The US troops in Iraq are there to stay unless the US government chooses to pull them out

The US troops in Iraq are there to stay unless the US government chooses to pull them out

    Sunday, February 25, 2024   No comments

 Since the 1990 US intervention in Iraq and the UNSC action after Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, Iraq lost control of its economy and that has not changed. The Iraqi government recently asked the US to schedule full withdrawal of the latter’s troops. That is unlikely to happen unless the US needs or wants to pull troops out, because the US maintains tight control over the Iraqi economy which is entirely dependent on oil. Revenues from the sale of Iraqi oil is processed by US banks and the US government is leveraging it to keep troops in Iraq. 

Member of the Finance Committee in the Iraqi Parliament, Jamal Kujar, confirmed that there are three economic files that the United States uses to pressure Iraq, namely the oil file, Iraqi funds in the US Treasury, and the dollar file, and that the release of Iraqi funds in the US Federal Bank has become conditional in accordance with American controls and specifications.

 Koger explained, “These files represent strong and influential pressure cards if used against Iraq, because the Iraqi economy is fragile and depends entirely on oil revenues at a rate of up to 94% of the gross national product.”

 Oil export revenues in 2023, according to data issued by the Ministry of Oil last January, amounted to about 87.6 billion dollars, at a rate of about 7.3 billion dollars per month. The country sold more than 1.23 billion barrels.

 Iraqi funds deposited with the US Federal Bank from oil export revenues, which is a procedure applied within the requirements of Chapter Seven of the United Nations procedures following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and is still in effect, in addition to the inclusion of new Iraqi companies and banks on the sanctions list it issues.

 

US Central Command Statement: "U.S. Forces, Allies Conduct Joint Strikes in Yemen; Houthis respond

US Central Command Statement: "U.S. Forces, Allies Conduct Joint Strikes in Yemen; Houthis respond

    Monday, January 22, 2024   No comments

After re-listing Houthis as a terrorist entity, US government has signaled that its strikes in Yemen are going to gain some permanence, coining a new name for the operation:  “Operation Poseidon Archer”. Afterwards, the  US Central Command issued a statement, announcing that the "U.S. Forces, Allies Conduct Joint Strikes in Yemen."

The full statement from US Central Command:

As part of ongoing international efforts to respond to increased Houthi destabilizing and illegal activities in the region, on Jan. 22 at approximately 11:59 p.m. (Sanaa / Yemen time), U.S. Central Command forces alongside UK Armed Forces, and with the support from Australia, Bahrain, Canada, and the Netherlands, conducted strikes on 8 Houthi targets in Iranian-backed Houthi terrorist-controlled areas of Yemen. 

These strikes from this multilateral coalition targeted areas in Houthi-controlled Yemen used to attack international merchant vessels and U.S. Navy ships in the region. The targets included missile systems and launchers, air defense systems, radars, and deeply buried weapons storage facilities. 

These strikes are intended to degrade Houthi capability to continue their reckless and unlawful attacks on U.S. and U.K. ships as well as international commercial shipping in the Red Sea, Bab Al-Mandeb Strait, and the Gulf of Aden. These strikes are separate and distinct from the multinational freedom of navigation actions performed under Operation Prosperity Guardian."

The UK followed with its own statement:

UK Defense Security statement. Four British Eurofighter Typhoon fighters conducted strikes against Ansar Allah this evening.

____

Meanwhile, the Yemen government in Sanaa, responded to the new strikes with this statement, posted by Mohammed Albukhaiti. 

This reaction follows a detailed responce issued by the same Yemini official reacting to EU intent to join the US and UK in their war on Sanaa government. The full text of the statement is below.

A message from Mohammed Albukhaiti, senior member and spokesperson of Ansar Allah

My message to the European Union countries regarding their possible participation in a military mission in the Red Sea.

The exceptional state of stability and security that Europe experienced after World War II is a result of the moral values   that prevailed in its societies at the internal level.  However, this moral system began to weaken as a result of the participation of some European countries in the immoral wars that America fought outside its borders.  We are now seeing its effects in the rise of the extreme right and the war in Ukraine.

European societies must realize that moral and human values   are fixed and do not change according to the nationality and religion of a person, and their treatment of them with extreme selectivity that amounts to schizophrenia will expand the scope of wars in the world, which will expand to Europe.

