Was Biden angry with Netanyahu for attacking Iran’s diplomatic building, a treaty violation, or for killing aid workers, a war crime, or both?

Was Biden angry with Netanyahu for attacking Iran’s diplomatic building, a treaty violation, or for killing aid workers, a war crime, or both?

    Monday, April 08, 2024   No comments

With news reports about US administration reaching out to Iran with an offer to stop its promise of retaliatory strikes against Israel for the latter's attack on Iran's diplomatic facility in Syria, and with Iran's foreign minister making an unscheduled trip to Oman yesterday, it appears that Biden used the killing of aid workers to mask his anger with Israel crossing a red line and carrying out what is essentially a direct attack on Iran.

There is no doubt that Iran can retaliate directly against Israel. It did so against the US when Trump assassinated Soleimani in January 2020. An Iranian retaliatory attack against Israel could set new course for the entire region, however. 

If Iran attacks Israel directly, the right-wing government in Israel will be forced to retaliate or it will collapse. If it were to retaliate to the retaliation, the armed confrontation enters a new phase, similar to the active front with Hezbollah. That will be catastrophic for Israel for many reasons.

Israel cannot invade Iran and if the US does not get involved directly, all Israel can do is to trade rockets and bombs from distance. That formular favors Iran for many reasons, too.  

First, Iran is a much larger country, and its weapons systems are dispersed all over the country. It will not be possible for Israel to take out all weapons systems. If that was possible, US could have done that in Yemen where a much smaller and less prepared group, the Houthis, have overcome a military Western coalition that has been bombing them for months.

Second, Iran has a formidable array of weapons, rockets and drones, that can be launched for months or even years. In addition to these long-distance weapons, Iran can rely on its allies in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq to provide support.

Iran will respond given that the highest authority in the country already stated that Iran will receive “a slap”. The question is whether US diplomacy will manage to limit Iran’s response to limits of Israel’s attack. That is, an attack on Israeli diplomatic missions and perhaps an attack on military installations in occupied territories to end the cycle. Iran has the option to attack Israel directly because it considers its diplomatic facilities sovereign territories of Iran. However, attacking Israel diplomatic facilities places Iran outside International norms, too, which it has been using to get the world community to condemn it. 

All these factors give credence to the reporting about the US offer to Iran, possibly through Oman. Because all these indicator show that Israel committed a grave mistake when it attacked a diplomatic facility. It may not just US acting to prevent the widening of a conflict, it is likely that Israel wants to limit the damage too. 

The following media reports provide more contect to what might be behind the scene negotiations.

Iranian diplomatic sources say the US is trying to convince Iran not to retaliate against Israel for its bombing of the Iranian embassy in Syria earlier this month, Al-Jarida newspaper reported on 8 April.

The Israeli strike targeted a building attached to the Iranian embassy in Damascus. It led to the killing of the commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, his deputy, and five other IRGC officers.

A source in the Iranian foreign ministry told Al-Jarida that Washington offered Tehran direct negotiations with Tel Aviv to de-escalate the conflict.  

According to the source, Washington will guarantee to persuade Tel Aviv to stop its military operations in Syria and Lebanon on the condition that Iran commit not to retaliate against Israel for the Damascus attack.

At the same time, a diplomatic source in Beirut told Al-Jarida that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected an American proposal to pledge to stop attacks in Syria.

The source added that Iranian leader Ali Khamenei is reviewing the US offer but is not expected to accept it if it does not include guarantees for a comprehensive ceasefire in Gaza and to stop all Israeli and US attacks on Iranian targets or those belonging to Iran's allies in the Axis of Resistance.

The source revealed that the Iranians had also previously received a verbal Israeli proposal via a Gulf state. In the proposal, Tel Aviv claimed it was ready to stop operations against Iranian targets in Syria and Lebanon in exchange for Tehran abandoning retaliation for the killing of Zahedi, whose killing was considered the most significant blow to Iran since the assassination of Qassem Soleimani.

According to the source, the Iranian Foreign Ministry responded to the Israeli message by saying that the proposal must also include a ceasefire in Gaza.

