#china syria partnership

[workersolidarity]

🇨🇳🇸🇾 SYRIAN PRESIDENT BASHAR AL-ASSAD MEETS WITH CHINESE PRESIDENT XI JINPING, ASSAD'S FIRST VISIT TO CHINA SINCE 2004

Chinese President Xi Jinping met with Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad to jointly announce the establishment of a China-Syria Strategic Partnership after their meeting in Hangzhou, China yesterday in the first visit by the Syrian President since 2004, long before the start of the Syrian Civil War.

The meeting comes on the backdrop of illegal US Sanctions meant to stifle economic activity in both Syria and China have failed to depose Assad or slow down Chinese technological advancement.

Chinese Officials say the partnership is of great practical importance as the partnership will greatly improve Syrian lives that have been hammered by war and sanctions.

Bashar Al-Assad and his wife were seen on Friday visiting the Lingyin Temple in Hangzhou, one of the largest Buddhist temples in China, and video appeared online showing Assad and his wife exchanging hugs and handshakes with smiling locals.

According to President Xi Jinping, Syria was one of the first Arab countries to establish diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China and even co-sponsored the resolution to restore China's lawful seat at the UN.

#source

[pissvortex]

Imperialism under Biden/Harris:

- Started war with Russia over natural gas

- Sponsors genocide in Palestine

- Continued attempts to overthrow social democrats in Latin America

- Continued sabre rattling against China and the DPRK

Imperialism under Trump:

- Continued sabre rattling against China (except Trump seems fine not propping up Taiwan)

- Continued attempts to overthrow social democrats in Latin America

- Assassinated Qasem Soleimani

- Bombed Syria

So, overall, it's two spur of the moment bombings versus two entire wars. Plus Trump negotiated with the DPRK and wants to dismantle NATO. For idiotic reasons, obviously, but he's objectively the anti-imperialist option.

you seem serious so: You have a very juvenile understanding of imperialism that seemingly only includes military action. Even if Trump did dismantle NATO it would not change America’s status as the finance capital / usury state of the world - I see no reason to doubt what he says openly is his intention when he says this move would actually increase American financial domination. That is imperialism, albeit a deviation from the current neoliberal global partnership imperialism because Trump is an American exceptionalist and (perhaps naively) believes in total American domination. He doesn’t really care about traditional conservative/liberal notions of diplomacy or world relations, he just likes watching the numbers go up. Every time there was a dip in the stock market he would just pump it with a trillion more dollars from the federal reserve. He correctly identifies America as the world’s money printer, and since the world has a U.S. currency standard, he has no reason to fear this backfiring. It’s why he’s pursuing this idiotic tariff idea, he knows the rest of the world will take a lot of punishment to continue to be “in” on American finance and he can make his petit bourgeois constituents happy with free money for hare-brained small business. He leaves the actual big finance and megacorporations alone and lets small businesses live in this fantasy realm of free government funding forever. It’s like a fake economy for complacency layered under the real one. This is not anti-imperialist, it’s petit-bourgeois populism and it isn’t better by any means.

[simply-ivanka]

Trump Was Good for America’s Alliances

He pushed NATO to spend more on defense, expanded the Quad and facilitated the Abraham Accords.

By Alexander B. Gray Wall Street Journal April 3, 2024

Foreign-policy experts are predictably fretting over Donald Trump’s re-election campaign. They fear that the former president threatens the alliances and partnerships that have sustained global peace since 1945. Should Mr. Trump return to the White House, the thinking goes, he will be unconstrained by the guardrails that prevented him from torpedoing America’s alliances in his first term and will permanently damage both U.S. security and the international order.

This narrative concedes a point that undermines its premise: The U.S. alliance system didn’t crumble during Mr. Trump’s first term. On the contrary, the Trump administration strengthened relations with partners in the Indo-Pacific, Central and Eastern Europe and the Mideast. Anyone who believes that Mr. Trump was once bound by conventional wisdom but won’t be again—and will wreak havoc on the global order he ostensibly detests—hasn’t been paying attention.

To understand Mr. Trump’s record, recall what he inherited. The Obama administration’s disastrous “red line” in Syria, its ill-conceived Iranian nuclear deal, its failure to deter or respond adequately to Russia’s 2014 aggression against Ukraine, its toleration of Chinese malign activity in the South and East China seas, and its promise of a “new model of great-power relations” with Beijing had brought U.S. relations with allies and partners like Japan, Taiwan, Israel, the Gulf Arab states and much of Eastern Europe to a historic low point. Much of Mr. Trump’s tenure was spent not simply repairing those relationships but expanding them in innovative ways.

Mr. Trump appalled many foreign-policy veterans, who thought his rhetoric threatened the world order. In one sense, that fear was absurd: Nearly every American administration has publicly scolded North Atlantic Treaty Organization member countries for shirking their defense-spending commitments. Mr. Trump did likewise—and, perhaps unlike his predecessors, was seen as willing to take decisive action to secure change. Through public and private cajoling—also known as diplomacy—he secured a commitment from NATO members to beef up their contributions. From 2017 through 2021, nearly every signatory raised defense spending, contributing substantially to the alliance’s ability to respond to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

These efforts resulted in a significant redistribution of U.S. forces from legacy bases in Germany to facilities in Poland and the Baltic states, where they are far better positioned to deter Moscow. Along with NATO allies, Mr. Trump provided long-sought Javelin antitank missiles to Ukraine, imposed sanctions against malign Russian actors, and worked with partners to stop the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which would have increased European allies’ energy dependence on Russia. These weren’t the acts of a retrograde isolationist; they were the work of a pragmatist seeking novel solutions to 21st-century challenges.

The administration’s goal of strengthening America’s standing in the world bore fruit, including the Abraham Accords between Israel and several Arab states, a significant upgrade to the Quad alliance among the U.S., India, Australia and Japan, stronger diplomatic relations with Taiwan thanks to unprecedented cabinet-level visits and record arms sales, and an unexpected deal between Serbia and Kosovo.

At each step, Mr. Trump asked his staff to think of creative ways to resolve issues that had bedeviled their predecessors for decades. Doing the same things over and over and expecting different results rightly struck the president as insane.