There are genocidal crimes committed every day in Gaza, the majority of whose victims are women and children, in full view of the world, and all countries must take serious action to stop them.

Unfortunately, the movement of some countries with their fleets in support of the perpetrators of genocide and the silence of others is what prompted us to take unilateral military action to stop it, because we had no choice but to do so.

We only target ships linked to Israel, not with the aim of seizing them or sinking them, but with the aim of changing their course to increase the economic cost to Israel as a pressure card to stop its crimes in Gaza and allow the entry of food, medicine and fuel to its besieged residents. This is a legitimate act, especially since we are in a state of war with it.  If the crews of those ships had responded to the instructions of our naval forces, they would not have been detained or bombed.

The steadfastness of the Palestinian people and the military operations of Yemen and Hezbollah against Israel were sufficient to pressure it to stop its crimes, but the American and British support for it, which reached the point of launching an aggression against Yemen, created the conditions for it to continue committing more crimes and expanded the scope of the conflict.

Today there is a war between Yemen, which is struggling to stop the crimes of genocide, and America and Britain, which are fighting to support and protect the perpetrators. It is also clear that the Palestinian people are not ready to surrender, which means that the situation is heading towards escalation.

Instead of European Union countries moving to add more fuel to the fire, they should move seriously to stop the crimes of genocide in Gaza, and then we will stop all our military operations immediately and automatically.

The Palestinian people are being subjected to great injustice to the point of being deprived of the right to live on their land by force of arms. If another human group had been subjected to the injustice that the Palestinians are being subjected to, we would have moved to help them, regardless of their religion or color.

We are not advocates of war, but rather advocates of peace, and it is America and Britain that attacked us, whether in 2015 indirectly or today directly, and we advise the European Union countries not to participate in any aggression against Yemen.

Our keenness to achieve a just and comprehensive peace that guarantees the safety and dignity of all countries and peoples does not mean abandoning our duty to defend the oppressed, nor abandoning our right to self-defense, no matter the sacrifices it costs us. We are prepared to fight until the Day of Resurrection even if the whole world comes together against us."

 

Media Review: Underscoring the risks associated with attacking Yemen, European countries, including France, refused to support it

Media Review: Underscoring the risks associated with attacking Yemen, European countries, including France, refused to support it

    Friday, January 12, 2024   No comments

 Attack on Yemen might be the riskiest action taken by the US administration, and that risk is obvious. France and some other European powers refused to take part in it or even sign on the statement issued after the strike on Yemen that were carried out by the US and UK, and supported by a handful of other nation-states like Bahrain. In Yemen, on the other hand, Houthis government may have gained more support not only from the people living in the territories under its control, but even from territories still under the control of Saudi-backed government.

Some background for this emerging military confrontation between the US and the Sanaa government in Yemen: Houthis-run goverment in Yemen imposed a blockade on commercial ships that either belong to Israel or trading with Israel until the blockade imposed by Israel on Gaza and its war in Gaza are stopped. Although Houthis stated that no other ships will be denied transit, the US insisted that the actions taken by Yemen are threat to global commerce. It acted on this jsutification. After the strike, the Government of Sanaa said that it will retaliate and that it will continue to enforce the blockade until Gazans are allowed food and safety.

Now the aftermath of the attacks and the reaction of worl to it.

The British newspaper "The Telegraph" indicates that Paris refused to work jointly with its Western allies, and did not support the American and British air strikes against Yemen.

An unidentified French official told the British newspaper The Telegraph that Paris “fears that, by joining the US-led strikes, it will lose any influence it has in the talks to defuse tensions between Hezbollah and Israel.” France has focused much of its diplomacy in recent weeks on avoiding escalation in Lebanon.

According to The Telegraph newspaper, France did not sign a statement of support for the US and British air strikes against Yemen, after saying that it “will not participate in air strikes to protect maritime navigation in the Red Sea.”

 

On the other hand, Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Korea and Bahrain signed a joint statement supporting the US-British strikes and warning against taking further measures.

 

The Dutch also provided logistical assistance during the strikes, but other major European powers, including France, Spain and Italy, did not provide military or political support.

 

On the other hand, France, along with Italy and Spain, refused to participate in the strikes, and avoided signing a statement supporting them.

 

According to The Telegraph newspaper, Emmanuel Macron's government refrained from joint action with its Western allies against Yemen, in contrast to what happened with it in recent years, in Libya and Syria, when its army participated in repelling ISIS attacks, according to its claim.

