24.5 C
Wednesday, May 29, 2024

Foreign analysts warn that 2023 has entered with the worst omens

Must read

Με τους χειρ&tau ;ερους οιωνοyς μπorκε το 2023 προειδο ποιοyν οι ξένοι αναλυτές

Foreign analysts conclude that 2023 has started with the worst omens for the global community, who put a series of important issues under the microscope. Linking the ongoing war in Ukraine with new developments in Palestine and Iran, analysts warn that the global community may next period be called upon to face new foci of tension in close proximity to Ukraine's battlefields.

The new attack received by Iran is a development that particularly worries both Western and Iranian, Russian and Asian analysts. From their perspective, the blows to Iran may continue.

It is noteworthy that in an analysis published by the Chinese press, the view that the West is trying to create a big united front stands out. first to weaken Russia and then to stem the rise of China.

"Conflict with Iran: Is the Next War Coming?"

"Trump's best foreign policy? Not to start any war» is the title of the intervention of the American senator J.D. Vance published in "The Wall Street Journal" on January 31st. Among other things, Mr. Vance states the following: "A few days before the 2022 midterm elections in America, Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky accused Russia of launching a missile at Poland. The missile attack, it turns out, did not come from Vladimir Putin's Russia but from Ukrainian air defenses. Even as NATO acknowledged that Russia had not fired the missile, Mr. Zelensky continued to deny Ukrainian responsibility. The story faded from the headlines and Mr Zelensky received a hero's welcome in Washington in December. American taxpayers' money continued to flow into Ukraine. A wiser foreign policy would not let such behavior go unnoticed. The columnist also mentions that: "The cross-party consensus in foreign policy has many times led the country down the wrong path. The leaderships of both parties supported the invasion of Iraq, the decades-long nation-building project in Afghanistan, regime change in Libya and the guerrilla war in Syria. All these policies cost a lot of money and a lot of lives. None of these conflicts served the long-term interest of the nation. That is, of course, until Donald Trump came along. American party insiders view Mr. Trump's record primarily through an inside lens. (But) in Mr. Trump's four years in office, he has not started any war, despite enormous pressure from his party and even members of his administration. Mr. Trump did more than just keep the peace. He brokered the Abraham Accords, a historic accord between Israel and Sunni Arab states that provides the best hope for a long-term counterbalance to Iran. He began the long and slow process of weaning the US from its economic dependence on China and began diplomatic talks with North Korea after half a century of stagnation. He also pushed hard for Europe to take more responsibility for its own defense, precisely so that the US would not be drawn into a conflict like the one in Ukraine.

Nina L. Khrushceva in an analysis published on February 3 in the Canadian newspaper "The Globe and Mail" entitled "Any compromise with Russia could endanger Zelensky's life" writes the following: "A leader who compromises for the sake of peace may well end up dead. This is a reality that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky should know very well. Ukraine's three decades of independence have been marked by fierce political strife, and the months leading up to the Russian invasion were no different. The then-unpopular Mr Zelensky went so far as to bring charges of treason against his predecessor. The Russian invasion changed everything, with Ukraine displaying a level of unity that surprised and, in many ways, inspired the world. Politically, Mr Zelensky has failed to create a government of national unity. But his policy of total resistance—including his demand that Russia withdraw completely from Ukrainian soil before any peace process begins—has won support from left and right-wing Ukrainian opposition parties, as well as its typically unruly oligarchs. The only reports of friction among the Ukrainian leadership concern the generals leading the fight. Some members of Mr Zelensky's inner circle reportedly fear that the military leaders – who enjoy huge popularity among the Ukrainian public – could challenge the president in the next election. Continuing, Ms. Khrushceva adds that: "Many of those who are urging Mr. Zelensky to negotiate with Russian President Vladimir Putin are doing so because they really want the bloodshed to stop. If Mr Zelensky is to be persuaded to make concessions to a regime that has decimated his country's infrastructure and continues to annex more and more of its territory then those encouraging him to do so need to come up with a plan – and they are willing to support it for years to come – which will mitigate any aggressive threats from Russia».