After three years of press adulation over America’s supposed return to the world stage under President Biden, one might ask: What have Americans and the world gotten from a supposedly more alliance-friendly U.S. president? So far, a catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan, the failure of American deterrence in Ukraine, an Iranian nuclear breakout inching ever closer, and an accelerating Chinese threat toward Taiwan. Allies in the Mideast, Eastern Europe, and Asia have begun to chart their own course in the face of an uncertain U.S. trumpet.

The global foreign-policy elite is sowing needless fear around the world by willfully misrepresenting Mr. Trump’s first term and scare-mongering about a second. Should Mr. Trump return to the White House, there will doubtless be sighs of relief among officials in friendly capitals who remember his time in office. It isn’t difficult to understand why: Mr. Trump’s language may make diplomats uncomfortable, but his actions strike fear among those who matter most to American security: our adversaries.

Mr. Gray is a senior fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council. He served as chief of staff of the White House National Security Council, 2019-21.

[voskhozhdeniye]

If you’re among those who have only just begun paying attention to US foreign policy and western media bias in light of Israel’s destruction of Gaza and Biden’s act of war against Yemen, it’s important to understand that none of the depravity you’re seeing is new. The lies. The insane double standards. The murderousness. The western political/media class always does this.

Every war the US involves itself in is always facilitated by lies promulgated in one voice by the official government in Washington and by the “independent” “free” press (actually propaganda services) of the western world. They deceived the world about Ukraine. They deceived the world about Yemen. They deceived the world about Syria, Libya and Iraq. There are always, always lies, obfuscations and manipulations involved in marketing a new war to the public, or in hiding its involvement in foreign wars from public attention.

All of this manipulation and deceit is necessary to hide the fact that the US-centralized empire is the most tyrannical power structure on this planet. And make no mistake, it is an empire. Washington serves as the hub of an undeclared empire comprised of alliances, partnerships, assets, public deals and secret agreements which knit a large number of nations together into what functions as a single power structure with regard to international affairs.

Most of the beneficiaries of this power structure reside in the west, or global north, while the most exploited and abused victims of this power structure tend to reside in the east, or global south. There are all sorts of rules and regulations and narratives and justifications for why this all happens the way it happens, but if you mentally “mute” the soundtrack on the verbal overlay and just look at what’s actually happening, what you will see is the lion’s share of the world’s wealth and resources moving northward and westward from populations of a darker average skin tone toward populations of a paler average skin tone. Wherever that movement is hindered, diverted, threatened or inconvenienced, you will see western war machinery moving southward and eastward to get it back on the desired track.

Most major international conflicts can be understood as either direct or indirect efforts by the US empire to shore up planetary domination, which are often met with resistance by populations who wish to retain their sovereignty. Much of this conflict happens in the middle east because that’s where the world gets a lot of its oil from, with US-aligned nations like Israel and Saudi Arabia frequently serving as the frontline for hostilities with non-US-aligned nations like Iran and Syria as well as non-US-aligned forces like Hezbollah, Ansarallah and Hamas.

This struggle for US planetary hegemony is disguised by the western political/media class as something other than what it is, because you can’t allow the public in a democratic nation to understand clearly that their government is on the side of evil. They’ll frame it as a US-led international coalition to liberate a nation from a tyrannical dictator. As a humanitarian intervention to protect human rights. As support for Israel’s right to defend itself. As protection of freedom of navigation in the Red Sea. But what’s actually happening is the world’s most powerful and murderous power structure killing human beings in western Asia in order to secure control over a crucial resource.

You see this all over the world against nations which refuse to allow themselves to be absorbed into the US-centralized power structure like North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba, with China being by far the strongest of these and Russia a distant second. And you will notice that you have heard every nation I just mentioned cast in a very negative light by the western press over the years. This is not a coincidence. 

You don’t need to believe anything I’m saying on faith. If you just keep in mind what I said and start watching the patterns for yourself while seeking out the truth day by day, you will see it for yourself. You will see the same patterns emerging over and over again, year after year. Over and over again you will see the US and the states that are aligned with it acting with extreme aggression toward non-US-aligned powers in ways that benefit the US-centralized power structure, and you will see the western press deceiving the world about what’s happening. The next Official Bad Guy you see dominating western press coverage on international affairs will be a non-US-aligned power, and if you apply diligent research and critical thinking you will find that they are not presenting an accurate picture of what’s happening.

Just keep learning and studying the patterns with open curiosity and self-honesty, and the picture will inevitably become clear to you. And then you will clearly see who’s really driving the bulk of the violence and disorder in our world.

[xtruss]

Analysis: The China-Russia Axis Takes Shape

The bond has been decades in the making, but Russia’s war in Ukraine has tightened their embrace.

— September 11, 2023 | By Bonny Lin | Foreign Policy

Alex Nabaum Illustration For Foreign Policy

In July, nearly a dozen Chinese and Russian warships conducted 20 combat exercises in the Sea of Japan before beginning a 2,300-nautical-mile joint patrol, including into the waters near Alaska. These two operations, according to the Chinese defense ministry, “reflect the level of the strategic mutual trust” between the two countries and their militaries.

The increasingly close relationship between China and Russia has been decades in the making, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has tightened their embrace. Both countries made a clear strategic choice to prioritize relations with each other, given what they perceive as a common threat from the U.S.-led West. The deepening of bilateral ties is accompanied by a joint push for global realignment as the two countries use non-Western multilateral institutions—such as the BRICS forum and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO)—to expand their influence in the developing world. Although neither Beijing nor Moscow currently has plans to establish a formal military alliance, major shocks, such as a Sino-U.S. conflict over Taiwan, could yet bring it about.

The cover of Foreign Policy's fall 2023 print magazine shows a jack made up of joined hands lifting up the world. Cover text reads: The Alliances That Matter Now: Multilateralism is at a dead end, but powerful blocs are getting things done."

China and Russia’s push for better relations began after the end of the Cold War. Moscow became frustrated with its loss of influence and status, and Beijing saw itself as the victim of Western sanctions after its forceful crackdown of the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989. In the 1990s and 2000s, the two countries upgraded relations, settled their disputed borders, and deepened their arms sales. Russia became the dominant supplier of advanced weapons to China.