 

In turn, the joint commander of the French forces in the Red Sea region, Admiral Emmanuel Sallars, said yesterday, Thursday, that “Paris’ current mandate does not include striking Ansar Allah directly.”

 

The American "Bloomberg" agency reported, in a report, that US President Joe Biden is facing "his biggest test yet regarding his ability to avoid a broader war in the Middle East," in the wake of the American-British aggression against Yemen.

The British Sky News network reported on Friday that the American and British strikes are pushing more Yemenis to support Ansar Allah in Yemen.

According to the British Sky News correspondent, who spoke to people inside Yemen, and they told her how terrified they felt when the British and American missiles fell yesterday, the Yemenis view the United Kingdom and the United States as “igniting the war by supporting the Saudi-led coalition.” .

She pointed out that, after the recent British and American strikes, the Yemenis are increasing their support for Ansar Allah, and “Washington and London do not favor this matter at all.”

Contrary to Ankara’s political rhetoric in support of Palestinians, Turkish exports to Israel increased

Contrary to Ankara’s political rhetoric in support of Palestinians, Turkish exports to Israel increased

    Saturday, January 06, 2024   No comments

Economics is the overriding engine in global relations

Contrary to Ankara’s political rhetoric on the war in the Palestinian enclave of Gaza, Turkish exports to Israel rose by 34.8 percent last month, according to official figures, as the country’s trade relations with Tel Aviv come under scrutiny.

Israel began pounding Gaza after Hamas militants carried out an unprecedented attack in the country on October 7, killing 1,200 people and taking more than 200 hostage. Israeli airstrikes and ground attacks on Gaza have so far claimed the lives of more than 22,000 people, according to the local authorities, in addition to leading to vast destruction in the enclave.

Kazakhstan, and soon Russia, increase export of agricultural goods through Iran via the INSTC

Kazakhstan, and soon Russia, increase export of agricultural goods through Iran via the INSTC

    Tuesday, August 08, 2023   No comments

In another sign of activating alternative paths for global trade with the uncertainty in the Black Sea due to the conflict in in Ukraine, Kazakhstan decided to export its agricultural goods across the Persian Gulf through the Islamic Republic of Iran to open a new direct route to free waters, which starts from the port of Korik in Kazakhstan, then the Iranian port of Amirabad overlooking the Caspian Sea, and then to the port of Bandar Abbas on the Persian Gulf.

The Iran route reduces the duration of the transfer of goods through presence in the ports of the Emirates, India, Pakistan, the Far East and the coasts of East Africa, in addition to that this route can export Kazakh goods to the European Union.

Meanwhile, the Deputy Prime Minister of Kazakhstan, Srik Jumangarin, held talks with the head of an Emirati shipping and transport company, to employ joint investments for this goal.

This is a major development, which practically, could allow Russia to export its goods and services through this route directly or through Kazakhstan, bypassing the risk associated with the Black Sea trade route. However, this North-South route has been in the making for over two decades, and only now it is showing its potential in a new geopolitical climate.

What is the International North–South Transport Corridor—INSTC?

It was first conceived in the early 2000’s. The idea was to build a transport corridor linking Russia’s Baltic Sea coast to India’s western ports in the Arabian Sea via Iran. Russia, India and Iran signed preliminary agreements to develop the 7,200-km-long International North-South Transport Corridor (NSTC) in 2002. NSTC consists of sea, road, and rail transportation systems with investments for building the railroads and truck highways coming mostly from India, Russia, and Iran. 

The INSTC's western route passes through Russia, South Caucasus, and Iran. The middle axis reaches India through Saint Petersburg – Astrakhan – Caspian Sea – North and South ports of Iran (Amirabad, Anzali, Chabahar, and Astara ports). The eastern axis passes through Russia-Kazakhstan-Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan-Iran.

Three years later, Azerbaijan signed up for the project. This agreement was eventually ratified by 13 countries — India, Russia, Iran, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Oman, Tajikistan, Turkey and Ukraine.

Now the NSTC is allowing states close to its main path to benefit from this increased North-South activities created by the sanctions imposed on Russia and the new sanctions imposed on Iran after the collapse of the Nuclear Deal. Iran stands to benefit most from this initiative, which, together with China’s BRI project will create new networks I the region and east Africa.

