.

In his lifetime, Jesus attracted a few dedicated followers. But his message of compassion resonated in the hearts of millions long after him. His teachings became the doctrine of a new religion, dubbed Christianity.

Jesus called the Jews to return to God and observe the commandments laid out in the Torah, the Jewish holy law. In Jesus’s spoken language of Aramaic, God is called Alaha. This is cognate to the Arabic word ilah, the root of Allah (al-ilah, “the God”), the name Arabs and Muslims would go on to use when referring to God.

In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus said, “Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God.” He preached, “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.” Even as the Romans crucified him, he cried, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

The gospels were written years after Jesus. So, some contradictions and inaccuracies are not surprising. However, one thing is clear in all four gospels: Jesus preached the worship of only one God. On occasion, the scribe’s imagination scandalously stretched, equating Jesus or the Holy Spirit with God.

From his message, it is clear that Jesus worshiped the single God, Alaha. This defies the Trinity, an innovation that emerged years after he was gone. The idea of the Trinity, rooted in “threefold”, was first used by Tertullian (d. 200) in his small circle. 

In the 4th century, the First Council of Nicaea, discussed Christ's relationship with the Father and formalized the doctrine of Jesus being of the same substance as God. After that event, the Gospel of Matthew must have been tempered for the Trinity.

As for the Bible, Jesus’s teachings hang on two commandments: First, you must love God with all your heart, soul and mind. Second, you must love other people as you love yourself.

Jesus’s early followers considered themselves Jews by birth or conversion. They believed in the Jewish God and Jesus as the Savior, considering him the prophesized Jewish mashiach, or messiah. They insisted on following Jewish laws and rituals. They never thought of Jesus as the divine. They believed God would destroy their enemies and set the stage for the coming mashiach. He would gather all Jews and bring justice and peace, specifically to Egypt.

Jesus’s disciples lived alongside other Jewish sects, such as Essenes, Sadducees and Pharisees. Some of them were referred to as Ebionites and Nazarenes. Jesus’s early followers closely obeyed his teachings. These peaceful people lived by loving their neighbors, adversaries and persecutors. They never referred to themselves as Christians, as Jesus never gave a name to the faith or followers. However, they considered themselves those Jews who worshiped the one God and exercised love for one another.

Christ preached for people to love one another unconditionally. The aggressively vicious behaviors of Christendom must not be bemused with his teachings. In his book, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon wrote: “Jesus did not bring peace on the earth, but a sword; his patient and humble virtues should not be confounded with the intolerant zeal of princes and bishops, who have disgraced the name of his disciples.”

God in Islam

In 610 AD, in a forgotten land that interested neither Romans nor Persians, a middle-aged man undertook a task no man had ever achieved: to unite mankind. His only weapon was his passionate conviction in the oneness of God, and thus the oneness of humanity. Like Noah, he was patient, persistent and faithful to God. Like Abraham, he reasoned to explain his ideas in a simple language that his people could easily comprehend. Like Moses, he spoke only a few words, filled with wisdom and meaning. Like Jesus, he was humble, compassionate, forgiving and looked after the sick and orphaned. His eloquence pierced the hearts of his listeners.

In his early years of preaching, no one beyond his close family joined him for fear of retribution from the tribal chiefs. After preaching for 13 years in his hometown of Mecca in Saudi Arabia, few people followed him. That only made him more determined. His perseverance finally paid off when he left his home; his teachings changed the desolate Arabian peninsula and the world. This brilliant man was Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam.

Muhammad preached Islam, an Arabic word meaning, “submission to the will of God.” This was the continuation of God’s message to Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus. He spoke of the one God, Allah, Who commanded him:

Say: He, God is one.

God is He on whom all depend.

He begets not, nor is He begotten.

And none is like Him.

As for the oneness of God:

If there were, in the universe, other gods besides God, there would have been confusion!

1,400 years ago, Muhammad rejected superstitions and the tradition of following the paths of ancestors. He called people to think, reason and reflect.

At a time when women had little value, Muhammad addressed men and women equally. When men considered daughters shame and killed them, Muhammad preached rights and privileges for women and forbade the people from molesting and hurting them. When the economy ran on the toil of slaves, Muhammad encouraged people to set them free for goodwill and penitence. He championed equal opportunity and encouraged people to give to those less fortunate what they loved for themselves.

These days, we must all have a keen mind when absorbing information. We must not be fooled by the propaganda against Islam that the US has disseminated across the globe. It is perpetuated to distract from domestic issues, cover for atrocities and justify interventions in Muslim countries. The Western support of the Israeli genocide against Palestinians clearly demonstrates that the West has long abandoned its Christian values.

To take a page again from Edward Gibbon, we can say: “[Islam] is free from suspicion or ambiguity; and the Koran is a glorious testimony to the unity of God. The prophet of Mecca [Muhammad] rejected the worship of idols and men, of stars and planets, on the rational principle that whatever rises must set, that whatever is born must die, that whatever is corruptible must decay and perish.”

BY MEHDI ALAVI

The article was originally published by Fair Observer on March 26, 2024.

  

Read More