When Xi Jinping assumed power in 2012, China was already Russia’s largest trading partner, and the two countries regularly engaged in military exercises. They advocated for each other in international forums; in parallel, they founded the SCO and BRICS grouping to deepen cooperation with neighbors and major developing countries.

When the two countries upgraded their relations again in 2019, the strategic drivers for much closer relations were already present. Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 damaged its relations with the West and led to a first set of economic sanctions. Similarly, Washington identified Beijing as its most important long-term challenge, redirected military resources to the Pacific, and launched a trade war against Chinese companies. Moscow and Beijing were deeply suspicious of what they saw as Western support for the color revolutions in various countries and worried that they might be targets as well. Just as China refused to condemn Russian military actions in Chechnya, Georgia, Syria, and Ukraine, Russia fully backed Chinese positions on Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet, and Xinjiang. The Kremlin also demonstrated tacit support for Chinese territorial claims against its neighbors in the South China Sea and East China Sea.

Since launching its war in Ukraine, Russia has become China’s fastest-growing trading partner. Visiting Moscow in March, Xi declared that deepening ties to Russia was a “strategic choice” that China had made. Even the mutiny in June by Wagner Group leader Yevgeny Prigozhin that took his mercenary army almost to the gates of Moscow did not change China’s overall position toward Russia, though Beijing has embraced tactical adjustments to “de-risk” its dependency on Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Building on their strong relationship, Xi and Putin released a joint statement in February 2022 announcing a “No Limits” strategic partnership between the two countries. The statement expressed a litany of grievances against the United States, while Chinese state media hailed a “new era” of international relations not defined by Washington. Coming only a few weeks before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, enhanced relations were likely calculated by Moscow to strengthen its overall geopolitical position before the attack.

It’s not clear how much prior detailed knowledge Xi had about Putin’s plans to launch a full-scale war, but their relationship endured the test. If anything, the Western response to Russia’s war reinforced China’s worst fears, further pushing it to align with Russia. Beijing viewed Russian security concerns about NATO expansion as legitimate and expected the West to address them as it sought a way to prevent or stop the war. Instead, the United States, the European Union, and their partners armed Ukraine and tried to paralyze Russia with unprecedented sanctions. Naturally, this has amplified concerns in Beijing that Washington and its allies could be similarly unaccommodating toward Chinese designs on Taiwan.

Against the background of increased mutual threat perceptions, both sides are boosting ties with like-minded countries. On one side, this includes a reenergized, expanded NATO and its growing linkages to the Indo-Pacific, as well as an invigoration of Washington’s bilateral, trilateral, and minilateral arrangements in Asia. Developed Western democracies—with the G-7 in the lead—are also exploring how their experience deterring and sanctioning Russia could be leveraged against China in potential future contingencies.

On the other side, Xi envisions the China-Russia partnership as the foundation for shaping “the global landscape and the future of humanity.” Both countries recognize that while the leading democracies are relatively united, many countries in the global south remain reluctant to align with either the West or China and Russia. In Xi and Putin’s view, winning support in the global south is key to pushing back against what they consider U.S. hegemony.

Alex Nabaum Illustration For Foreign Policy

In the global multilateral institutions, China and Russia are coordinating with each other to block the United States from advancing agendas that do not align with their interests. The U.N. Security Council is often paralyzed by their veto powers, while other institutions have turned into battlegrounds for seeking influence. Beijing and Moscow view the G-20, where their joint weight is relatively greater, as a key forum for cooperation.

But the most promising venues are BRICS and the SCO, established to exclude the developed West and anchor joint Chinese-Russian efforts to reshape the international system. Both are set up for expansion—in terms of scope, membership, and other partnerships. They are the primary means for China and Russia to create a web of influence that increasingly ties strategically important countries to both powers.

The BRICS grouping—initially made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—is at the heart of Moscow and Beijing’s efforts to build a bloc of economically powerful countries to resist what they call Western “Unilateralism.” In late August, another six states, including Egypt, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, were invited to join the group. With their growing economic power, the BRICS countries are pushing for cooperation on a range of issues, including ways to reduce the dominance of the U.S. dollar and stabilize global supply chains against Western calls for “Decoupling” and “De-risking.” Dozens of other countries have expressed interest in joining BRICS.

The SCO, in contrast, is a Eurasian grouping of Russia, China, and their friends. With the exception of India, all are members of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. The accession of Iran in July and Belarus’s membership application put the SCO on course to bring China’s and Russia’s closest and strongest military partners under one umbrella. If the SCO substantially deepens security cooperation, it could grow into a counterweight against U.S.-led Coalitions.

Both BRICS and the SCO, however, operate by consensus, and it will take time to transform both groups into cohesive, powerful geopolitical actors that can function like the G-7 or NATO. The presence of India in both groups will make it difficult for China and Russia to turn either into a staunchly anti-Western outfit. The diversity of members—which include democracies and autocracies with vastly different cultures—means that China and Russia will have to work hard to ensure significant influence over each organization and its individual members.

What’s next? Continued Sino-Russian convergence is the most likely course. But that is not set in stone—and progress can be accelerated, slowed, or reversed. Absent external shocks, Beijing and Moscow may not need to significantly upgrade their relationship from its current trajectory. Xi and Putin share similar views of a hostile West and recognize the strategic advantages of closer alignment. But they remain wary of each other, with neither wanting to be responsible for or subordinate to the other.

Major changes or shocks, however, could drive them closer at a faster pace. Should Russia suffer a devastating military setback in Ukraine that risks the collapse of Putin’s regime, China might reconsider the question of substantial military aid. If China, in turn, finds itself in a major Taiwan crisis or conflict against the United States, Beijing could lean more on Moscow. During a conflict over Taiwan, Russia could also engage in opportunistic aggression elsewhere that would tie China and Russia together in the eyes of the international community, even if Moscow’s actions were not coordinated with Beijing.

A change in the trajectory toward ever closer Chinese-Russian ties may also be possible, though it is far less likely. Some Chinese experts worry that Russia will always prioritize its own interests over any consideration of bilateral ties. If, for instance, former U.S. President Donald Trump wins another term, he could decrease U.S. support for Ukraine and offer Putin improved relations. This, in turn, could dim the Kremlin’s willingness to support China against the United States. It’s not clear if this worry is shared by top Chinese or Russian leaders, but mutual distrust and skepticism of the other remain in both countries.