Comparing economic indicators for countries associated with BRICS and the G7

Comparing economic indicators for countries associated with BRICS and the G7

    Saturday, May 20, 2023   No comments

Economic data showed that "the BRICS economy has surpassed that of the Group of Seven."

The data indicated that "the Group of Seven, 30 years ago, was 2.5 times larger than the BRICS group, in terms of gross domestic product," while now, "the BRICS have surpassed the former colonial powers that make up the Group of Seven."

Economic analysts pointed out that this data may "answer what these powers are trying to stop, namely China, because it constitutes the largest part of the BRICS economy," as China is equivalent in terms of gross domestic product in US dollars to 6 countries from the Group of Seven.

In other words, China's GDP is equal to that of Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Italy and Canada combined.

In other interesting data on the share of international powers in global GDP since 1980, the third chart below shows that the United States has been on its share since 1980: no loss, no gain.

The data also shows that developing countries are also unchanged, while Europe, the Organization for Co-operation and Development and developed countries, except for the United States, are the biggest losers. As for China, its share has grown tenfold, to become the biggest gainer.

Earlier, Joseph W. Sullivan, senior advisor to the "Lindsey Group" and economist at the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said during the administration of former US President Donald Trump, that "the BRICS currency could shake the dominance of the dollar, and the moment of de-dollarization may have arrived." finally".

In his interview with the American newspaper "Foreign Policy", Sullivan added that in New Delhi, Alexander Babakov, deputy speaker of the Russian State Duma, said that "Russia is now leading the development of a new currency, which will be used for cross-border trade by the" BRICS "Brazil, Russia, India and China." and South Africa".

And based on the economy, at least, the prospects for the success of the currency issued by the “BRICS” group are contained, according to “Force Policy”, and although many practical questions remain unanswered, such a currency could expel the US dollar as a reserve currency for its members. "BRICS", and shook the position of the dollar from its throne.

Naldi Pandor, South African Foreign Minister, has said that the creation of a new BRICS currency will be a major item on the agenda of the upcoming "BRICS" summit, in Johannesburg on August 22.

Countries that have applied to join the BRICS:

At the moment, BRICS consists of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.

Applications to join came from:

— Algiers,

— Argentina,

— Afghanistan,

— Bangladesh,

— Bahrain,

— Belarus,

— Venezuela,

— Egypt,

— Zimbabwe,

— Indonesia,

— Iran,

— Kazakhstan,

— Mexico,

— Nigeria,

— Nicaragua,

— UAE,

— Pakistan,

— Saudi Arabia,

— Senegal,

— Syria,

— Sudan,

— Thailand,

— Tunisia,

— Türkiye, and

— Uruguay.

*****

 Monetary Fund and the World Bank

Currently, the “BRICS” group occupies an important position in the global scene, as its member states enjoy increasing economic power and international influence. The group enhances cooperation and trade exchange between its member states, and seeks to increase its voice and influence in global affairs.

  The BRICS group is facing challenges in promoting economic and political cooperation among member states, but it is a strong alternative to the traditional global economic system.

According to the latest widespread data, the economic assessment indicates the superiority of the “BRICS” group over the Group of Seven, as the group includes Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, and these member states are emerging economic powers that play a vital role in the global economy. The seven are from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as the European Union.

It is known that the “BRICS” group is witnessing continuous expansion, as Bangladesh, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates have joined the New Development Bank of the “BRICS” group, and there are several other countries preparing to join as well. This shift confirms the growth of the strength and influence of the “BRICS” group in the global arena, and may pose a challenge to the Group of Seven in the future.

And indications have emerged portending important developments about the future of the “BRICS”, which is the possibility of Mexico joining it, which constitutes a large part of the North American trade bloc (CUSMA). The United States to fair and equal trade competition with global economies on the American frontier.

Currently, the five BRICS countries contribute about 31.5% of global GDP, while the share of the Group of Seven countries drops to 30%. The BRICS countries are expected to exceed 50% of global GDP by 2030, and the proposed expansion will strongly advance this goal.

Previously, 30 years ago, the G7 was 2.5 times larger than the BRICS countries in terms of GDP. However, current data indicates that the BRICS countries have outperformed the former colonial powers of the Group of Seven.

Indeed, China's GDP surpassed that of the United States in 2015 when the economies were compared against a purchasing parity benchmark.