However, some IRGC leaders were unhappy with the foreign ministry's response, viewing the Israeli proposal as a trap. The IRGC leaders argued that any negotiations with Israel must take place only after Iran has retaliated.

The source stated that IRGC commanders believe that Israel's targeting of the Iranian consulate is an opportunity that should not be missed to strike a strong blow at Israel, especially since the consular building in Damascus is considered sovereign Iranian territory and was targeted in a clear violation of international law.

The source said that the IRGC leadership believes Washington will not enter a war with Iran even if it retaliates against Israel. They also consider that an adequately harsh strike against Israel will compel it to accept a ceasefire in Gaza and abandon any plans to invade Lebanon or escalate its bombing in Syria.

Western government continue to lose credibility

Despite the fact that the attack on Iran’s diplomatic mission in Syria violated global treaties including the Vienna Conventions regulating diplomatic and consular relations and the immunities of diplomats and headquarters (1961, 1963, 1969) and the Rome Statute, US government and its Western allies did not explicitly condemn the attack. Instead, they called on Iran to exert “self-restraint.” 

On Thursday, the German Foreign Ministry called, through a statement, on all parties in the Middle East to calm down, exercise restraint, and act responsibly, following a call by Minister Annalena Baerbock who discussed the matter with Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian.

On Thursday, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron warned of “expanding conflicts”. During a phone call with his Iranian counterpart, Hossein Amir Abdollahian, according to a statement by the Iranian Foreign Ministry that was reported by local media outlets, including the private “Tasnim” agency.

According to the agency, the Iranian Foreign Ministry quoted Cameron as saying that he asked Iran to exercise restraint, and said that “lack of restraint on the part of the parties could lead to further expansion of conflicts in the region.”

Regional powers on the other hand voiced condemnation, directly accusing Israel of violating international norms.

Turkey denounced, in a Foreign Ministry statement, the bombing and considered it a violation of international law, warning that the attack may lead to an exacerbation of the conflict in the region.

Saudi Arabia also condemned the targeting in a Foreign Ministry statement, expressing its “categorical rejection of targeting diplomatic facilities for any justification, and under any pretext.”

In a brief Foreign Ministry statement, the UAE condemned “the targeting of the Iranian diplomatic mission in the Syrian capital, Damascus,” without any additional comment.

Qatar also condemned, in a Foreign Ministry statement, the attack, and considered it “a blatant violation of international agreements and conventions,” stressing “its complete rejection of targeting diplomatic and consular missions and the necessity of providing protection for their employees in accordance with the rules of international law.”

Egypt said, in a statement to the Foreign Ministry, “We categorically reject the attack on diplomatic facilities under any justification, and we stand in solidarity with Syria in respecting its sovereignty and the integrity of its lands and people.”

Kuwait also considered, in a Foreign Ministry statement, the attack a “flagrant assault,” renewing its call on “the international community and the Security Council to assume its responsibilities towards taking the necessary measures and exerting the necessary efforts to preserve the safety and stability of the countries of the region and reduce tension and escalation.”

In a statement condemning the attack, the Omani Foreign Ministry stressed “the need to stop the escalation in the region and reject aggression and other actions that threaten security and stability,” expressing condolences to the families of the victims and wishing a speedy recovery to the injured.

Iraq also confirmed in a Foreign Ministry statement that the attack “represents a clear and flagrant violation of international law and Syrian sovereignty,” warning that “the expansion of the cycle of violence in the region will lead to more chaos and instability.”

China and Russia, on the other hand, took advantage of Western reluctance to denounce the flouting of international law

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said that his country strongly condemns the Israeli attack and stresses that the security of diplomatic institutions cannot be violated. He stressed in a press conference in Beijing that “China opposes any actions that lead to escalation of tensions in the Middle East region.”

The Russian Foreign Ministry on Monday strongly condemned the Israeli attack on the Iranian consulate building in the Syrian capital Damascus earlier in the day, denouncing the action as "unacceptable."

"We consider any attacks on diplomatic and consular facilities, the inviolability of which is guaranteed by the relevant Vienna Conventions, to be categorically unacceptable," the ministry said in a statement.