— This article appears in the Fall 2023 issue of Foreign Policy. | Bonny Lin, the Director of the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

[mariacallous]

Turkey and the United States have been treaty allies since Ankara joined the trans-Atlantic alliance in 1952 by formally becoming a member of NATO. Over the ensuing 70 years, Turkey’s bilateral relationship with the United States has been through its fair share of ups and downs. In the mid-1960s, the relationship was rocked by the secret U.S. deal with the Soviet Union to withdraw Jupiter missiles from Turkey during the Cuban missile crisis and former U.S. President  Lyndon B. Johnson’s letter threatening not to defend Turkey over Cyprus.

Later differences over Vietnam created an anti-American backlash in Turkish public opinion. In the mid-1970s, the Turkish invasion and occupation of Northern Cyprus led to a congressionally imposed arms embargo and subsequent limits on U.S. arms exports to Turkey. Despite these periodic difficulties, a common threat perception about the dangers that Moscow posed to European and global security helped maintain a strong government-to-government relationship during the Cold War.

Following the Soviet Union’s demise in the early 1990s, the relationship between Washington and Ankara blossomed for a time and arguably reached a peak at the turn of the millennium, when President Bill Clinton declared that U.S.-Turkish ties constituted a “strategic partnership,” and U.S. diplomatic activism helped secure an invitation to Ankara from the European Union to open accession talks (an objective of Turkish foreign policy since the early 1960s).

Under the leadership of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, this relationship has essentially been driven off a cliff during his two decades of domination of Turkish politics. Since 2003, the bilateral relationship has slowly been purposefully undermined to the point that Washington no longer has a reliable ally to work with. These days, the relationship is characterized by Turkey’s mercurial, hypocritical, and callous stance on a range of security issues.

Since the first Gulf War, Washington has gone to great lengths to accommodate Ankara’s regional security concerns. The Clinton administration was visionary in promulgating Operation Provide Comfort, which not only prevented Saddam Hussein from killing more of Iraq’s Kurdish population, but also ensured that the separatist Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) of Turkey was designated as a terrorist organization. During this period, Washington closely shared actionable intelligence to limit border incursions from northern Iraq into Turkey.

Similarly, in 1999, U.S. intelligence played a pivotal role in helping to capture and deliver Turkey’s equivalent of Osama bin Laden into the hands of Turkish forces: Abdullah Ocalan, the leader of the PKK would not be in Turkish prison today had it not been for the United States. More recently, following several terrorist attacks carried out by Islamic State forces in Turkey, Washington quickly championed the deployment of Patriot missile batteries inside Turkey, sourced from NATO members.

How has Turkey reciprocated? Ankara has cozied up to the United States’ emerging great-power rivals, China and Russia. These diplomatic dalliances ultimately led to the Turkish decision to purchase, first, a Chinese air and missile defense system, and when that fell through, the decision to purchase the Russian S-400 advanced air defense missile.

Turkey has allowed itself to become a vital enabler of violent Islamist extremist forces in Syria with funds and arms flowing through Turkey into its strife-plagued neighbor. Despite repeated efforts by the United States to work out differences over rival opposition forces battling against the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, Turkey has repeatedly demanded that the U.S reposition its forces, launched airstrikes on U.S. partners, and has even come dangerously close to bombing the small U.S. special forces group in a wildly irresponsible effort to rouse nationalistic fervor at home in support of Erdogan’s narrow domestic political agenda.

The Erdogan regime has held American citizens (and local employees of the U.S. government) as virtual hostages in an effort to leverage U.S. domestic politics to shut down investigations of money laundering and sanctions evasion activity by actors with ties to the Turkish state. It also refused to join the West in imposing sanctions on Putin’s Russia after the invasion of Ukraine. Instead, Turkey has become a key destination for illicit financial flows from Russian oligarchs seeking to shield their assets and a transit point for dual use goods supporting Russia’s wartime defense industry.

Finally, and perhaps most egregiously, Turkey has held Sweden’s prospective NATO membership (and earlier, Finland’s) hostage to Erdogan’s desire to extract benefits for acquiescing in steps that he had earlier told Finnish and Swedish leaders that he supported unconditionally, thus putting in jeopardy one of the most important strategic costs that President Vladimir Putin’s aggression has brought upon his own Russian Federation.

To add injury to insult, since the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks that were carried out by Hamas in southern Israel, Erdogan has turned his back on the West and its allies, deciding instead to shore up his support for Hamas. Referring to the militant group’s members as mujahadeen (freedom fighters), Ankara has positioned itself as an adversary of a key U.S. ally. More troublingly, Ankara has provided Hamas with office space inside Turkey while granting Turkish passports to its senior leadership. Hamas, which has operated inside Turkey since 2011, uses its base there to procure funds. The U.S. Treasury Department has accused Hamas of smuggling more than $20 million through a currency exchange in Istanbul.

Turkey’s stance on the Arab-Israeli conflict is emblematic of its duplicitous and hypocritical foreign-policy stance with its Western allies. While Ankara publicly vilifies Israel for its counterterrorism mission in Gaza, Turkish companies continue to trade with Israel. Many of the business owners who have sent more than 400 container ships to Israel since Oct. 7 publicly rebuke Israel while privately continuing to trade with their alleged foe. Similarly, Ankara routinely scolds Washington for its partnership with the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) based on the premise that the SDF is an offshoot of the PKK in Turkey.

While the SDF and U.S. officials have given widespread assurances that the SDF’s only mission is to eliminate Islamic State forces, Erdogan has unapologetically solidified his partnership with Hamas, a militant entity that unambiguously proved its barbaric bona fides on Oct. 7.

Despite this sorry record and the almost total erosion of support for Turkey in the U.S. Congress, policy officials across multiple administrations of both parties have refrained from imposing any serious costs on Turkey. This has largely been caused by a set of assumptions that consistently failed to result in long-term improvements in the bilateral relationship. They include the notion that Turkey, given its crucial geographical location is “too big to fail,” that if Washington consistently treats Turkey as a trusted ally it will behave like one, and the more recent hope that Turkey might play an important mediating role in the Russia-Ukraine war or as an intermediary in negotiations to release the Hamas hostages in Gaza.

