Western Leaders 20260814

Standing on the Precipice: Western Leaders Continue to Fiddle

Will The West Stay Awake and Become Alert?

Opinion: The following article is commentary and its views are solely those of the author. This article was first published the 14th of August via The Angry Demagogue.

In February 2022 the Russian member of the Axis invaded Ukraine. In October 2023, less than two years later, the Iranian proxy Hamas invaded Israel and their proxy Hezbollah joined the fight the next day. North Korea and China the other members of the axis did not, probably, coordinate either attack, but nor did they discourage it or help to end it. In the period of less than two years, the free countries of the world were given a wake-up call to what historians may end up writing was the start of a new world war.

Sweden and Finland were spooked enough to take a bold move and join NATO and the existing European members of NATO seem to realize that they need to start worrying about their own defense – at least against Russia, if not the rest of the Axis. In Ukraine, they put together a bold defense and created a drone force that is, if not winning, at least is not losing the war of attrition that the conflict has “settled” into. Ukraine may have convinced itself that it can win this war on the battlefield and Russia is counting on its Axis allies to help it overcome their own military incompetence. North Korean troops are dying in Ukraine and there are rumors that 50,000 more North Korean troops are on the way. Iran and China are supplying weapons. The Axis is not only keeping the war going for Russia, it is arguably, along with its nuclear weapons, a path to victory.

Standing on the Precipice: Western Leaders Continue to Fiddle

Europe and parts of the United States did not take the hint that in October 2023 that the Putin’s Russia is not the only country threatening their security. The Iranian piece of the Axis also aims to dismantle Western freedoms and religion via direct military threats, terrorism and unchecked immigration.

Has the Middle East changed after the Ukraine invasion and more specifically, October 7? Asking different people will get you different answers. For Israeli PM Netanyahu it has been a strategic victory for Israel as both Hezbollah and Hamas are on their heals and Iran’s nuclear and missile forces have been severely damaged. For Israel’s opposition, the last three years have brought no positive change for Israel in the Middle East since Hamas, Hezbollah and the Islamic Republic of Iran still exist.

For Iranian Islamists it has changed by showing that they can stand up to their own people and to the United States so that any attempt to topple them will end in failure. For the Islamic Republic, a non-total-defeat shows the world that they can continue their quest for regional and global control despite the hiccups caused by Israel and the United States. The same holds for Hamas and Hezbollah who believe that Israel has been isolated in the world and that the UN, the Hague and the EU – along with America’s DSA – will make being Jewish and Israeli so illegitimate that they will soon be able to chose their apartments in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

According to Erdogan’s Turkey, the Middle East is their playground as they have managed to maintain positive relations with both Hamas and the United States. They have troops in Qatar, a new alignment with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and have so many forces in northern and sub-Saharan Africa that an expanded Ottoman Empire lies in the not too distant future. Greece will be overcome and where Iran failed to destroy Israel, they will succeed.

President Trump believes, or states, that the United States has scored a decisive victory over Iran, is bringing peace to Lebanon and Gaza via Israeli concessions and the disarmament of Hamas and Hezbollah and the future in the middle east goes through Washington. The President also states that the Abraham Accords will be expanded and that Israel, Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia are all strong and reliable allies of the United States and that all these countries are moving towards a more peaceful and economically vibrant Middle East.

Back in the 1960’s and 1970’s when there were two regional Moslem states that were friendly to Israel, Turkey and Iran. During that cold war period, the only Gulf state that counted was Saudi Arabia. Syria and Egypt were Israel’s existential enemies and the Hashemites of Jordan were more concerned with survival than fighting (at least after 1967). Lebanon was a non-threat to Israel (as a matter of fact Israel supplied arms to the Shiite villagers in the south during the civil war of the late 1970’s at the request of the Shah of Iran).

Currently Iran is Israel’s main enemy, although Turkey is pushing to move ahead of them as the main existential threat to Israel. Israel faces a “Sunni Vise” that includes Turkey and Syria in the north and Egypt in the South. We can add to that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan although that alliance (which now includes Turkey) seems to be more a showpiece than a defense treaty. Or, in the words of Hussein Aboubakr Mansour, “In the Middle East, the vocabulary of collective defense is often detached from the activity of defending. The announcement is the whole of the content”.

Regarding the United States presence in the Middle East, only the details have changed. The Cold War is over but the U.S still has the challenge of controlling oil flow out of the region as its new main enemy, China, depends on it. As for the United States and Israel, that relationship has moved from dependent to almost partner on defense and technology but Israel is still the same steady, reliable, democratic presence it has been for the past few decades. The U.S is certainly closer to the other Gulf states, notably Qatar, but their money has simply replaced (or actually supplemented) Saudi money, although they are much more cynical and effective with it.