In an editorial entitled "The Guardian's take on violence on the Israel-Palestine axis: the risk of a third intifada" (January 31) the British newspaper "The Guardian" stated the following: "The question is no longer whether a third intifada could happen, but what can be done to prevent it. In a recent poll, 61% of Palestinians and 65% of Israeli Jews believed that possibility was on the horizon. As the violence escalates, the crisis of domestic political leadership demonstrates why others must take action – but Antony Blinken proved that no one should expect the US to do so. At issue is the increasingly distant prospect of a two-state solution, which the US has consistently supported. name but do nothing to promote it. Support for the two-state solution has fallen dramatically among both Palestinians and Israeli Jews, falling to the lowest level since polls began nearly two decades ago. Without a viable path to their own state, Palestinians see settlements incorporating more and more land and themselves with little prospect of changing the conditions that Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and a UN rapporteur – as well as the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem – have described it as a form of apartheid, albeit different from that seen in South Africa. Two developments intensify today's risk. The first is that illegal firearms circulate much more widely in the West Bank. The second is the state of politics. Israel has the most far-right and anti-Arab government in its history. Far from trying to rein in the Israeli government, the US – along with the UK and others – denounces the Palestinians for trying to claim accountability in legal forums. Anti-democratic Arab states have moved steadily closer to Israel. Escalation of violence is not inevitable. But all the signs are pointing in the wrong direction, with no one willing to take real action to pull things back from the brink.

Nilofar Eschborn in an analysis titled "Conflict with Iran: Is the Next War Coming?" which was published on the German news site "t-online" reminds us that at the beginning of 2023, in addition to the ongoing war in Ukraine and the escalation of tension in Palestine, world public opinion is called to focus on Iran. In an analysis published on January 31, Ms. Eschborn noted the following: "Israel and Iran are engaged in a shadow war. For a long time, the conflict did not receive much attention – but now it could escalate. A drone strike is responsible for the latest escalation in the conflict between Israel and Iran: Over the weekend, Iran's state news agency Irna reported a similar incident at a defense ministry munitions factory near Isfahan. The American "Wall Street Journal" said on Sunday, citing people familiar with the operation, that Israel was behind the attacks. What's fueling the recent escalation: Israel's fear of Iran's nuclear arsenal. In response to an “existential threat”, Israel has not shied away from indirectly threatening Iran with an attack on nuclear facilities. The drone attack near Isfahan is not the first attack: in recent years, Tehran has accused Israel of various covert actions on Iranian soil. The latest drone attack can certainly be seen as an escalation of the existing conflict. At least that's how expert Eckart Woertz sees it in an interview with t-online. The reason for this however, is not so much the attack itself as the timing. According to experts, it is impossible to say for sure whether there is a real risk of war at this time. But one thing is certain: both countries are heavily armed.

In an article entitled "Washington accuses Russia of not complying with the latest nuclear treaty" (January 31) the French newspaper "Le Figaro" reported the following: "American diplomats blamed Moscow for suspending inspections and canceling planned talks under the treaty. The United States said on Tuesday that Russia is not complying with the New Start treaty, the latest nuclear disarmament agreement between them. With their new majority in the House of Representatives, Republicans had previously asked US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to report by Tuesday whether Russia is violating the treaty. “Russia is not complying with its obligation under the New Start Treaty to facilitate inspection activities on its territory,” a State Department spokesman said. Relations between the two nuclear powers are at an all-time low since the start of the war in Ukraine. The last meeting of that advisory committee was held in October 2021. In a letter released last week, the heads of several powerful US congressional committees said Russia's actions and statements “raise at least serious compliance concerns.” ; with the New Authority. The treaty is the last such bilateral agreement between the two powers. Immediately after his election in January 2021, US President Joe Biden extended it for five years, until 2026. The treaty signed in 2010 limits the arsenals of both countries to a maximum of 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads on each side , a number that represents a reduction of almost 30% compared to the previous limit set in 2002. It also limits the maximum number of launchers and heavy bombers to 800».