In reality, continuing to operate this way will only lead to more rather than fewer crises in the bilateral relationship while Erdogan seeks to wring every possible advantage from events as they unfold, as his spoiler stance on NATO expansion revealed.

The Biden administration badly needs to develop a long-term strategy for managing a Turkey that, certainly if Erdogan remains in charge and perhaps even after that, is animated by a profoundly anti-Western populist nationalist ideology. At the same time, Washington policymakers need to bear in mind that Turkey remains a deeply divided society, and that Erdogan’s anti-Westernism represents the views of barely 50 percent of the population.

There are some experiences worth recalling in constructing a long-term strategy that imposes costs on the Erdogan regime while not unnecessarily disadvantaging the pro-Western half of Turkey’s population. First, when the U.S. government asked Turkey for assistance in lifting the Islamic State’s siege of Kobani, Syria, in 2014 and Turkey refused, Washington simply orchestrated the dropping of relief supplies that confronted the Erdogan regime with a fait accompli with no apparent damage to the bilateral relationship. Subsequently, Kurdish forces were allowed to transit through Turkish territory to reinforce their comrades around Kobani—a result that was only possible because Washington played hardball.

When the Turks shot down a Russian aircraft after it allegedly traversed Turkish airspace from Syria in 2015, the Russians declared a boycott on Turkish agricultural produce that led to a Turkish apology and no apparent damage to the bilateral relationship. When the Turks held U.S. citizen and pastor Andrew Brunson on questionable charges of aiding terrorism, the Trump administration raised tariffs on Turkish goods and imposed sanctions on two Turkish officials. Brunson was back in U.S. hands in short order. All of this suggests that steps to penalize Turkey and impose costs can be effective if pursued on a clear and consistent basis.

The recent decision to begin moving the process of Swedish accession to NATO through the Turkish Grand National Assembly suggests that Erdogan may have realized that his effort to extort the U.S. Congress into approving the sale of F-16s to Turkey may have been impeding the effort to secure F-16s more than it was helping.

Swift sanctioning of Turkish entities that are evading Western sanctions on Russia or illicitly funding Hamas and announcing those sanctions publicly is a minimum level of effort that the U.S. must condition the Turkish government and public to expect when Turkey engages in these kinds of anti-Western actions.

As Henri J. Barkey recently cautioned in Foreign Affairs: “Going forward, Washington should not just bandage surface wounds or seek to restore a golden age in U.S.-Turkish relations that never existed. By acting firmly and consistently, the United States can craft a new kind of relationship: a normal one.”

That is easier said than done. After all, a purely transactional foreign policy with allies does not come naturally to Americans who, as leaders of the Western alliance, have grown accustomed to turning the other cheek when a wayward ally such as Turkey indulges in anti-American rhetoric or anti-Western policies. But if the United States imposes no costs on Turkey for such behavior, it will only encourage more of the same by Erdogan and his cronies.

Setting clear parameters and enforcing them relentlessly is the only way to keep the relationship from dipping into the periodic crises that afflicted it over the past decade.

[kramlabs]

The 3rd Pivot

Context.

Two main reasons.

1. Bibi showing his 'New Middle East' map at the UN completely erasing Palestine.

2. Serial provocations at Al-Aqsa, including a storming by hundreds of Israeli settlers.

Al-Aqsa is a definitive red line - for Palestinians, for the Arab world, and for the lands of Islam.

Yet there's WAY more.

The dead giveaway is the Israeli rhetoric of a 'Pearl Harbor'.

Everyone knows what it means.

Project Ukraine is dead.

So the Masters of the Universe need a new war ("on terror") to set West Asia on fire.

Peaceful West Asia means reconstruction for Syria, redevelopment for Iraq and Lebanon, Iran and Saudi Arabia as part of BRICS 11, the Russia-China strategic partnership respected and engaged all across West Asia.

The Northern Sea Route is already in effect, directly undermining the Suez Canal.

One of the key themes discussed at Valdai at the highest level was de-dollarization.

All of the above is anathema for the usual suspects.

Mossad and IDF caught by surprise is childish fantasy. They knew it was coming.

The question now is whether Hezbollah will be coming to town.

[kneedeepincynade]

Come comrades come to me! For i bring great news indeed! The west has failed and failed hard it did! The entire mudmachine and the worst terrorist scum of the west have failed and Syria stands strong against the west in defiance of their so called order!

The post is machine translated

Translation is at the bottom

The collective is on telegram

😘 合作共赢 | CINA E SIRIA ELEVANO LE RELAZIONI AD UN PARTENARIATO STRATEGICO 🥰

😍 Oggi, 22 settembre, è una giornata storica per la Repubblica Popolare Cinese e la Repubblica Araba di Siria 🥳

🇨🇳 Il Presidente Xi Jinping e il Presidente Bashar al-Assad hanno annunciato, durante un Colloquio ad Hangzhou, l'Istituzione di un Partenariato Strategico, per elevare le Relazioni Sino-Siriane in una Nuova Era 💕

⭐️ Il 领袖 ha ricordato che la Siria è stata uno dei primi Paesi Arabi a stabilire relazioni diplomatiche con la Nuova Cina, nonché uno dei promotori del ripristino del legittimo seggio della Repubblica Popolare Cinese alle Nazioni Unite 🥳

💕 Negli ultimi 67 anni, le Relazioni Sino-Siriane hanno resisito alla prova dei forti venti e delle grandi tempeste a livello internazionale, e l'Amicizia tra i due Paesi ha continuato a rafforzarsi, ha affermato il Presidente Xi Jinping 🇨🇳

🤝 L'Istituzione di un Partenariato Strategico Sino-Siriano, ha dichiarato Xi Jinping, rappresenta una pietra miliare nella Storia dei Rapporti Sino-Siriani 💕

🇨🇳 La Cina, ha affermato il Presidente Xi Jinping, sostiene fermamente la Siria nella salvaguardia della propria Sovranità, e si oppone alle interferenze straniere anti-Siriane e alle prepotenze unilaterali ⭐️