The Arab world has barely changed even though the UAE and others have jointed the Abaraham Accords and have a relatively strong relationship with Israel. However, the real issue in the middle east has never been Israel-Palestine but has been and still is the intra-Arab and intra-Moslem rivalry and mistrust. Even when ostensibly on the same side, like the Saudis and UAE are in Yemen, there are separate armies fighting and last month the Saudis bombed the UAE forces – even though both were fighting the Houthis.

Egypt and Turkey, the two largest Sunni states in the region by population and military force are at opposite ends of the Moslem Brotherhood fight. Egypt is more suspicious of Turkey’s support for the Brotherhood, arch enemies of the Al-Sisi government, than they are of Israel’s moves in Gaza. Syria too, while pretending to act as a unified country is at war with the Kurd citizens in the north, Druze in the south and Alawites in the northwest. Their inclusion of ISIS and al-Qaeda fighters in their army – even foreign fighters – means that even within the Sunni majority, there is distrust and fighting.

And Libya is a proxy war if there ever was one with Turkey, Egypt, Iran and Russia involved.

So where do we stand in Europe and the Middle East today?

On the one hand, everyone is correct – Israel is in a better spot strategically, yet has not finished the job. The United States has, with Israel, set back Iran’s plans for regional domination but that gain is one “agreement” away from being overturned. Turkey is extending its influence but does not have the wherewithal to create a new Ottoman Empire as not only Israel stands in the way but so too does Egypt and the rest of the Sunni-Arab world as they do not have fond memories of Ottoman control of Arab lands. The Arab countries, large and small, are fighting the same tribal wars they have fought for the past decades and even centuries. Israel has strong internal unity and morale while its leaders re-arrange their parliamentary chairs.

In Europe, Ukraine has stopped an army three times its size while Russia, against most predictions is able to absorb massive casualties and economic sanctions due to the help of its allies .

Before the invasions of Ukraine and Israel by members of the Axis in 2022 and 2023 the geopolitical situation consisted of four revisionist powers united only in their opposition to the international status quo and the free countries united in their wish to maintain the status quo and to concentrate on comfort to the neglect of all else -including freedom. The Western European powers had no real military power to speak of (with the possible exception of France) as even the UK’s glorious navy was reduced to the minimum number of ships necessary to still call it an ocean going Navy. Ukraine ignored Russian threats and Israel was convinced it could outsmart, deter and bribe its sworn enemies to give up all for a life of comfort.

In the United States, the military was organized as a Walmart or Target warehouse with “just in time inventory”, no long term armaments contracts and with nothing much done to create what won WWII and the Cold War – a strong economic and industrial base. Looking for cheap labor and products and piling debt upon debt, the America;s industrial and fiscal situations mirrored its military un-readiness into a game of catch up – which it is doing neither fiscally nor militarily. Although the current administration is pushing to increase its manufacturing might, the fact that the American shipbuilding industry is able to produce only 3 military ships a year means, one, two or three administrations won’t be enough to complete the task. It requires a seriousness of purpose lacking in a Democratic party fearful of the DSA and a Republican party not serious enough to create a national consensus that will require some sacrifice from citizens.

Although there is a lot of talk, the current leadership in all free countries are the same leaders that led us down this path where they are not ready to meet and defeat middling powers let alone powerful ones.

Just four years ago the late Henry Kissinger published a book called “Leadership” which focused on six leaders he thought were consequential to their countries and the world. You might disagree with his choice but one thing running through each of these leaders (Germany’s Adenauer, France’s de Gaulle, Sadat of Egypt, UK’s Thatcher, Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew and Richard Nixon) is that they were patriots and they were willing to take risks to push their countries forward. We don’t seem to see Western leaders who are dedicated first and foremost to their country and its citizens and who recognize the ongoing (the never ending!) threat from tyrants.

Putin, Xi, Khamenei (or whomever is in charge) and Kim are tyrants who don’t need to concern themselves with their citizens and that is the one thing our uncreative and cowardly leaders do not seem to understand. The obsession of today’s western leaders with negotiations and deals and false human rights claims just feeds the tyrannical rule of its enemies and pushes their defeat further and further away. Eisenhauer famously refused to shake hands with the Nazi general who surrendered to him in spite of military custom because he realized that this was not a war of one country against another but a war by his country and their allies against evil.