Giuseppe Sarcina in an opinion piece entitled “Zelensky's 10-point plan for peace in Ukraine” published on February 1st in the Italian newspaper "Corriere della Sera" states the following: "Diplomats are working on the "Zelensky formula". The Ukrainian leader would like to put his peace plan to a vote at the UN General Assembly, which is meeting in an emergency on February 24, the anniversary of the Russian attack. (The Ukrainian President's list of proposals) starts with nuclear security, in particular the protection of the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant, which is dangerously close to the fighting. French President Emmanuel Macron has already been pushing the Kremlin for months to create a kind of demilitarized island around Europe's largest nuclear power plant. The second point refers to “Food security, including the protection of grain exports to the poorest nations”. (In terms of energy, not) The Ukrainians suggest: “Ensure energy security by applying restrictions on the price of Russian hydrocarbons”. European countries agreed, with great difficulty, on a ceiling on oil and natural gas prices. But India and China, Moscow's two other big clients, continue to move independently. Other countries will follow. That is why, in the event of a vote in the UN Assembly, this would be one of the most divisive points. (Regarding the issue of prisoners of war, the Ukrainian side proposes) “Release all prisoners of war and displaced persons, including children taken to Russia”. From here, things get a lot more complicated. Zelensky envisages “restoring the territorial integrity of Ukraine based on the principles laid down in the UN Charter”. The same applies to the proposal for the “Withdrawal of Russian troops and the restoration of Ukraine's borders”. The seventh step refers to: "Establishment of a special court to prosecute war crimes committed by the Russians". (Ukrainian side also recommends) The protection of the houses of the environment, with an emphasis on the restoration of aqueducts and sewage treatment facilities. (Also) Ukraine calls for a conflict prevention mechanism to be created. (The Ukrainian list) closes with the request for "a document signed by all parties certifying the end of the war.

Escalation in the Middle East

On January 31, the Iranian news agency "Mehr" published in an article titled "Iran's permanent mission warns, any US military action against Iran would be a declaration of war" the statement of the Permanent Mission of Iran to the UN, which states that: "The Permanent Mission of Iran to the UN has warned that Tehran will consider any US military action against Iran as a declaration of war. (The US move) will be met with retaliation. "According to Iran, using the military option at any level means entering the US into war. “For now, Iran considers such a possibility to be limited,” Iran's Permanent Mission to the United Nations said. Tehran also said that if the US “miscalculates and starts a war”, then Washington will be responsible for the consequences of such a conflict. Washington has so far denied any involvement in the recent attack on Iran. In a statement early Sunday, Iran's defense ministry said its air defense units repelled a drone attack on a military laboratory in Isfahan. The ministry reported that one of the laboratory complexes had been attacked by a number of small unmanned aerial vehicles (MAVs). The air defense of the complex successfully repelled the attack. Iran's foreign minister, Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, condemned the “cowardly attack”. Tehran has also made it clear that it will not stop its progress on its "peaceful nuclear program". 

Ben Caspit in an opinion article published in the Israeli newspaper "Maariv" on February 3 under the title “Before eliminating terrorism, Itamar Ben Gabir would do well to try to grow up”, he offered the following views: “Before eliminating terrorism, restore the feeling of security (which has never really prevailed here); prevent the terrorists and appease the Jews, Itamar Ben Gabir would do well to try to grow up. Even if it were possible to immediately seal every terrorist's house, terrorism would not disappear from the world. I recommend that you study the findings of the committee once established by the Secretary of Defense and former Chief of Staff to see if demolishing terrorist homes will actually increase deterrence. Spoiler: no. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) destroy almost all the homes of the terrorists involved in the attacks. Does this stop terrorist attacks? No. The only way to fight terrorism is through hard work. On the other hand, it would be good to tell the truth. As long as there is no leadership on either side that is willing to talk about ending the conflict, the conflict will continue. And make no mistake: most of the blame lies with the other side, which has so far rejected all the outrageous peace proposals put to it. We suffer terrorist attacks and bury civilians and soldiers, but our situation is incomparably better than theirs. You have to make sure it stays that way. We should hope that, at least on the security issue, Benjamin Netanyahu will be able to chart the right path and install proper checks and balances in the system as he is locked into the most right-wing cabinet in Israel's history. (At the same time he will be called) to have an unpleasant encounter with reality (on a number of issues such as) justice, mass protests (against his government), losses in the investment sector, high technology, the state of markets, valuation credit rating etc. The question is whether he will recover in time or miss the train as he usually does. This time, it's about the train we're all riding together.