Noting that the attack was carried out in a densely populated metropolitan area with a high risk of mass civilian casualties, the ministry said such "aggressive" actions by Israel are "absolutely unacceptable and must be stopped."

 

UN Security Council rejects US draft resolution on War in Gaza

UN Security Council rejects US draft resolution on War in Gaza

    Friday, March 22, 2024   No comments

 Algeria, the country that proposed an earlier UNSC resolution to stop the war on Gaza, rejected the US-drafted resolution. It was joined by both China and Russia, whose vetoes sunk the US resolution.

Amar Bendjama, Algeria’s ambassador to the UN, said the text was inadequate and failed to address the immense suffering endured by the Palestinians. “Those who believe that the Israeli occupying power will choose to uphold its international legal obligations are mistaken,” he told the council. “They must abandon this fiction.”

Last February, it objected to the use of the term “immediate” in the draft resolution submitted by Algeria.

Since blocking the Algerian draft resolution, which calls for an "immediate humanitarian ceasefire" in Gaza at the end of last February, US officials have been negotiating an alternative text that focuses on supporting diplomatic efforts on the ground for a six-week truce in exchange for the release of the hostages.

The Secretary-General of the United Nations, António Guterres, said that children, women and men are “living an endless nightmare,” stressing that there is no effective way to distribute aid without a ceasefire.

US rejection of three previous UNSC resolutions made some members skeptical and worried that US intentions have been thus far about shielding Israel and not about stopping the bloodshed. They want to see a clean resolution that orders an immediate cease fire and the unhindered delivery of food, water, medicine, and shelter to end the starvation of civilians in Gaza. Other issues can be addressed in separate resolutions.

China insists on an immediate and unconditional ceasefire not linked to the release of the captives

China's Permanent Representative to the Security Council, Zhang Jun, said: "We voted against the American draft resolution because it does not request an immediate ceasefire, even though the Secretary-General used Article 99 of the Charter for that purpose," adding that "the Council wasted a long time and did not request a ceasefire." Fire after."

The Chinese delegate believed that “the American draft resolution is ambiguous and does not meet the aspirations of the international community,” and that it is “unbalanced because it does not explicitly oppose the attack on Rafah,” and “it does not warn of the dire consequences that could result from such an attack.”

He continued: "The Council now has before it a clear draft resolution requesting an immediate ceasefire, and China supports it," expressing his hope "that it will gain the support of member states," because it "requests an end to the conflict and the immediate release of the hostages."

The Chinese delegate also indicated that “China rejects the accusations of America and Britain” related to its positions, considering that “if the United States is serious about a ceasefire, it should support this draft resolution.”

Zhang Jun, China's permanent representative to the UN, offered further explanation about China's voting position and relevant considerations after the vote.

Zhang said that more than 160 days have passed since the outbreak of the Gaza conflict. In the face of this human tragedy in which more than 32,000 innocent civilians have lost their lives and has left millions suffering from famine, the most urgent action to be taken by the Council is to promote an immediate, unconditional, and sustained ceasefire, which is the universal call of the international community. But the Council has dragged its feet and wasted too much time in this regard, Zhang said.

The envoy added that the US has always evaded and dodged the most essential issue, which is a ceasefire. The final text remains ambiguous and does not call for an immediate ceasefire, nor does it even provide an answer to the question of realizing a ceasefire in the short term. This is a clear deviation from the consensus of the Council members and falls far short of the expectations of the international community. 

"An immediate ceasefire is a fundamental prerequisite for saving lives, expanding humanitarian access, and preventing further conflict. The US draft, on the contrary, sets up preconditions for a ceasefire, which is no different from giving a green light to continued killings, and thus unacceptable," Zhang noted.

Moscow said that the American draft resolution does not call for a ceasefire in Gaza.. Talk about that is a hoax

The Russian Deputy Representative to the United Nations, Dmitry Polyansky, confirmed that the American draft resolution on the situation in the Gaza Strip does not include any call for a ceasefire.

Polyansky stated that the draft resolution "does not include any call for a ceasefire, as previous drafts did not include. Rather, only a philosophical statement appeared there about its importance, while linking it to the release of prisoners."