This is not a call for war against all evil or perpetual conflict of power against power but rather a recognition that if one is not ready to face what tyrants want – your destruction – eventually they will defeat you. America was not prepared to fight WWII but it had an industrial and managerial base that could be transformed into a wartime asset no one has ever had. It also had the luxury of two oceans protecting their manufacturing plants from enemy attack. Finally, it had, admittedly only after Pearl Harbor, the understanding that the moral imperative was defeating the evil that was Nazism as well as Japanese militaristic barbarism and not in coming to some rapprochement with it.

The geopolitical situation has not changed even if there are small tactical advantages that one side has over the other in localized theatres. We are still in the same position where the Axis of revisionist states is using all its force and all the weaknesses of the western world to its advantage and a western world that is continuing to ignore that reality. The internal and external threats in free countries are now at crisis levels.

When it comes down to it, as much as we like to blame our leaders (and we certainly do), it is up to the citizens to demand and to choose brave, creative leaders who are not locked into what has brought us to the precipice of defeat. The leadership since the end of the Cold War has been lacking any sense of urgency no matter what happens. The disaster that was Afghanistan should have been a wake up call – instead it was ignored. The invasion of Ukraine should have put free countries on a war footing for the manufacture and supply of military hardware but instead of was treated as if no other wars would be fought until this one was over. October 7 and the subsequent fighting in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, Iran, Iraq, Syria, the entire Persian Gulf should have told the west that terrorism and the immigration of real and potential terrorists into its borders will destroy what it loves best.

So far, the Axis leaders have not waited for the west to wake up, re-arm, control its borders and stop shooting itself in the foot and there is no reason to think it will wait before its next adventure.

Disclaimer: the views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of the author, and not necessarily the opinions reflected by angrymetatraders.com or its associated parties.

Follow Ira Slomowitz via The Angry Demagogue on Substack https://iraslomowitz.substack.com/

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

Share:
postN19

Preventing WWIII: Part 2 – Reviving Western Deterrence

Preventing WWIII: Part 2 - Reviving Western Deterrence

Opinion: The following article is commentary and its views are solely those of the author.

Aggressive Western Action Can over-extend China and Revive Needed Deterrence.

Some cliches are just correct, in spite of their being cliches – “if you want peace, prepare for war” is one. But really it should be “if you want to avoid war, deter war”.

Therefore, it is not clear to me why there is opposition by some in the Republican party to fighting Russian aggression in Ukraine. For some, I guess it is a knee jerk reaction against Biden administration policy while for others it seems to be a general loathing of American involvement in the world. 

Each is understandable on its own but does not take into effect the appeasement of Russia will have on Western deterrence around the world – including in the Western hemisphere and the Indo-Pacific. While most Americans understand that Russian control of Ukraine threatens the main Western European countries, the key to Russian imperialism really is in the south. Historically, Russia has always tried to find a warm water port to call its own. For nearly four centuries Czarist Russia fought Ottoman Turkey so that Russia could expand its territory southward and have a warm water presence in the Mediterranean. Currently, a Ukrainian presence in the Black Sea denies Russia even the opportunity to pressure modern Turkey to abide its wishes.

A Russian victory in Ukraine would mean dominance of the Black Sea by the Russian Navy and directly challenge Turkey to appease Russian power by giving them free passage through the Dardanelles to the Mediterranean. That in itself would not be worth much to the Russians without a port in the Mediterranean, which they currently have. That they have one goes back to the disastrous decision by the Obama administration to invite Russia back into the Mideast in order to take care of Syrian chemical weapons. This came, we all remember, when the Syrians laughed at Obama and crossed his “red line” about using chemical weapons against its own people. We might also remember when then Secretary of State John Kerry (the one who was never right on a single foreign policy issue ever) who, first demanded that Syria turn over all chemical weapons in a week, then reassured them that even if we attack it will be “unbelievably small”.

In 1973-4, Henry Kissinger brilliantly took advantage of the Israeli-Arab War’s outcome with Israel’s surrounding the Egyptian 3rd Army in the south and controlling the road to Damascus in the north, by brokering a cease fire on both fronts. This led directly to the expulsion of Russia/Soviet Union from the Middle East. While Russia continued friendly ties with the murderous Assad family – first Hafez and then his son, Bashar, they did not have a military, air or naval presence there. Due to this longstanding relationship with Assad’s Syria, Obama and Kerry thought it a brilliant idea to have them come in and do the dirty work that they didn’t want to do – prevent Assad from gassing his own people. 