The Asian Press

"Russia can't replace the energy market that Putin destroyed" is the title of Julian Lee's opinion piece published on February 1st in the English-language Japanese newspaper "Japan Times". The columnist states the following: "Russia has spent nearly 50 years building its energy market in Europe. President Vladimir Putin destroyed it in less than 50 weeks. When Moscow's troops invaded Ukraine on February 24, European energy market customers panicked. A market that absorbed nearly 2.5 million barrels of crude per day, 1 million barrels of refined products and 155 billion cubic meters of natural gas per year has all but disappeared. The European market for Russian natural gas is also gone. A vast network of natural gas fields and pipelines developed at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars since the first natural gas crossed the Austrian border in 1968 has been thrown into the dust. While Russia may be able to salvage some kind of energy relationship with Europe after the war ends, it is unlikely that EU countries will ever allow themselves to be as dependent on Russian gas as they were just a year ago. before. Governments and consumers in Europe are finally getting serious about demand containment and energy efficiency. While record prices paid for natural gas and electricity have spurred investment in renewable energy and the first serious efforts to change the way retail electricity prices are set. Putin's war in Ukraine has cost Russia the European energy market. It will not be easy to replace. Whatever approach Moscow and Europe ultimately achieve, Russians will still be counting the cost of war for generations to come.

“They are attacking Iran to hurt Russia”, is the title of Petr Akopov's new opinion piece published by the Russian agency “Ria Novosti”. on February 2. The article makes the following arguments: "Although no one has yet claimed responsibility for the recent attacks on Iranian military factories, there is no doubt that the United States and Israel are behind them. The attacks themselves could come from Iraqi Kurdistan which is not controlled by Baghdad and where Israeli and US intelligence services are strong. Israel is not only helping Ukraine but at the same time preventing Iran from helping Russia. And at the same time, it relies on mutual understanding with Russia in Syria, whose territory it continues to attack. Until last February, Iran was – along with North Korea – the country under the most pressure from the West. Russia has now risen to the same level as Iran: we have been stigmatized as the spawn of the devil. There was a Russian-Iranian rapprochement before last February, but now it has accelerated and is becoming deeper, more confidential and more strategic. And no threat of war can scare Iran.

Oleksandr Motyl in an opinion piece published on February 1 in the Ukrainian newspaper "Gazeta" with the title "It's surprising, but it's a fact: the "Putin rule" can bring peace» argues the following: "Sometimes even Russian dictator Vladimir Putin has a good idea. For many years, he insisted that Russia has a right to lands that historically belonged to it and whose inhabitants were considered “ours”. Ex’ and his claims for the Ukrainian Donbass and Crimea, where many Russians and Russian-speaking populations live. This is also his justification for the genocidal war he launched against Ukraine on February 24, 2022. Since, according to Putin, Ukrainians are actually Russians, Russia should have every right to do whatever it wants to them. Putin rightly says that Russia has the right to “historic territories”. He just doesn't understand what the consequences would be for the Russian Federation if the "Putin principle" was applied. (In this case) the Russian Federation will cease to be a federation and instead of this will shrink into a small state centered on Moscow».

Source: KYPE 

Source: www.sigmalive.com

- Advertisement -AliExpress WW

More articles

- Advertisement -AliExpress WW

Latest article