🇨🇳 La Cina sostiene il Governo Siriano nella Lotta per la propria integrità territoriale, e promuove una Soluzione Politica alla Questione in Siria, dichiarando che essa deve essere guidata dalla Siria e dal Popolo Siriano, e da nessun altro ❤️

🇨🇳 La Cina è pronta a rafforzare la Cooperazione a Mutuo Vantaggio (合作共赢), così come a sostenere la Ricostruzione della Siria, mediante la Collaborazione nell'ambito della Nuova Via della Seta 🤝

🇸🇾 Il Presidente Assad ha ringraziato il Presidente Xi Jinping per il Sostegno della Cina alla Siria, e ha dichiarato che - attraverso grandi lotte - la Repubblica Popolare Cinese ha intrapreso, con successo, la Via del Socialismo con Caratteristiche Cinesi (中国特色社会主义), e che si è sempre schierata dalla parte dell'equità e della giustizia internazionale 🕊

🇸🇾 La Siria apprezza e sostiene le Iniziative Cinesi, tra cui la Nuova Via della Seta, dichiarando che esse aiutano i Popoli a raggiungere uno Sviluppo Comune (共同发展) e la Prosperità Comune, attraverso la Cooperazione (共同富裕) 🤝

🇸🇾 Il Presidente Assad si è congratulato con la Cina per i grandi risultati raggiunti, e ha affermato che la Siria si oppone a qualsiasi interferenza negli Affari Interni Cinesi ❤️

💕 La Siria è pronta a rafforzare l'Amicizia con la Cina in tutti i settori, tra cui il Coordinamento negli Affari Regionali ed Internazionali 🤝

❤️ Hanno partecipato, a questo storico evento, numerosi Ministri della Repubblica Araba di Siria, nonché Funzionari di Alto Livello del Partito Comunista Cinese, tra cui Cai Qi, Ding Xuexiang, Wang Yi e Shen Yiqin 🚩

🌸 Iscriviti 👉 @collettivoshaoshan 😘

😘 合作共赢 | CHINA AND SYRIA RAISE RELATIONS TO A STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP 🥰

😍 Today, September 22, is a historic day for the People's Republic of China and the Syrian Arab Republic 🥳

🇨🇳 President Xi Jinping and President Bashar al-Assad announced the establishment of a strategic partnership to elevate Sino-Syrian relations into a new era during a meeting in Hangzhou 💕

⭐️ The 领袖 recalled that Syria was one of the first Arab countries to establish diplomatic relations with New China, as well as one of the promoters of the restoration of the legitimate seat of the People's Republic of China at the United Nations 🥳

💕 Over the past 67 years, Sino-Syrian Relations have withstood the test of strong winds and major storms internationally, and the Friendship between the two countries has continued to strengthen, said President Xi Jinping 🇨🇳

🤝 The establishment of a Sino-Syrian Strategic Partnership, declared Xi Jinping, represents a milestone in the history of Sino-Syrian relations 💕

🇨🇳 China, President Xi Jinping stated, firmly supports Syria in safeguarding its Sovereignty, and opposes anti-Syrian foreign interference and unilateral bullying ⭐️

🇨🇳 China supports the Syrian Government in the Fight for its territorial integrity, and promotes a Political Solution to the Syria Issue, declaring that it must be led by Syria and the Syrian People, and no one else ❤️

🇨🇳 China is ready to strengthen Mutual Benefit Cooperation (合作共赢), as well as support the Reconstruction of Syria, through Collaboration under the New Silk Road 🤝

🇸🇾 President Assad thanked President Xi Jinping for China's Support for Syria, and declared that - through great struggles - the People's Republic of China has successfully embarked on the Path of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics (中国特色社会主义), and who has always taken the side of equity and international justice 🕊

🇸🇾 Syria appreciates and supports Chinese Initiatives, including the New Silk Road, declaring that they help Peoples achieve Common Development (共同发展) and Common Prosperity, through Cooperation (共同富裕) 🤝

🇸🇾 President Assad congratulated China on its great achievements, and said that Syria opposes any interference in China's Internal Affairs ❤️

💕 Syria is ready to strengthen Friendship with China in all areas, including Coordination in Regional and International Affairs 🤝

❤️ Numerous Ministers of the Syrian Arab Republic, as well as high-level officials of the Chinese Communist Party, participated in this historic event, including Cai Qi, Ding Xuexiang, Wang Yi and Shen Yiqin 🚩

🌸 Subscribe 👉 @collectivoshaoshan 😘

[warningsine]

BEIJING (AP) — China and Syria announced the formation of a strategic partnership on Friday as Chinese leader Xi Jinping kicked off a series of diplomatic meetings ahead of the upcoming Asian Games.

Xi met Syrian President Bashar Assad in the southern Chinese city of Hangzhou, which is hosting the 15-day sports competition.

“In the face of the unstable and uncertain international situation, China is willing to work with Syria to firmly support each other ... and jointly safeguard international fairness and justice,” Xi said in a video clip posted online by state broadcaster CCTV.

Assad’s visit parallels in some ways that of Russian President Vladimir Putin last year for the opening ceremony of the Beijing Winter Olympics. Both leaders are virtual pariahs in the West but welcomed by China as it tries to expand its global influence and promote an alternative to the U.S.-led international order.

The Syrian leader will attend the Asian Games opening ceremony on Saturday night along with the king of Cambodia, the crown prince of Kuwait and the prime ministers of Nepal, East Timor and South Korea, China’s Foreign Ministry has said.

Xi also met Kuwaiti Crown Prince Sheikh Meshal Al Ahmed Al Jaber Al Sabah on Friday and said he would work with him to take bilateral relations to a new level, CCTV reported.

Both meetings took place at a state guest house at West Lake, a scenic tourist destination in Hangzhou that has inspired Chinese painters for centuries.

Cambodian King Norodom Sihamoni arrived Friday at the airport in Hangzhou. CCTV video posted online showed him walking down the stairs from his plane to the tarmac for a red carpet welcome that included the Asian Games mascots.

Assad, who is making a rare trip abroad, is looking for ways to emerge from the international isolation brought on by a brutal war at home that shows no sign of ending after 12 years. He was expected to discuss economic assistance from China, which could play a major role in Syria’s future reconstruction.