As Russia came in and established air and sea bases in Syria and introduced the infamous Wagner group to carry out its brutal ground operations, Russia slowly started to strengthen its position in the region. While slyly allowing Israel to attack Iranian arms shipments meant for Hezbollah while pretending to be its ally, Russia formed a close  relationship with Iran. Wagner, which fought hand in hand with Hezbollah in order to prop up the Assad regime (and attack American forces fighting ISIS) is now rumored to be training Hezbollah in the use of Russian anti-aircraft systems. 

In addition, reports last week that an Iranian Ilyushin 76 cargo jet has now landed in one of the Russian air-bases they established after Obama’s kind invitation to return to the Mideast. This plane, filled with Iranian arms destined for Hezbollah has been unable to land in regular Syrian airports or bases because Israel continuously puts them out of service. Knowing that Israel would never attack a Russian base – this is a safe haven that Russia gladly supplies. 

When free countries unite in warfare there is usually one joint goal  – that they are all united to defend freedom – that is why they fight together.  While autocratic and totalitarian regimes fight together it is usually a combination of a negative goal – disturbing or destroying the current world or regional order – as well as the goal for each power in itself. Currently, the joint goal in the Mideast (of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea) is to hurt the main ally of the US in the region – Israel, in order to weaken and embarrass the US. For Iranians, they also want Israel destroyed. For Russia, they want Israel weakened so they can replace the US as the power broker in the Mideast. For China, it is to dismantle America’s control of the flow of oil and, eventually, the replacement of the USD in the global economy with the Yuan.

Ukraine is important in this calculus because, as we said above it gives Russia complete control of the Black Sea and will pressure Turkey – whose NATO membership is uses only to its own advantage – to break permanently with the West. While the Chinese theory is that the two fronts the US is supplying arms to, Ukraine and the Mideast, are tying it down and expending its resources it would otherwise use in the Pacific, in truth, an aggressive strategy on both fronts would be to over-extend Russian and Chinese resources in order to keep China from moving on Tiawan. A credible threat of destruction or even marginalization of the Axis allies in the Mideast – including (besides the soon to be gone Hamas) Hezbollah, Shiite-Iranian proxies in Iraq and Syria, as well as Iran itself combined with a major offensive in Ukraine will tie down Axis resources and possibly prevent a Chinese blockade or attack on Taiwan.   If its two main allies need full supply and full readiness to be able to respond to credible and massive attacks by Ukraine, Israel and the US, China itself might have to expend resources to prop up its own allies. 

Add to that a major show of naval force in the Indo-Pacific by Japan, India, Australia and South Korea combined with US forces will give China the choice of destroying their own wavering economy by attacking or blockading Taiwan or in maintaining peaceful Pacific trade routes while trying to prevent the collapse of its Axis allies. 

An immediate and radical change in policy can restore Western deterrence quickly.   Re-arming Ukraine and leaving Israel to do its job without pressure to stop in Gaza and to respond forcefully in Lebanon will send a strong message. Biden brought two carrier groups to the Mideast and told Hezbollah, “don’t”. But they did.  

In spite  of that  US Secretary of Defense Austin told Israel that its response to Hezbollah aggression in the north is “provoking” them.  

And the US hesitates even against Iranian proxies. Just now, the NY Times has reported that Biden-Blinken have turned down a Pentagon plan to be more aggressive in response to Iranian attacks against US forces in Syria and Iraq for fear of “provoking Iran” (this seems to tell us that the Austin complaint from Austin to Israel is really from Blinken).  

Iran never seems to fear provoking the US.   

Israel fooled itself by thinking Hamas was deterred by its destruction of an arms factory or two (as the US is doing now in Iraq/Syria) when proper deterrence would have meant them knowing we can and will go into Gaza and destroy their underground city as Israel is doing now. Instead, media fear mongers, backed by Israeli ex-Generals on the payroll of the US progressive left (via cushy think-thank jobs) combined with policy directives by successive governments have told us and Hamas time and time again that Israel cannot destroy Hamas as the cost is too high. I don’t want to speak too early, but that seems to have been as wrong as their assurance that Hamas is deterred since they want to drink white wine in the evening overlooking the Mediterranean while watching their children play innocent video games.

It is time to stop calling for cease fires and repeating UN hypocrisy and to start being aggressive and provocative in the defense of freedom. 

Disclaimer: the views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of the author, and not necessarily the opinions reflected by angrymetatraders.com or its associated parties.

You can follow Ira Slomowitz via The Angry Demagogue on Substack https://iraslomowitz.substack.com/