 The Russian diplomat believed that talk about the United States including a ceasefire in Gaza in the draft resolution for the first time is “just an American trick.”

In addition, “there is practically a green light for an Israeli military operation in Rafah, while attention should be focused mainly on praising the United States’ own efforts on the ground,” according to Polyansky.

He added, "This is not what humanitarian agencies need," stressing that "no philosophy will be useful in the absence of a direct demand for a ceasefire."

Polyansky pointed out, "We should not give in to Washington's attempts to present the hope as if it were a real thing, as the United States is still not interested in a real ceasefire, and is doing everything in its power not to prevent its closest ally in the Middle East from abusing the Palestinians."

History of the American veto to protect Israel

The United States’ position on UN Security Council resolutions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is consistent with its historical use of the veto to prevent any resolutions criticizing Israel, or calling for the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The United States, Israel's main backer, had previously used its veto power in the Security Council to prevent the international body from calling for an immediate ceasefire in the Palestinian territories.

Since 1945, one of the five permanent members of the Council - the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France - has used its veto to stop 36 draft Security Council resolutions related to Israel and Palestine before. Of these decisions, the United States objected to 34 decisions, while Russia and China objected to two of them.

Security Council resolutions after October 7

The US veto blocked the resolution issued on October 18, 2023, which had demanded a “humanitarian truce” and Israel’s cancellation of its evacuation order in northern Gaza.

The US representative to the United Nations said, “Resolutions are important... but the actions we take must be based on facts on the ground and support direct diplomacy that can save lives,” according to what Reuters reported.

On February 20, the United States used its veto power again to stop another draft resolution in the Security Council, blocking a demand for an immediate ceasefire on humanitarian grounds.

13 members of the Council voted in favor of the text drafted by Algeria, while Britain abstained from voting.

This is the third American veto against a draft resolution since the start of the fighting in Gaza.

The draft resolution drafted by Algeria and objected to by the United States did not link the ceasefire to the release of the hostages, but rather demanded this separately.

Washington has opposed the use of the word ceasefire in any UN action on the war between Israel and Hamas, but the American text uses language that President Joe Biden said he used last week in a phone conversation with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

This is the second time since October 7 that Washington has proposed issuing a Security Council resolution on Gaza. Russia and China had used their veto power to stop its first attempt.

In December, more than three-quarters of the 193-member UN General Assembly voted to demand an immediate ceasefire on humanitarian grounds. General Assembly resolutions are not binding, but they reflect a global consensus on critical matters—More than 150 countries thinking that the war in Gaza should be stopped immediately to address the starvation and killing of civilians leave the US position quite exposed. Only 10 countries voted against this UNGA resolution. The global consensus, if it continues to be opposed by the US alone, will eventually degrade US standing in the world.

Sensing US fractured foreign policy, China formulates its foreign policy with Taiwan and recognition of independent Palestine top priorities

Sensing US fractured foreign policy, China formulates its foreign policy with Taiwan and recognition of independent Palestine top priorities

    Saturday, March 09, 2024   No comments

Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the US foreign policy was built on a compelling narrative of human rights and democracy and on a powerful military. Because powerful militaries need justifying rhetoric, the US prioritized is human rights claims. The nexus between human rights norms and Western intervention has collapsed with the ongoing starvation of civilians in Gaza and the near total destruction of homes and infrastructure in the Strip. The difference of Western postures to the war and Ukraine and the War in Gaza made the disconnect even more obvious. China sees these developments as an opportunity to create a foreign policy that is more consistent and that benefit from the self-inflicted injuries of Western powers. The analysis of current events provides more background information.