On the other hand, the interests of the BRICS countries are not only limited to trade, but are also rooted in the political belief that the world should be multipolar.

The BRICS group encourages the idea of a global system that includes several political and economic poles, in which its interests are better guaranteed through a balance of power and a multiplicity of partners, rather than a unipolar system in which the United States dominates.

And in 2021, the BRICS countries played an effective role in strengthening and reforming the global multilateral system, as they adopted a joint statement aimed at strengthening and reforming the global system.

  Among the aspects called for in this statement was the need to reform the current Security Council system in the United Nations to be more representative and in line with current global realities. The statement also dealt with many other issues of common concern to the BRICS countries.

According to economic data, China is particularly outperforming in its GDP. China's GDP is equal to a group of countries in the Group of Seven, including Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Canada.

These data reflect the remarkable economic success of the “BRICS” countries, and indicate that China has a major role in achieving this success thanks to the large size of its economy within the BRICS group. China's strong economy enhances the position of the BRICS" as a powerful group and its influence on the global economy is increasing significantly.

However, it should be noted that China's economic supremacy does not necessarily mean that it has completely surpassed the G7 in all economic and political aspects. The Group of Seven still maintains its influence and its important role in international relations and world trade.

China's trade value with three of the four potential BRICS countries exceeds 100 billion US dollars, and its sales reach 416 billion US dollars. Indeed, China's trade alone accounts for more than 90% of the BRICS countries' total trade value in dollar terms. This is attributed to China's economic dominance and its impressive rate of growth.

According to the Chinese government, foreign trade between China and BRICS countries registered a year-on-year growth of 12.1% in the first five months of this year, amounting to about 195.71 billion US dollars. This rate is 3.8 percentage points higher than China's overall growth rate in foreign trade over the same period.

Russia also plays an important and active role inside and outside the BRICS group, with a turnover of about $164 billion. This can be explained by the fact that the BRICS countries are a group that is highly dependent on energy, as their population constitutes more than 40% of the world's population. Thus, net power exporters have a strong position. Russia's strength is based in particular as an energy producer for the "BRICS" countries.

As for India, its trade has recorded a value of 142 billion US dollars among the “BRICS” countries. India enjoys a more balanced trade outcome among the member states, trading equally with all members except China and South Africa, and especially for members with a large Indian diaspora.

And Brazil, it is noticeable that its intra-trade is directed towards Asia, especially China and India, instead of trade with Africa or Russia. This shift may indicate the importance of Asia in Brazil's economic relations and reflects the important role played by China in particular. This means that Asia is an important market for Brazilian products, and may also reflect the shift in Brazil's economic and trade orientation towards emerging markets and the rising economic powers of Asia.

It is noted that there is active trade between South Africa and other "BRICS" countries. Although the South African economy is considered the smallest in size among the “BRICS” partners, trade between India, South Africa, China and South Africa exceeds the trade between India and Russia or Russia and Brazil, and this indicates the existence of important economic relations between South Africa and the rest of the “BRICS” partners . This strong direction of trade reflects South Africa's preference to strengthen relations with the "BRICS" countries and take advantage of the trade and investment opportunities available in these countries.

Ultimately, according to Joseph W. Sullivan, former economist in the administration of US President Donald Trump, the creation of a new BRICS currency is a threat to the dominance of the US dollar and may contribute to the transformation of the world order. He also referred to Russia's efforts to develop a new currency that will be used for trade between the BRICS countries, which include Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.

It is believed that the creation of a new BRICS currency may challenge the US dollar as a reserve currency and may shake its position as a strong global currency. This topic is expected to be part of the agenda of the upcoming BRICS summit in Johannesburg. This step may reflect the desire of some countries to achieve independence and abandon the heavy dependence on the US dollar in international trade and financial relations.

In conclusion, the BRICS countries are superior to the Group of Seven in many important economic indicators. This superiority raises questions about the transformation of economic and geopolitical power in the world? Are we about to see massive shifts in the global economic system? Will the hegemony of traditional Western countries recede and emerging countries will regain their global status?

These results may open the door to questions about the future of reserve currencies and the role of the US dollar as a strong global currency. Could a new BRICS currency emerge that would challenge and shake the US dollar? Will the system of global economic relations be radically modified?

These exciting developments call us to carefully follow the developments of the global economy and monitor the shifts in economic forces.