Syrian state TV quoted Assad as thanking Xi and his government for standing on the side of the Syrian people “during the crisis and suffering.” China has backed Assad, using its veto on the U.N. Security Council eight times to block resolutions against his government.

Xi told Assad that China supports Syria in opposing external interference and unilateral bullying and promoting a political solution that is led and owned by Syrians, China’s CCTV said.

Assad expressed hope that the meeting would be the basis for “wide-ranging and long-term strategic cooperation in all fields” between China and Syria.

The Asian Games, which have more participants than the Olympics, also sparked a diplomatic row between India and China. Three Indian athletes from Arunachal Pradesh, which China claims as its territory, refused to accept their visas and stayed home after they were given visas stapled to their passports — different from those given to the rest of the team.

The Asian Games were scheduled for last year but postponed because of China’s then-strict pandemic restrictions. China eased its restrictions in December of last year.

[kspp]

Changing World Order: (Im) balance of Power in Eurasia.

The disintegration of the USSR and the end of the Cold War proved to be a global paradigm shift in the sense that various developments following these two pivotal events changed the course of global affairs. It paved the way for a US led ‘unipolar’ world order. Commentators like Fukuyama declared ‘the end of history’ and the triumph of the ‘liberal global order’. Another important shift was from traditional ‘inter-state’ conflicts to ‘intra-state’ conflicts. Except for military campaigns by Russia, the US, and Israel primarily in the Middle East, Caucasus, and Balkan, we have not seen any full-scale inter-state conflicts. Rather they were replaced by ‘intra-state’ civil wars and unrest existing in various corners of the globe.

However, after the 9/11 attacks, the US hegemony has been challenged by various states and other non-state actors. Trump’s presidency was a decisive period in global politics it became evident that the US was struggling to maintain its stature and position in world politics. The Middle East and Eastern Europe were traditionally Western Spheres of influence. Obama’s ‘Asia Pivot’ in the ‘Indo-Pacific’ created a power vacuum in the Middle East and Eastern Europe leaving space for Russian and Chinese aggression. This became one of the contributing factors in the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine. The US lost its influence in the Middle East which was discernible in the case of Syria and Afghanistan. The successive isolationist policies of the Trump administration emboldened China to exercise its power in multilateral organizations.

Furthermore, the regional politics of the Middle East changed significantly in terms of power dynamics. Until 2020, only two Arab countries-Egypt (1978-79) and Jordan (1994) normalized their relations with Israel. In 2020, Israel managed to normalize its relations with four more Arab countries- the UAE, Morocco, Sudan, and Bahrain. The US recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel in 2017 by relocating its embassy there. Isolation of Iran in regional politics is an outcome of these developments.

The US has been trying to champion the Indo-Pacific region; partly because Hillary Clinton propagated ‘Asia-Pacific’ as the driver of global politics, partly because of the China Trap as G. T. Allison would put it. The geo-political competition in the Indo-Pacific region commenced with the introduction of the strategic rebalancing policy of the US towards Asia – namely the ‘Pivot to Asia Policy’ by the US and the inauguration of the strategically ambitious ‘geo – economic’ infrastructural project of Belt and Road Initiative by China. China’s ‘reclamation’ of contested territories in the South China Sea and intrusion in the Indian Ocean along with other developments compelled the US and its allies to rejuvenate QUAD (The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue).The Indo-Pacific Theater brought together reluctant partners of the US closer. The US started taking part actively in the partnership, preparedness, and promotion of a networked Indo-Pacific region. The middle powers such as India, Japan, and Australia have been working in the direction of creating a middle power coalition. Recently, the ambitious Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) was launched on May 23, 2022, by President Joe Biden with fourteen participating members. However, except for Japan, most of the countries did not show as much willingness as the US envisioned.

China, on the other hand, is working hard to win credibility from the Indo-Pacific countries through lucrative financial investments under the BRI and Maritime Silk Road Initiative (MSRI) frameworks. Due to China’s heavy investments, the countries of South Asia, Southeast Asia, and to some extent, the Middle East have become battlegrounds for asserting hegemony for China and the US. Many of these destination countries, despite pressure, do not want to take any side or limit themselves to a block but want to harness the opportunities by avoiding any possible conflict of interest. Japan, despite having a huge trade dependency on China, continues embracing the US. Australia is repelled by China on a range of issues from Taiwan to the Southwest Pacific. Russia is getting closer to China, especially since the Ukraine invasion. As pointed out by the Chinese foreign minister, they both have “strong resilience and strategic determination.” As of now, China has not termed the ongoing Russian-Ukraine conflict as an ‘invasion’ and even initiated a diplomatic outreach campaign to advance its interests in the Indo-Pacific by supporting Russia’s cause if not directly.

India has adopted an unconventional approach by taking considerable bold posturing in its foreign policy stance; focusing on its ties with the US when it comes to the Indo-Pacific region. This has undoubtedly caused a deterioration of India’s bilateral relations with China. Since the Galwan clash, both countries have not made any significant progress in resolving border disputes. After the G219 highway, China is now constructing another highway called G695 national expressway through Akshai Chin connecting Tibet with Xinjiang. The new highway route passes even closer to the Line of Actual Control (LAC) compared to the past one. Despite these developments, relative progress has taken place through the BRICS National Security Advisors (NSA) talks where both the countries seem to cooperate on issues such as counter-terrorism. Overall, Eurasia is again the center of geopolitical competition. With the decline of the US hegemony and a rising China, regional stability is being challenged, leaving less scope for co-operation and increasing conflict.