In Beijing yesterday, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi held a press conference on the sidelines of the “Meeting of the Second Session of the 14th National People’s Congress,” in which he discussed the “shape” that the foreign policy of the “People’s Republic of China” will take during the coming year. While the Chinese official repeated some of the well-known broad lines of his country’s foreign policy, it seemed remarkable that he escalated “in tone” with regard to some files, especially those related to “Taiwan independence” and American practices towards China. On the other hand, in response to a question about Chinese-Russian relations, Wang Yi stressed that Moscow and Beijing had made the choice to “preserve bilateral relations and develop them strategically, on the basis of the fundamental interests of the two peoples,” considering that the two countries had established a “new model” of relations between large countries. It is represented by a commitment to permanent good neighborliness and deepening comprehensive strategic cooperation on the basis of non-alliance, non-confrontation and non-targeting of a third party,” which “is different from what existed during the Cold War.” Speaking about the latter, the Chinese official considered that “this war should not be repeated,” given that the people have now “rejected the idea of hegemony” and will not accept division. When asked about the Israeli crimes committed in the Gaza Strip, Yi stressed that the “inability” to stop “the humanitarian catastrophe resulting from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in the twenty-first century, is tragic for humanity, and a disgrace to civilization,” noting that “what “There is no pretext or excuse that justifies the continuation of the conflict and the killing of civilians,” he said. Wang Yi also stressed that “it is not permissible to continue to ignore the long-term occupation of the Palestinian territories, and the aspirations of the Palestinian people to establish an independent state, as well as the continuation of the historical injustice that this people has suffered over the generations, without correcting it.” According to the Chinese official, “Getting out of the spiral of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict once and for all, removing the fertile ground for extremist ideas of all kinds, and truly achieving lasting peace in the Middle East is not possible except by restoring the Palestinian people’s rights,” and implementing the “two-state solution.” In a comprehensive manner. He also renewed the call for granting Palestine “full membership in the Security Council,” along with “holding a more effective and credible international peace conference,” to set a timetable for implementing the principle of the “two-state solution.” With regard to Taiwan, Beijing, through its Foreign Minister, reiterated Emphasizing that its “clear” policy is to continuously seek the peaceful reunification of the island, warning, in return, that “the red line is clear” on this issue as well, which is not to allow “the separation of Taiwan from the motherland.” Wang Yi added, addressing the authorities in Taiwan and their allies: “Whoever prepares (for Taiwan independence) from within the island of Taiwan will inevitably be held accountable by history. Whoever tolerates that independence and supports it on the international scene will be consumed by the fire he kindled, and will eat the bitter fruits he sowed.” Wang Yi also called on all Chinese people to “give priority to the supreme national interest” and oppose Taiwan independence “together.”

Prior to the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s statements, some Chinese media outlets, especially the state-owned Global Times newspaper, hinted that Prime Minister Li Qiang had escalated, in the annual “government work report” he submitted to the “Chinese People’s Congress,” regarding... Taiwan, as he did not mention the term “peaceful reunification,” stressing instead that China “will be resolute in pushing for the reunification of China.” While some Western observers said that this step was “deliberate” by Beijing, considering that it may be “an indication of a more assertive future stance towards Taiwan,” the deputy director of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University did not deny this, in an interview with the newspaper. The Chinese, the aforementioned point of view, considered that deleting the phrase “indicates that confronting secession attempts and containing Taiwan independence provocations will be a more urgent and practical task for the mainland in the coming years.”

Although the Chinese Foreign Minister stressed, once again, the necessity of not dragging Beijing and Washington into any kind of confrontation or conflict, in order to avoid “unpleasant consequences,” he quickly “escalated” his criticism of American practices, asking: “If The United States was saying one thing and doing another, so where is its credibility as a major country? If the United States feels tense and anxious just hearing the name (China), where is its self-confidence as a major country? (...)». He added that Washington faces problems “with itself, not with China,” considering that the American “addiction” to Beijing’s “suppression” will ultimately harm the United States itself. The Chinese minister’s criticism also extended to Europe, as he saw that the latter “classified China in three categories at the same time, that is, partner, competitor, and systemic adversary,” considering that such a classification is unrealistic and unenforceable.

Rim Hani

China to the International Court of Justice: armed resistance is a legitimate right

China to the International Court of Justice: armed resistance is a legitimate right

    Saturday, February 24, 2024   No comments

 China used its participation in the International Court of Justice hearings on Palestine to counter the US argument that Israel should not be ordered to withdraw unconditionally from the occupied Palestinian territories without security guarantees.

In this context, the legal advisor to the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ma Xinmin, told the court that justice “has been delayed for a long time, but it should not be denied,” stressing that “the Palestinians should not be deprived of it.”

He added, "Israel is a foreign country that occupies Palestine, and therefore the right to self-defense falls more on the shoulders of the Palestinians than the Israelis."

Chinese President Xi Jinping officially received the credentials of the Taliban ambassador to Beijing

Chinese President Xi Jinping officially received the credentials of the Taliban ambassador to Beijing

    Tuesday, January 30, 2024   No comments

The Afghan Foreign Ministry announced on Tuesday that Chinese President Xi Jinping officially received the credentials of the Taliban ambassador to Beijing. Mawlawi Assadullah, also known as Bilal Karimi, handed over his credentials along with ambassadors from 41 countries to President Xi at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, the ministry said in a statement.

President Xi is the first head of state to officially accredit a Taliban ambassador during a special ceremony, and last year, Taliban Prime Minister Hassan Akhund received the newly appointed Chinese ambassador to Afghanistan.

 

No country in the world has officially recognized the Taliban as the government of Afghanistan yet, but ambassadors appointed by the Taliban are actively working in many Asian capitals.

Taliban Ambassador to Chaina, Bilal Karimi

 

The Taliban movement has been criticized by the international community due to the severe restrictions it imposes on women's rights.

 

A Brussels-based research center said on Tuesday that countries in the region need to deal with Afghanistan regarding security and economic issues and urged Western powers to support such efforts or at least refrain from obstructing them.

 

China has maintained good relations with the Taliban since its return to power in August 2021, and Beijing is considered one of Kabul's largest trading partners.

Chinese Foreign Ministry: We are good friends of the Arab and Islamic countries

Chinese Foreign Ministry: We are good friends of the Arab and Islamic countries

    Tuesday, November 21, 2023   No comments

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi announced on Monday before a delegation including Arab foreign ministers that the international community must take urgent measures to stop the “humanitarian catastrophe” unfolding in Gaza.

"Let us work together to quickly calm the situation in Gaza and restore peace in the Middle East as soon as possible," Wang said in his opening speech in Beijing.

Wang added to the diplomats that “there is a humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in Gaza,” noting that “the situation in Gaza affects all countries around the world and reconsiders the principle of good and evil and the basic principles of humanity.”

He stressed that "the international community must act urgently and take effective measures to prevent the spread of this tragedy."

Wang said, "China is a good friend and brother of the Arab and Islamic countries," adding that it "firmly defended the legitimate rights and interests of the Arab and Islamic countries, and strongly supported the efforts of the Palestinian people to restore their legitimate national rights and interests."

Earlier, the Chinese Foreign Minister expressed "China's strong sympathy for the Palestinians, especially in the Gaza Strip," adding that "what the people of Gaza need most is security, food and medicine, not war, weapons and ammunition."

Wang Yi stressed that "the historical injustice against Palestine cannot continue," and that "China is currently working closely with all parties to strengthen the ceasefire and end the war."

The Arab delegation includes the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Palestine, and the Secretary-General of the Council of Islamic Cooperation.

The visit of the Arab ministerial delegation comes as part of a tour to the capitals of a number of countries that are permanent members of the Security Council, with the participation of the foreign ministers of the committee formed from the recent Arab-Islamic summit, with the aim of advancing the process of stopping the war on Gaza, and dealing with the deteriorating humanitarian conditions in the Strip.

China backs an international peace conference to push the Palestinian issue back to the track of two-state solution: top diplomat

China supports the convening of a more authoritative, broader and more effective international peace conference as soon as possible to push the Palestinian issue back to the track of the two-state solution, said Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, in a phone conversation on Wednesday with Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi.

Wang, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, noted that the current situation in Gaza continues to deteriorate, with an increasing number of casualties among the civilians. Any country with a conscience and a sense of responsibility can't allow such a tragedy to continue. The recent emergency special session of the UN General Assembly passed a resolution calling for an immediate humanitarian truce, reflecting the strong call from the international community, Wang said.