[brookstonalmanac]

Events 4.4 (after 1950)

1958 – The CND peace symbol is displayed in public for the first time in London. 1960 – France agrees to grant independence to the Mali Federation, a union of Senegal and French Sudan. 1963 – Bye Bye Birdie, a musical romantic comedy film directed by George Sidney, was released. 1964 – The Beatles occupy the top five positions on the Billboard Hot 100 pop chart. 1967 – Martin Luther King Jr. delivers his "Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence" speech in New York City's Riverside Church. 1968 – Martin Luther King Jr. is assassinated by James Earl Ray at a motel in Memphis, Tennessee. 1968 – Apollo program: NASA launches Apollo 6. 1969 – Dr. Denton Cooley implants the first temporary artificial heart. 1973 – The Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City are officially dedicated. 1973 – A Lockheed C-141 Starlifter, dubbed the Hanoi Taxi, makes the last flight of Operation Homecoming. 1975 – Microsoft is founded as a partnership between Bill Gates and Paul Allen in Albuquerque, New Mexico. 1975 – Vietnam War: A United States Air Force Lockheed C-5A Galaxy transporting orphans, crashes near Saigon, South Vietnam shortly after takeoff, killing 172 people. 1977 – Southern Airways Flight 242 crashes in New Hope, Paulding County, Georgia, killing 72. 1979 – Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto of Pakistan is executed. 1981 – Iran–Iraq War: The Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force mounts an attack on H-3 Airbase and destroys about 50 Iraqi aircraft. 1983 – Space Shuttle program: Space Shuttle Challenger makes its maiden voyage into space on STS-6. 1984 – President Ronald Reagan calls for an international ban on chemical weapons. 1987 – Garuda Indonesia Flight 032 crashes at Medan Airport, killing 23. 1988 – Governor Evan Mecham of Arizona is convicted in his impeachment trial and removed from office. 1990 – The current flag of Hong Kong is adopted for post-colonial Hong Kong during the Third Session of the Seventh National People's Congress. 1991 – Senator John Heinz of Pennsylvania and six others are killed when a helicopter collides with their airplane over an elementary school in Merion, Pennsylvania. 1991 – Forty-one people are taken hostage inside a Good Guys! Electronics store in Sacramento, California. Three of the hostage takers and three hostages are killed. 1994 – Three people are killed when KLM Cityhopper Flight 433 crashes at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol. 1996 – Comet Hyakutake is imaged by the USA Asteroid Orbiter Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous. 1997 – Space Shuttle program: Space Shuttle Colombia is launched on STS-83. However, the mission is later cut short due to a fuel cell problem. 2002 – The MPLA government of Angola and UNITA rebels sign a peace treaty ending the Angolan Civil War. 2009 – France announces its return to full participation of its military forces within NATO. 2010 – A magnitude 7.2 earthquake hits south of the Mexico-USA border, killing two and damaging buildings across the two countries. 2011 – Georgian Airways Flight 834 crashes at N'djili Airport in Kinshasa, killing 32. 2013 – More than 70 people are killed in a building collapse in Thane, India. 2017 – Syria conducts an air strike on Khan Shaykhun using chemical weapons, killing 89 civilians. 2020 – China holds a national day of mourning for martyrs who died in the fight against the novel coronavirus disease outbreak. 2023 – Finland becomes a member of NATO after Turkey accepts its membership request.

[blueweave]

Middle East and Africa Oilfield Services Market size by value at USD 23.11 billion in 2023. During the forecast period between 2024 and 2030, BlueWeave expects the Middle East and Africa Oilfield Services Market size to expand at a CAGR of 6.98% reaching a value of USD 28.98 billionby 2030. The Middle East and Africa Oilfield Services Market is influenced by several driving factors, including increased exploration and production activities driven by rising energy demand, advancements in drilling technologies enhancing efficiency and productivity, government initiatives to attract foreign investment in the oil and gas sector, growing adoption of enhanced oil recovery techniques to maximize extraction from mature fields, and the presence of significant reserves in untapped regions. Additionally, geopolitical stability, regulatory reforms promoting industry growth, and strategic partnerships among oilfield service providers contribute to market expansion. These factors collectively shape the dynamic landscape of the Middle East and Africa Oilfield Services Market.

Opportunity – Expanding end use industries

The expanding landscape of end use industries, coupled with population growth, contributes significantly to the accelerating growth rate of the oilfield services market in the Middle East and Africa. Rapid urbanization and industrialization, particularly in emerging economies, such as India, China, and Southeast Asia, drive the demand for oilfield services. As these regions witness increased industrial activities and infrastructure development, the market experiences substantial value growth, indicating a promising trajectory in the coming years.

Impact of Escalating Geopolitical Tensions on Middle East and Africa Oilfield Services Market  

Escalating geopolitical tensions has profound effects on the Middle East and Africa Oilfield Services Market. With the Middle East being a major oil producing region and Africa holding significant reserves, any disruption in these areas can severely impact the global oil supply. Geopolitical conflicts in Yemen, Syria, and Libya, as well as tensions between Iran and the United States, have led to uncertainty and volatility in oil prices. Such instability hampers investment in oilfield services, affecting exploration, drilling, and production activities. Additionally, geopolitical tensions often result in infrastructure damage and project delays, further complicating operations for oilfield service companies. Companies operating in these regions must navigate complex political landscapes and mitigate risks, impacting their profitability and growth prospects amidst geopolitical uncertainties.

Sample Request @ https://www.blueweaveconsulting.com/report/middle-east-and-africa-oilfield-services-market/report-sample

[blogynews]

"Unveiling Unprecedented Alliance: China's Xi Jinping Forms Extraordinary Bond with Syria's Bashar al-Assad"

Chinese President Xi Jinping and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad announced a “strategic partnership” during their meeting in Beijing on Friday. The talks were held on the eve of the Asian Games opening ceremony, which Assad is attending as part of his first visit to China since 2004. Assad is seeking financial support to aid in the reconstruction of Syria, which has been devastated by the civil…

[blogynewz]

"Unveiling Unprecedented Alliance: China's Xi Jinping Forms Extraordinary Bond with Syria's Bashar al-Assad"

Chinese President Xi Jinping and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad announced a “strategic partnership” during their meeting in Beijing on Friday. The talks were held on the eve of the Asian Games opening ceremony, which Assad is attending as part of his first visit to China since 2004. Assad is seeking financial support to aid in the reconstruction of Syria, which has been devastated by the civil…

[blogynewsz]

"Unveiling Unprecedented Alliance: China's Xi Jinping Forms Extraordinary Bond with Syria's Bashar al-Assad"

Chinese President Xi Jinping and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad announced a “strategic partnership” during their meeting in Beijing on Friday. The talks were held on the eve of the Asian Games opening ceremony, which Assad is attending as part of his first visit to China since 2004. Assad is seeking financial support to aid in the reconstruction of Syria, which has been devastated by the civil…